.... the rate is probably not what they claim, but less than that, especially since I recently saw a story on slashdot saying doubled....
Broadband was/is subsidized by dialup subscribers.
Dialup legal position is one of insuring better competition.... some FCC thing about telephone line equal opportunity..... anti-monopoly.
But cable is not that way legally and can be and is used in a monopolistic manner. If I want a cable modem here there is only no choice but comcast.
I'm sure the report is a marketing effort making things sound better than they are in order to attract the "jump on the (broad) band wagon"... keep up with the jones...
... we have plenty examples from teh patenting of the wheel to swinging sideways on a swing...
To tell us that its not what the subject or a patent application is but rather how it is written out, how it is made to appear or sound novel and all the other things that are required to qualify as a patentable object.
SOOOO.... and likewise, writting the same subject out in a manner using terms of that which is not patentable can invalidate patents. This can go as far as root or core subjects in software that can then cause a casscading effect thru any number of patents.
Of teh subject matter that is not patentable, you have natural law, physical phenomenon and abstract ideas. (these are the top three)..... Now how about the natural laws of teh physical phenomenon of abstraction creation and use?
have doubts? then see my home page and follow towards the virtual interaction configuration. Or do a google search on - MS book Software factories - and read my comments and follow the links I give..
I seemed to noticed at the company I work at, that they have decided to keep overtime to a minimum for everyone.... OR IN OTEHR WORDS:
If the Bosses can't benefit from overtime than nobody below them will get overtime, cause they don't have any incentive to stay around past 8 hours.....
to clairify, available to the general public would be in teh form of digital internet, which of course can be printed out. (if you only know how many articles I have printed out...hard copy is nice, but I don't need it in fancy paper... as a taxpayer)
to expand on the benefit of availability to the public.... doesn't the wider spread of information such as research only open the door to faster and better advancements, and even competition in teh marketplace?
I mean If the publishing houses want to sponsor some research for which they would then have the exclusive rights to, then whats stopping them, other than affordability?
Isn't the idea of capitalism about getting what you pay for?
If its not than perhaps someone needs to start explaining what capitalism really is... like in social science classes in high school.
Otherwise the term capitalism is going to become attached to concept of deception, bait and switch, pay for something that another, not you, benefist from, consumer deception, taxpayer deception, etc...
On the other hand, if classy publication is a value to the presentation of the research, then why is it apparently not included, payed for, by the grants? That would be a set number of copies that are distributed to qualified parties while also being made available to the general public, who paid for it, for their review (the benefits of which may include young adults looking into what field of work they might chose to enter or study for/in, etc...) Not to mention open peer review...
higher level of abstractions...
on
Database File System
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Keeping the traditional file system is only logical as this database sort of file access is in fact a higher level of abstraction.
Considering there are numerious project of such higher level of file access abstraction going on, it does become a secondary choice for the user if they want to use one of these higher abstraction level file access systems.
To remove the traditional file system altogether would be a mistake, as then it could become a system of babel or keywords.... "what was I thinking when I created that keyword and lets not even get into what crazy joe was thining when he came up with his keywords...
But hey, given how MS based developers would create some obscure dll name and place it in some obscure location in order to copy protect.....
higher level abstractions are useful only to the point that you can, if need be, drop down in abstraction level to get your bearings as to where you are. If you cannot touch physical reality then how do you know you are not floating around aimlessly?
being out of touch with physical reality can evenm be very dangerious and hard to correct.
I'm aware of the goals of dbus. Its these goals that inspired me to name it in the AROS bounty I mention above.
I am also watching with interest DragonflyBSD, as not only does Matt Dillion seem to understand a direction towards simplicity but also wrote a C compiler for Amiga. He also was the originator for csh on the Amiga, which interestingly enough provided a way to send and receive messages via the Amigas IPC ports typically recognized as AREXX ports, however... AREXX didn't need to be running in order to use this csh facility and some software (ie. ImageFX and some of the video toaster) also didn't require AREXX to be running for their IPC functionality to be accessible.
But as you said, I too realize KDE may not embrace dbus as well as some would like..
I'm not pro MS and you would know this had you read my response above. which BTW does address your points.
somehow it just doesn't seem to be research, for you to simply have read it. The research would come in what you would find in the mentioned google search.
to those comments refering to dcop and dbus...and even corba
Yes guys, I'm aware of these, however neither are standard in the general scope of linux or FSF software but are instead desktop specific or to complexicated, and this only helps the divide of flamewars.
for whats it worth I even have a bounty set up for anyone who wants to create a bridge between linux and AROS (Amiga Research OS -- a FOSS project on sourceforge -- that can run hosted on linux. bounty thru Team AROS) via such existing projects as dbus... or dcop... or hell, a bridge that will allow communication to/from AROS to linux IPC whatever used.
but ease of use and ease of adding to existing open source applications (this IPC port) and documentation of what functionality is accessible thru the port in such applications, is needed.
perhaps there is something to be learned from how Amiga did it, and it became standard, easy to impliment and use and generally the apps include documentation of accessible functionality.
dcop only deals with a small percentage of available packages... and dbus currently even less, but not even a handful of apps.
Standard doesn't mean having numerous and obscure way of doing it (IPC at the user level), as that is quite the opposite of standard.
So.... there are better things to do than flamewar over destops... as such is only a non-productive distraction.
its important, I cannot stress that enough, given what MS is up to in teh direction of "software factories" methodology --- their book has missed two publishing dates so far but they are doing what they do instead.... collect feedback on the scope of this direction via shorter articles, websites dedicated to software factories, etc...
google on - software factories MS book - and if you really understand what they are up to, then you too will realize the importance of getting an easy to use and impliment standard IPC in use.... shrug...
Maybe that will be dcop or dbus.... A plan, good, fair or poor, is better than no plan at all. Being destop specific is not a plan for the bigger picture or scope of FOSS packages.
KDE may be the most popular but its not the best that can be done.
getting to the best may just require siome stepping stones, like kde, gnome, your favoirite desktop, etc..
But I think it is amazing how there is still a lack of a standardized general user accessible IPC port so that users who so chose can automate some things on their own.
Free software will never be free until it is easy enough to create that most anyone with a basic undertsanding of software concepts can create software thru the use of general automation tools. Be it that they use such tools to do simple scripting or complex programming.
But one thing is for sure. A standardized user accessible IPC port is required to reach that level of computing usability.
Flamewars? I'm sure there is plenty better to do..... Or are you all waiting for MS to show you via "software factories" of which they are pursuing.
the over weight problem can be greatly improved by removing the cheap and poisonious sweatner of high frutose corn suryp from teh american diet (shown to increase triglicerides by 1/3)
the work place stress matter can be improved by removing the use of such things that inherently cause additional work, such a the use of any MS OS. For in the drive to make people need them, MS has incorporated the manifestation of the intelligence insulting user frustration function.
the solutions are clear, but the problem with implimenting them is two fold, one of which is money related (ie. HFCS is cheap cheap cheap), and the other is failure to communicate the solution (ie. MS marketing skill has nothing to do with honesty.)
For with todays technology there is no need to subsidize a new band for testing success.
To put it in simple terms, a new band establishes themselves a level of popularity, via the internet, where upon reaching a reasonable level (if they can), becomes into a position of having record companies bid on handeling the new artist. Leaving it up to the artist to prove themselves and in the process not tale away from established artist..
such a direction will flush out the record industry dead weight.
.... The MS mindset of making people need them has resulted in a widely integrated manifestation of the user frustration function in their software.
Its this same manifestation of the application of doing things in software to "make people need them" that is causing all the security problems.
This security problem is not fixable by this mindset that cause it.
Its like an alcoholic or drug abuser, their mind is geard towards supporting the continuation of its vise. What I call a "self supporting dependancy". And under such conditions, as those who have admitted it and sough help, you have to have external help in order to be lead out of the blindness of the self supporting mindset.
.... MS considers getting caught in breaking the law and then being fined for it, as a cost of doing business.
MS has no comprehension of the difference between right and wrong.
Even now what they are doing with Longhorn is not anything of an innovation of theirs. But they understand how to distort reality to bias people to think they need MS and while even claiming inventor/innovatorship (in the illusion they create). Facets of consumer fraud.
The patent grab they are doing now is just more of the same distortions of the perceptions of reality and we all know how easy it is to fool the USPTOs perception.
The truth is there is a real physics to abstraction creation and use, and this abstraction physics is like the physics of physical reality, not patentable.
Much of what the USPTO is fooled by is the use of abstractions to describe something in terms of complexity that simple only exist due the effort to make it sound complex and patentable, but much regarding software is not patentable.
MS intends to use these patents to monopolize the future of abstraction physics... indirectly. Yeah teh worlds flat and if you sail of MS land you will fall off...
MS is truely a criminal regarding honesty and many courts have recognized that.
MS became rich off their ability to deceive, using abstractions..... make people need you...
give/sell and man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and you feed him for life.
When you teach someone to do it for themselves, then they won't need you anymore.
MS is a federally found criminal against the consumers. That is what Anit-trust is all about.
screw those who think in terms of double standards, boo hoo, but we can't run a cheating the consumer business otherwise. Though that is not the perception.... is it?
Abstraction physics is not an exclusive to the programming elite, and Certainly NOT MS!
Anyone can be honest (though its not easy), and anyone can be dishonest.... via the bottomless pit of abstractions (the ability to distort the perception of what IS, via abstractions.)
artist would need to register for numerious reasons including keeping the music clean of pirated stuff. Its not for trading music but for publishing original works.
the "own site" makes since but it doesn't help teh general population to find your site.
The iTunes Store is an outlet (a store). but not the only (possible) one.
I was thinking more along the lines of new bands/artist (not to rule out older bands/aritst) seeking web based audiences.
The RIAA will either come to an end or change. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean the IP camel won't break its back.
communicatons on "the net" are not the same as running applications such as accounting, client (business contacts and quoting, etc..) etc... (which can be done without internet connection)..
There is a lot of information within any business that doesn't need to require internet based application rental to access or be held hostage with or made more accessible to corporate espionage (sp?) (theres plenty without it and no need to add more variables to any investigation, hiding, cheating, or busting process...)
To be secure from internet abuses is to simply not connect to the internet with any system containing information you do not want accessed via the internet. either that or provide iron fisted control over all ports by the owner of the system.
...."At its heart is a question that has been around from the very beginning: How does software owned by everyone and by no one survive in a world where copyrights and patents shape the legal landscape?"
I do wonder when it will be that the anti-gpl advocates finally give up or the general population is educated enough to laff at them loudly.
To change linux licensing means to gaher up all the coders (including the remains of any who have died) for the kernel and get them to agree... and that doesn't even begin to approach any of the GPL applications.
Wildstrom is obviously in some illusional world, for it will be far easier to change the IP laws to fit the landscape.
that would make it easy for musicians new and old to put their music on the internet for both free and for pay.
and once enough do use it then others will create sites contaning ratings, etc...
Of course this is aimed at non-riaa musicians but once the ratings for any group or artist gets up there, then that group or artist then have bargining power with RIAA..... to force them to either get better about the treatment of artist of come to an end.
And since such a system will reduce subsidizing new bands and the risk of it, by the RIAA....
Slashdot Mirror
.... first thing that comes into your mind?
A matter of wondering what SCO is becomming associated to in thought.
.... They are asking a question on top of the check that is happening anyways...
.... thats not good enough!!!!!
It can be done much better.
Lets face it, a sales person gets at best 30%... Typically 10-15%
Why should it be any different here?
Because the sales person can be automated.
.... the rate is probably not what they claim, but less than that, especially since I recently saw a story on slashdot saying doubled....
Broadband was/is subsidized by dialup subscribers.
Dialup legal position is one of insuring better competition.... some FCC thing about telephone line equal opportunity..... anti-monopoly.
But cable is not that way legally and can be and is used in a monopolistic manner. If I want a cable modem here there is only no choice but comcast.
I'm sure the report is a marketing effort making things sound better than they are in order to attract the "jump on the (broad) band wagon"... keep up with the jones...
It works against your consumer freedom of choice.
... we have plenty examples from teh patenting of the wheel to swinging sideways on a swing...
To tell us that its not what the subject or a patent application is but rather how it is written out, how it is made to appear or sound novel and all the other things that are required to qualify as a patentable object.
SOOOO.... and likewise, writting the same subject out in a manner using terms of that which is not patentable can invalidate patents. This can go as far as root or core subjects in software that can then cause a casscading effect thru any number of patents.
Of teh subject matter that is not patentable, you have natural law, physical phenomenon and abstract ideas. (these are the top three)..... Now how about the natural laws of teh physical phenomenon of abstraction creation and use?
have doubts? then see my home page and follow towards the virtual interaction configuration. Or do a google search on - MS book Software factories - and read my comments and follow the links I give..
I seemed to noticed at the company I work at, that they have decided to keep overtime to a minimum for everyone.... OR IN OTEHR WORDS:
If the Bosses can't benefit from overtime than nobody below them will get overtime, cause they don't have any incentive to stay around past 8 hours.....
huh?
......
this is about mockery gone to far.
MS didn't like it when lindows
.... MS is fully aware of their intent to embrace and extend via the power of their money, follower base, and deceptive marketing.
Funny how the Justice Department doesn't have the balls to tell MS NO.
to clairify, available to the general public would be in teh form of digital internet, which of course can be printed out. (if you only know how many articles I have printed out...hard copy is nice, but I don't need it in fancy paper... as a taxpayer)
to expand on the benefit of availability to the public.... doesn't the wider spread of information such as research only open the door to faster and better advancements, and even competition in teh marketplace?
the research is paid for, right?
I mean If the publishing houses want to sponsor some research for which they would then have the exclusive rights to, then whats stopping them, other than affordability?
Isn't the idea of capitalism about getting what you pay for?
If its not than perhaps someone needs to start explaining what capitalism really is... like in social science classes in high school.
Otherwise the term capitalism is going to become attached to concept of deception, bait and switch, pay for something that another, not you, benefist from, consumer deception, taxpayer deception, etc...
On the other hand, if classy publication is a value to the presentation of the research, then why is it apparently not included, payed for, by the grants? That would be a set number of copies that are distributed to qualified parties while also being made available to the general public, who paid for it, for their review (the benefits of which may include young adults looking into what field of work they might chose to enter or study for/in, etc...) Not to mention open peer review...
Keeping the traditional file system is only logical as this database sort of file access is in fact a higher level of abstraction.
.....
Considering there are numerious project of such higher level of file access abstraction going on, it does become a secondary choice for the user if they want to use one of these higher abstraction level file access systems.
To remove the traditional file system altogether would be a mistake, as then it could become a system of babel or keywords.... "what was I thinking when I created that keyword and lets not even get into what crazy joe was thining when he came up with his keywords...
But hey, given how MS based developers would create some obscure dll name and place it in some obscure location in order to copy protect
higher level abstractions are useful only to the point that you can, if need be, drop down in abstraction level to get your bearings as to where you are. If you cannot touch physical reality then how do you know you are not floating around aimlessly?
being out of touch with physical reality can evenm be very dangerious and hard to correct.
I'm aware of the goals of dbus. Its these goals that inspired me to name it in the AROS bounty I mention above.
I am also watching with interest DragonflyBSD, as not only does Matt Dillion seem to understand a direction towards simplicity but also wrote a C compiler for Amiga. He also was the originator for csh on the Amiga, which interestingly enough provided a way to send and receive messages via the Amigas IPC ports typically recognized as AREXX ports, however... AREXX didn't need to be running in order to use this csh facility and some software (ie. ImageFX and some of the video toaster) also didn't require AREXX to be running for their IPC functionality to be accessible.
But as you said, I too realize KDE may not embrace dbus as well as some would like..
I'm not pro MS and you would know this had you read my response above. which BTW does address your points.
somehow it just doesn't seem to be research, for you to simply have read it. The research would come in what you would find in the mentioned google search.
to those comments refering to dcop and dbus...and even corba
... or dcop... or hell, a bridge that will allow communication to/from AROS to linux IPC whatever used.
... shrug...
Yes guys, I'm aware of these, however neither are standard in the general scope of linux or FSF software but are instead desktop specific or to complexicated, and this only helps the divide of flamewars.
for whats it worth I even have a bounty set up for anyone who wants to create a bridge between linux and AROS (Amiga Research OS -- a FOSS project on sourceforge -- that can run hosted on linux. bounty thru Team AROS) via such existing projects as dbus
but ease of use and ease of adding to existing open source applications (this IPC port) and documentation of what functionality is accessible thru the port in such applications, is needed.
perhaps there is something to be learned from how Amiga did it, and it became standard, easy to impliment and use and generally the apps include documentation of accessible functionality.
dcop only deals with a small percentage of available packages... and dbus currently even less, but not even a handful of apps.
Standard doesn't mean having numerous and obscure way of doing it (IPC at the user level), as that is quite the opposite of standard.
So.... there are better things to do than flamewar over destops... as such is only a non-productive distraction.
its important, I cannot stress that enough, given what MS is up to in teh direction of "software factories" methodology --- their book has missed two publishing dates so far but they are doing what they do instead.... collect feedback on the scope of this direction via shorter articles, websites dedicated to software factories, etc...
google on - software factories MS book - and if you really understand what they are up to, then you too will realize the importance of getting an easy to use and impliment standard IPC in use.
Maybe that will be dcop or dbus.... A plan, good, fair or poor, is better than no plan at all. Being destop specific is not a plan for the bigger picture or scope of FOSS packages.
KDE may be the most popular but its not the best that can be done.
getting to the best may just require siome stepping stones, like kde, gnome, your favoirite desktop, etc..
But I think it is amazing how there is still a lack of a standardized general user accessible IPC port so that users who so chose can automate some things on their own.
Free software will never be free until it is easy enough to create that most anyone with a basic undertsanding of software concepts can create software thru the use of general automation tools. Be it that they use such tools to do simple scripting or complex programming.
But one thing is for sure. A standardized user accessible IPC port is required to reach that level of computing usability.
Flamewars? I'm sure there is plenty better to do..... Or are you all waiting for MS to show you via "software factories" of which they are pursuing.
the over weight problem can be greatly improved by removing the cheap and poisonious sweatner of high frutose corn suryp from teh american diet (shown to increase triglicerides by 1/3)
the work place stress matter can be improved by removing the use of such things that inherently cause additional work, such a the use of any MS OS. For in the drive to make people need them, MS has incorporated the manifestation of the intelligence insulting user frustration function.
the solutions are clear, but the problem with implimenting them is two fold, one of which is money related (ie. HFCS is cheap cheap cheap), and the other is failure to communicate the solution (ie. MS marketing skill has nothing to do with honesty.)
... to pursue the consumer in legal battels...
For with todays technology there is no need to subsidize a new band for testing success.
To put it in simple terms, a new band establishes themselves a level of popularity, via the internet, where upon reaching a reasonable level (if they can), becomes into a position of having record companies bid on handeling the new artist. Leaving it up to the artist to prove themselves and in the process not tale away from established artist..
such a direction will flush out the record industry dead weight.
.... The MS mindset of making people need them has resulted in a widely integrated manifestation of the user frustration function in their software.
Its this same manifestation of the application of doing things in software to "make people need them" that is causing all the security problems.
This security problem is not fixable by this mindset that cause it.
Its like an alcoholic or drug abuser, their mind is geard towards supporting the continuation of its vise. What I call a "self supporting dependancy". And under such conditions, as those who have admitted it and sough help, you have to have external help in order to be lead out of the blindness of the self supporting mindset.
Whos helping MS??? If anyone can?
...considering how big hard drives are getting....
They really do need to be faster and last longer..
.... MS considers getting caught in breaking the law and then being fined for it, as a cost of doing business.
MS has no comprehension of the difference between right and wrong.
Even now what they are doing with Longhorn is not anything of an innovation of theirs. But they understand how to distort reality to bias people to think they need MS and while even claiming inventor/innovatorship (in the illusion they create). Facets of consumer fraud.
The patent grab they are doing now is just more of the same distortions of the perceptions of reality and we all know how easy it is to fool the USPTOs perception.
The truth is there is a real physics to abstraction creation and use, and this abstraction physics is like the physics of physical reality, not patentable.
Much of what the USPTO is fooled by is the use of abstractions to describe something in terms of complexity that simple only exist due the effort to make it sound complex and patentable, but much regarding software is not patentable.
MS intends to use these patents to monopolize the future of abstraction physics... indirectly. Yeah teh worlds flat and if you sail of MS land you will fall off...
MS is truely a criminal regarding honesty and many courts have recognized that.
MS became rich off their ability to deceive, using abstractions..... make people need you...
give/sell and man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and you feed him for life.
When you teach someone to do it for themselves, then they won't need you anymore.
MS is a federally found criminal against the consumers. That is what Anit-trust is all about.
screw those who think in terms of double standards, boo hoo, but we can't run a cheating the consumer business otherwise. Though that is not the perception.... is it?
Abstraction physics is not an exclusive to the programming elite, and Certainly NOT MS!
Anyone can be honest (though its not easy), and anyone can be dishonest.... via the bottomless pit of abstractions (the ability to distort the perception of what IS, via abstractions.)
kazza is out in regards to what I was suggesting.
artist would need to register for numerious reasons including keeping the music clean of pirated stuff. Its not for trading music but for publishing original works.
the "own site" makes since but it doesn't help teh general population to find your site.
The iTunes Store is an outlet (a store). but not the only (possible) one.
I was thinking more along the lines of new bands/artist (not to rule out older bands/aritst) seeking web based audiences.
The RIAA will either come to an end or change. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean the IP camel won't break its back.
try rebol for internet collaboration.
communicatons on "the net" are not the same as running applications such as accounting, client (business contacts and quoting, etc..) etc... (which can be done without internet connection)..
There is a lot of information within any business that doesn't need to require internet based application rental to access or be held hostage with or made more accessible to corporate espionage (sp?) (theres plenty without it and no need to add more variables to any investigation, hiding, cheating, or busting process...)
To be secure from internet abuses is to simply not connect to the internet with any system containing information you do not want accessed via the internet. either that or provide iron fisted control over all ports by the owner of the system.
...."At its heart is a question that has been around from the very beginning: How does software owned by everyone and by no one survive in a world where copyrights and patents shape the legal landscape?"
I do wonder when it will be that the anti-gpl advocates finally give up or the general population is educated enough to laff at them loudly.
To change linux licensing means to gaher up all the coders (including the remains of any who have died) for the kernel and get them to agree... and that doesn't even begin to approach any of the GPL applications.
Wildstrom is obviously in some illusional world, for it will be far easier to change the IP laws to fit the landscape.
... the idea of combining poor security with placing reliance of your business operations on the net in such manner....
Yeah its a real good Idea you have there MS..... keep up the good work...
-----
Help promote Linux, support MS insanity.
that would make it easy for musicians new and old to put their music on the internet for both free and for pay.
and once enough do use it then others will create sites contaning ratings, etc...
Of course this is aimed at non-riaa musicians but once the ratings for any group or artist gets up there, then that group or artist then have bargining power with RIAA..... to force them to either get better about the treatment of artist of come to an end.
And since such a system will reduce subsidizing new bands and the risk of it, by the RIAA....