In other areas in the world, like in europe, the FCC equivalent required the cable companies to allow competitors to access their cable infrastructure. The fees were made such that that the competitor can still make a business. Then the market decides on whether there are caps or not, and how big they are, instead of the monopolist.
It's enabling a market in a place where a monopoly is the only viable option (running two cables to your home is just a dumb and wasteful idea). But seems it doesn't go well with the American idea of "freedom".
In europe, the situation is much better than in the US, and that's partly thanks to these regulations.
Privately owned water went well in London, so well...
You know if my internet is shit I can live with it but if I have no (or poisoned) water, then that's a different matter. And I'm saying this on slashdot.
I haven't tried it myself just had read through its (rather small) website. And I saw download links for client software. So I assumed you would require this to access the private cloud. Seems I was wrong. Thanks for correcting!
Office runs natively inside the browser, without the hassle to download custom software. Open365 requires a custom client to download.
My guess is they integrated libreoffice into NPAPI or PepperAPI and then ship the whole thing as the client together with a browser. That's not an 100% replacement of office 365 where you don't have to download custom blobs you have to fully trust. Office 365 is at least confined to the browser sandbox. And yes its all open source so at least you can audit it, but that doesn't help if there is a vulnerability in libreoffice and you get exploited. Office 365 uses the Web APIs and their sandboxing technology, which is very advanced and secure in comparison.
No Microsoft shill here, I'd love to see an OSS alternative to Office 365, but I hope that they set some priorities right.
Perhaps it has something to do that with every centimeter the sea rises, the hawaii landmass shrinks? And who is the major land owner in Hawaii? Yes, the taxpayer! Means that raising sea levels destroy state owned real estate in the hundreds of millions. And land in Hawaii is not cheap you know.
Yes, of course its symbolic, but they want to not look like hyppocrites when they demand other states to adopt greener technologies.
Same argumentation works for "Security Researcher" too. The evil russians who built the nuclear bombs were "researchers" too. And only because the commercial criminal who hacked into the facebook servers wasn't a white hat we shouldn't be prevented from calling him security researcher.
Don't call him hacker either after all "hacker" is a positive term meant to address people who are using things in ways those things were not designed for.
Yet another reason why SSH password based authentication is so bad. Both SSH agent forwarding and SSH password based auth are best disabled. Then they can't intercept anything.
And the miniature black hole they created, that wandered to the center of the earth since and that will eat up this planet from inside over the next few decades. Wake up, sheeple, we must leave earth before its too late! Scientist's experiment gone mad!
Google is world monopolist in multiple multi billion dollar markets (Search, Android), as well as Microsoft (Windows, Office). Apple is no market leader anywhere. The only thing Apple does better than Google or Microsoft is to make wagonloads of money with the tiny share they have. Apple serves the most profitable minority, while Google and MS take over the rest.
If you think the capitalist system is inherently corrupt, look at communism. E.g. in east Germany, you needed to have good friends and only then you got rare resources. Or in China where when you become one of the nine PSC members, your family members will become successful billionaires.
Well the NASA sort of lost its point after it has successfully been used to show the russians who the boss is. Perhaps the Chinese manage to make enough competition that the American pride gets hurt. If that happens, there will be an US flag waving on Mars faster than the senate requires to pass an average budget legislation.
Usually, the dead end research is done by the publicly funded institutions, and the more achievable targets are done by the drug companies. But research is not the major cost driver for the drug manufacturers, its the studies to find out whether a human survives a drug, combinations with other drugs, etc. You don't want to give a drug to thousands of people and then find out 1 year later that the drug causes them to die. It starts to get fun when there is a media war fought with the manufacturer trying to deny the harmful effect of the drug, etc. All this has happened in the past already, these regulations are in place for a reason.
All the monopolies you just listed are explicitly government-created.
So you seriously suggest that the only way a company should be able to compete with a cable provider is to dig up the whole earth and lay a second piece of fiber next to the already existing and working one, just in order to connect a home? Don't you think this is a waste? And last but not least, somebody would have to pay for the second set of fibers, and that's (as always) the customers.
About drug patents: they are unfortunate, but they are required. The most important principle of medicine is that it should do more good than it does harm. In order to ensure this, giant studies need to be conducted before a drug gets approved. They cost billions of dollars per drug. This is a big investment the drug companies have to make, and they won't do it if the moment they get the drug approved to be safe a competitor can copy the drug and make more money. Yes, we need to find a way to make those giant studies cheaper, and once we do, we should shorten the life span of those patents to match the development, but unfortunately there is no way around these government granted monopolies. At least for drugs, software patents are a different matter (most of them are just trivial patents, and those which aren't would have been invented anyway, just due to the big pressure that's in the market; esp. there is no big giant approval process to get software onto devices, AND software is already protected by copyright, and lock-in mechanisms).
Also note that the drug patents are limited by time. Once the patent expires, the drug is available for everyone at a comparatively low price.
Slashdot Mirror
In other areas in the world, like in europe, the FCC equivalent required the cable companies to allow competitors to access their cable infrastructure. The fees were made such that that the competitor can still make a business. Then the market decides on whether there are caps or not, and how big they are, instead of the monopolist.
It's enabling a market in a place where a monopoly is the only viable option (running two cables to your home is just a dumb and wasteful idea). But seems it doesn't go well with the American idea of "freedom".
In europe, the situation is much better than in the US, and that's partly thanks to these regulations.
Privately owned water went well in London, so well...
You know if my internet is shit I can live with it but if I have no (or poisoned) water, then that's a different matter. And I'm saying this on slashdot.
Well there is the place whose rule 1 is to not talk about it...
I haven't tried it myself just had read through its (rather small) website. And I saw download links for client software. So I assumed you would require this to access the private cloud. Seems I was wrong. Thanks for correcting!
Says the guy posting to a web discussion site.
Office runs natively inside the browser, without the hassle to download custom software. Open365 requires a custom client to download.
My guess is they integrated libreoffice into NPAPI or PepperAPI and then ship the whole thing as the client together with a browser. That's not an 100% replacement of office 365 where you don't have to download custom blobs you have to fully trust. Office 365 is at least confined to the browser sandbox. And yes its all open source so at least you can audit it, but that doesn't help if there is a vulnerability in libreoffice and you get exploited. Office 365 uses the Web APIs and their sandboxing technology, which is very advanced and secure in comparison.
No Microsoft shill here, I'd love to see an OSS alternative to Office 365, but I hope that they set some priorities right.
Perhaps it has something to do that with every centimeter the sea rises, the hawaii landmass shrinks? And who is the major land owner in Hawaii? Yes, the taxpayer! Means that raising sea levels destroy state owned real estate in the hundreds of millions. And land in Hawaii is not cheap you know.
Yes, of course its symbolic, but they want to not look like hyppocrites when they demand other states to adopt greener technologies.
Yet another proof that the NASA funds crime.
Same argumentation works for "Security Researcher" too. The evil russians who built the nuclear bombs were "researchers" too. And only because the commercial criminal who hacked into the facebook servers wasn't a white hat we shouldn't be prevented from calling him security researcher.
Don't call him hacker either after all "hacker" is a positive term meant to address people who are using things in ways those things were not designed for.
Yet another reason why SSH password based authentication is so bad. Both SSH agent forwarding and SSH password based auth are best disabled. Then they can't intercept anything.
In lunar space, nobody can hear you read a book.
Full agree.
By the time you have downloaded the 300 TB, they'll have built another, bigger, particle collider, and released an even bigger tarball about that one.
And the miniature black hole they created, that wandered to the center of the earth since and that will eat up this planet from inside over the next few decades. Wake up, sheeple, we must leave earth before its too late! Scientist's experiment gone mad!
Yeah certainly, building the largest particle collider in the world is way more easier than copying 300 TB of data. And it will be way more fun, too!
http://techrights.org/2015/10/...
Disclaimer: he might be a bit biased, but there is probably lots of truth as well.
What makes you so sure that you aren't fiction as well?
Google is world monopolist in multiple multi billion dollar markets (Search, Android), as well as Microsoft (Windows, Office). Apple is no market leader anywhere. The only thing Apple does better than Google or Microsoft is to make wagonloads of money with the tiny share they have. Apple serves the most profitable minority, while Google and MS take over the rest.
"Cartel"? Is that the word for it?
No, there are alternatives to it, some of them even existing right now.
If you think the capitalist system is inherently corrupt, look at communism. E.g. in east Germany, you needed to have good friends and only then you got rare resources. Or in China where when you become one of the nine PSC members, your family members will become successful billionaires.
Well the NASA sort of lost its point after it has successfully been used to show the russians who the boss is. Perhaps the Chinese manage to make enough competition that the American pride gets hurt. If that happens, there will be an US flag waving on Mars faster than the senate requires to pass an average budget legislation.
Usually, the dead end research is done by the publicly funded institutions, and the more achievable targets are done by the drug companies. But research is not the major cost driver for the drug manufacturers, its the studies to find out whether a human survives a drug, combinations with other drugs, etc. You don't want to give a drug to thousands of people and then find out 1 year later that the drug causes them to die. It starts to get fun when there is a media war fought with the manufacturer trying to deny the harmful effect of the drug, etc. All this has happened in the past already, these regulations are in place for a reason.
All the monopolies you just listed are explicitly government-created.
So you seriously suggest that the only way a company should be able to compete with a cable provider is to dig up the whole earth and lay a second piece of fiber next to the already existing and working one, just in order to connect a home? Don't you think this is a waste? And last but not least, somebody would have to pay for the second set of fibers, and that's (as always) the customers.
About drug patents: they are unfortunate, but they are required. The most important principle of medicine is that it should do more good than it does harm. In order to ensure this, giant studies need to be conducted before a drug gets approved. They cost billions of dollars per drug.
This is a big investment the drug companies have to make, and they won't do it if the moment they get the drug approved to be safe a competitor can copy the drug and make more money. Yes, we need to find a way to make those giant studies cheaper, and once we do, we should shorten the life span of those patents to match the development, but unfortunately there is no way around these government granted monopolies. At least for drugs, software patents are a different matter (most of them are just trivial patents, and those which aren't would have been invented anyway, just due to the big pressure that's in the market; esp. there is no big giant approval process to get software onto devices, AND software is already protected by copyright, and lock-in mechanisms).
Also note that the drug patents are limited by time. Once the patent expires, the drug is available for everyone at a comparatively low price.