That is pretty naive on the part of Perens and Stallman. They're acting like IBM and HP are a couple of college kids. They're MASSIVE corporations, not individuals. They have no sense of 'obligation' or anything even close to that. The goal of these companies is to make money, and you certainly don't make money by giving away patents. Open Source, Free Software, whatever, is all about writing code for free, with no strings attached. Last time I checked, no strings attached, means no strings attached. If somebody (or a massive corporation) wants to use the stuff without contributing, that's their right according to RMS and his ilk. It sounds like these guys have been living in la-la land too long, and are upset that their idealistic, utopian expectation of the whole world freely writing and giving away software doesn't quite hold true. Bummer.
Unfortunately, big businesses (ANY business, for that matter) exist to make a profit. They don't generally 'give back' to ANY community for no reason. When you see companies 'giving back' to communities, it's usually because there's some good PR involved, or there's something else in it for them. Wouldn't you be pretty pissed off if a company you owned a piece of started to give away your money just to be nice? I know I would.
I'm sure that lots of developers would rather develop games on a Linux console over an XBox console. Unfortunately, their business isn't based on the number of developers. Any console business is based primarily on the number of pimply-faced 12 year old kids who buy it.(although developers are important, too). They could have developers out the wazoo (I know that a huge company like Sega did), but unfortunately, that's not how the business works. If they can't provide a gaming console that's cheap, mass-produced, and a marketing campaign that can appeal to millions of gamers all over the world, then this business just won't work.
Aw, shit, I could hardly understand the technical stuff they were doing. I wasn't sure if it was real or not. Although, if I do ever go blind, I do plan on getting one of those nifty brail writer thingies that Mother used. Very cool.
I didn't say that it was accurate, just that it was one of the most accurate hacker movies I've ever seen. What, was 'The Matrix' more realistic? Actually, it WAS accurate in what hacking can really be all about... You work hard, and you get to make a lot of money as security experts (or go to jail when you get caught doing black hat stuff). And, there's more to 'hacking' then just computers. It also involves social engineering, etc. The movie shows all of this pretty well, I thought.
The most accurate 'hacker' movie I've ever seen was 'Sneakers', and it's at least 10 years old. 'Sneakers' got me interested in computer security, systems, etc.
Sure, then you have Cuba, the USSR, etc... Those societies tried to take the dollar as the driving force. Not somewhere I want to be. By in large, the dollar does a fair job of driving good ideas. It's not 100% (what is), but overall, it's proven much more successful than the egalitarian version.
True, but not as much as you may think. There are tons and tons of new smaller, crappy sites, with pictures plucked off of Usenet, but the big guys are still doing very well. It's a tougher business than it was a few years ago, but like virtually anything else, there's still money to be made if you know what you're doing, and you're willing to work very, very hard. (no pun intended).
Well, yes, it DOES appear that Katz is right on this occasion. The only problem is that his conclusion is painfully obvious. Sex sells. It always has, and it always will. Through good times and bad, the human libido continues.
All of Christianity is a cult. Christianity convinces people to reject and hate outsiders, give their money to other people for no apparent reason, and to talk to invisible beings that live in the sky. If this isn't a cult, I don't know what is.
And I urge you to write every Christian minister you know to put their talents to good use, rather than continuing the vicious cycle of ignorance and hatred.
I'd be really worried about burning out if I had to constantly code with at least one person looking over my shoulder. Personally, I like to code alone. I couldn't last too long with somebody else nagging/checking my work. Hell, I don't even like code reviews. Generally, when I work on large projects, we agree to a standard coding method, naming conventions, etc. then go to it. With decent developers, generally you don't need to check in constantly. Besides, just day to day workflow prohibits it. I code for a few minutes, get a snack, code for a few minutes, check Slashdot, etc. If I couldn't do that, I don't think I'd be a programmer (at least at that company) for very long.
I wish that that were true. But unfortunately, I worked on a help desk for several years before I became a developer. You put Gnome in front of the average user, and they're lost. I hate to say it, but the average user gets confused with the 'Save' command. I think that training would be expensive. But even if it isn't, there are still lots of other costs that come along with changing infrastructure that you can't take lightly.
Oh, I agree. Software costs a lot. The thing is, how much did they get for $2 million? Let's be conservative and say it's for a thousand people ($2000/seat). For that thousand people, you'd have to pay for training (very expensive, generally $1000/person/day). And, you'd have to get extra support people (at least, at first), and those support people would be much higer paid than your average MS wonk, because there's less supply of Open Source people. It's the NET difference that executives who do buying look at. That $2 million may have been a drop in the bucket compared to what it would cost to change over their infrastructure and retrain and retool all of their people. Who knows?
Except with the smallest of companies, software is rarely a major expense for companies, especially OS's. Usually, a MUCH higher cost is associated with development and support (paying salaries, contractors, etc.). Whether the TCO of Linux is really lower than that of proprietary software is still up in the air, I think. It may be cheaper for a company to pay a few grand for Windows, then save tens of thousands by hiring a generic Windows admin.
But luckily, with MS Service Packs, and most hotfixes now, it's VERY easy to rollback changes. I think that that is a VERY important feature to any "upgrade".
Well, I can definately tell that there are solar flares. I might not be able to see the Northern Lights, but my cell phone has certainly become a lot less reliable recently.
But the thing is, there's nothing stopping farmers from using a thousand other varieties of seeds. They can use traditional soybean/corn/wheat seeds, or other native varieties. Monsanto doesn't own the patent on 'soybeans'. They just own the patent on the soybean/corn/wheat plant that THEY created.
There ya go softsign. I knew I'd be moderated down. I should've known. Posting anything on Slashdot other than "MAKE IT FREE! ANARCHY! CHAOS! Power to the people! Money sucks! All businesses are evil!" merits a 'troll'. Wonderful.
But at the same time, would the farmer have known? He probably would've noticed the different plants. Ignorance usually is NOT a valid legal defense. Going back to my original example, if I run a restaurant, and a friend slaps a McDonald's sign on it, it's my responsibility to take that sign down. I can't just accept the increase in business and shrug my shoulders and say 'I didn't put it there'. That's a pretty poor defense.
Slashdot Mirror
That is pretty naive on the part of Perens and Stallman. They're acting like IBM and HP are a couple of college kids. They're MASSIVE corporations, not individuals. They have no sense of 'obligation' or anything even close to that. The goal of these companies is to make money, and you certainly don't make money by giving away patents. Open Source, Free Software, whatever, is all about writing code for free, with no strings attached. Last time I checked, no strings attached, means no strings attached. If somebody (or a massive corporation) wants to use the stuff without contributing, that's their right according to RMS and his ilk. It sounds like these guys have been living in la-la land too long, and are upset that their idealistic, utopian expectation of the whole world freely writing and giving away software doesn't quite hold true. Bummer.
Unfortunately, big businesses (ANY business, for that matter) exist to make a profit. They don't generally 'give back' to ANY community for no reason. When you see companies 'giving back' to communities, it's usually because there's some good PR involved, or there's something else in it for them. Wouldn't you be pretty pissed off if a company you owned a piece of started to give away your money just to be nice? I know I would.
I'm sure that lots of developers would rather develop games on a Linux console over an XBox console. Unfortunately, their business isn't based on the number of developers. Any console business is based primarily on the number of pimply-faced 12 year old kids who buy it.(although developers are important, too). They could have developers out the wazoo (I know that a huge company like Sega did), but unfortunately, that's not how the business works. If they can't provide a gaming console that's cheap, mass-produced, and a marketing campaign that can appeal to millions of gamers all over the world, then this business just won't work.
Aw, shit, I could hardly understand the technical stuff they were doing. I wasn't sure if it was real or not. Although, if I do ever go blind, I do plan on getting one of those nifty brail writer thingies that Mother used. Very cool.
I didn't say that it was accurate, just that it was one of the most accurate hacker movies I've ever seen. What, was 'The Matrix' more realistic? Actually, it WAS accurate in what hacking can really be all about... You work hard, and you get to make a lot of money as security experts (or go to jail when you get caught doing black hat stuff). And, there's more to 'hacking' then just computers. It also involves social engineering, etc. The movie shows all of this pretty well, I thought.
Wargames WAS cool! Not quite as realistic as Hackers, but yeah, it was very cool! I loved the modem that you put your phone headset into.
The most accurate 'hacker' movie I've ever seen was 'Sneakers', and it's at least 10 years old. 'Sneakers' got me interested in computer security, systems, etc.
Sure, then you have Cuba, the USSR, etc... Those societies tried to take the dollar as the driving force. Not somewhere I want to be. By in large, the dollar does a fair job of driving good ideas. It's not 100% (what is), but overall, it's proven much more successful than the egalitarian version.
I wish I had some mod points for ya' AC. You're exactly right.
True, but not as much as you may think. There are tons and tons of new smaller, crappy sites, with pictures plucked off of Usenet, but the big guys are still doing very well. It's a tougher business than it was a few years ago, but like virtually anything else, there's still money to be made if you know what you're doing, and you're willing to work very, very hard. (no pun intended).
Well, yes, it DOES appear that Katz is right on this occasion. The only problem is that his conclusion is painfully obvious. Sex sells. It always has, and it always will. Through good times and bad, the human libido continues.
Last I heard, coercision and exploitation has existed in 'religion' for centuries.
All of Christianity is a cult. Christianity convinces people to reject and hate outsiders, give their money to other people for no apparent reason, and to talk to invisible beings that live in the sky. If this isn't a cult, I don't know what is.
And I urge you to write every Christian minister you know to put their talents to good use, rather than continuing the vicious cycle of ignorance and hatred.
I'd be really worried about burning out if I had to constantly code with at least one person looking over my shoulder. Personally, I like to code alone. I couldn't last too long with somebody else nagging/checking my work. Hell, I don't even like code reviews. Generally, when I work on large projects, we agree to a standard coding method, naming conventions, etc. then go to it. With decent developers, generally you don't need to check in constantly. Besides, just day to day workflow prohibits it. I code for a few minutes, get a snack, code for a few minutes, check Slashdot, etc. If I couldn't do that, I don't think I'd be a programmer (at least at that company) for very long.
I wish that that were true. But unfortunately, I worked on a help desk for several years before I became a developer. You put Gnome in front of the average user, and they're lost. I hate to say it, but the average user gets confused with the 'Save' command. I think that training would be expensive. But even if it isn't, there are still lots of other costs that come along with changing infrastructure that you can't take lightly.
Oh, I agree. Software costs a lot. The thing is, how much did they get for $2 million? Let's be conservative and say it's for a thousand people ($2000/seat). For that thousand people, you'd have to pay for training (very expensive, generally $1000/person/day). And, you'd have to get extra support people (at least, at first), and those support people would be much higer paid than your average MS wonk, because there's less supply of Open Source people. It's the NET difference that executives who do buying look at. That $2 million may have been a drop in the bucket compared to what it would cost to change over their infrastructure and retrain and retool all of their people. Who knows?
Except with the smallest of companies, software is rarely a major expense for companies, especially OS's. Usually, a MUCH higher cost is associated with development and support (paying salaries, contractors, etc.). Whether the TCO of Linux is really lower than that of proprietary software is still up in the air, I think. It may be cheaper for a company to pay a few grand for Windows, then save tens of thousands by hiring a generic Windows admin.
But luckily, with MS Service Packs, and most hotfixes now, it's VERY easy to rollback changes. I think that that is a VERY important feature to any "upgrade".
Duh! Again, I go away on a honeymoon, and I instantly forget what day it is... Jeez... TCP/IP over HTTP...
I actually believed this until I read about the 'scent'.... Jeez, go away on a honeymoon, and totally forget what day it is...
Well, I can definately tell that there are solar flares. I might not be able to see the Northern Lights, but my cell phone has certainly become a lot less reliable recently.
But the thing is, there's nothing stopping farmers from using a thousand other varieties of seeds. They can use traditional soybean/corn/wheat seeds, or other native varieties. Monsanto doesn't own the patent on 'soybeans'. They just own the patent on the soybean/corn/wheat plant that THEY created.
There ya go softsign. I knew I'd be moderated down. I should've known. Posting anything on Slashdot other than "MAKE IT FREE! ANARCHY! CHAOS! Power to the people! Money sucks! All businesses are evil!" merits a 'troll'. Wonderful.
But at the same time, would the farmer have known? He probably would've noticed the different plants. Ignorance usually is NOT a valid legal defense. Going back to my original example, if I run a restaurant, and a friend slaps a McDonald's sign on it, it's my responsibility to take that sign down. I can't just accept the increase in business and shrug my shoulders and say 'I didn't put it there'. That's a pretty poor defense.