So balance the budget over 10 years, including a realistic ROI from the research. Stop pretending that the ROI is some infinite number. What number is it? Factor it into the budget.
It might be worth it to someone. But those people are probably not numerous enough for Sony to deal with.
I also disagree that it's reasonable to cut power consumption by 70%. Electronics makers already try to keep power consumption down. There's not 70% of useless inefficiency in a TV.
Sure they can, just allowing the Bush era tax cuts to expire gets rid of basically all of the growth in the deficit (as a percentage of GDP, which is what matters) for the next twenty years or so.
But cutting a far smaller research budget will? Where's the logic in that?
The budget can't be balanced until people learn to give up things. That means everyone. If you want to say "my pet program is exempt", then so will everyone else. Then no one gives up anything, and the problems just get worse.
And who says that a balanced budget is the right thing to do? Economists will tell you that a balance budget when you are trying to grow the economy is a bad idea.
When do we not want to grow the economy? Apparently, the answer is "in the future, when the bill for the spending comes due". Ask Greece how well borrowing and spending works to permanently sustain economic growth.
You just need to prioritize things.
Says the guy who wants money spent on his pet programs.
So balance the budget over 10 years including an (accurate, historically-supported, conservatively-calculated) increase in revenue as a result of research.
Research doesn't balance the budget. Stop pretending it does. It might (or might not) help a little bit. What about the rest?
I guess I've never heard of anyone who found a "good lawyer" by this criteria then.
Usually people just spend a lot of money to get documents written and read. Then the lawyer suggests unreasonable, extremely one-sided changes. Then the other guy's lawyer counter-offers extremely unreasonable one-sided changes. This goes on until people get tired of paying lawyers to cause trouble.
A good counter-offer is $0 for research. Balance the budget over 10 years if you want there to be money for your pet programs. The same counter-offer should go for every other item in the budget.
- Because there's no way to know that the system would have been cracked any sooner without OtherOS. - Because the attacks on Sony were immensely more expensive and damaging than the cracking. - Because it's still hard to pirate 20-40 GB console games on a large scale. - Because a cracked system can be partly re-secured. - Because the PSN would not have been attacked if OtherOS had never been a feature on the PS3.
And that's why no one will ever do this again. Because no matter what you do, it's never enough for a group of people with an extreme entitlement mentality and nothing to offer Sony (or any product company) in return.
No one will do this again for the same reason no one lets homeless people use their house when they're on vacation.
They can make TV's that use 70% less power for example. But pitching that to consumers requires informed consumers, and most of us, about most of the technology we use, aren't, or at least aren't informed enough for things like a TV that uses 70% less power, but costs 2x as much to even know if that's a worthwhile deal.
They tried that. It didn't attract anyone worthwhile. They got hacked, sued, hacked again, and endlessly attacked. I think they've learned their lesson to never, ever try to reach out to these sorts of "developers" ever again. I think lots of people have learned a similar lesson from Sony's experience.
If you can avoid paying an attorney, I'd suggest avoiding it. Attorneys don't have magic sources of information. Look it up yourself.
And attorneys always offer advice based on this premise: - Pretend the other side is evil, and out to get you - Pretend you like going to court and want to spend lots of time there - Do things so you'll somehow eventually win in court, after spending enormous amounts of time and money fighting.
They'll tell you to keep careful documentation that will help your case and to avoid keeping any documentation that might hurt your case.
If you don't think your project is worth spending lots of time in court, do what people who stay out of court do: Be a good person. Don't lie. Work with the people around you to make sure they know what you're doing. Make sure they're reasonable people who can be trusted. Be their friend. Put your employer's interests ahead of your own. Make it transparent. Get them to agree you can work on your project and you'll still own it. Get this agreement in writing. Follow up periodically, making sure they are still satisfied with your work and they're not bothered by your moonlighting. Get this in writing.
You need to get it in writing because, even though your employer is reasonable and trustworthy, at some point they may talk to an attorney. See above for the way the attorney will look at the situation. You need to be able to appeal to your employer's reason and trustworthiness and friendship. Otherwise, they might listen to their attorney and you'll end up in court. As the defendant, even if you win, you'll lose.
Presumably he pays his employees an annual salary, not an hourly wage. In such arrangements, the specific times the employee is "on the clock" and "off the clock" are debatable. That leads to a need for an understanding, so it is clear to both parties that neither is cheating the other. Hence the talking.
You have tax returns? Stop being a sucker. Quit your job and apply for government benefits. Relax and start living off your neighbors' hard work. There's a nearly endless stream of products and services you're entitled to receive. Why work? Why fill out complicated tax forms?
There are probably free, government funded, services to scan documents. But stuff like that isn't for suckers like you. You have to pay.
Slashdot Mirror
So balance the budget over 10 years, including a realistic ROI from the research. Stop pretending that the ROI is some infinite number. What number is it? Factor it into the budget.
A pet program implies that it only benefits the person interested in it and a small constituency.
So you're misunderstanding the meaning of "pet program" and that's distracting you?
Best we can do is hold out until things get better and then hope that congress will get off its ass and actually do something.
And your solution is to wait and hope. Great.
Why do you keep calling it my pet program?
Every program is someone's pet program. You're defending this one.
Yes you usually want to grow the economy but you definitely don't want to shrink it now.
But you want to shrink it next year? Or when? When can we have a responsible level of spending. Over 10 years? Then balance the budget over 10 years.
Above a certain amount, all debt is bad. Especially when you have no strategy to ever pay it back or even borrow less.
...our creditors don't seem to think that the US is in danger of default any time soon based on recent US Treasury auctions.
And this will continue to be true. Until it's not. Then what?
Are you sure?
Pretty sure.
...In general it's not worth it for consumers...
Agreed.
It might be worth it to someone. But those people are probably not numerous enough for Sony to deal with.
I also disagree that it's reasonable to cut power consumption by 70%. Electronics makers already try to keep power consumption down. There's not 70% of useless inefficiency in a TV.
Sure they can, just allowing the Bush era tax cuts to expire gets rid of basically all of the growth in the deficit (as a percentage of GDP, which is what matters) for the next twenty years or so.
False.
But cutting a far smaller research budget will? Where's the logic in that?
The budget can't be balanced until people learn to give up things. That means everyone. If you want to say "my pet program is exempt", then so will everyone else. Then no one gives up anything, and the problems just get worse.
And who says that a balanced budget is the right thing to do? Economists will tell you that a balance budget when you are trying to grow the economy is a bad idea.
When do we not want to grow the economy? Apparently, the answer is "in the future, when the bill for the spending comes due". Ask Greece how well borrowing and spending works to permanently sustain economic growth.
You just need to prioritize things.
Says the guy who wants money spent on his pet programs.
Then hurry up and balance the budget so we can afford research then.
Without a car analogy, it's a suggestion for you to grow up and stop contributing to the problem.
So balance the budget over 10 years including an (accurate, historically-supported, conservatively-calculated) increase in revenue as a result of research.
Research doesn't balance the budget. Stop pretending it does. It might (or might not) help a little bit. What about the rest?
Cutting defense spending and fixing the tax laws can't produce enough money to balance the budget.
I guess I've never heard of anyone who found a "good lawyer" by this criteria then.
Usually people just spend a lot of money to get documents written and read. Then the lawyer suggests unreasonable, extremely one-sided changes. Then the other guy's lawyer counter-offers extremely unreasonable one-sided changes. This goes on until people get tired of paying lawyers to cause trouble.
A good counter-offer is $0 for research. Balance the budget over 10 years if you want there to be money for your pet programs. The same counter-offer should go for every other item in the budget.
- Because there's no way to know that the system would have been cracked any sooner without OtherOS.
- Because the attacks on Sony were immensely more expensive and damaging than the cracking.
- Because it's still hard to pirate 20-40 GB console games on a large scale.
- Because a cracked system can be partly re-secured.
- Because the PSN would not have been attacked if OtherOS had never been a feature on the PS3.
So what? Better to never implement it. If you never provide something, no one will attack you for taking it away. I expect Sony has learned this.
If you lose money dealing with "customers", you're better off without them.
Sony had tossed the hacker community a bone and a respectful nod.
Obviously, that was a huge mistake.
And that's why no one will ever do this again. Because no matter what you do, it's never enough for a group of people with an extreme entitlement mentality and nothing to offer Sony (or any product company) in return.
No one will do this again for the same reason no one lets homeless people use their house when they're on vacation.
They can make TV's that use 70% less power for example. But pitching that to consumers requires informed consumers, and most of us, about most of the technology we use, aren't, or at least aren't informed enough for things like a TV that uses 70% less power, but costs 2x as much to even know if that's a worthwhile deal.
It isn't. Consider yourself informed.
They tried that. It didn't attract anyone worthwhile. They got hacked, sued, hacked again, and endlessly attacked. I think they've learned their lesson to never, ever try to reach out to these sorts of "developers" ever again. I think lots of people have learned a similar lesson from Sony's experience.
Have fun paying lawyer bills.
If you can avoid paying an attorney, I'd suggest avoiding it. Attorneys don't have magic sources of information. Look it up yourself.
And attorneys always offer advice based on this premise:
- Pretend the other side is evil, and out to get you
- Pretend you like going to court and want to spend lots of time there
- Do things so you'll somehow eventually win in court, after spending enormous amounts of time and money fighting.
They'll tell you to keep careful documentation that will help your case and to avoid keeping any documentation that might hurt your case.
If you don't think your project is worth spending lots of time in court, do what people who stay out of court do: Be a good person. Don't lie. Work with the people around you to make sure they know what you're doing. Make sure they're reasonable people who can be trusted. Be their friend. Put your employer's interests ahead of your own. Make it transparent. Get them to agree you can work on your project and you'll still own it. Get this agreement in writing. Follow up periodically, making sure they are still satisfied with your work and they're not bothered by your moonlighting. Get this in writing.
You need to get it in writing because, even though your employer is reasonable and trustworthy, at some point they may talk to an attorney. See above for the way the attorney will look at the situation. You need to be able to appeal to your employer's reason and trustworthiness and friendship. Otherwise, they might listen to their attorney and you'll end up in court. As the defendant, even if you win, you'll lose.
Presumably he pays his employees an annual salary, not an hourly wage. In such arrangements, the specific times the employee is "on the clock" and "off the clock" are debatable. That leads to a need for an understanding, so it is clear to both parties that neither is cheating the other. Hence the talking.
You have tax returns? Stop being a sucker. Quit your job and apply for government benefits. Relax and start living off your neighbors' hard work. There's a nearly endless stream of products and services you're entitled to receive. Why work? Why fill out complicated tax forms?
There are probably free, government funded, services to scan documents. But stuff like that isn't for suckers like you. You have to pay.
Slashdot is becoming pretty cartoonish.
Becoming? The sad thing is that Slashdot's increasing cartoonishness seems to be a reflection of a large subset of the readers.
The idea seems to be that Apple is cheating all those workers out of the perfect utopian lives they'd have if only Apple loved them.
Adapt to it anyway. Do it by trying harder. The language isn't going to adapt to you.