Sexy losers is one of the few comics that makes me laugh out loud. At times it''s hilarious. Just because the subject material os a bit unconventional shouldn't put people off. Think of it as perversion slapstick.
Having said that, it wouldn't come as a surprise to me if I learned that MS, or other software companies with vested interests in government/big business, started offering financial incentives for these organisations not to switch over to open source...
And it's a good thing. I read today that the NSW government had signed up with MS for $400 mil or something. The good thing is that they screws them for a good deal with threats of going open source. Anything that stops MS from collecting their monopoly rents is a step in the right direction.
Is gaming such an interesting spectator sport? It's more interesting to play than watch someone else. And if you want to watch someone else play well you can do that using your own screen and some server on the net. If someone gets promotional dollars out of games it's going to be the game makers not the players.
And what about the players themselves. Can you see yourself (or anyone) worshiping someone for their their ability to click really fast for endless hours in front of a screen? It's all about personalities and their ability to promote products.
besides competing with hundreds of other similar shareware and freeware products
Well, there you have it. Why should anyone buy your software? Is it unique in any way? Were you the first to get it to market? Does it satisfy a particular niche? Is your product of superior quality?
You're always going to have a certain level of piracy. You can see this as negative (lost sales) or positive (free marketing). Most people who pirate weren't going to pay for it in the first place. You have to hope they'll recommend it to someone who will. Software protection is an illusion that reduces sales.
I have a friend who wrote a fairly simple utility. He did it well and did it early. He sold it as shareware (no longer though) and was turing over $500K a year lat I heard. So it can be done.
No, since you're not linking to the adaptor you do not have to GPL the program. You could open a pipe to it or open a socket to it. If the GPL can be interpreted to mean that this constitutes "linking" then just connecting to Linux would GPL your code, and MS would be right.
I think GPL does have that problem, and that it will be to its detriment in the long term. Besides the FUD attack form the likes of Microsoft, it for all practical purposes precludes commercial development. You have to ask yourself: what is the difference between software that was written from open source and then closed (eg because it is commercial) or software that was never written. The community loses out in both cases. Free (BSD style) lowers the barriers for entry for software development and enables small, innovative companies to popup and create things that might not have been created by people working in their spare time or for OSS companies.
Not that they could enforce it - it's really blatant restraint of trade - this one is easy to get around. You just get someone who isn;t working on your wordprocessor to write a library that abstracts the bits you need. Then let the programmers use the library. Not only is it legal but it's a good way to structure you app making it more portable.
Whatever, but the point is that those who write the code want it to be used. The more people who use it the better, although not at the cost of doing a poorer job (which is another motivation for programmers - doing it "right" or doing interesting or challenging things). And I think that last bit is the difficult thing. Your average highly opinionated nerd would probably find it hard to compromise on this issue or that. The result is that effort is divided and the user gets a lot of duplication which doesn't really serve any purpose.
Absolutely. I find my bottle of Rhohypnol makes me a real stud muffin. The girls are all over me, drooling over my body. They're putty in my hands. Much better than buying dinner or expensive jewelry.
But I would not say direct because then paradoxically you know exactly how much risk to take, removing your risk
Like all things in the market, it's perceived risk, so it can't be measured, except maybe through the stock price which puts you back at square one.
But it can be a simple and direct relationship. I might buy some deeply out-of-the money options with not much time remaining. Basically they are very cheap - a few cents. If the stock price moved sharply in my favour an I bought alot of these before it did, I could get rich overnight (say $1m on a $50K investment). But the chances of it happening are reasonably slim. An even more basic example is roulette: putting a bet on a number pays off well (36:1) but doesn't happen that often.
Not quite. Elephants falling out of the sky isn't very probable. Viruses and other antisocial or nefarious attacks are almost certain.
But people deny the risks or just can't be bothered. In order to "weed them out" they should be attacked regularly. Then they adapt and don't effect the rest of the population.
If you realised the shear number of bugs out there that could kill you compared to your one life, you'd realise the significance of this.
That isn't quite right. A "short squeeze" is where a stock has been heavily shorted (by the "shorts"). Another group of investors (the "longs") decide that the shorts have had their day and that there won't be too much more short selling going on. The longs decide to buy aggressively, pushing the price up and putting pressure on the short sellers who are losing money. As the short sellers crack they push the price up because they buy the stock back. The price shoots up and the longs cash in.
If the person you borrowed from wants his shares back your broker will organize another short for you without having to buy on the market.
If not for the risk, I too would be shorting SCOX.
That's exactly the point. People make money because they take on risk. There is a direct correlation between risk and reward.
Just as a matter of interest, what did you short it at? Now seems like a good time to short, at around $15. It will probably dip down to $10 where it's shown resistance and maybe back up above $15 if they get some "good news".
Oh shit!..now these bastards are not even modding it up as Funny!!
Maybe everyone has lost their sense of humour when it comes to spam. And remember that Slashdot is mostly American - and they love a good execution. Especially the Texans.
And I hope the authorities don't find that post if a spammer is killed by a wild mob or mental patient. Won't I have a red face!
Maybe so. I thought about leaving the last one out, in the name of good taste, but, of course, this is Slashdot, so I thought better of it. If I was really sick I would have posted these:
"Mommy ate my furry clam" "I like to eat little boy's stools" "Daddy tore me with his huge member"
Not quite, I think he is saying that he has to relocate to continue his work. Let's face it. The US is a pretty fucked place to live unless you're rich and have several lobbyists on the payroll.
Don't feel bad. I've lost alot of money on the market. $200 a cheap way to learn. You tend to get wobbles back and forth and it's hard to deal with them in an emotional sense.
If I could short US stocks, I would wait until SCO got some good news or just a build-up in a positive vibe, which seems to be happening a little now. The other option is to have an order sitting at about $14, which seems to be the upper limit, it's unlikely to run past that (famous last words).
Slashdot Mirror
Because that defy's the business strategy of "Bleed those artsy-fartsy halfwits dry"
You mean those halfwits who make enough to actually afford a Mac?
to do things like print messages, run /bin/sh, or reboot the machine. Unimpressive.
/bin/sh as root. Which is very handy for me, since I forgot the admin password on my laptop and need to reset it.
That is, run
Sexy losers is one of the few comics that makes me laugh out loud. At times it''s hilarious. Just because the subject material os a bit unconventional shouldn't put people off. Think of it as perversion slapstick.
Having said that, it wouldn't come as a surprise to me if I learned that MS, or other software companies with vested interests in government/big business, started offering financial incentives for these organisations not to switch over to open source...
And it's a good thing. I read today that the NSW government had signed up with MS for $400 mil or something. The good thing is that they screws them for a good deal with threats of going open source. Anything that stops MS from collecting their monopoly rents is a step in the right direction.
What's the point of adding an unnecessary focussing mechanism
Hey I can write a book on a Tandy 100 with a cassette drive. Who needs anything else? Right? Obviously not. Quality and utility are always key.
Off the top of my head this would probably deliver:
- Much improved image quality
- Ability to zoom into distant objects
- Ability to take pictures close and very close (macro mode)
All of the above increase the effective resolution of the device.
Is gaming such an interesting spectator sport? It's more interesting to play than watch someone else. And if you want to watch someone else play well you can do that using your own screen and some server on the net. If someone gets promotional dollars out of games it's going to be the game makers not the players.
And what about the players themselves. Can you see yourself (or anyone) worshiping someone for their their ability to click really fast for endless hours in front of a screen? It's all about personalities and their ability to promote products.
besides competing with hundreds of other similar shareware and freeware products
Well, there you have it. Why should anyone buy your software? Is it unique in any way? Were you the first to get it to market? Does it satisfy a particular niche? Is your product of superior quality?
You're always going to have a certain level of piracy. You can see this as negative (lost sales) or positive (free marketing). Most people who pirate weren't going to pay for it in the first place. You have to hope they'll recommend it to someone who will. Software protection is an illusion that reduces sales.
I have a friend who wrote a fairly simple utility. He did it well and did it early. He sold it as shareware (no longer though) and was turing over $500K a year lat I heard. So it can be done.
No, since you're not linking to the adaptor you do not have to GPL the program. You could open a pipe to it or open a socket to it. If the GPL can be interpreted to mean that this constitutes "linking" then just connecting to Linux would GPL your code, and MS would be right.
I think GPL does have that problem, and that it will be to its detriment in the long term. Besides the FUD attack form the likes of Microsoft, it for all practical purposes precludes commercial development. You have to ask yourself: what is the difference between software that was written from open source and then closed (eg because it is commercial) or software that was never written. The community loses out in both cases. Free (BSD style) lowers the barriers for entry for software development and enables small, innovative companies to popup and create things that might not have been created by people working in their spare time or for OSS companies.
Why don't you write a little adaptor that connects to the mysql db that your app connects to (without linking to it) and GPL that?
Not that they could enforce it - it's really blatant restraint of trade - this one is easy to get around. You just get someone who isn;t working on your wordprocessor to write a library that abstracts the bits you need. Then let the programmers use the library. Not only is it legal but it's a good way to structure you app making it more portable.
Whatever, but the point is that those who write the code want it to be used. The more people who use it the better, although not at the cost of doing a poorer job (which is another motivation for programmers - doing it "right" or doing interesting or challenging things). And I think that last bit is the difficult thing. Your average highly opinionated nerd would probably find it hard to compromise on this issue or that. The result is that effort is divided and the user gets a lot of duplication which doesn't really serve any purpose.
Absolutely. I find my bottle of Rhohypnol makes me a real stud muffin. The girls are all over me, drooling over my body. They're putty in my hands. Much better than buying dinner or expensive jewelry.
But I would not say direct because then paradoxically you know exactly how much risk to take, removing your risk
Like all things in the market, it's perceived risk, so it can't be measured, except maybe through the stock price which puts you back at square one.
But it can be a simple and direct relationship. I might buy some deeply out-of-the money options with not much time remaining. Basically they are very cheap - a few cents. If the stock price moved sharply in my favour an I bought alot of these before it did, I could get rich overnight (say $1m on a $50K investment). But the chances of it happening are reasonably slim. An even more basic example is roulette: putting a bet on a number pays off well (36:1) but doesn't happen that often.
Not quite. Elephants falling out of the sky isn't very probable. Viruses and other antisocial or nefarious attacks are almost certain.
But people deny the risks or just can't be bothered. In order to "weed them out" they should be attacked regularly. Then they adapt and don't effect the rest of the population.
If you realised the shear number of bugs out there that could kill you compared to your one life, you'd realise the significance of this.
Well, it all depends on your style, really. The one thing I can say for sure is that Warren Buffet will not be buying this stock.
That isn't quite right. A "short squeeze" is where a stock has been heavily shorted (by the "shorts"). Another group of investors (the "longs") decide that the shorts have had their day and that there won't be too much more short selling going on. The longs decide to buy aggressively, pushing the price up and putting pressure on the short sellers who are losing money. As the short sellers crack they push the price up because they buy the stock back. The price shoots up and the longs cash in.
If the person you borrowed from wants his shares back your broker will organize another short for you without having to buy on the market.
If not for the risk, I too would be shorting SCOX.
That's exactly the point. People make money because they take on risk. There is a direct correlation between risk and reward.
Just as a matter of interest, what did you short it at? Now seems like a good time to short, at around $15. It will probably dip down to $10 where it's shown resistance and maybe back up above $15 if they get some "good news".
Oh shit!..now these bastards are not even modding it up as Funny!!
Maybe everyone has lost their sense of humour when it comes to spam. And remember that Slashdot is mostly American - and they love a good execution. Especially the Texans.
And I hope the authorities don't find that post if a spammer is killed by a wild mob or mental patient. Won't I have a red face!
I hope so. One brutal public execution of a spammer by a wild mob would stop spam overnight.
Another strategy might be to bait psychopaths with spam mails "look what this guy sent your momma" then direct them to the spammer's residence.
You are just sick.
Maybe so. I thought about leaving the last one out, in the name of good taste, but, of course, this is Slashdot, so I thought better of it. If I was really sick I would have posted these:
"Mommy ate my furry clam"
"I like to eat little boy's stools"
"Daddy tore me with his huge member"
Indeed. Let's see Cindy get around:
"I like to swallow"
"Do me by the backdoor"
"Call the football team I'm wet"
"Daddy likes to do me too"
and so on...
At some point SCO will understand the meaning of the term "community"...
(can't talk now, Alyssa Milano naked on TV)
I intend to flee if you try to arrest me.
Not quite, I think he is saying that he has to relocate to continue his work. Let's face it. The US is a pretty fucked place to live unless you're rich and have several lobbyists on the payroll.
Don't feel bad. I've lost alot of money on the market. $200 a cheap way to learn. You tend to get wobbles back and forth and it's hard to deal with them in an emotional sense.
If I could short US stocks, I would wait until SCO got some good news or just a build-up in a positive vibe, which seems to be happening a little now. The other option is to have an order sitting at about $14, which seems to be the upper limit, it's unlikely to run past that (famous last words).