If a bomb was dropped on Boston and the FSF headquarters was vaporized and fsf.org went down today, nothing would change tomorrow. Linux would still be free for download, under the same license it's always been under.
The wording of the GPL is still valid. The GPL wouldn't "dissapear".
Similarly, if you like the OPL, keep using it. It's still a perfectly valid, legal license.
If he's so smart, then why can't he make a profit on anything besides his illegal monopolies?
This is +5 insightful??!
Microsoft started in a college dorm room. Within twenty-five years, Bill Gates turned it into an empire. In the competitive market for software in the 80s and early 90s, Microsoft swept over the competition, thanks largely to Bill Gates's ability to move MS into the right place at the right time, signing the right contracts with the right companies.
Now, he's reaping the benefits -- they've got $40 billion in cash, a 90%+ marketshare, and, yes, a monopoly. Bill Gates would eat you for breakfast in a "non-monopoly situation." Lord knows, he's done it to enough other companies.
Now, I'm sure Bill's still got a few tricks up his sleeve. If he were forced to compete in a free market, he'd probably still be doing pretty damn good for Microsoft. But why would he want to exert himself like that, if he can spend less effort maintaining the status quo, where not only does Microsoft make a profit, but they exceed the GDP of several small countries?
I'm certainly not an MS fanboy, but wisecracks like the parent post's are just ignorant. Monopolies don't come out of thin air -- you get to be the monopoly by being the best at the market (even, or probably especially, if that means being ruthless).
The problem is that, if you look at history, the impetus for colonizing mars just isn't there. Sure, the people who went wanted to go "because it was there," but the finances were for other reasons.
"Because it's there" doesn't cut it.
There were a few basic reasons why governments and people ponied up enormous amounts of cash for colonization efforts:
- They could make money off of resources to be found there. - They could exploit people there. And probably make money off of them. - Religious / political freedom - There was a military advantage to being there
There's not much on Mars. But even if the entire place was made of solid gold, it would cost more to ship it back to Earth than it could be sold for here.
There aren't Martians. If there are, they'd probably kick our asses though, given that they're used to the environment and we're not.
There's not really a military advantage to Mars. The only nation realistically capable of reaching Mars today is America. And it takes us all of 6 weeks to demolish a small country.
Religious freedom? Americans have it. And again, since no dictatorships can reach Mars, those who live in them won't be heading there soon.
So, sorry folks, I don't think it'll happen in our lifetime:(
I own CDs of several artists... somewhere. I know they're under a pile of crap.
But when I want to listen to that one song from a Dave Matthews Band CD that I own, it's faster for me to fire up Kazaa, pull the MP3 down the T1, and play it, vs. rooting through all my crap to find the CD.
That's legal, fair use. (Isn't it?) However, the RIAA would only see "Dave Matthews Band - Crush.mp3" flying to my computer, and slap me with a lawsuit. That's a hassle I can't afford (in time or money) to deal with.
Now, yes, there are people who just download songs they haven't purchased a copy of. But, my point is that the RIAA can't just assert that because the music is theirs vs. being an MP3 of an indie band, it's illegal for me to download it.
But... I think that it used to be that phone numbers were dished out in units of 10,000. You'd get an entire exchange at once (xxx.yyy.0000->9999).
However, with cel systems coming in and such, there was suddenly a great demand for new exchanges. And they started to run out. Four cel phone carriers in an area code, now you need (at least) four new exchanges.
So instead, somebody decided that they wouldn't give out an entire exchange at once. Just a few hundred numbers within the exchange. This means that an exchange is no longer tied to a particular carrier.
If that's the case, then there's no reason that a number can't be portable. Carriers have to get used to not owning an entire exchange, and only use specific numbers within the exchange, etc.
Therefore, there's no technical reason why number portability can't be implemented.
Now, is it a right? Nope. *But*.... lots of people don't change cel service because there's a lot of inertia involved in changing your phone number. Well, sure, a college kid might not care if he has to tell two dozen friends a new number. But what if you're a businessman, and gave out your cel phone number on 10,000 business cards over the past two years? Now you're stuck with one provider.
This lets providers jerk you around a lot more than if it were a totally open market where you could say "I'm going to switch." So, it's just a nice pro-consumer move.
The CD can be described as practically a religious experience to listen to. No single could ever do it justice.
But damn, Green Day? Listening to the song "Minority" never made me need to listen to the next track. It's a single. It's released on MTV as a music video. as. a. single. They themselves have marketted it, through MTV, as a song that is wholely complete in and of itself.
Tommy, on the other hand, was conceived of as an entire fucking movie.
(Same with The Wall, by Pink Floyd.)
You can't tell me that I'm supposed to be happy with watching their music video of a "hit single," but not purchase it as a single...
Re:I see Windows as a challenge...
on
Special Ops
·
· Score: 4, Funny
...but someone who can make a windows box truely secure... now they've done something!!
Not to mention that the RIAA only considers one definition of sharing: "To loan."
People in support groups, for example, "share" stories with one another all the time, when they tell others how they're feeling, and empathize with one another. Is the "sharer" deprived of his emotions while he explains them to others around him?
To share can mean to loan, but arguably, I'm also "sharing" if I invite a friend over to watch a movie at my house that I just bought.
I speak as a programmer who works with other programmers, a hobbyist programmer who likes to geek out with other hardcore hobbyists, and a manager who hires programmers.
And clearly, you also speak as someone who has forgotten what it's like to be nine years old, and interacts with elementary schoolers infrequently.
But that's okay, I'm not as elitist as you, so I'll forgive you and actually explain what I mean by that.
I started programming in 3rd grade. I had a book that taught me IBM BASIC. Pretty watered-down stuff. And as smart as I am (and was), it was hard, mostly because of my age.
If you're 20 and want to learn how to program, well, some tutorials online and some books from Barnes'n'Noble's will probably do you just fine. If not, maybe liberal arts is for you after all. However, expecting 3rd and 4th graders to grasp the concepts of object-oriented development on their own is a bit of a tall order.
Studies have shown that abstract spatial reasoning skills are often not fully developed until ages 12-14. In English: kids have a hard time imagining things they can't see.
Coming up with the abstract logic behind a virtual system of "objects", frankly, would be a very big challenge for any small kid, ESPECIALLY if all s/he had to go on was highly technical documents from Sun's website.
I can vividly remember being a "budding young programmer." And the "APIs" I can remember were "INPUT A$" and "PRINT B$". And that was still challenging enough. Expecting a 9 year old to grok BufferedIOReader, I think, is a bit foolish.
But, then again, the world doesn't need those easily-overwhelmed folks, so maybe I should just be a bit harsher.
Turns out it doesn't matter on new jets - only ones certified pre-'89. So why don't they let people use their mobiles on the newer planes where it's not an issue? Back to the old 'conspiracy theories' on that one.
You give people too much credit. No conspiracy theory here, sorry.
*You* may ask the flight attendant when the plane was manufactured, and be conscientious enough to only use your phone on newer planes. But let's face it. There are a lot of ignorant and downright inconsiderate people out there.
I can just hear people saying, "Oh, my brother used his phone on a flight a week ago, I guess it means I can use mine now."
Nobody's going to take prohibitions on older planes seriously if newer planes allow the use of said items. It's far more effective to just disallow them everywhere.
A desktop PC was my main workhorse. I had a palm pilot which I kept due dates and whatnot in. Notes for all classes in good old-fashioned spiral-bound notebooks. Taken with old fashioned pens. I was actually given a laptop as a gift midyear. Did I like it? Sure. Was the wireless cool? Yup. I could play games in my friend's dorm room with it. Did I take it to class? Nope.
For one thing, a laptop can't really take notes in math class. For another, it weighs five lbs. My notebook doesn't. And finally, they really are loud and annoying to those around you. If you do the math, everyone in that room for that lecture is paying about $50 to hear the prof speak for that hour. Don't be a jackass and IM away at your friends during that time. You should concentrate, and you owe it to others nearby to let them do the same.
So: laptop worth it? Sometimes it's nice to use in a library. But they usually have computers there from which you can send email back to your dorm. A desktop'll be cheaper, and will do what needs doing.
As for assignments, I was given the PDA, so I used it to keep track of them, and yes, it was handy. However, upon reflection, it was nothing that a small pocket notebook wouldn't have handled equally as gracefully.
So: Got lots of cash or lots of generous relatives? Spring for whatever you'd like. You'll find a use for it all, I'm sure.
Don't have infinite cash? Pen'n'paper tends to get the job done as effectively now as it ever has. Yes, you need a computer to write reports on. A desktop is cheaper, harder for others to steal, and you'll probably want the large speakers that accompany it, anyway, to play your monster MP3 collection on, rather than tinny little laptop speakers.;) So, if you can only buy one computer, and you're price-conscious, I'd recommend a desktop. Mac, PC, really doesn't matter.
Just remember: it's not about what you buy. You're going to do the best in college by trying hard, staying focussed, and being a good student. Nothing you can throw in your backpack will make college "easier" or "better." Just try to learn something the best way you know how, and you probably will do okay.
(FWIW, the kids who were habitual laptop-in-class types tended to have lower GPAs than the rest of us, but that's just one observation, and a debate for another time...)
Hmm.. Targetted ads *might* be good. But they might also be a bad thing sometimes.
Scenario 1: Tivo sends you (a young guy) ads about beer, SUVs, and Levi's jeans. It sends the woman in the apartment down the hall ads for women's clothing.
Scenario 2: Because of interesting purchases, viewing habits, whatever on your part, it sends you ads for women's clothing.
Scenario 3: For the same reason, it sends you those same ads, and your buds come over to watch the football game on your bigscreen TV. *Insert awkward pause in conversation here*.
Targetted ads sound a-ok on the surface, but sometimes, it's nice to be anonymous.
Re:nostalgic
on
Ximian's Back
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Second that.
I've bought two new computers (one a dell, the other hp) in the past 18 months. They both booted directly int 1024x768.
Slashdot Mirror
Broadband isn't just about the bandwidth. It's about latency too.
The traffic you generate from a game of Counterstrike online is only about 2 Kb/s, up and down.
However, you need those few bytes sent *fast* -- 50 ms, as opposed to 250 ms.
Sorry, when vi died a while back, ":s//" stopped working....
Well, the next series of ships will be ready for 2015... right in time to transport Eva 02 from Germany to Japan :)
(For those who don't get it: Watch Neon Genesis: Evangelion...)
?
Who goes into fusion research, or booster design, or even AI?
Short answer: Nobody.
Why: Because nobody'll hire kids to go into any of the above.
If a bomb was dropped on Boston and the FSF headquarters was vaporized and fsf.org went down today, nothing would change tomorrow. Linux would still be free for download, under the same license it's always been under.
The wording of the GPL is still valid. The GPL wouldn't "dissapear".
Similarly, if you like the OPL, keep using it. It's still a perfectly valid, legal license.
If he's so smart, then why can't he make a profit on anything besides his illegal monopolies?
This is +5 insightful??!
Microsoft started in a college dorm room. Within twenty-five years, Bill Gates turned it into an empire. In the competitive market for software in the 80s and early 90s, Microsoft swept over the competition, thanks largely to Bill Gates's ability to move MS into the right place at the right time, signing the right contracts with the right companies.
Now, he's reaping the benefits -- they've got $40 billion in cash, a 90%+ marketshare, and, yes, a monopoly. Bill Gates would eat you for breakfast in a "non-monopoly situation." Lord knows, he's done it to enough other companies.
Now, I'm sure Bill's still got a few tricks up his sleeve. If he were forced to compete in a free market, he'd probably still be doing pretty damn good for Microsoft. But why would he want to exert himself like that, if he can spend less effort maintaining the status quo, where not only does Microsoft make a profit, but they exceed the GDP of several small countries?
I'm certainly not an MS fanboy, but wisecracks like the parent post's are just ignorant. Monopolies don't come out of thin air -- you get to be the monopoly by being the best at the market (even, or probably especially, if that means being ruthless).
The problem is that, if you look at history, the impetus for colonizing mars just isn't there. Sure, the people who went wanted to go "because it was there," but the finances were for other reasons.
:(
"Because it's there" doesn't cut it.
There were a few basic reasons why governments and people ponied up enormous amounts of cash for colonization efforts:
- They could make money off of resources to be found there.
- They could exploit people there. And probably make money off of them.
- Religious / political freedom
- There was a military advantage to being there
There's not much on Mars. But even if the entire place was made of solid gold, it would cost more to ship it back to Earth than it could be sold for here.
There aren't Martians. If there are, they'd probably kick our asses though, given that they're used to the environment and we're not.
There's not really a military advantage to Mars. The only nation realistically capable of reaching Mars today is America. And it takes us all of 6 weeks to demolish a small country.
Religious freedom? Americans have it. And again, since no dictatorships can reach Mars, those who live in them won't be heading there soon.
So, sorry folks, I don't think it'll happen in our lifetime
Right before "Shoots Jar Jar," you forgot the line:
:)
Indiana Jones: Realizes he has only one bullet left in gun.
vi!
Ripping my CDs would involve finding them. :)
And the bandwidth comes with the dorm fee.
... but then there are gray areas.
I own CDs of several artists... somewhere. I know they're under a pile of crap.
But when I want to listen to that one song from a Dave Matthews Band CD that I own, it's faster for me to fire up Kazaa, pull the MP3 down the T1, and play it, vs. rooting through all my crap to find the CD.
That's legal, fair use. (Isn't it?) However, the RIAA would only see "Dave Matthews Band - Crush.mp3" flying to my computer, and slap me with a lawsuit. That's a hassle I can't afford (in time or money) to deal with.
Now, yes, there are people who just download songs they haven't purchased a copy of. But, my point is that the RIAA can't just assert that because the music is theirs vs. being an MP3 of an indie band, it's illegal for me to download it.
Disclaimer: IANATCE (I am not a telco employee)
But... I think that it used to be that phone numbers were dished out in units of 10,000. You'd get an entire exchange at once (xxx.yyy.0000->9999).
However, with cel systems coming in and such, there was suddenly a great demand for new exchanges. And they started to run out. Four cel phone carriers in an area code, now you need (at least) four new exchanges.
So instead, somebody decided that they wouldn't give out an entire exchange at once. Just a few hundred numbers within the exchange. This means that an exchange is no longer tied to a particular carrier.
If that's the case, then there's no reason that a number can't be portable. Carriers have to get used to not owning an entire exchange, and only use specific numbers within the exchange, etc.
Therefore, there's no technical reason why number portability can't be implemented.
Now, is it a right? Nope. *But*.... lots of people don't change cel service because there's a lot of inertia involved in changing your phone number. Well, sure, a college kid might not care if he has to tell two dozen friends a new number. But what if you're a businessman, and gave out your cel phone number on 10,000 business cards over the past two years? Now you're stuck with one provider.
This lets providers jerk you around a lot more than if it were a totally open market where you could say "I'm going to switch." So, it's just a nice pro-consumer move.
Three words.
Tommy. The Who.
The CD can be described as practically a religious experience to listen to. No single could ever do it justice.
But damn, Green Day? Listening to the song "Minority" never made me need to listen to the next track. It's a single. It's released on MTV as a music video. as. a. single. They themselves have marketted it, through MTV, as a song that is wholely complete in and of itself.
Tommy, on the other hand, was conceived of as an entire fucking movie.
(Same with The Wall, by Pink Floyd.)
You can't tell me that I'm supposed to be happy with watching their music video of a "hit single," but not purchase it as a single...
...but someone who can make a windows box truely secure... now they've done something!!
:)
Unplugged the machine?
On the other hand, the Occupied status seems useful, 'don't bug me unless it is important'
:)
I use AIM. AIM has had this feature for ages.
You go and click 'away', and then you type in "I'm busy; don't bug me unless it is important."
If you're not that busy, you can click 'away', and then type in "I'm nearby; msg me if you want to chat."
Not to mention that the RIAA only considers one definition of sharing: "To loan."
People in support groups, for example, "share" stories with one another all the time, when they tell others how they're feeling, and empathize with one another. Is the "sharer" deprived of his emotions while he explains them to others around him?
To share can mean to loan, but arguably, I'm also "sharing" if I invite a friend over to watch a movie at my house that I just bought.
I speak as a programmer who works with other programmers, a hobbyist programmer who likes to geek out with other hardcore hobbyists, and a manager who hires programmers.
And clearly, you also speak as someone who has forgotten what it's like to be nine years old, and interacts with elementary schoolers infrequently.
But that's okay, I'm not as elitist as you, so I'll forgive you and actually explain what I mean by that.
I started programming in 3rd grade. I had a book that taught me IBM BASIC. Pretty watered-down stuff. And as smart as I am (and was), it was hard, mostly because of my age.
If you're 20 and want to learn how to program, well, some tutorials online and some books from Barnes'n'Noble's will probably do you just fine. If not, maybe liberal arts is for you after all. However, expecting 3rd and 4th graders to grasp the concepts of object-oriented development on their own is a bit of a tall order.
Studies have shown that abstract spatial reasoning skills are often not fully developed until ages 12-14. In English: kids have a hard time imagining things they can't see.
Coming up with the abstract logic behind a virtual system of "objects", frankly, would be a very big challenge for any small kid, ESPECIALLY if all s/he had to go on was highly technical documents from Sun's website.
I can vividly remember being a "budding young programmer." And the "APIs" I can remember were "INPUT A$" and "PRINT B$". And that was still challenging enough. Expecting a 9 year old to grok BufferedIOReader, I think, is a bit foolish.
But, then again, the world doesn't need those easily-overwhelmed folks, so maybe I should just be a bit harsher.
Hmm. You're one of those people to whom the dashboard of a 747 is "simple," aren't you. :)
"Daddy? How do I compile?"
*sigh* For the last time, Bob, M-L, M-X, C-M-K, "make", esc-esc-return...
Turns out it doesn't matter on new jets - only ones certified pre-'89. So why don't they let people use their mobiles on the newer planes where it's not an issue? Back to the old 'conspiracy theories' on that one.
You give people too much credit. No conspiracy theory here, sorry.
*You* may ask the flight attendant when the plane was manufactured, and be conscientious enough to only use your phone on newer planes. But let's face it. There are a lot of ignorant and downright inconsiderate people out there.
I can just hear people saying,
"Oh, my brother used his phone on a flight a week ago, I guess it means I can use mine now."
Nobody's going to take prohibitions on older planes seriously if newer planes allow the use of said items. It's far more effective to just disallow them everywhere.
Indeed, how much more democracy would such a hypothetical page bring about? :)
The format for BNF (a format for describing language grammars) is itself written in a document that gives BNF ... in BNF.
I was a freshman this year.
;) So, if you can only buy one computer, and you're price-conscious, I'd recommend a desktop. Mac, PC, really doesn't matter.
My setup:
A desktop PC was my main workhorse.
I had a palm pilot which I kept due dates and whatnot in.
Notes for all classes in good old-fashioned spiral-bound notebooks. Taken with old fashioned pens.
I was actually given a laptop as a gift midyear. Did I like it? Sure. Was the wireless cool? Yup. I could play games in my friend's dorm room with it. Did I take it to class? Nope.
For one thing, a laptop can't really take notes in math class. For another, it weighs five lbs. My notebook doesn't. And finally, they really are loud and annoying to those around you. If you do the math, everyone in that room for that lecture is paying about $50 to hear the prof speak for that hour. Don't be a jackass and IM away at your friends during that time. You should concentrate, and you owe it to others nearby to let them do the same.
So: laptop worth it? Sometimes it's nice to use in a library. But they usually have computers there from which you can send email back to your dorm. A desktop'll be cheaper, and will do what needs doing.
As for assignments, I was given the PDA, so I used it to keep track of them, and yes, it was handy. However, upon reflection, it was nothing that a small pocket notebook wouldn't have handled equally as gracefully.
So: Got lots of cash or lots of generous relatives? Spring for whatever you'd like. You'll find a use for it all, I'm sure.
Don't have infinite cash? Pen'n'paper tends to get the job done as effectively now as it ever has. Yes, you need a computer to write reports on. A desktop is cheaper, harder for others to steal, and you'll probably want the large speakers that accompany it, anyway, to play your monster MP3 collection on, rather than tinny little laptop speakers.
Just remember: it's not about what you buy. You're going to do the best in college by trying hard, staying focussed, and being a good student. Nothing you can throw in your backpack will make college "easier" or "better." Just try to learn something the best way you know how, and you probably will do okay.
(FWIW, the kids who were habitual laptop-in-class types tended to have lower GPAs than the rest of us, but that's just one observation, and a debate for another time...)
Hmm.. Targetted ads *might* be good. But they might also be a bad thing sometimes.
Scenario 1: Tivo sends you (a young guy) ads about beer, SUVs, and Levi's jeans. It sends the woman in the apartment down the hall ads for women's clothing.
Scenario 2: Because of interesting purchases, viewing habits, whatever on your part, it sends you ads for women's clothing.
Scenario 3: For the same reason, it sends you those same ads, and your buds come over to watch the football game on your bigscreen TV. *Insert awkward pause in conversation here*.
Targetted ads sound a-ok on the surface, but sometimes, it's nice to be anonymous.
Second that.
I've bought two new computers (one a dell, the other hp) in the past 18 months. They both booted directly int 1024x768.