Maybe the integration of a security patch or more important features that caused this. After all, they knew about the issue at launch so there's most probably a reasonable reason for the bug. In addition is appears only specific network configurations will cause the issue to occur.
Because I lack large dev team branching/merging experience, it's hard for me to understand where they could have gone wrong. To me having a branch that makes things work doesn't reverse the fact that another feature may be more important hence a fix is required either way. Again, just speculating.
Where did you get this idea? Windows has always catered to the majority. They didn't stay you could launch a space shuttle with their OS. Use the right tools for the right job. In this case Linux was that tool to break the gap.
You should be happy MS used Linux for something within their critical structure. After all, Linux is the perfect OS to solve problems that require infinite flexibility. Linux is also amazing when packaged for specific hardware. Raspberry Pi, mobile phones... That's where Linux has shinned the most in the last 5 years.
Company CTOs or equivalent need to understand the needs of their company before they pick a product. Here's a list that shows the products side by side: https://wiki.documentfoundatio...
Not all data collection has vile intentions. A lot of the data collected is used to understand user behavior or the sequence of events that lead to a failure. Some of the data collection is simply to do with the errors themselves.
By default they leave it on because they want to improve their OS.
Yes but you are looking at it from the point of view of the user. I'm suggesting the publishers need to be motivated to do this and a fraction of the 1.5% of PC users may not be enough UNLESS we see something like the steambox pickup.
I agree with everything you said except that it doesn't explain the connection between the systems
However, that system needs to know whether a crash has occurred, and how is it going to do that? It needs access to some sort of sensor, but by its nature that same sensor is probably also used by some of the other modern systems that provide collision avoidance/mitigation features. Bang, now you've a link between a system that has remote communication capabilities and a system that has a need for direct control of essential vehicle systems.
This is a problem that is easily solved by providing read only access to sensor data. There is no reason for the external communication systems to allow write operations of any sort.
You might be surprised at how healthy gaming is becoming on Linux
1.5% of PC users use Linux. Healthy from the standpoint that the games available work but not a convincing when you look at the numbers. The real question is, what percentage of that 1.5% will actually game? In the current state I would assume less than on PC.
My understanding is that converting a game from one OS to another in a framework such as Unity is simple but the big publishers don't use theses frameworks. So how much work goes into making it happen? I honestly don't know. There's also the issue of support to users. What are the additional complications of having to support an OS with so many flavors and colors?
but Steambox has been convincing some of the big name publishers to put in the relatively minimal amount of effort necessary for Linux support.
What is defined as minimal efforts? If Linux already has DirectX (though that was suppose to have happened by now), then maybe but if not how are games converted over without the supporting library?
The only fix for the security problems with Onstar and any similar system is total removal of the hardware and software!!!!!
Although true, it's probably not what GM wants. The easiest way to fix while keeping the product alive this is to stop remote updates. It should be an active decision to update your car the same way it is for updating a NAS or SCSI controller firmware.
In addition, there should be a disconnect between the entertainment system and the car's operating functions. I don't understand why the same computer needs to handle both work loads as they do not cross over in functionality or need.
I'm not clear why you insist on the source of R&D dollars being crowdfunded. What if you have an idea you want to fund yourself? You take a risk by spending the dev cost building a game or piece of software. You set a price tag and sell it. If you make 100 times what you put in good for you. If you lose well that's unfortunate.
But that's already how it works. They eat the cost of development and then find channels to sell it through. There's the odd company that chooses to be in control such as Origin and Blizzard but generally most games are available through most channels. Consoles offer resell of games if the publisher allows it. At least you know when you buy the game if you can or cannot resell later.
but it shouldn't be illegal to crack it
Depends what you mean by crack it. If I crack it so that I can use it without buying into it, I believe it's theft (copyright infringement). If you purchase it, crack it and play it, I don't see a problem with that. I'm pretty sure the publishers won't care either. The problem is those that crack it, distribute the crack and worst host cracked servers for non licensed copies of the game. Meanwhile the company can't profit from that use.
Last I checked you are allowed to reverse engineer anything you want as long as you don't attempt to copy for sale (that's where it becomes illegal). See wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... This here speaks on both our behalf but mostly says that software reverse engineering is legal in the US as long as you don't reveal trade secrets if applicable (that's where the shit hits the fan IMO). http://lwn.net/Articles/134642...
Fact is, go ahead and reverse engineer anything your purchased because as long as you don't distribute your findings or copy protected content you aren't breaking the law.
I'll take a different approach to see if I can understand how you think it should work because I still don't understand where you stand.
I believe that if you want access to software (games or apps), music or movies and that the producer is asking for $xx.xx, you pay $xx.xx or simply don't use the product. No different than when you buy a hammer, a computer or anything else that has engineering behind it. IMO that's how the exchange of goods and services has worked for thousands of years.
Now, explain to me how it should work instead. Ideally your solution should not be suggestive but rather based on successful methods in our current consumer market.
We're not having the debate you think we are having then. The debate from my perspective, is over what obligates me to agree to someone else's terms to acquire something that the cost to reproduce is negligible, when we made no agreement before some work was done to have that item exist.that I would pay them something
That's where your arguments falls off the table. You do not know the cost to make said intellectual properly. It could have cost them $1,000,000 or $100. If you want it, pay the price. If you can't justify the purchase then don't buy it hence don't use it. This applies even to material goods as they include their R&D into the cost of the product. The only difference is that you can't actually get away with not paying for R&D on material goods. When you buy the latest Intel processor, do you really think that inflated price is just materials? NO, it's the R&D that went into it that your paying for.
Maybe in your world intellectual property just appears out of thin air but in the real world there's groups of people that work on these projects to bring them to market
I have no idea what you mean by "legal hard media
My bad. Hard copy of entertainment material such as movies and music.
You don't seem to understand what a copy is. A copy is not the thing that the first person made.
So how does a musician make money from his work? By selling COPIES! He sets a price and it either sells or it doesn't. If the price is out to lunch he won't sell shit. It's not relevant if you have a copy in your hands OR NOT. You are making use of said product. It's that simple.
In thirty years, most 'manufacturing' will consist of downloading a design from the Net and loading it into a 3D printer, either in your garage or the local print shop.
That will be true for end user products but the construction industry will still be around as well as commercial and industrial manufacturing methods will probably still be cheaper. I don't argue that there's a point in time where 3d printing may take over all types of manufacturing but 30 years may still be still a little early.
I say this because 3d printing has existed for a long time and even with today's low cost material and equipment the cost per piece (when volume applies) is still MUCH higher. With electricity cost being what they are, 3d printing may take a little while longer before it can compete against mainstream manufacturing of volume goods.
What discussion? Until the gaming industry brings to table evidence that they've changed, there's nothing to discuss. Why would anyone negotiate with someone who's simply trying to stall endlessly to avoid having to actually do anything?
How does this have anything to do with buying or not buying a product? I'm not clear at all which is why I didn't understand your ranting in the first place.
You said yourself this is an industry-wide problem.
Nope. I said it was a problem in the corporate world and pointed out some roles which appear more affected due to the nature of "salaried workers". I wasn't pointing at a specific industry. Fact is that you not buying their product isn't going to help those people at all. The people that need to make change happen are the people abused. You are a consumer so choose not to support the gaming industry if you wish but that won't change anything unless you convince millions of customers to follow suite which is very doubtful.
So don't be surprised that the entire industry is being held accountable as a whole. And yes, that will solve the problem, by crashing the entire industry to make room for a less malevolent version if that's what it'll take.
This will only happen if people boycott them. And boycotting means NOT USING, contrary to the excuse some here appear to give themselves for not paying for gaming products and entertainment?
Not at all - I have enough backlog to last me over the coming crash and reboot
Who gives a shit. The topic was about buying games/entertainment. How did you get to the point of talking about yourself?
I've written several programs that I haven't expected to get paid for.
That's a choice you make.
Also, you ignore the fact that the people writing software to break DRM usually do it for free,
Once again. Their choice.
No, that's never how I worked freelance. We agree on the payment up front. Sure, the agreed upon money is paid upon services rendered, but there are restaurants that work on the same principal, agree to the price first and then pay at the end of the meal.
Yes. Not sure why you bring this up. Your basically making my point. If you leave without paying at the restaurant you'll be charged with theft. It's no different for intellectual property. If you don't like the prices are the restaurant you don't eat there. Same should go for intellectual property.
I'm trying to understand what makes something a company's product in your mind.
Something you can purchase as it's own entity or a group of entities.
If a company chooses to sell something after it has entered the public domain, is it still their product?
That's a different debate. You can jump around the topic all you want (which I'm assuming your doing because you don't have any good arguments to justify your original reasoning).
A lot of food products completely wrapped get thrown in the dumpster. Is it still their product and therefore stealing to go dumpster diving? What about if a software company throws media with a copy of their software/video in a dumpster?
The product has left its ownership. As for software and entertainment it depends on it's licensing model. Entertainment is pretty easy as the legal hard media is the license.
Why are you so confused about all this. Why do you keep introducing tangents into the discussion? You appear to have lots of trouble staying on point and that's maybe because you don't understand what a sellable good is. Sure there's a difference between a material and intellectual good but even that's not complicated to understand. They make something and you either buy it or not. If you don't agree with the license model then don't consume the product.
It sucks to realize your cunning plan depended on other people not reacting to your defections in ways you don't want them to, doesn't it? But the only effective response to realizing bad karma actually hurts is not to blame karma, or your victims, or even anyone who sees those victims and decides you're fair game, but to change your actions.
What does that mean? Lots of nonsense and no constructive comments to further the discussion.
If you continue to support the company doing something you don't like your the idiot and boycotting all companies won't solve the problem.
I'd say "welcome to real life", but like I pointed out before, even fairy tales do keep pointing this out.
I have no idea what this is suppose to mean in this context. You seem bitter about something but I'm not sure what.
The situation with entertainment materials is that for whatever reason, they do the work and then expect to get paid after the fact over and over again without doing more work.
It's no different than the engineers that engineer a hammer. The hammer will be sold for hundreds of years and the engineers not having anything more to add. The part about entertainment that is better for those doing the work is that further funds usually equals another project or continued work on said project. E.g. COD1, COD2, COD3... and that goes on until today (over 10 years later). Music and movies are usually paid for and never purchased again unless on subscription.
Furthermore, the software developers do software work in addition to the work they get paid to do, for free,
I'm not sure what you mean by free. I don't know one developer that isn't paid for their work. Indie devs are different as they put up the work up front hoping to get paid later (identical model to self employment).
and copyright interferes by saying that even if you do work to make something, if someone else did something similar first, they have the wherewithal to stop you from doing things with the results of your work.
That's a separate issue from to buy or not to buy. If you consider a company as evil for abusing copyrights you have the option to not purchase their product.
You also have a view of how mercy works that I am completely unfamiliar with. Also, your concept of a honor system
People do however go to third parties that have already bought a car, had used it for awhile and then for whatever reason decided to sell it. Copyright protection can interfere with ability though, so no, it's not the same at all.
Hard copies can be sold, I think we can agree on that. Digital copies in most stores do not allow reselling. Origin for a while allowed transferring a product key but I don't know if it's still possible. Steam also allows for selling digital copies (to this day).
Now, I'll give you that music and movies in digital form do not offer an opportunity for resell but they still have hard copies which can be sold. CDs can be purchased for $18 while digital copies can be purchased for $9 or even less if you don't want all the songs. It's a cost model that is in some ways less lucrative as it doesn't force the customer to buy a whole album. I don't know about you but I prefer that model. Much better model but still not my favorite. I'm more of a subscription kind of guy because I like to keep adding to my playlist and that runs cheaper for me at the end of the day.
I'll say like you said about companies making money but the other way around. The copyright issues are issues for the content providers to deal with, not the customer. As a customer you simply pay for what you use and don't pay for what you don't use. If you don't agree with the companies practices you can avoid their products. I think's that's a valid way of functioning.
Keep in mind that I totally agree that copyrights are a huge issue and some countries are working towards changing the system to remove the abuse that comes from copyright.
No, there are plenty of examples where not playing fair yields better outcomes. Mercy, for example. Fairness is a broken concept anyways. Some people think it's completely fair for everyone to go to hell. Just as long as everyone is treated the same, the worst outcome is completely fair.
Mercy? You think we should run on mercy? To hell with the honor system then. Lets just have mercy on you and pay you minimum wage for what you do. We just need to make sure you can eat so you can return to work tomorrow right?
By playing fair I mean not stealing. If you can't afford the product don't buy it hence don't use it. It's no different than material goods. People don't go breaking into dealerships because they want to get the car they can't afford.
This mentality of entitlement gets old real quick. For some reason intellectual property gets completely different treatment than the purchase of material goods regardless of how much work is involved. If people think the makers make too much money then they should just stop buying the products.
Considering a large percentage of users here are software developers I'm not sure why/. users have a view that encourages NOT PAYING for software and entertainment.
And it's not about reselling alone. It's about perpetual access without worrying about the status of any company's financial future.
For music and movies this is not an issue since multiple services are available and you can simply cancel your subscription with one service and go to the next.
As for games, steam has done a good job. I have a 10 year old steam game that I can still run today. With companies like Steam who actually care about the gaming industry we are in good hands. It will force the competition to follow suite if they aren't already leaning that way.
I agree. Not all the content is there but the amount of content will continue to grow. There's lots of competition and there's no reason for not having old offerings via stream. The internet of things is adapting to this new way to getting media and 10 years down the road it will be far better.
As for music I find all the music I need. The music streaming industry has been doing it for longer and aren't plague with the same network challenges as movie streaming.
And if they want to get paid it is up to them to figure out how to do so
They sell a product. You choose to buy it or not. Nothing needs to change there unless you start using the product without paying them then they will find a way to make you pay and usually that means you experience will be shattered such as forced DRM or other equivalent.
Nowhere in my consideration for all of this is whether or not other people in the chain are getting anything
It's absolutely not your responsibility to allow them to monetize the product as long as you play fair. Not playing fair = worst experience down the road. Our society is plague with rules and blockages because of people who don't care about others. Once all games are DRM you'll either quit using their products or you'll start paying. Question is, will you despise the model you force the company to adopt?
I dunno, have EA and friends started paying overtime yet?
Unpaid overtime is a huge issue across the corporate world and seems to be especially true of specialized labor such as programmers, engineers and management. The problem is that people are willing to accept large salaries with the understanding that they will need to put extra hours to accomplish the work. Problems arise when the work load is too big and the employer expects the work to be done outside the 44 hours. In the case of management the Canadian government has them categorized a non eligible for OT unless the company volunteers OT. Employers often use the carrot on a stick to motivate employees to go beyond the 44 hours by providing measurable or non measurable profit sharing and bonuses. In the case of salaried workers they should be paid OT but the population in Canada seems accepting that extra hours MUST be provided.
At the end of the day the internal practice of a company is your business in the way that you can choose to avoid buying their products. In my opinion steeping to their level by not being just is encouraging people to do that to all companies good or bad.
Slashdot Mirror
Please send your resume to me. We need a few d*ck heads that lack the ability to be constructive in their comments.
Maybe the integration of a security patch or more important features that caused this. After all, they knew about the issue at launch so there's most probably a reasonable reason for the bug. In addition is appears only specific network configurations will cause the issue to occur.
Because I lack large dev team branching/merging experience, it's hard for me to understand where they could have gone wrong. To me having a branch that makes things work doesn't reverse the fact that another feature may be more important hence a fix is required either way. Again, just speculating.
Where did you get this idea? Windows has always catered to the majority. They didn't stay you could launch a space shuttle with their OS. Use the right tools for the right job. In this case Linux was that tool to break the gap.
You should be happy MS used Linux for something within their critical structure. After all, Linux is the perfect OS to solve problems that require infinite flexibility. Linux is also amazing when packaged for specific hardware. Raspberry Pi, mobile phones... That's where Linux has shinned the most in the last 5 years.
Company CTOs or equivalent need to understand the needs of their company before they pick a product. Here's a list that shows the products side by side:
https://wiki.documentfoundatio...
Not all data collection has vile intentions. A lot of the data collected is used to understand user behavior or the sequence of events that lead to a failure. Some of the data collection is simply to do with the errors themselves.
By default they leave it on because they want to improve their OS.
The good thing is you have an option to opt out.
Yes but you are looking at it from the point of view of the user. I'm suggesting the publishers need to be motivated to do this and a fraction of the 1.5% of PC users may not be enough UNLESS we see something like the steambox pickup.
I agree with everything you said except that it doesn't explain the connection between the systems
However, that system needs to know whether a crash has occurred, and how is it going to do that? It needs access to some sort of sensor, but by its nature that same sensor is probably also used by some of the other modern systems that provide collision avoidance/mitigation features. Bang, now you've a link between a system that has remote communication capabilities and a system that has a need for direct control of essential vehicle systems.
This is a problem that is easily solved by providing read only access to sensor data. There is no reason for the external communication systems to allow write operations of any sort.
You might be surprised at how healthy gaming is becoming on Linux
1.5% of PC users use Linux. Healthy from the standpoint that the games available work but not a convincing when you look at the numbers. The real question is, what percentage of that 1.5% will actually game? In the current state I would assume less than on PC.
My understanding is that converting a game from one OS to another in a framework such as Unity is simple but the big publishers don't use theses frameworks. So how much work goes into making it happen? I honestly don't know. There's also the issue of support to users. What are the additional complications of having to support an OS with so many flavors and colors?
but Steambox has been convincing some of the big name publishers to put in the relatively minimal amount of effort necessary for Linux support.
What is defined as minimal efforts? If Linux already has DirectX (though that was suppose to have happened by now), then maybe but if not how are games converted over without the supporting library?
The only fix for the security problems with Onstar and any similar system is total removal of the hardware and software!!!!!
Although true, it's probably not what GM wants. The easiest way to fix while keeping the product alive this is to stop remote updates. It should be an active decision to update your car the same way it is for updating a NAS or SCSI controller firmware.
In addition, there should be a disconnect between the entertainment system and the car's operating functions. I don't understand why the same computer needs to handle both work loads as they do not cross over in functionality or need.
I'm not clear why you insist on the source of R&D dollars being crowdfunded. What if you have an idea you want to fund yourself? You take a risk by spending the dev cost building a game or piece of software. You set a price tag and sell it. If you make 100 times what you put in good for you. If you lose well that's unfortunate.
But that's already how it works. They eat the cost of development and then find channels to sell it through. There's the odd company that chooses to be in control such as Origin and Blizzard but generally most games are available through most channels. Consoles offer resell of games if the publisher allows it. At least you know when you buy the game if you can or cannot resell later.
but it shouldn't be illegal to crack it
Depends what you mean by crack it. If I crack it so that I can use it without buying into it, I believe it's theft (copyright infringement). If you purchase it, crack it and play it, I don't see a problem with that. I'm pretty sure the publishers won't care either. The problem is those that crack it, distribute the crack and worst host cracked servers for non licensed copies of the game. Meanwhile the company can't profit from that use.
Last I checked you are allowed to reverse engineer anything you want as long as you don't attempt to copy for sale (that's where it becomes illegal). See wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
This here speaks on both our behalf but mostly says that software reverse engineering is legal in the US as long as you don't reveal trade secrets if applicable (that's where the shit hits the fan IMO). http://lwn.net/Articles/134642...
Fact is, go ahead and reverse engineer anything your purchased because as long as you don't distribute your findings or copy protected content you aren't breaking the law.
I'll take a different approach to see if I can understand how you think it should work because I still don't understand where you stand.
I believe that if you want access to software (games or apps), music or movies and that the producer is asking for $xx.xx, you pay $xx.xx or simply don't use the product. No different than when you buy a hammer, a computer or anything else that has engineering behind it. IMO that's how the exchange of goods and services has worked for thousands of years.
Now, explain to me how it should work instead. Ideally your solution should not be suggestive but rather based on successful methods in our current consumer market.
We're not having the debate you think we are having then. The debate from my perspective, is over what obligates me to agree to someone else's terms to acquire something that the cost to reproduce is negligible, when we made no agreement before some work was done to have that item exist.that I would pay them something
That's where your arguments falls off the table. You do not know the cost to make said intellectual properly. It could have cost them $1,000,000 or $100. If you want it, pay the price. If you can't justify the purchase then don't buy it hence don't use it. This applies even to material goods as they include their R&D into the cost of the product. The only difference is that you can't actually get away with not paying for R&D on material goods. When you buy the latest Intel processor, do you really think that inflated price is just materials? NO, it's the R&D that went into it that your paying for.
Maybe in your world intellectual property just appears out of thin air but in the real world there's groups of people that work on these projects to bring them to market
I have no idea what you mean by "legal hard media
My bad. Hard copy of entertainment material such as movies and music.
You don't seem to understand what a copy is. A copy is not the thing that the first person made.
So how does a musician make money from his work? By selling COPIES! He sets a price and it either sells or it doesn't. If the price is out to lunch he won't sell shit. It's not relevant if you have a copy in your hands OR NOT. You are making use of said product. It's that simple.
That is where it's going with 3d printers. How can people pay the bills if all their intellectual work is free of charge.
In thirty years, most 'manufacturing' will consist of downloading a design from the Net and loading it into a 3D printer, either in your garage or the local print shop.
That will be true for end user products but the construction industry will still be around as well as commercial and industrial manufacturing methods will probably still be cheaper. I don't argue that there's a point in time where 3d printing may take over all types of manufacturing but 30 years may still be still a little early.
I say this because 3d printing has existed for a long time and even with today's low cost material and equipment the cost per piece (when volume applies) is still MUCH higher. With electricity cost being what they are, 3d printing may take a little while longer before it can compete against mainstream manufacturing of volume goods.
8.5% is the same difference as 400%? Again, I must question your sense of proportion.
I question your math skills. I have yet to see the 400%.
What discussion? Until the gaming industry brings to table evidence that they've changed, there's nothing to discuss. Why would anyone negotiate with someone who's simply trying to stall endlessly to avoid having to actually do anything?
How does this have anything to do with buying or not buying a product? I'm not clear at all which is why I didn't understand your ranting in the first place.
You said yourself this is an industry-wide problem.
Nope. I said it was a problem in the corporate world and pointed out some roles which appear more affected due to the nature of "salaried workers". I wasn't pointing at a specific industry. Fact is that you not buying their product isn't going to help those people at all. The people that need to make change happen are the people abused. You are a consumer so choose not to support the gaming industry if you wish but that won't change anything unless you convince millions of customers to follow suite which is very doubtful.
So don't be surprised that the entire industry is being held accountable as a whole. And yes, that will solve the problem, by crashing the entire industry to make room for a less malevolent version if that's what it'll take.
This will only happen if people boycott them. And boycotting means NOT USING, contrary to the excuse some here appear to give themselves for not paying for gaming products and entertainment?
Not at all - I have enough backlog to last me over the coming crash and reboot
Who gives a shit. The topic was about buying games/entertainment. How did you get to the point of talking about yourself?
I've written several programs that I haven't expected to get paid for.
That's a choice you make.
Also, you ignore the fact that the people writing software to break DRM usually do it for free,
Once again. Their choice.
No, that's never how I worked freelance. We agree on the payment up front. Sure, the agreed upon money is paid upon services rendered, but there are restaurants that work on the same principal, agree to the price first and then pay at the end of the meal.
Yes. Not sure why you bring this up. Your basically making my point. If you leave without paying at the restaurant you'll be charged with theft. It's no different for intellectual property. If you don't like the prices are the restaurant you don't eat there. Same should go for intellectual property.
I'm trying to understand what makes something a company's product in your mind.
Something you can purchase as it's own entity or a group of entities.
If a company chooses to sell something after it has entered the public domain, is it still their product?
That's a different debate. You can jump around the topic all you want (which I'm assuming your doing because you don't have any good arguments to justify your original reasoning).
A lot of food products completely wrapped get thrown in the dumpster. Is it still their product and therefore stealing to go dumpster diving? What about if a software company throws media with a copy of their software/video in a dumpster?
The product has left its ownership. As for software and entertainment it depends on it's licensing model. Entertainment is pretty easy as the legal hard media is the license.
Why are you so confused about all this. Why do you keep introducing tangents into the discussion? You appear to have lots of trouble staying on point and that's maybe because you don't understand what a sellable good is. Sure there's a difference between a material and intellectual good but even that's not complicated to understand. They make something and you either buy it or not. If you don't agree with the license model then don't consume the product.
It sucks to realize your cunning plan depended on other people not reacting to your defections in ways you don't want them to, doesn't it? But the only
effective response to realizing bad karma actually hurts is not to blame karma, or your victims, or even anyone who sees those victims and decides you're fair game, but to change your actions.
What does that mean? Lots of nonsense and no constructive comments to further the discussion.
If you continue to support the company doing something you don't like your the idiot and boycotting all companies won't solve the problem.
I'd say "welcome to real life", but like I pointed out before, even fairy tales do keep pointing this out.
I have no idea what this is suppose to mean in this context. You seem bitter about something but I'm not sure what.
The situation with entertainment materials is that for whatever reason, they do the work and then expect to get paid after the fact over and over again without doing more work.
It's no different than the engineers that engineer a hammer. The hammer will be sold for hundreds of years and the engineers not having anything more to add. The part about entertainment that is better for those doing the work is that further funds usually equals another project or continued work on said project. E.g. COD1, COD2, COD3... and that goes on until today (over 10 years later). Music and movies are usually paid for and never purchased again unless on subscription.
Furthermore, the software developers do software work in addition to the work they get paid to do, for free,
I'm not sure what you mean by free. I don't know one developer that isn't paid for their work. Indie devs are different as they put up the work up front hoping to get paid later (identical model to self employment).
and copyright interferes by saying that even if you do work to make something, if someone else did something similar first, they have the wherewithal to stop you from doing things with the results of your work.
That's a separate issue from to buy or not to buy. If you consider a company as evil for abusing copyrights you have the option to not purchase their product.
You also have a view of how mercy works that I am completely unfamiliar with. Also, your concept of a honor system
Mercy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Honor System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Honor system as in you paying for a product even if you can get away by not paying for it.
People do however go to third parties that have already bought a car, had used it for awhile and then for whatever reason decided to sell it. Copyright protection can interfere with ability though, so no, it's not the same at all.
Hard copies can be sold, I think we can agree on that. Digital copies in most stores do not allow reselling. Origin for a while allowed transferring a product key but I don't know if it's still possible. Steam also allows for selling digital copies (to this day).
Now, I'll give you that music and movies in digital form do not offer an opportunity for resell but they still have hard copies which can be sold. CDs can be purchased for $18 while digital copies can be purchased for $9 or even less if you don't want all the songs. It's a cost model that is in some ways less lucrative as it doesn't force the customer to buy a whole album. I don't know about you but I prefer that model. Much better model but still not my favorite. I'm more of a subscription kind of guy because I like to keep adding to my playlist and that runs cheaper for me at the end of the day.
I'll say like you said about companies making money but the other way around. The copyright issues are issues for the content providers to deal with, not the customer. As a customer you simply pay for what you use and don't pay for what you don't use. If you don't agree with the companies practices you can avoid their products. I think's that's a valid way of functioning.
Keep in mind that I totally agree that copyrights are a huge issue and some countries are working towards changing the system to remove the abuse that comes from copyright.
No, there are plenty of examples where not playing fair yields better outcomes. Mercy, for example. Fairness is a broken concept anyways. Some people think it's completely fair for everyone to go to hell. Just as long as everyone is treated the same, the worst outcome is completely fair.
Mercy? You think we should run on mercy? To hell with the honor system then. Lets just have mercy on you and pay you minimum wage for what you do. We just need to make sure you can eat so you can return to work tomorrow right?
By playing fair I mean not stealing. If you can't afford the product don't buy it hence don't use it. It's no different than material goods. People don't go breaking into dealerships because they want to get the car they can't afford.
This mentality of entitlement gets old real quick. For some reason intellectual property gets completely different treatment than the purchase of material goods regardless of how much work is involved. If people think the makers make too much money then they should just stop buying the products.
Considering a large percentage of users here are software developers I'm not sure why /. users have a view that encourages NOT PAYING for software and entertainment.
And it's not about reselling alone. It's about perpetual access without worrying about the status of any company's financial future.
For music and movies this is not an issue since multiple services are available and you can simply cancel your subscription with one service and go to the next.
As for games, steam has done a good job. I have a 10 year old steam game that I can still run today. With companies like Steam who actually care about the gaming industry we are in good hands. It will force the competition to follow suite if they aren't already leaning that way.
I agree. Not all the content is there but the amount of content will continue to grow. There's lots of competition and there's no reason for not having old offerings via stream. The internet of things is adapting to this new way to getting media and 10 years down the road it will be far better.
As for music I find all the music I need. The music streaming industry has been doing it for longer and aren't plague with the same network challenges as movie streaming.
And if they want to get paid it is up to them to figure out how to do so
They sell a product. You choose to buy it or not. Nothing needs to change there unless you start using the product without paying them then they will find a way to make you pay and usually that means you experience will be shattered such as forced DRM or other equivalent.
Nowhere in my consideration for all of this is whether or not other people in the chain are getting anything
It's absolutely not your responsibility to allow them to monetize the product as long as you play fair. Not playing fair = worst experience down the road. Our society is plague with rules and blockages because of people who don't care about others. Once all games are DRM you'll either quit using their products or you'll start paying. Question is, will you despise the model you force the company to adopt?
I dunno, have EA and friends started paying overtime yet?
Unpaid overtime is a huge issue across the corporate world and seems to be especially true of specialized labor such as programmers, engineers and management. The problem is that people are willing to accept large salaries with the understanding that they will need to put extra hours to accomplish the work. Problems arise when the work load is too big and the employer expects the work to be done outside the 44 hours. In the case of management the Canadian government has them categorized a non eligible for OT unless the company volunteers OT. Employers often use the carrot on a stick to motivate employees to go beyond the 44 hours by providing measurable or non measurable profit sharing and bonuses. In the case of salaried workers they should be paid OT but the population in Canada seems accepting that extra hours MUST be provided.
At the end of the day the internal practice of a company is your business in the way that you can choose to avoid buying their products. In my opinion steeping to their level by not being just is encouraging people to do that to all companies good or bad.