The 'social contract' aspect only holds up if there is knowledge conveyed to the consumer of the expectations prior to performing the act which would evoke the social contract. That is, the consumer would have to know that pop-up ads and the like were going to be presented, and as such accepts them as part of visiting the site. Proceeding constitutes consent at that point. It is not a social contract to say 'Now that you're here, here's your end of the bargain...' etc. Of course, telling a potential visitor that they are about to be bombarded with annoying ads would most likely erode traffic, hence prior warning probably won't happen. They also can't have it both ways.
Since no site will warn me about ad content prior to visiting their site, no 'social contract exists', and I can freely block them as I please.
I was really looking forward to HL2, but now I'm going to skip it.
First, the whole activation thing is just too inconvenient. It smacks of the RIAA-conspiracy model of 'You will pay us this much for the product, you will use the product in this way, and you will like it.' I think that a product should be at my convenience, to use and I see fit, and the only thing the publisher should be concerned with is that I actually paid for the product. But what Valve is doing is just too much.
Second, I usually only have time to play games when I'm on the road. That means I use a laptop. This thing requires me to have my battery-sucking CD attached all the time, and that's a deal killer.
Hey, Valve, how about making a really good product and then selling it for a really good price? Then most of the 'pirates' out there wouldn't bother to steal it because its not worth the effort. Sure, there would still be the losers that would do it for the challenge, but who would really bother to steal something that's really cool yet costs $20 bucks? You might actually sell 100x more copies than are stolen. In other words, how about giving some value for the money you're charging? Something to think about.
Meanwhile, I'm putting my dollars where they'll actually be appreciated.
Peter Norvig posted a great political essay today. He dissects the political issues for this debate with great reason and skill...
After reading this 'great' article, it came across as just another pro-liberal rant. The man is obviously biased, and as such, his reasoning is clouded, and his findings contaminated. Place this on the top of the tripe pile. The icing is in his conclusion:
"If these two candidates were applying for the job of president, Bush would not get past the initial phone screen. Kerry scores well on all accounts and appears to be a very strong candidate. No interview process is perfect, but this one seems clear-cut."
IOW - his entire 'paper' can be summarized in three words: "Vote for Kerry."
Its a long tenet in business that you expend 80% of [resource] on 20% of [service]. In a support organization, 80% of the support person's calls will service just 20% of customers. Some customers beat that curve heavilly. In days past, I always craved for a 'go-to-hell' fund where we could just buy the product back so the customer would go away - it would be way more profitable, and reduce the stress on the support team.
But, as with most PHB's, reducing the figure in the 'revenue' column is always more painful than reducing the figure in the 'cost' column.
Things, including pornography, were much less accessible to children because they weren't readily available.
and
... that decision should be left up to the parents. But, of course, people today don't like to take responsibility for their actions... instead being real parents.
This has nothing to do with not being 'real' parents. It has to do with access. You are correct, in the day when to get a nudie book you had to ask for it from behind the counter, or sneak a peek at your friend's dad's stash, it was much less accessable. Now they want to make it freely available in the public libraries!
You're incorrect in that this does not need to be in the courts. The miscreants that create/market this tripe don't care about family values or our children - other than to turn them into future consumers for their garbage. Only through the courts can we attempt to bridle them into some corner of civil responsibility.
Parents can certainly shield their children from this in their homes. Its when the children are outside of the home that it becomes a problem. You can't monitor your kids 100% of the time.
This type of stuff, while clearly 'free speech', must be kept behind the 'virtual counter', with an accountable gatekeeper, that takes all precautions to prevent the underage from accessing it. The only way to do that in a free-market society is with government regulation and the threat of criminal penalty.
If you concede that adults must have access to this, then the big problem becomes how to prevent children from having access. I think it should be part of the CODB - if you're going to market a product that can only (legally) be used by one market segment, you have to provide solutions to prevent the other segments from getting to it.
It's a big problem - but don't assume that just because kids can get to this stuff that parents aren't doing their job.
The higher TCO for Linux lies in people like yourself. As your comments demonstrate, you have a highly detailed understanding of Linux and its applications, and because of that knowledge and experience you keep things running smoothly. In your situation, the overall CTO to your company is limited pretty much to your salary and the electricity to run the boxes (and any service contracts, leases, etc.)
TCO also comes in the form of lost productivity as people learn to use the new OS, etc.
I'm pretty much like you are. I have an IQ of 139, and I didn't find college very interesting and the computer boom hit, so I went into it. Now, I'm 43 in a field that's tanking and will continue to tank for the next four- or five-years, I'm deep in debt from being out of work for two years, I work in a job I hate and it sucks, and I have no degree to fall back on.
Right now, degreed CS dudes are a dime a dozen. So I'm going back to business school, and when I get out in 2008, hopefully I'll be in a position to put 30 years of CS experience coupled with a BS in entrepreneurship might influence a bank to lend me some money and start my own business, or convince someone that I'm qualified to run theirs.
The skinny is that unless you're one of the elite-elite (as opposed to 1337, of course), that is, the kind of elite where the NSA comes and gets you and puts you in a dungeon because your so elite, you will need to interface with the rest of the world. Interfacing with the rest of the world means putting up with all kinds of bullshit like bills, taxes, asshole cops, politicians, and the like. And you spend 90% of your time doing what you don't want to do in order to spend the other 10% doing exactly what you want. This ratio can drop to something like 40/60 if you happen to like your job (and mowing the lawn).
So, regardless of how much it sucks, finish college before going to the next step. It doesn't matter how hard the major is, a good deal of the time it will be boring.
Agreed. I have never, never ever, met a Ph.D that was worth a toss. In fact, most of the Ph.D's I worked with had no background in computer science whatsoever. By and large their Ph.D's were handed to them by their 'sponsors' from their universities, basically as a quid pro quo for doing research for the sponsor.
For me, Ph.D adds no points to a CV, and in most cases, gets expedited to file 13.
Lawrence, did publish the two TOS Mudd episodes in (the badly named) 'Mudd's Angels' (since it came about during the Charlie's Angels hype.) That link is here.
I agree that Google should not be selling AdWords that mimic brand names to competitors. This should, I think, have the same "protections" as domain names. That is, if bmw.com pointed to a Ford site, then BMW would and does have recourse to say that they have a 'claim' on the domain bmw.com. Now if Podunc Insurance Co. buys the AdWord 'AXA' from Google, so that people searching for 'AXA' suddenly get an ad for Podunc, then I think that AXA has an interest in telling Google to stop the practice.
Having said that, I believe its wrong for AXA to sue (or should have to sue) over this. Google should have the good sense to settle such issues via an ombudsman or similar remedy. In my example, Google would tell Podunc sorry, but the AdWord 'AXA' mimics a trademark, can only be used by AXA.
Now, if AXA sued Google without any attempt to resolve the issue outside of the courts, then AXA deserves to be/.'d into oblivion. Its getting real old how companies are turning any transgression into a revenue stream.
Repent! You $@!#!@$ D&D Sinners!
on
D&D Is 30
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I personaly kind of like this system, which is by itself a better, more modern way of artist compensation than copyright is.
The hole in the argument is the presumption of guilt. I should not have to pay a levy on a product because others use it to pirate. In truth, this is yet-another-way to wring yet-more-money out of poeple. It might make a difference if the money were used to combat piracy, but since it goes into the unions-producers-agents collective pockets, its just another way to make a buck with no work. The MPAA tried this in the US back in the early 80's and it was defeated on the grounds that because it can be used for piracy, doesn't mean that it will be used for piracy. This shifts the burden back on to law enforcement where it belongs.
The French method is a means to derive revenue from illegal activities. In doing so, they are no better than criminals themselves.
YCC Chick: What seems to be wrong with my car?
Tow Truck Driver: Welp, it seems you've done busted a fan belt.
YCCC: Golly! Can you fix it? I mean, I'm stuck out here in the rain in the middle of nowhere.
TTD: No problem, little lady. Fan belts aint't no real trick. Happens all the time.
YCCC: Will it cost very much? I mean, I just spent all my money on this groovy car built by women, for women.
TTD: The fan belt will cost you about twelve bucks, but the installtion will be about twelve-hundred.
YCCC: WTF!?
TTD: Welp, you see we gotta tow this honey to a Volvo dealer, and they have to take the front end apart to install the fan belt. Shouldn't take more than a couple of days.
YCCC: (crying) But, its so easy to refill the washer fluid...
From the above cited article Bourbon Drinker Sues For Son's Birth Defects:
In his opening statement April 24, a lawyer for the Thorps, Barry M. Epstein of Newark, N.J., said he intends to prove that Michael was the victim of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and deserves enough money to take care of him for the rest of his life.
Every time I read a statement like this, I consciously append "... less 30% and expenses."
it would be naive of us to think they are there for any other reason than to generate revenue.
Well, yes, but you can till be decent while you're doing it. There's also something to be said about getting rich while positively contributing to the community at large. What this smacks of is pure unadulterated greed.
He's moonlighting, for profit, in his employers's own line of work
I wasn't aware Apple was in the Netflix management business.
If Apple had the same type of program in their roadmap, or were considering it (and can PROVE it), AND this employee had access to that program and/or was working on it, THEN Apple would have a claim as you suggest.
However, now that Apple has fully converted to the Dark Side, he would have been much wiser to release it anonymously or dump it in the public domain. He could have still requested $10 donations.
But I can't. I've always admired their innovation and 'bad-boy' attitude, the willingness to do it different, not to mention the fact that they're right most of the time. Jobs is always 10 years ahead of the curve. But their 'Apple Developers Program', their closed architecture, their 'Mine! Mine!' mindset, and now this - brutefully stealing work from their employees, just says they're just in it for the money.
I suppose they learned this behavior from M$. Sad, really.
On the cross-link that describes the history of the plot and bon-fire night, the final paragraph reads:
Today, almost 400 hundred years later, little has changed and though 'Guys' are still placed on top of bonfires, (along with the occasional pope and unpopular contemporary politician) it is simply the continuation of a harmless tradition - the anti-catholic sentiment having long since disappeared.
So, burning the Pope in effigy is not an anti-Catholic sentiment? Hmm....
Anytime you can make a 20x return it is a good invstement. The author says it correctly when stating they're making their decisions in a moral vacuume. It may not be right, but it is profitable.
Outside all the moral arguments that SCO is slime, et cetera, if you asked the question 'will SCO's FUD drive SCO stock up?', then we all could have made money. The majority of us, however, would consider such gains blood money, and abstain. Others will, as you pointed out, laugh at us all the way to the bank, and back.
Thanks, but to clarify, I was looking for a smaller copy of the book besides the hardback and other paper back copy of the book I already own (don't have enough room in my backpack), not to mention the ebook I have on my laptop. Very cool book indeed, well worth keeping. Close. Right next to HHGG.
Slashdot Mirror
Since no site will warn me about ad content prior to visiting their site, no 'social contract exists', and I can freely block them as I please.
First, the whole activation thing is just too inconvenient. It smacks of the RIAA-conspiracy model of 'You will pay us this much for the product, you will use the product in this way, and you will like it.' I think that a product should be at my convenience, to use and I see fit, and the only thing the publisher should be concerned with is that I actually paid for the product. But what Valve is doing is just too much.
Second, I usually only have time to play games when I'm on the road. That means I use a laptop. This thing requires me to have my battery-sucking CD attached all the time, and that's a deal killer.
Hey, Valve, how about making a really good product and then selling it for a really good price? Then most of the 'pirates' out there wouldn't bother to steal it because its not worth the effort. Sure, there would still be the losers that would do it for the challenge, but who would really bother to steal something that's really cool yet costs $20 bucks? You might actually sell 100x more copies than are stolen. In other words, how about giving some value for the money you're charging? Something to think about.
Meanwhile, I'm putting my dollars where they'll actually be appreciated.
This sounds very much like the maze cars of Logan's Run fame.
It's a JOKE - indicating something inherently wrong with the basis of the system. Like 42 = 7 * 9, or the Spock beating the computer at chess...
But, as with most PHB's, reducing the figure in the 'revenue' column is always more painful than reducing the figure in the 'cost' column.
and
This has nothing to do with not being 'real' parents. It has to do with access. You are correct, in the day when to get a nudie book you had to ask for it from behind the counter, or sneak a peek at your friend's dad's stash, it was much less accessable. Now they want to make it freely available in the public libraries!
You're incorrect in that this does not need to be in the courts. The miscreants that create/market this tripe don't care about family values or our children - other than to turn them into future consumers for their garbage. Only through the courts can we attempt to bridle them into some corner of civil responsibility.
Parents can certainly shield their children from this in their homes. Its when the children are outside of the home that it becomes a problem. You can't monitor your kids 100% of the time.
This type of stuff, while clearly 'free speech', must be kept behind the 'virtual counter', with an accountable gatekeeper, that takes all precautions to prevent the underage from accessing it. The only way to do that in a free-market society is with government regulation and the threat of criminal penalty.
If you concede that adults must have access to this, then the big problem becomes how to prevent children from having access. I think it should be part of the CODB - if you're going to market a product that can only (legally) be used by one market segment, you have to provide solutions to prevent the other segments from getting to it.
It's a big problem - but don't assume that just because kids can get to this stuff that parents aren't doing their job.
TCO also comes in the form of lost productivity as people learn to use the new OS, etc.
Right now, degreed CS dudes are a dime a dozen. So I'm going back to business school, and when I get out in 2008, hopefully I'll be in a position to put 30 years of CS experience coupled with a BS in entrepreneurship might influence a bank to lend me some money and start my own business, or convince someone that I'm qualified to run theirs.
The skinny is that unless you're one of the elite-elite (as opposed to 1337, of course), that is, the kind of elite where the NSA comes and gets you and puts you in a dungeon because your so elite, you will need to interface with the rest of the world. Interfacing with the rest of the world means putting up with all kinds of bullshit like bills, taxes, asshole cops, politicians, and the like. And you spend 90% of your time doing what you don't want to do in order to spend the other 10% doing exactly what you want. This ratio can drop to something like 40/60 if you happen to like your job (and mowing the lawn).
So, regardless of how much it sucks, finish college before going to the next step. It doesn't matter how hard the major is, a good deal of the time it will be boring.
For me, Ph.D adds no points to a CV, and in most cases, gets expedited to file 13.
Lawrence, did publish the two TOS Mudd episodes in (the badly named) 'Mudd's Angels' (since it came about during the Charlie's Angels hype.) That link is here.
Having said that, I believe its wrong for AXA to sue (or should have to sue) over this. Google should have the good sense to settle such issues via an ombudsman or similar remedy. In my example, Google would tell Podunc sorry, but the AdWord 'AXA' mimics a trademark, can only be used by AXA.
Now, if AXA sued Google without any attempt to resolve the issue outside of the courts, then AXA deserves to be /.'d into oblivion. Its getting real old how companies are turning any transgression into a revenue stream.
Jack T. Chick has spoken!
The hole in the argument is the presumption of guilt. I should not have to pay a levy on a product because others use it to pirate. In truth, this is yet-another-way to wring yet-more-money out of poeple. It might make a difference if the money were used to combat piracy, but since it goes into the unions-producers-agents collective pockets, its just another way to make a buck with no work. The MPAA tried this in the US back in the early 80's and it was defeated on the grounds that because it can be used for piracy, doesn't mean that it will be used for piracy. This shifts the burden back on to law enforcement where it belongs.
The French method is a means to derive revenue from illegal activities. In doing so, they are no better than criminals themselves.
Typical.
Tow Truck Driver: Welp, it seems you've done busted a fan belt.
YCCC: Golly! Can you fix it? I mean, I'm stuck out here in the rain in the middle of nowhere.
TTD: No problem, little lady. Fan belts aint't no real trick. Happens all the time.
YCCC: Will it cost very much? I mean, I just spent all my money on this groovy car built by women, for women.
TTD: The fan belt will cost you about twelve bucks, but the installtion will be about twelve-hundred.
YCCC: WTF!?
TTD: Welp, you see we gotta tow this honey to a Volvo dealer, and they have to take the front end apart to install the fan belt. Shouldn't take more than a couple of days.
YCCC: (crying) But, its so easy to refill the washer fluid...
Give me a freakin break...
In response to your request for certification that we have not contributed, alledged and unidentified, SCO IP into Linux, our official response:
Nuts!
Yours truly,
Mr. Shadow Director Software Support XYZ Corporation
That 'tripod thingy' is his hair infuser, or perhaps this.
Every time I read a statement like this, I consciously append "... less 30% and expenses."
I wasn't aware Apple was in the Netflix management business.
If Apple had the same type of program in their roadmap, or were considering it (and can PROVE it), AND this employee had access to that program and/or was working on it, THEN Apple would have a claim as you suggest.
However, now that Apple has fully converted to the Dark Side, he would have been much wiser to release it anonymously or dump it in the public domain. He could have still requested $10 donations.
Let his fate be an omen to all that follow...
I suppose they learned this behavior from M$. Sad, really.
So, burning the Pope in effigy is not an anti-Catholic sentiment? Hmm....
The Orion.
Outside all the moral arguments that SCO is slime, et cetera, if you asked the question 'will SCO's FUD drive SCO stock up?', then we all could have made money. The majority of us, however, would consider such gains blood money, and abstain. Others will, as you pointed out, laugh at us all the way to the bank, and back.
The TPB is just too big.
Obvious crude humor mercifully withheld.