A living wage for a family guy is $30,000. There are approximately 225 working days in the year. That's $133 profit a day, each day, every day, in completed transactions. No fudging, no exceptions, no "waiting on confirmation", or you skip a mortgage payment or lose your health cover.
I'm not saying that it's impossible, just that when everyone is a potential competitor, you need to be completely serious about it and do the sums before you give up the day job. Having fun at your job is what you do before you get a mortgage and orthodentist bills. After that, job security takes priority, and fun is what you do in your off hours.
Do you realise that you're advocating making technology illegal? How do you propose to decide who is and is not allowed access to smart card programmers? Corporate policing of tools and knowledge is a terrifying prospect.
I mention this because I have a box full of probes, logic analysers and ICE systems at home that I've aquired over many years while working for tech companies. So, that makes me safe right? Well, wrong. If I buy a piece of hardware while working for Path-E-Tech, how does that stop OmniCorp Inc from having me chucked in the clink because they don't want me to have it?
Guilty until proven innocent is not the way it should work, and the sooner we make that clear to the corps, the better.
Because GPL licensed code is habitually ripped off by commercial companies, through evil or plain old ignorance. I've seen it both ways, and I've seen it at every company I've worked at.
You, dear reader, might not have seen it, but that doesn't mean that I haven't, or that it doesn't happen.
GPL needs a huge public case to bring it to the attention of both developers and pointy haired idiots. It must be made clear that the GPL can't be retrospectively revoked (that it doesn't specify "irrevocable and in perpetuity" beggars belief), but that once violated, you are commiting copyright violation (or "theft" in newspeak) every time you duplicate. This needs to be made clear in no uncertain terms, with a fat headline grabbing fine, not just another quiet non-disclosed settlement by that pussweed Moglen.
The GPL is so badly understood even by people that use and comment on it every day (yes, you, dear reader), that this is a long overdue public test of it. If it ain't broke, let's say so. If it's broke, let's find that out and fix it.
$1000 in 3 weeks, while his wife and kids were away. They're going to be eating a lot of rice and lima beans, and let's hope they don't get ill.
Heck, let's go over the numbers again:
"Mr Big" is one of a handful of Ultima players who make six figure sums annually from their trades.
Assuming "six figure" is $100,000, at an average auction price of $7 (which seems to be the case from the ones I've seen) that's 14285 transactions per trader per year, or 40 competed transactions each and every day of the year for these traders. Cutting that back to an 222 working day year, it's 64 completed transactions per day.
Push the average value up, and it becomes more manageable, but then you have to spend more time on each trade. And remember, you've only got 225,000 rubes to sell to. If the "handful" of six figure traders is three, then that's $1.33 from each and every rube every year, which seems reasonable until you consider the dozens, hundreds, thousands of casual traders scrabbling for their money.
It's easy to say that you're making money at this. It's even possible to fool yourself. But until I see IRS filings, I'm going to take it with a huge pinch of salt.
Further, the sky is green and grass is blue, and we have patents and trademarks and copy rights on all of the above.
How long before their press releases consist of them stripping nekkid, smearing themselves in peanut butter and running around screaming "ALL YOUR CODE BASE ARE BELONG TO US. YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME." ? I give it two weeks.
Fifteen minutes? Have you been frozen in a block of ice since 1992? Try three minutes, less in some shops. The goal is to cut the customer off, read from a script, say a variant of "Please-try-that-thank-you-for-your-successfully-r esolved-call-please-call-back-if-you-have-any-furt her-problems-goodbye." then hit on hook. That's consumers. Business customers sometimes get upwards of four, even five minutes.
How much do you want to play these games? Do you want it enough to offer cold hard cash in return for a non-exclusive license? Have you considered offering advertising links? Do you have anything else that the rights owners might like?
If the question is "How can we persuade rights owners to give us the rights for nothing", then you can't be that interested in playing them.
Are you smoking the same crack as SCO? The GPL is a license that grants you rights that you wouldn't otherwise have. If it "breaks-down", you're left with no rights. That means that SCO can pursue their IP, but also that everybody else who's contributed to anything that SCO are still releasing can hit SCO for copy right infringement.
In fact, SCO have already breached their license. Why the FSF is bitch-slapping them with infringement suits left right and centre amazes me. Is that pussweed Eben Moglen trying to talk this one out? He's on crack as well if he is. SCO have gone rabid, and they need to be put down.
People are saying again and again that the GPL requires you to license any patents that you hold relating to the code. It does no such thing. It says that you do not have GPL distribution rights if you pursue patents or other intellectual property [sic] claims.
There is absolutely nothing in the GPL that prohibits SCO, IBM, Red Hat or any other GPL distributor from pursuing patent or IP [sic] claims once they stop distributing. The GPL does not protect from submarine patents. Clearly SCO is too stupid to stop distributing, but there's no reason to believe that IBM will be if it chooses to dump linux distribution.
In fact, there is nothing to stop them from pursuing patent claims while distributing. Their patent claims will be a separate issue from the copy right infringement claims of any contributors who wish to sue them for breaching the GPL license. So far we're seeing Red Hat and IBM launching countersuits against SCO, but what they and other contributors - yes, that means you - should really do is to simply file suit for copy right violation now that SCO have voided their GPL license and continue to distribute GPL code. Why is nobody doing this?
Oh, we all know what the GPL means, but perhaps we should take some time to actually read what it says.
License != contract. If you have copyrighted code in the distro that SCO continues to distribute, you can sue them for copyright infringement. I'm guessing that you don't.
SCO is a publically traded company. There is absolutely nothing to stop IBM from offering $X per share to small shareholders, and $0 per share to the major shareholding fucknuts that are currently sailing it onto the rocks.
Since we're at war with the Taliban / al Quada, it follows that we've always been at war with the Taliban / al Quada, just as the Russians have always been our friends and allies in our holy war against te'er, right?
What, just like SCO were when they decided to distribute a Linux distro, including code that said "Please use me", and then get all of their revenue by suing people for doing so?
Remind me, what SEC filing that that plan appear on? Because it seems to me like "Abandon development and marketing of obselete product, make all of our money from barratry" would be the sort of thing that investors would like to know about beforehand.
Me too. I'm left with the choice of just buying generic crap, or taking the advice of a guy who was in his basement at 2am listening to power supplies. I think I'll take the gamble.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me put it more simply:
A living wage for a family guy is $30,000. There are approximately 225 working days in the year. That's $133 profit a day, each day, every day, in completed transactions. No fudging, no exceptions, no "waiting on confirmation", or you skip a mortgage payment or lose your health cover.
I'm not saying that it's impossible, just that when everyone is a potential competitor, you need to be completely serious about it and do the sums before you give up the day job. Having fun at your job is what you do before you get a mortgage and orthodentist bills. After that, job security takes priority, and fun is what you do in your off hours.
>DirecTV seems to be hassling people who have the ability to steal programming
Have or had. Let's say I sold my programmer at a garage sale. Now, how do I go about proving that?
Do you realise that you're advocating making technology illegal? How do you propose to decide who is and is not allowed access to smart card programmers? Corporate policing of tools and knowledge is a terrifying prospect.
I mention this because I have a box full of probes, logic analysers and ICE systems at home that I've aquired over many years while working for tech companies. So, that makes me safe right? Well, wrong. If I buy a piece of hardware while working for Path-E-Tech, how does that stop OmniCorp Inc from having me chucked in the clink because they don't want me to have it?
Guilty until proven innocent is not the way it should work, and the sooner we make that clear to the corps, the better.
Are you listening, Red Hat?
Because GPL licensed code is habitually ripped off by commercial companies, through evil or plain old ignorance. I've seen it both ways, and I've seen it at every company I've worked at.
You, dear reader, might not have seen it, but that doesn't mean that I haven't, or that it doesn't happen.
GPL needs a huge public case to bring it to the attention of both developers and pointy haired idiots. It must be made clear that the GPL can't be retrospectively revoked (that it doesn't specify "irrevocable and in perpetuity" beggars belief), but that once violated, you are commiting copyright violation (or "theft" in newspeak) every time you duplicate. This needs to be made clear in no uncertain terms, with a fat headline grabbing fine, not just another quiet non-disclosed settlement by that pussweed Moglen.
The GPL is so badly understood even by people that use and comment on it every day (yes, you, dear reader), that this is a long overdue public test of it. If it ain't broke, let's say so. If it's broke, let's find that out and fix it.
$1000 in 3 weeks, while his wife and kids were away. They're going to be eating a lot of rice and lima beans, and let's hope they don't get ill.
Heck, let's go over the numbers again:
"Mr Big" is one of a handful of Ultima players who make six figure sums annually from their trades.
Assuming "six figure" is $100,000, at an average auction price of $7 (which seems to be the case from the ones I've seen) that's 14285 transactions per trader per year, or 40 competed transactions each and every day of the year for these traders. Cutting that back to an 222 working day year, it's 64 completed transactions per day.
Push the average value up, and it becomes more manageable, but then you have to spend more time on each trade. And remember, you've only got 225,000 rubes to sell to. If the "handful" of six figure traders is three, then that's $1.33 from each and every rube every year, which seems reasonable until you consider the dozens, hundreds, thousands of casual traders scrabbling for their money.
It's easy to say that you're making money at this. It's even possible to fool yourself. But until I see IRS filings, I'm going to take it with a huge pinch of salt.
Who cares? More to the point, who cares about articles that decide reliability based on a sample size of one?
Are we just killing time while we wait for the next SCO rant?
Further, the sky is green and grass is blue, and we have patents and trademarks and copy rights on all of the above.
How long before their press releases consist of them stripping nekkid, smearing themselves in peanut butter and running around screaming "ALL YOUR CODE BASE ARE BELONG TO US. YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME." ? I give it two weeks.
Red Hat? SuSE? Mandrake? Are they not companies now?
Fifteen minutes? Have you been frozen in a block of ice since 1992? Try three minutes, less in some shops. The goal is to cut the customer off, read from a script, say a variant of "Please-try-that-thank-you-for-your-successfully-r esolved-call-please-call-back-if-you-have-any-furt her-problems-goodbye." then hit on hook. That's consumers. Business customers sometimes get upwards of four, even five minutes.
Now I'm kind of aroused. Got a divx of that?
MONEY
How much do you want to play these games? Do you want it enough to offer cold hard cash in return for a non-exclusive license? Have you considered offering advertising links? Do you have anything else that the rights owners might like?
If the question is "How can we persuade rights owners to give us the rights for nothing", then you can't be that interested in playing them.
You're either with the GPL, or you're with the proprietary terrorists.
Are you smoking the same crack as SCO? The GPL is a license that grants you rights that you wouldn't otherwise have. If it "breaks-down", you're left with no rights. That means that SCO can pursue their IP, but also that everybody else who's contributed to anything that SCO are still releasing can hit SCO for copy right infringement.
In fact, SCO have already breached their license. Why the FSF is bitch-slapping them with infringement suits left right and centre amazes me. Is that pussweed Eben Moglen trying to talk this one out? He's on crack as well if he is. SCO have gone rabid, and they need to be put down.
I'd put a bullet in his brain. Poor old thing, snarling and frothing. That's no way to live.
People are saying again and again that the GPL requires you to license any patents that you hold relating to the code. It does no such thing. It says that you do not have GPL distribution rights if you pursue patents or other intellectual property [sic] claims.
There is absolutely nothing in the GPL that prohibits SCO, IBM, Red Hat or any other GPL distributor from pursuing patent or IP [sic] claims once they stop distributing. The GPL does not protect from submarine patents. Clearly SCO is too stupid to stop distributing, but there's no reason to believe that IBM will be if it chooses to dump linux distribution.
In fact, there is nothing to stop them from pursuing patent claims while distributing. Their patent claims will be a separate issue from the copy right infringement claims of any contributors who wish to sue them for breaching the GPL license. So far we're seeing Red Hat and IBM launching countersuits against SCO, but what they and other contributors - yes, that means you - should really do is to simply file suit for copy right violation now that SCO have voided their GPL license and continue to distribute GPL code. Why is nobody doing this?
Oh, we all know what the GPL means, but perhaps we should take some time to actually read what it says.
"I took redruM69's 5.35Mb version and upx'd it. W00t! 1 4r 1337!!!!!! f33r m33!!!!"
Hmm. Not exactly ground breaking stuff.
>The job of the company's officers is to create shareholder value
The job of the company's officers is to keep the shareholders happy. It's not the same thing at all.
"ridiculous", you looser.
License != contract. If you have copyrighted code in the distro that SCO continues to distribute, you can sue them for copyright infringement. I'm guessing that you don't.
SCO is a publically traded company. There is absolutely nothing to stop IBM from offering $X per share to small shareholders, and $0 per share to the major shareholding fucknuts that are currently sailing it onto the rocks.
Ronald Reagan? He aided the Taliban. In fact, he even called them "the moral equivelant of [America's] Founding Fathers". The filthy traitor.
Since we're at war with the Taliban / al Quada, it follows that we've always been at war with the Taliban / al Quada, just as the Russians have always been our friends and allies in our holy war against te'er, right?
What, just like SCO were when they decided to distribute a Linux distro, including code that said "Please use me", and then get all of their revenue by suing people for doing so?
Remind me, what SEC filing that that plan appear on? Because it seems to me like "Abandon development and marketing of obselete product, make all of our money from barratry" would be the sort of thing that investors would like to know about beforehand.
Me too. I'm left with the choice of just buying generic crap, or taking the advice of a guy who was in his basement at 2am listening to power supplies. I think I'll take the gamble.
Dyslexic moderators, or just unable to concatenate unit and arian?