I am curious. From reading your posts, you seem to be saying that things are wrong and there is nothing we can do about it. So, why are you still here? Why are you even bothering to comment?
The cost of the land in no way makes the US$2 million more economical. It just means the land itself was not economical either.
To me, this is just a person who is spending way too much money to be able to say "I built my house using a recycled 747 because I wanted all curved shapes". What one could have done with that money is build a house that would have very little ecological impact and used considerably less energy and water.
It takes a lot of money to build a truly "green" house, and the person in this article could have done it, probably for much less than what is being spent now.
Does the guy that designed or built your car get royalties every time you get in it?
No, but the manufacturer, who paid the designer and builder (work for hire) do get paid every time a car (which is an output copy of the design and manufacturing process) is sold
Does the guy that designed or made your clothes get royalties every time you wear them?
No, but the manufacture who paid the designer and maker (work for hire) do get paid every time someone buys the clothes (which is an output copy of the design and creation process).
So, why shouldn't the people who paid for the "work for hire" design and creation of music be paid every time a copy of the music, AKA an output copy of the design and creation process, is created?
I see. We should blindly accept everything from sources YOU like or that support your views while blindly rejecting everything from sources you DON'T like or don't support your views. Yes, very reasonable there.
No, I don't think so.
There is this thing called critical thinking, maybe you should try it some time.
Oh, and I also studied nuclear technology courtesy of the United States military. I know how nuclear devices work. You can mod me flame bait all you want but everything I said was true and everything kdumbshit said is false.
Somehow I doubt that the groups who created this report are impartial and it is well known that if one goes looking for a specific conclusion, one will find the conclusion whether the conclusion is correct or not.
Instead of having the turbine drive the car, have it drive an electric generator. Have a small bank of batteries and use the electricity to drive motors at the hubs.
By decoupling the speed of the car from the speed of the turbine, the turbine can be run at its most efficient speed.
By getting rid of the transmission and replacing the weight with batteries, and having motors at the hubs, the acceleration and fuel consumption can be cut because the vehicle can run on batteries at slow speeds.
First was fuel consumption, because turbines are only efficient at certain high speeds. Great for the interstate, but sucks for commuting and in the city.
The second was noise at speed. The faster they went, the noisier they were, especially behind them. If one can hear, one did not want to be behind a turbine car, especially at speed.
kdawson, you dumbass. You need to learn about a subject before you start making stupid comments.
Here, let me enlighten your stupid ass. A nuclear device will not cause a nuclear explosion unless it is armed. It can cause a conventional explosion but it can not cause a nuclear explosion.
Now, please shut the fuck up about shit you know nothing about, you pathetic shithead.
The GPP was not stating his opinion but rather stating what he believes to be the facts. His main point is that the tech is wrong and we should be afraid of it.
You think that because you are an fucking idiot who thinks that if your candidate loses an election, it must be because of fraud and not because more people voted for the other guy.
From what I have read, the net returns Apple developers see are tiny, if not non-existent. Very, very few apps make enough to justify development costs.
This is not what one would need to convince a good manager. One needs a few good case studies. Testimonials are only good if they are from a business that is almost exactly the same as the business for which one works.
"I want access to these additional six million customers and it's going to cost me an additional $4600 per year to test for them. Worth it or not?"
If the additional six million won't generate the additional $4,600.00 per year, then the answer would be "No, it is not worth it." From what I hear, most apps don't even make $4,600.00 per year.
And, there are some people who are willing to pay to not have to wait to take those steps and wait those 30 minutes. They would rather pay the $30 to get an up-to-date system that they just plug up and play. The people who are paying are paying for convenience.
Hell, go out and offer to do the update for $15.00 and make a little money.
knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
But, Sony has an affirmative defense in that they did not intentionally cause damage, but rather said damage was an unintended side-effect of the DRM they purchased from a third party.
Slashdot Mirror
I am curious. From reading your posts, you seem to be saying that things are wrong and there is nothing we can do about it. So, why are you still here? Why are you even bothering to comment?
Citation needed, from a reliable, non-biased source.
The cost of the land in no way makes the US$2 million more economical. It just means the land itself was not economical either.
To me, this is just a person who is spending way too much money to be able to say "I built my house using a recycled 747 because I wanted all curved shapes". What one could have done with that money is build a house that would have very little ecological impact and used considerably less energy and water.
It takes a lot of money to build a truly "green" house, and the person in this article could have done it, probably for much less than what is being spent now.
No, but the manufacturer, who paid the designer and builder (work for hire) do get paid every time a car (which is an output copy of the design and manufacturing process) is sold
No, but the manufacture who paid the designer and maker (work for hire) do get paid every time someone buys the clothes (which is an output copy of the design and creation process).
So, why shouldn't the people who paid for the "work for hire" design and creation of music be paid every time a copy of the music, AKA an output copy of the design and creation process, is created?
I see. We should blindly accept everything from sources YOU like or that support your views while blindly rejecting everything from sources you DON'T like or don't support your views. Yes, very reasonable there.
No, I don't think so.
There is this thing called critical thinking, maybe you should try it some time.
Oh, and I also studied nuclear technology courtesy of the United States military. I know how nuclear devices work. You can mod me flame bait all you want but everything I said was true and everything kdumbshit said is false.
Somehow I doubt that the groups who created this report are impartial and it is well known that if one goes looking for a specific conclusion, one will find the conclusion whether the conclusion is correct or not.
Instead of having the turbine drive the car, have it drive an electric generator. Have a small bank of batteries and use the electricity to drive motors at the hubs.
By decoupling the speed of the car from the speed of the turbine, the turbine can be run at its most efficient speed.
By getting rid of the transmission and replacing the weight with batteries, and having motors at the hubs, the acceleration and fuel consumption can be cut because the vehicle can run on batteries at slow speeds.
First was fuel consumption, because turbines are only efficient at certain high speeds. Great for the interstate, but sucks for commuting and in the city.
The second was noise at speed. The faster they went, the noisier they were, especially behind them. If one can hear, one did not want to be behind a turbine car, especially at speed.
kdawson, you dumbass. You need to learn about a subject before you start making stupid comments.
Here, let me enlighten your stupid ass. A nuclear device will not cause a nuclear explosion unless it is armed. It can cause a conventional explosion but it can not cause a nuclear explosion.
Now, please shut the fuck up about shit you know nothing about, you pathetic shithead.
The problem is that most people still won't care. In fact, many people see locked-down hardware, and software too, as an advantage
The GPP was not stating his opinion but rather stating what he believes to be the facts. His main point is that the tech is wrong and we should be afraid of it.
Citation Needed
Honestly, you sound like a paranoid, Luddite, conspiracy theorist.
This is obviously flamebait, so how did it get modded insightful? Oh, wait, I forgot how the moderation system works on slashdot. Never mind.
You think that because you are an fucking idiot who thinks that if your candidate loses an election, it must be because of fraud and not because more people voted for the other guy.
Funny, my rights haven't been crushed. Please tell me which rights of yours have been crushed.
From what I have read, the net returns Apple developers see are tiny, if not non-existent. Very, very few apps make enough to justify development costs.
This is not what one would need to convince a good manager. One needs a few good case studies. Testimonials are only good if they are from a business that is almost exactly the same as the business for which one works.
Also, if one convinces one's boss to go with a FOSS solution and it fails, guess where the blame will fall.
It doesn't really because there are many more Android OS variants than there are variations of Windows.
"I want access to these additional six million customers and it's going to cost me an additional $4600 per year to test for them. Worth it or not?"
If the additional six million won't generate the additional $4,600.00 per year, then the answer would be "No, it is not worth it." From what I hear, most apps don't even make $4,600.00 per year.
And, there are no homosexuals in Iran either.
And, there are some people who are willing to pay to not have to wait to take those steps and wait those 30 minutes. They would rather pay the $30 to get an up-to-date system that they just plug up and play. The people who are paying are paying for convenience.
Hell, go out and offer to do the update for $15.00 and make a little money.
I really don't see the problem.
But, Sony has an affirmative defense in that they did not intentionally cause damage, but rather said damage was an unintended side-effect of the DRM they purchased from a third party.