In a way they transcend the govt (within their jurisdiction), if they say that DVD's region coding is anticompetitive, and want to stop it, they can and will. If the govt gets enough pressure from outside, they'll knock back the ACCC's decision.
Thing is, going against tbe ACCC is not wise, especially in an upcoming election year (can ye imagine govt election ads gettin' moderated heavier than opposition ones because of a grudge? =).
The ACCC has and hopefully always will be the sane side of Australian law.
Where you can use any other type of OS, and send a work order to a clustered network, for processing.
Of course, for this to become reality, it would require software manufacturers support. Which is where things fall out, not because of ignorance, but it just wouldn't be cost effective (why spend extra money on a feature few users would be able to use?).
This then presents another problem, inhouse development by individual companies based on need, with no outlook for distribution of this work. It's cool that some companies would be willing to sacrifice resources to develop a distributed solution for a product that they need, but there's no guarentee that they'll release it to the public afterwards.
mainly because of the range of appeal a single distribution must consider.
It would become a nightmare if a distribution was split up into mini distributions, based on usage needs. With questions propping up like,
person 1 - "I have a problem with XYZ Linux"
person 2 - "is that Enterprise or desktop distribution?"
Linux has enough distributions as-is, it doesn't need subdistributions furthering the fragmentation.
Seems to me the story was just trying to create controversy, by singleing out Linux. When not encompass the whole spectrum of OS's and their relative bloat? Or would that be considered too much good journalism?
Then there's something to be said for apps tucked away out of sight. I used to love going through DOS (and later on Windows), finding programs they'd left in obscure places, and finding out what they did. After trying out Linux, I found myself doing the same thing. It's just something fun to do, exploring.
Of course no normal American would like that would they? Cos the USA is the leader of the world, what they do must be the first of any country, because they're out to impress whom? God? Alien species?
When ye think about it, whats the point of being the biggest country in the world, when your vast masses of your country men and women are living below the poverty line?
I would love to see some other country steal the USA's thunder, just because I know it'll go and piss ye all off. =)
but I have to commend whomever at the patent office searched their database to see if a similar patent existed.
Raw stupidity like that is what keeps the rest of the world believing Americans are all like that.
Cheers,
leroy.
Games are kind of a weird case...
on
EULA In Games
·
· Score: 2
and the article makes a pretty good point, that all thats needed is the "no reverse engineering" clause.
The thing that got me was the quote from Microsoft about why EULA are neccessary. It basically stated that EULA exist because publishers would have to charge more, because of those that would exploit reverse engineering. According to that then, I can readily buy (for an added price) versions of software that allow me to reverse engineer them. Seems quite obvious lawyers don't live in our reality.
The problem as I see it, is that the IOC is given far too much priveledge, and they are increasingly acting as a business rather than a non-profit organization. And politicians and marketing people will say that this is good for such and such country, good for the athletes.
The IOC's barring of internet broadcasts shows quite clearly, that they want to control everything about the olympics. They already control all the video footage captured, and it was highlighted on Australian television, when footage of a Paralympic event couldn't be shown by a rival station (even though they could get the proper permission from the other station) because the IOC owned the pictures. To my knowledge, there isn't another organization that has these strict controls over usage of media. And for what purpose does it have these strict controls? Solely for protection of sponsors interests. Is this good for the IOC? Yes. Is this good for competing athletes? No. All it achieves is narrowing of their audience, which seems slightly strange.
Less people who see an event, less incentive for sponsors to sponsor the Olympics. They be digging themselves their own grave.
I went into my first year of University knowing that I'd be taught Java. Already having a strong knowledge of C and C++, I agreed I should keep an open mind about it.
Then the lecturers came in, zealots, preaching that OOP is the ONLY way you should program, and that it is applicable anywhere.
The part that really pissed me off, was in a tutorial, they said we were to design the software to run on a coke machine. I questioned whether Java was suitable, and that a functional language would do a much quicker job. After 5 minutes of being yelled at by the tutor, I decided to concede and went about designing the most obfuscated coke machine I could, I created so many tiny insignificate objects.
Guess who got top marks for their design? That's right. Me.
Perhaps the problems with Java aren't the language, or Sun, or IBM, but the teachers of it.
Cheers,
leroy.
New kernel updates get released every now and then, with people sitting around waiting for the number to tick over to #.even#.0.
Then there's those that say, well its only cosmetic things that have been changed since #.even#.prelease-#. If you look at the whole picture then, it seems a little more accurate.
I think people should look at the whole development since 2.3 started to what 2.4.0 is going to be rather than sulk about how nothing brand smackingly new is added between two revisions.
Or then again, maybe its just this expectation that something magical is going to happen, a new feature is suddenly going to be added or something, when it's been quite clear that since the 2.4.0-prelease kernels that no new features would be added, only bugfixes.
Jus' my 2 Australian cents, when rounded down after being converted to USD, is nothing. =)
Slashdot Mirror
In a way they transcend the govt (within their jurisdiction), if they say that DVD's region coding is anticompetitive, and want to stop it, they can and will. If the govt gets enough pressure from outside, they'll knock back the ACCC's decision.
Thing is, going against tbe ACCC is not wise, especially in an upcoming election year (can ye imagine govt election ads gettin' moderated heavier than opposition ones because of a grudge? =).
The ACCC has and hopefully always will be the sane side of Australian law.
Cheers,
leroy.
..for distributed computing.
Where you can use any other type of OS, and send a work order to a clustered network, for processing.
Of course, for this to become reality, it would require software manufacturers support. Which is where things fall out, not because of ignorance, but it just wouldn't be cost effective (why spend extra money on a feature few users would be able to use?).
This then presents another problem, inhouse development by individual companies based on need, with no outlook for distribution of this work. It's cool that some companies would be willing to sacrifice resources to develop a distributed solution for a product that they need, but there's no guarentee that they'll release it to the public afterwards.
Cheers,
leroy.
mainly because of the range of appeal a single distribution must consider.
It would become a nightmare if a distribution was split up into mini distributions, based on usage needs. With questions propping up like,
person 1 - "I have a problem with XYZ Linux"
person 2 - "is that Enterprise or desktop distribution?"
Linux has enough distributions as-is, it doesn't need subdistributions furthering the fragmentation.
Seems to me the story was just trying to create controversy, by singleing out Linux. When not encompass the whole spectrum of OS's and their relative bloat? Or would that be considered too much good journalism?
Then there's something to be said for apps tucked away out of sight. I used to love going through DOS (and later on Windows), finding programs they'd left in obscure places, and finding out what they did. After trying out Linux, I found myself doing the same thing. It's just something fun to do, exploring.
Cheers,
leroy.
Of course no normal American would like that would they? Cos the USA is the leader of the world, what they do must be the first of any country, because they're out to impress whom? God? Alien species?
When ye think about it, whats the point of being the biggest country in the world, when your vast masses of your country men and women are living below the poverty line?
I would love to see some other country steal the USA's thunder, just because I know it'll go and piss ye all off. =)
Cheers,
leroy.
but I have to commend whomever at the patent office searched their database to see if a similar patent existed.
Raw stupidity like that is what keeps the rest of the world believing Americans are all like that.
Cheers,
leroy.
and the article makes a pretty good point, that all thats needed is the "no reverse engineering" clause.
The thing that got me was the quote from Microsoft about why EULA are neccessary. It basically stated that EULA exist because publishers would have to charge more, because of those that would exploit reverse engineering. According to that then, I can readily buy (for an added price) versions of software that allow me to reverse engineer them. Seems quite obvious lawyers don't live in our reality.
Cheers,
leroy.
The problem as I see it, is that the IOC is given far too much priveledge, and they are increasingly acting as a business rather than a non-profit organization. And politicians and marketing people will say that this is good for such and such country, good for the athletes.
The IOC's barring of internet broadcasts shows quite clearly, that they want to control everything about the olympics. They already control all the video footage captured, and it was highlighted on Australian television, when footage of a Paralympic event couldn't be shown by a rival station (even though they could get the proper permission from the other station) because the IOC owned the pictures. To my knowledge, there isn't another organization that has these strict controls over usage of media. And for what purpose does it have these strict controls? Solely for protection of sponsors interests. Is this good for the IOC? Yes. Is this good for competing athletes? No. All it achieves is narrowing of their audience, which seems slightly strange.
Less people who see an event, less incentive for sponsors to sponsor the Olympics. They be digging themselves their own grave.
Cheers,
leroy.
I went into my first year of University knowing that I'd be taught Java. Already having a strong knowledge of C and C++, I agreed I should keep an open mind about it. Then the lecturers came in, zealots, preaching that OOP is the ONLY way you should program, and that it is applicable anywhere. The part that really pissed me off, was in a tutorial, they said we were to design the software to run on a coke machine. I questioned whether Java was suitable, and that a functional language would do a much quicker job. After 5 minutes of being yelled at by the tutor, I decided to concede and went about designing the most obfuscated coke machine I could, I created so many tiny insignificate objects. Guess who got top marks for their design? That's right. Me. Perhaps the problems with Java aren't the language, or Sun, or IBM, but the teachers of it. Cheers, leroy.
the 'release frequently' motto.
New kernel updates get released every now and then, with people sitting around waiting for the number to tick over to #.even#.0.
Then there's those that say, well its only cosmetic things that have been changed since #.even#.prelease-#. If you look at the whole picture then, it seems a little more accurate.
I think people should look at the whole development since 2.3 started to what 2.4.0 is going to be rather than sulk about how nothing brand smackingly new is added between two revisions.
Or then again, maybe its just this expectation that something magical is going to happen, a new feature is suddenly going to be added or something, when it's been quite clear that since the 2.4.0-prelease kernels that no new features would be added, only bugfixes.
Jus' my 2 Australian cents, when rounded down after being converted to USD, is nothing. =)
Cheers,
leroy.