Another reason why software is unreliable, is that in a lot of cases we (the users and the programmers) do not know really what the sofware is supposed to do. Programming is writing a very precise description of how to solve a problem with a computer. If you don't know how to solve the problem or if you're not sure what the problem is, then your result will not matche people's expectations.
Reliable software can be be produced in cases where the problem being solved is well understood (i.e. space flight) and the requirements do not change. Unfortunately, such problems are rare.
Fo example, does Slashcode have a formal spec? Requirements document? Should I be able to sue when my comments get lost?
If the answer to the above questions is "no", tha does that make the the actual software is useless?
I have started my own collection as a programmer, my vimrc file is getting very complex as well as scripts to do simple tasks that much faster (logging into remote databases and configuring the display, etc).
Well, my.emacs file goes back to the '80s and VAXen...;)
I think most programmers get tired of doing the same thing over and over again, especially as you move from job to job. I had convinced several companies I worked for to release some of the software as open source, mostly so I can use it in the next job.
For example, this project was part of code we build at a startup (now defunct). Since then I used it in two other jobs. The team that build this software to start with, is still using it at several different companies.
So, rather than building the same thing again and again, I got to build it once and then since it's open source, I get to use it as long as I need.
For large corporations, ditching Oracle in favor of PostgreSQL would be *extremely* costly, involving training and no small amount of anxiety on the parts of managers. The benefits would be hard to sell. Yeah, yeah, I know, user community, blah, free software, blah, blah.
What about paid for technical support directly from the developers? Check pgsql.com. Very few places really need Oracle.
Read up on JBoss to see how this kind of business model is doing.
Actually, when a song is on the radio, the artist, publishers, etc are getting paid. Maybe not by you, but they are getting paid.
True. But they get paid for one play and I guess the fee is based on an estimated number of listeners.
Frankly, if you treat P2P/MP3 file swaping like radio all you need to do is pay royalties to the artists (maybe even based on some download rating) . I wouldn't mind paying additional few dollars a month for my internet connection, if that money went toward artist royalities (note this leaves out the record companies).
In fact some Universities are proposing something like that, so that RIAA will leave them alone and let students share music freely.
But you're still missing the core point. The media companies don't want their songs to get exposure, they want specific songs to get exposure. Allowing them all to float around gives them an equal chance to be exposed, so they've lost control. It isn't about just making money, its about control. They think they can make more money if they can control the market.
I understand that they want control. They'd like to be a monopoly that charges you each time you listen to a song for 300 years. But the customers don't want that and if there is competition is allowed they will be wiped out by market forces.
Do you have a source for this? I've always heard the opposite, either no money is exchanged (one can't live without the other) or the radio station licenses the broadcast rights. With the rise in influence of companies like Clear Channel, it wouldn't surprise me but I'd like to see something reputable.
The media company has entered into an agreement with the station to air the song, it's a form of advertising. If 10 people hear the song and don't buy the cd, it's an unsuccessful attempt. If ten people download an illegal copy it's piracy. What's the difference? Control of property. Illegal copies potentially deprive companies of making a living
The media companies actually pay a lot of money to get their songs played on the radio (like $100K per song!). So, if they treated MP3 distribution as radio and let the songs go around the P2P netoworks, the music would get similar exposure at a much lower cost.
Please, as a musician, I would like to get something in return for providing you with music you enjoy. I know this is not what the big record companies are after, but there are (a lot) more record companies out there who actually try to do some honest business.
... and another thing. What if the recordings I want are of a musican who has been dead for 50 years? Who is to get the money?
There have been initiatives to launch pay-per-download services, with no success. Don't try to fool yourself folks! It's not the record companies that block successful services (I mean, there is such thing as free enterprise...), it's the fact that you can get it for free elsewhere that people don't want to pay for downloadable music.
It's not that people don't want to pay - it's that people do not want to be ripped off. I use Emusic.com, which cost $10/month for unlimited MP3, no strings attached, downloads. Because they have lots of music I like (eg. jazz) I'm happy to pay and I get my money's worth.
But if I had to pay $20/month plus $1 per song, plus extra $2 to burn it to CD - that's too much.
Plus, if the song went away when I cancelled my subscription - that's a ripoff.
So don't blame the people for not wanting to be ripped off. If you want people to buy stuff, you have to offer something they like at a price they are willing to pay.
Is this the service where your music files will disappear from your computer when you stop paying?
Or the one where you have to pay extra to burn songs to CD?
Thanks, but no thanks. I use Emusic.com - I get all MP3 I want for $10 bucks a month - no strings attached.
While you're correct, the act of listening to mp3's doesn't steal from anyone? Distributing those mp3's, however, does break US copyright law. If one copy of the song was purchased and 10 copies have been distributed, isn't that 10 copies that may have been sold?
Maybe yes, maybe no. If ten people listen to the song on the radio and don't buy the CD is that theft too?
If I drive a small car, instead of an SUV, am I stealing from the oil companies? After all I only buy 10 gallons of gas, instead of 30?
Let's imagine a world where there is *no* IP. Making a living as a programmer is no longer viable.
Hardly. Most programmers working today work on customized in house software that would be useless outside their own companies.
You are also mixing up patents and copyrights, they are quite different. At least patents last for only about 20 years. Copyright at the moment last for about 150 years.
The copyright laws have gotten way out of balance. I wouldn't mind such laws if copyright expired after 14 years. Having a 14 year monopoly on distributing a work should be enough.
If you want to sample an artist's music before buying a disc, why not listen to the radio, MTV, or the short samples available on Amazon.com (or wherever) to get an idea of what the artist is like?
Let's see, last three CD I bought were Larry Coryell "Cedar of Absalom" (his latest) and Micheal Urbaniak "Constelletion" (live recording from Warsaw concert in 1974) and Jim Hall "Live" (which was finally released in CD - I have the vinyl version).
Now which MTV channel or radio stations play these?
Those are the situations Ellision/Oracle will need to be fearful of. Many many many applications *do not* require the featureset that Oracle provides, and therefore, you will start to see (as has already happened) projects getting picked off by the lowest end databases.
I agree with you. Oracle is the "main frame" of databases. These days you can start developing and deploying with MySQL or Postgres and if the system really needs it you can move to Oracle. Cost savings can be astounding.
Well, if I remember correctly, Larry Ellison said something like the following. Database cannot be compromised. It has to be secure and reliable. That's one software that businesses depend on, so database is the last software threatened by opensource such as MySQL and PostgreSQL.
Like an operating system is not a piece of software on which a business depends on?
Larry should go and read "The Innovator's Dilemma".
So, I have recently proposed an alternative to management. That we set up a linux server running mySQL, apache, and PHP. We could then create web applications to replace the faulty applications we are now using.
It's probably true that there are problems with the software you are using. But I think it's bit arrogant of you presuming that you could re-write the whole thing. Do you have a record of deliverying working apps? How much code do you have in production?
Perhaps a better solution would be to find if there is a vendor that provides a better/cheaper solution that runs on Linux and suggest that.
How does being against the idea of hiring guest workers over people who plan to stay in America (Citizens and permanent residents) get equated to xenophobia?
I bet most of the H1B workers would be happy to stay in the US. It's the US that doesn't want them. When they live here, they not only make money but they spend it too.
Yes, but it's actually even worse than that. Frankly it's nothing less than cival war. The world economy as we know it is based upon the principle of distributing scarce resources. IP in all its forms is a way of trying to extend the economics of scarcity(capitalism)
You are missing the point of this idea. The spectrum could be shared by everyone for free, just as long as everyone follows the right protocols (just like using the highways today, or the Ethernet). Keep in mind this would be a huge wireless network of cooperating computers, so no big transmitters would be needed anymore.
This approach would also give the big media companies total control over what they send to you: first they send the software, then the "content". If you crack it, they just update the software.
No need for expensive frequency bands, no need to buy Congress to pass stupid laws, no need for Broadcast flags.
Now I don't care if they do this, as long as we can also use the same medium for what we like. And there is plenty of bandwith.
Yeah, just wait for this message. 'you must download the Bonzia buddy application to view this program.' I can't wait for 'pop-up' commercials from DRM software. ick
Hopefully, after the Big Media (tm) was busy with implementing the latest Bonzi Buddi, they'd leave the rest of the internet to us. Then they would find out, that given a choice people don't want to consume their stuff after all...
Based on the power that Television companies hold, does anybody really think this is going to happen? We have a hard enough time with the record labels, now they want to go up against people like NBC?
But software radio would make any kind of changeable DRM real easy. You'd have to download the software to receive to program first. The software could be changed as soon as someone cracked it.
The big media should be all over this and forget the stupid broadcast flag.
Internet is like TV, print, radio and any other medium roled into one.
NO. Internet is not like any of those. Internet is fundamentally a communication network that allows people to talk to each other. Those other media are not.
See, I'm "talking to you" right now. If you were Dan Rather and said that "Internet is like TV" on TV, what chance would *I* have to respond?
Slashdot Mirror
Reliable software can be be produced in cases where the problem being solved is well understood (i.e. space flight) and the requirements do not change. Unfortunately, such problems are rare.
Fo example, does Slashcode have a formal spec? Requirements document? Should I be able to sue when my comments get lost?
If the answer to the above questions is "no", tha does that make the the actual software is useless?
Well, my .emacs file goes back to the '80s and VAXen... ;)
For example, this project was part of code we build at a startup (now defunct). Since then I used it in two other jobs. The team that build this software to start with, is still using it at several different companies.
So, rather than building the same thing again and again, I got to build it once and then since it's open source, I get to use it as long as I need.
What about paid for technical support directly from the developers? Check pgsql.com. Very few places really need Oracle.
Read up on JBoss to see how this kind of business model is doing.
True. But they get paid for one play and I guess the fee is based on an estimated number of listeners.
Frankly, if you treat P2P/MP3 file swaping like radio all you need to do is pay royalties to the artists (maybe even based on some download rating) . I wouldn't mind paying additional few dollars a month for my internet connection, if that money went toward artist royalities (note this leaves out the record companies).
In fact some Universities are proposing something like that, so that RIAA will leave them alone and let students share music freely.
I understand that they want control. They'd like to be a monopoly that charges you each time you listen to a song for 300 years. But the customers don't want that and if there is competition is allowed they will be wiped out by market forces.
Salon has been writing about this for a while for example take a look here: Will Congress Tackle Pay for Play
So are you saying that I can distribute MP3s of Charlie Parker's recodings legally? I don't think so..
The media companies actually pay a lot of money to get their songs played on the radio (like $100K per song!). So, if they treated MP3 distribution as radio and let the songs go around the P2P netoworks, the music would get similar exposure at a much lower cost.
It's not that people don't want to pay - it's that people do not want to be ripped off. I use Emusic.com, which cost $10/month for unlimited MP3, no strings attached, downloads. Because they have lots of music I like (eg. jazz) I'm happy to pay and I get my money's worth.
But if I had to pay $20/month plus $1 per song, plus extra $2 to burn it to CD - that's too much. Plus, if the song went away when I cancelled my subscription - that's a ripoff.
So don't blame the people for not wanting to be ripped off. If you want people to buy stuff, you have to offer something they like at a price they are willing to pay.
Is this the service where your music files will disappear from your computer when you stop paying? Or the one where you have to pay extra to burn songs to CD?
Thanks, but no thanks. I use Emusic.com - I get all MP3 I want for $10 bucks a month - no strings attached.
Maybe yes, maybe no. If ten people listen to the song on the radio and don't buy the CD is that theft too?
If I drive a small car, instead of an SUV, am I stealing from the oil companies? After all I only buy 10 gallons of gas, instead of 30?
Hardly. Most programmers working today work on customized in house software that would be useless outside their own companies.
You are also mixing up patents and copyrights, they are quite different. At least patents last for only about 20 years. Copyright at the moment last for about 150 years.
The copyright laws have gotten way out of balance. I wouldn't mind such laws if copyright expired after 14 years. Having a 14 year monopoly on distributing a work should be enough.
Let's see, last three CD I bought were Larry Coryell "Cedar of Absalom" (his latest) and Micheal Urbaniak "Constelletion" (live recording from Warsaw concert in 1974) and Jim Hall "Live" (which was finally released in CD - I have the vinyl version).
Now which MTV channel or radio stations play these?
I agree with you. Oracle is the "main frame" of databases. These days you can start developing and deploying with MySQL or Postgres and if the system really needs it you can move to Oracle. Cost savings can be astounding.
Like an operating system is not a piece of software on which a business depends on?
Larry should go and read "The Innovator's Dilemma".
It's probably true that there are problems with the software you are using. But I think it's bit arrogant of you presuming that you could re-write the whole thing. Do you have a record of deliverying working apps? How much code do you have in production?
Perhaps a better solution would be to find if there is a vendor that provides a better/cheaper solution that runs on Linux and suggest that.
I bet most of the H1B workers would be happy to stay in the US. It's the US that doesn't want them. When they live here, they not only make money but they spend it too.
You are missing the point of this idea. The spectrum could be shared by everyone for free, just as long as everyone follows the right protocols (just like using the highways today, or the Ethernet). Keep in mind this would be a huge wireless network of cooperating computers, so no big transmitters would be needed anymore.
This approach would also give the big media companies total control over what they send to you: first they send the software, then the "content". If you crack it, they just update the software.
No need for expensive frequency bands, no need to buy Congress to pass stupid laws, no need for Broadcast flags.
Now I don't care if they do this, as long as we can also use the same medium for what we like. And there is plenty of bandwith.
Hopefully, after the Big Media (tm) was busy with implementing the latest Bonzi Buddi, they'd leave the rest of the internet to us. Then they would find out, that given a choice people don't want to consume their stuff after all...
But software radio would make any kind of changeable DRM real easy. You'd have to download the software to receive to program first. The software could be changed as soon as someone cracked it.
The big media should be all over this and forget the stupid broadcast flag.
NO. Internet is not like any of those. Internet is fundamentally a communication network that allows people to talk to each other. Those other media are not.
See, I'm "talking to you" right now. If you were Dan Rather and said that "Internet is like TV" on TV, what chance would *I* have to respond?