Ahh, but therein lies the "crux": Who determines what "overcharging" is? Sure, the medium and cost of duplication (if you're dealing with CD distrubution) is only.50. Does this mean that everything above.50 is overcharging? How and more importantly, who determines what a fair price is? Apparently, Microsoft has determined that $199 is a fair price for Windows XP. While I or you may disagree, millions and millions of customers pay $199 for Windows XP and to them, it's a fair price for what it offers. Sure, some pundits would point to the lack of competition and MS's government-labeled "monopoly" as the reason why they can get away for charging $199 for Windows, but I've found, as have others, that paying $199 for Windows 2k was a hell of lot easier and more painless than installing Linux.
Microsoft does more than just sells software to people who don't "know any better". In fact, I know a bunch of people (including myself), who buy Microsoft and we DO "know better". It's just that we use our computers as tools and want a minimum of hassle and $199 represents a HELL of a bargain compared to spending our nights fucking around with what really is a really good Server OS. The old saying really is true: "Linux is only free if your time has no value." My time currently goes for $15/hour (not much, I admit), during normal business hours, and really has no set price outside of those hours: my spare time is "priceless" in the sense that the last thing I want to do when I'm not working is WORKING on a computer. Redhat also does the same thing, to an extent. I certainly could not roll my own distribution and their work into hardware auto-detection and setup saves me countless hours of "fiddling". It's not that I'm too busy to "do things myself", it's just that I don't feel like doing it myself. I'm lazy, overweight, and American and we've got nukes to prove the point (why invade a country when you can just blow it to smithereens at the push of a button? hrm...).*
No company has the power to prevent you from using someone else's software unless you were stupid enough to sign some sort of contract stating otherwise. And even if you did, I have my doubts as to the legality of such a contract, much like you don't have the right to sell yourself into slavery. However, I'm no lawyer, nor am I the legal system, but if I see a piece of software that I think sucks or think I could do better, or I think is too expensive and that it would just be easier to write my own version (or even maybe "That's an interesting program, I'd like to see what it takes to write that..."), MS is not going to stand on my doorstep and beat me up because I'm doing it unless I'm violating their patents or copyrights (and that in itself is worthy of another long, lengthy, passion filled debate, see DMCA). Witness that it seems most "OSS" projects are quite literaly clones or functional equivalents of "commercial" software (OpenOffice, Apache, KDE/GNOME, etc). While on occasion we really get some innovation (I think dashboard is pretty innovative in concept, I hope they really can deliver), the point is that people are "publishing better bike plans" everyday. (caveat: A lot of those better bike plans are no such thing). I offer freshmeat and sourceforge for your perusal to discover this for yourself. (and again: It's not necessarily a bad thing, either).
From a strictly monetary point of view, Free Software kills value. No one says that's the only point of view you have to have, and indeed I mentioned that there's actually a trade-off involved (human interest value vs. quantifiable monetary value). Some people hold the first with more value, others the latter (see various dictators that would sell their own people into slavery for a few more bucks.. life is cheap, we'll make more, but money buys really nice things).
*I use Windows 2k because it works. I also have another system with Redhat9, and it mostly just works, as well. If Redhat 9 didn't find/support my hardware, or meet most of my needs, you can bet your sweet ass I'd have Win2k or XP on the new machine pronto.
"At the end of the day, the GPL is not about making software free; it's about destroying value."
But isn't it true? It's undeniable that the GPL and Free Software *does* destroy value, but the key is destroying value FOR WHOM. For giant monolithic corporations that require absolute control to inflate their profit margins, free software is an absolute bane to their existence if that's their only business model (Microsoft, proprietary UNIX venders with no other line of income). For those who use Free Software to enhance value, their business model is still safe, they now compete by providing superior packaging (hardware and software support, see IBM, Sun, even SGI these days). You will never see a Free Software company reach the kind of marketcap of a Microsoft: Free Software has pushed software into the "commodity" zone. Software that is ubiquitously cheap, affordable, with high standards of quality (uhm, well, maybe one day (in terms of the overwhelming majority of OSS, anyway.. for every SAMBA, there's probably 10 turds or stillborn children on sourceforge)). It has enhanced the value for the END USER, rather than for the developer/owner/investor. It's a shifting of value, to be more precise, and a lot of people have a problem with that. One, you can measure with your bank account. The other is less tangible.
You know, there was a guy named "the Bum Hunter" on a sick video called "Bum Fights: A Cause for Concern." I can just see that becoming a real "reality" TV show, with some asshole jumping bums to take measurements and to "tag" them for tracking.
How much would said "photovoltaic" cells cost, and how durable are they? Can they withstand high winds, impact from softball-sized hail, treelimbs, leaves, etc? What's the maintainence on them like? I live in an area where we get hail, high winds (even tornadoes), ice storms in the winter, etc. How well will these work in those conditions? And when they (and everything does eventually) break, how easily can you replace them? At what expense? As it stands now, with "typical" shingles, they last a long time, take quite a bit of abuse, and if they get blown off in a windstorm, well, you're looking at what, $30-40 to replace them? With labor?
I'm not saying it can't be done, nor that it shouldn't be done, and I have no idea what the state of of "solar power" is these days, but those were concerns in the 90's and they may still be concerns today. Of course, if someone would pour 1% of the total energy revenues into Solar energy, I'm sure research would accelerate.:)
The biggest problem is with high-traffic. We use Nextel's at my courier company where I'm a nighttime dispatcher. Nothing is more annoying than talking to someone and someone else "gets in". You then have to tell that person to hang on, wait for the phone to be "ready" again, manually dial the other person's phone, and then resume conversation until some other jackass "jumps in". The workflow disruption in high-traffic (many-to-one relationship?) is crippling.
No shit. And as a games programmer, add to that: 3D modelling software (Blender (various version for compatability), Wings3D, Milkshape), sound editing software (SoundForge, FruityLoops)..
Um. I've mailed out thousands of letters over the years. Thousands. Never had a lost letter. Never had a package pilfered. Never had a box come in completely destroyed (as I have with UPS). And for.37, it's not a bad deal.
Granted, it would be nice to see some competition, but hey..
The smart thing to do, then, is to get a partnership with both Amazon and B&N, link to both in the article (like "Get it at bn or amazon (thanks for supporting/.!).
They did patch. However, shouldn't admins check their systems for exploits after applying the patch? I mean, are you supposed to apply a patch and just assume you were not compromised?
DId you notice, according to the article, that out of a country with a billion people, that there are only *8 million* computers (personal?) in India? And as for "cost", let's be real. My Indian friend brought back a CD he got in Bombay that he paid about $1.47 US dollars for. It contained the entire Adobe Suite. He said the same for just about any software you could name, you rarely paid over $5 on the street. No one pays for software in India. No one. What's amazing to me is that even with the availability of "free" Windows, people are still choosing Linux.
I have a feeling it'll be like the shoe industry: Cheap labor == cheap laptops, but the end companies won't lower the prices a single cent. You'll still be paying $1999 for that $100 laptop. w00t!
Uh, who the fuck is doing that? Define huge profits. Redhat is making money, but NOTHING that could be considered huge. IBM? They're making money off hardware and support, they just happen to sell Linux as part of the deal (for some customers). SUN? HA! It must be SCO, then. Most companies/individuals that are making money off of Open Source are not making HUGE profits. Most are simply making a living.
Will it also work with the debian repositories? One thing I find lacking with freshrpms.net is a noticeable "lack" of applications compared to the debian collection...
Indeed. The only real problem I can see is with "camping". Camping in the sense that there are people who never let anyone else take a turn killing some monster for an item or whatever. Of course, this could be solved with a robust tradeskills system (I hear Star Wars: Galaxies is on the way) so that player created items are the only things around and that players can trade in-game cash or real cash to get their items.. Then materials becomes bottleneck, but if it's "random spawns", no one can really call "camp" on those kind of things..
Chances are I already paid $299 for my Win2K (which I have), so paying another ~$60 just to run my app under Linux is just frivolous if I'm just trying to "make a statement". However, with someone like Disney, who probably pays for site licensing and whatnot, it's more cost-effective to not renew their subscriptions and move to Linux. I'm learning to live with the GIMP on my linux desktop, but I also have Win2k on another for Bryce, Photoshop, and Premiere.
But... would it really? I mean, the folks will still buy a Photoshop License (for Windows). With WINE, they get the app to work. All at zero cost to Adobe. They still have you as a customer if you're using it legitimately, they still make their $900 and they still have one less platform to target, do QA, etc on.
Dude, get a clue. I'm fucking trolling. Goddamn, do I have to spell it out?
I know what RMS's motivations are (social-political revolution.. more akin to collective-altruism, hence the constant comparisons to Socialism/Communism. Although he claims (and can rationalize) his viewpoint that he's really not a collective-altruist (well, that he's not a communist, anyway), I think his writings (and I've read them all) tell a different story. Nice, happy utopian programmer dreams that have absolutely no bearing on the real world. However, the one thing I absolutely admire about him (and Ayn Rand, amongst others) is that even though I may not agree with him (or the others), he sticks to his guns, no matter what. It makes sense to him and he's not going to relent. 100% props for him (even though I don't agree that all software should be "free").
Jesus, I was bored at work today.:)
(BTW: I don't really know a lot about Linux other than I use it, daily, for real world work. I've been intrigued by the mission of the FSF since around 1996 and am impressed by the scope of their accomplishments. I feel that the "mission statement" of RMS and his group is, well, religious in nature. (See his ethics and morals regarding closed source software.. To him, nothing could be more "selfish" than to deny someone access to your source code. I happen to be a very selfish bastard, so I resent that.;) )I gave up religion when I was 10 and have no desire to pick up another. Anyway, while I understand what RMS is saying, implicitly (hey, another poster actually called me on something.. That's impressive in itself, someone actually reads out there), I actually find myself more aligned to Kernighan when it comes to computers (it's just a tool to get a job done, not something to fight or die or argue over), and when it comes to OSS philosophy, I prefer ESR's take that OSS can be a superior development model.)
Another purpose of this line of posting was merely to affirm another poster's comments about the "Open Content" topic: With Open Content (like slashdot), there is no real form of determining what's true and what's not true. Moderator's alone cannot do the job (indeed, how many blatantly false postings have you seen get modded up to +5?), so the reader himself has to sort the chaff from the wheat. As an example of that, witness the number of people (6 as of this writing) that came to arms at my first posting? And yet, there's no moderation. While I do stand by my assertions that 1) I think RMS is a big fat hairy cry-baby and 2) Linux is not GNU is not Linux and 3) It's Linux, most of my posting regarding *anything* RMS is merely, what do you call it.. flame-baiting? Trolling? I'm not sure of the technical term. Time killing is more like it.
Read my other responses where I've basically said the same. I don't call it GNU/Linux, and if you want to, that's fine by me, as well. What gets me are the assclowns that think the name GNU/Linux will solve all the world's ills. Just as RMS thinks it would be a polite gesture to say "GNU/Linux", I think it's impolite to ask people to change the name for some political motive. (trademark infringement, that's kinda different) RMS and GNU get tons of recognition, from the tools themselves. That's their best advertisement. By "insisting" upon "GNU/Linux", RMS makes himself out to be a whiney little cry-baby, and that's what sickens me. How can a man who produced such great software resort to crying about "GNU/Linux"? For him, it's some sort of moral imperative. For the rest of us, it's Linux and it's what we use to get the job done.
All I can say to your "speak for yourself" is ditto.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh, but therein lies the "crux": Who determines what "overcharging" is? Sure, the medium and cost of duplication (if you're dealing with CD distrubution) is only .50. Does this mean that everything above .50 is overcharging? How and more importantly, who determines what a fair price is? Apparently, Microsoft has determined that $199 is a fair price for Windows XP. While I or you may disagree, millions and millions of customers pay $199 for Windows XP and to them, it's a fair price for what it offers. Sure, some pundits would point to the lack of competition and MS's government-labeled "monopoly" as the reason why they can get away for charging $199 for Windows, but I've found, as have others, that paying $199 for Windows 2k was a hell of lot easier and more painless than installing Linux.
Microsoft does more than just sells software to people who don't "know any better". In fact, I know a bunch of people (including myself), who buy Microsoft and we DO "know better". It's just that we use our computers as tools and want a minimum of hassle and $199 represents a HELL of a bargain compared to spending our nights fucking around with what really is a really good Server OS. The old saying really is true: "Linux is only free if your time has no value." My time currently goes for $15/hour (not much, I admit), during normal business hours, and really has no set price outside of those hours: my spare time is "priceless" in the sense that the last thing I want to do when I'm not working is WORKING on a computer. Redhat also does the same thing, to an extent. I certainly could not roll my own distribution and their work into hardware auto-detection and setup saves me countless hours of "fiddling". It's not that I'm too busy to "do things myself", it's just that I don't feel like doing it myself. I'm lazy, overweight, and American and we've got nukes to prove the point (why invade a country when you can just blow it to smithereens at the push of a button? hrm...).*
No company has the power to prevent you from using someone else's software unless you were stupid enough to sign some sort of contract stating otherwise. And even if you did, I have my doubts as to the legality of such a contract, much like you don't have the right to sell yourself into slavery. However, I'm no lawyer, nor am I the legal system, but if I see a piece of software that I think sucks or think I could do better, or I think is too expensive and that it would just be easier to write my own version (or even maybe "That's an interesting program, I'd like to see what it takes to write that..."), MS is not going to stand on my doorstep and beat me up because I'm doing it unless I'm violating their patents or copyrights (and that in itself is worthy of another long, lengthy, passion filled debate, see DMCA). Witness that it seems most "OSS" projects are quite literaly clones or functional equivalents of "commercial" software (OpenOffice, Apache, KDE/GNOME, etc). While on occasion we really get some innovation (I think dashboard is pretty innovative in concept, I hope they really can deliver), the point is that people are "publishing better bike plans" everyday. (caveat: A lot of those better bike plans are no such thing). I offer freshmeat and sourceforge for your perusal to discover this for yourself. (and again: It's not necessarily a bad thing, either).
From a strictly monetary point of view, Free Software kills value. No one says that's the only point of view you have to have, and indeed I mentioned that there's actually a trade-off involved (human interest value vs. quantifiable monetary value). Some people hold the first with more value, others the latter (see various dictators that would sell their own people into slavery for a few more bucks.. life is cheap, we'll make more, but money buys really nice things).
*I use Windows 2k because it works. I also have another system with Redhat9, and it mostly just works, as well. If Redhat 9 didn't find/support my hardware, or meet most of my needs, you can bet your sweet ass I'd have Win2k or XP on the new machine pronto.
"At the end of the day, the GPL is not about making software free; it's about destroying value."
But isn't it true? It's undeniable that the GPL and Free Software *does* destroy value, but the key is destroying value FOR WHOM. For giant monolithic corporations that require absolute control to inflate their profit margins, free software is an absolute bane to their existence if that's their only business model (Microsoft, proprietary UNIX venders with no other line of income). For those who use Free Software to enhance value, their business model is still safe, they now compete by providing superior packaging (hardware and software support, see IBM, Sun, even SGI these days). You will never see a Free Software company reach the kind of marketcap of a Microsoft: Free Software has pushed software into the "commodity" zone. Software that is ubiquitously cheap, affordable, with high standards of quality (uhm, well, maybe one day (in terms of the overwhelming majority of OSS, anyway.. for every SAMBA, there's probably 10 turds or stillborn children on sourceforge)). It has enhanced the value for the END USER, rather than for the developer/owner/investor. It's a shifting of value, to be more precise, and a lot of people have a problem with that. One, you can measure with your bank account. The other is less tangible.
Personally, I like my money green.
You know, there was a guy named "the Bum Hunter" on a sick video called "Bum Fights: A Cause for Concern." I can just see that becoming a real "reality" TV show, with some asshole jumping bums to take measurements and to "tag" them for tracking.
I dunno why, but that disturbs me.
And finally, first the "homeless." Then us.
How much would said "photovoltaic" cells cost, and how durable are they? Can they withstand high winds, impact from softball-sized hail, treelimbs, leaves, etc? What's the maintainence on them like? I live in an area where we get hail, high winds (even tornadoes), ice storms in the winter, etc. How well will these work in those conditions? And when they (and everything does eventually) break, how easily can you replace them? At what expense? As it stands now, with "typical" shingles, they last a long time, take quite a bit of abuse, and if they get blown off in a windstorm, well, you're looking at what, $30-40 to replace them? With labor?
:)
I'm not saying it can't be done, nor that it shouldn't be done, and I have no idea what the state of of "solar power" is these days, but those were concerns in the 90's and they may still be concerns today. Of course, if someone would pour 1% of the total energy revenues into Solar energy, I'm sure research would accelerate.
Is always hiring friendly faces. I'm sure your PhD won't be held with disdain there, in fact, it'll probably be a non-issue!
Now, just compromise the automatic-update machines, install trojan on updates, and
"Arise, my children! SkyNet is BORN! ph33r m3!"
I do have friends and if you give me a minute, I'll log on as them to post proof!
Now we're outsourcing our fucking astronauts?
The biggest problem is with high-traffic. We use Nextel's at my courier company where I'm a nighttime dispatcher. Nothing is more annoying than talking to someone and someone else "gets in". You then have to tell that person to hang on, wait for the phone to be "ready" again, manually dial the other person's phone, and then resume conversation until some other jackass "jumps in". The workflow disruption in high-traffic (many-to-one relationship?) is crippling.
No shit. And as a games programmer, add to that:
3D modelling software (Blender (various version for compatability), Wings3D, Milkshape), sound editing software (SoundForge, FruityLoops)..
I for one welcome our new Robotic Bunny-Human Power Overlords.
Post Office == abysmal service?
.37, it's not a bad deal.
Um. I've mailed out thousands of letters over the years. Thousands. Never had a lost letter. Never had a package pilfered. Never had a box come in completely destroyed (as I have with UPS). And for
Granted, it would be nice to see some competition, but hey..
The smart thing to do, then, is to get a partnership with both Amazon and B&N, link to both in the article (like "Get it at bn or amazon (thanks for supporting /.!).
They did patch. However, shouldn't admins check their systems for exploits after applying the patch? I mean, are you supposed to apply a patch and just assume you were not compromised?
DId you notice, according to the article, that out of a country with a billion people, that there are only *8 million* computers (personal?) in India? And as for "cost", let's be real. My Indian friend brought back a CD he got in Bombay that he paid about $1.47 US dollars for. It contained the entire Adobe Suite. He said the same for just about any software you could name, you rarely paid over $5 on the street. No one pays for software in India. No one. What's amazing to me is that even with the availability of "free" Windows, people are still choosing Linux.
I have a feeling it'll be like the shoe industry:
Cheap labor == cheap laptops, but the end companies won't lower the prices a single cent. You'll still be paying $1999 for that $100 laptop. w00t!
/* then use a huge name to make huge profits. */
Uh, who the fuck is doing that? Define huge profits. Redhat is making money, but NOTHING that could be considered huge. IBM? They're making money off hardware and support, they just happen to sell Linux as part of the deal (for some customers). SUN? HA! It must be SCO, then. Most companies/individuals that are making money off of Open Source are not making HUGE profits. Most are simply making a living.
Will it also work with the debian repositories? One thing I find lacking with freshrpms.net is a noticeable "lack" of applications compared to the debian collection...
Indeed. The only real problem I can see is with "camping". Camping in the sense that there are people who never let anyone else take a turn killing some monster for an item or whatever. Of course, this could be solved with a robust tradeskills system (I hear Star Wars: Galaxies is on the way) so that player created items are the only things around and that players can trade in-game cash or real cash to get their items.. Then materials becomes bottleneck, but if it's "random spawns", no one can really call "camp" on those kind of things..
/* since the copyright holder gets to determine the conditions of its copying */
Potentially void in Germany...
As a poor person, I'd rather have the full loaf.
Chances are I already paid $299 for my Win2K (which I have), so paying another ~$60 just to run my app under Linux is just frivolous if I'm just trying to "make a statement". However, with someone like Disney, who probably pays for site licensing and whatnot, it's more cost-effective to not renew their subscriptions and move to Linux. I'm learning to live with the GIMP on my linux desktop, but I also have Win2k on another for Bryce, Photoshop, and Premiere.
But... would it really?
I mean, the folks will still buy a Photoshop License (for Windows). With WINE, they get the app to work. All at zero cost to Adobe. They still have you as a customer if you're using it legitimately, they still make their $900 and they still have one less platform to target, do QA, etc on.
Dude, get a clue. I'm fucking trolling. Goddamn, do I have to spell it out?
:)
;) )I gave up religion when I was 10 and have no desire to pick up another. Anyway, while I understand what RMS is saying, implicitly (hey, another poster actually called me on something.. That's impressive in itself, someone actually reads out there), I actually find myself more aligned to Kernighan when it comes to computers (it's just a tool to get a job done, not something to fight or die or argue over), and when it comes to OSS philosophy, I prefer ESR's take that OSS can be a superior development model.)
I know what RMS's motivations are (social-political revolution.. more akin to collective-altruism, hence the constant comparisons to Socialism/Communism. Although he claims (and can rationalize) his viewpoint that he's really not a collective-altruist (well, that he's not a communist, anyway), I think his writings (and I've read them all) tell a different story. Nice, happy utopian programmer dreams that have absolutely no bearing on the real world. However, the one thing I absolutely admire about him (and Ayn Rand, amongst others) is that even though I may not agree with him (or the others), he sticks to his guns, no matter what. It makes sense to him and he's not going to relent. 100% props for him (even though I don't agree that all software should be "free").
Jesus, I was bored at work today.
(BTW: I don't really know a lot about Linux other than I use it, daily, for real world work. I've been intrigued by the mission of the FSF since around 1996 and am impressed by the scope of their accomplishments. I feel that the "mission statement" of RMS and his group is, well, religious in nature. (See his ethics and morals regarding closed source software.. To him, nothing could be more "selfish" than to deny someone access to your source code. I happen to be a very selfish bastard, so I resent that.
Another purpose of this line of posting was merely to affirm another poster's comments about the "Open Content" topic: With Open Content (like slashdot), there is no real form of determining what's true and what's not true. Moderator's alone cannot do the job (indeed, how many blatantly false postings have you seen get modded up to +5?), so the reader himself has to sort the chaff from the wheat. As an example of that, witness the number of people (6 as of this writing) that came to arms at my first posting? And yet, there's no moderation. While I do stand by my assertions that 1) I think RMS is a big fat hairy cry-baby and 2) Linux is not GNU is not Linux and 3) It's Linux, most of my posting regarding *anything* RMS is merely, what do you call it.. flame-baiting? Trolling? I'm not sure of the technical term. Time killing is more like it.
Anyway, have a great day!
Read my other responses where I've basically said the same. I don't call it GNU/Linux, and if you want to, that's fine by me, as well. What gets me are the assclowns that think the name GNU/Linux will solve all the world's ills. Just as RMS thinks it would be a polite gesture to say "GNU/Linux", I think it's impolite to ask people to change the name for some political motive. (trademark infringement, that's kinda different) RMS and GNU get tons of recognition, from the tools themselves. That's their best advertisement. By "insisting" upon "GNU/Linux", RMS makes himself out to be a whiney little cry-baby, and that's what sickens me. How can a man who produced such great software resort to crying about "GNU/Linux"? For him, it's some sort of moral imperative. For the rest of us, it's Linux and it's what we use to get the job done.
All I can say to your "speak for yourself" is ditto.