>but a lot of human suffering goes into producing much of it,
Much? How do you define much? Lots are made in the US where there are laws and a whole lot of police and D.A. willing to work over-time to crack down on this stuff. Is the industry clean, Hell no. But "alot"?
> especially much of the cheap, street quality stuff.
Its all "cheap/street quality". Just because I spend money on better film and soft lighting doesn't mean that its not "cheap/street quality".
>Most of the characters are drugged/coerced into performing by their overlords,
Once again, "Most"?
> any many do it out of necessity, in order to get their square meals.
I think that says more about western society than one industry. Minimum wage is sometimes not enough.
> I think the police have their priorities right, if they're more worried about stopping the pr0n racket than protecting the rights of a multi-billion dollar company.
I would agree if you had said "stopping the degration of humans."
I'm actually suggesting you do this. Your local resturant or mall or a subway car during rush hour will be an excellent lab to perform this social experiment on why its not a good idea to aways show your warts.
Walk up to a person in a crowded room and state you opinion on a technology issue you feel strongly about. Go into minute details and don't spare the personnal attacks. Make jokes about what you hate about the issue, don't forget to laugh at your own wittyness. Get it all out of your system. Then move on to another person in the room and repeat.
Can you see why showing warts/pettyness is a bad thing?
>Jerks who do not provide useful input will be purged.
Actually, jerks thrive on attention. Just like trolls (not implying anything here).
>No long term harm seems to have been inflicted due to free speech.
Its the way you say things that cause the long term harm.
>However, what are the chances of educating the average street Joe on the elegant art of writing code?
For years the average Joe has no clue about the elegant art of writing mathematical proofs. How is this different? Is there life really that much worse off? Isn't there much more important things to educate them with rather than your passion?
>Is it easy to get Joe to identify with the very real possibility that, at this moment, someone may be using his computer with its high-speed connection to harass their enemies
So he and everyone else moves to Linux, don't you think that crackers will move their attacks to Linux? But you can secure it better? Doesn't that end up in the hands of Joe Average to secure their own system, something he can do with Windows too? So what does getting him to change to Linux? Don't you just want him to secure his system?
>Windows bashing is the best sales pitch we have.
If that is the best, you might as well pack up and go home right now.
Any thing else than some person saying "Hey look at this spiffy neat-o code I created. Want to use it? Perhaps you can learn something from it." is really not OpenSource and is most likely the opinion of the speaker.
Virgins are humans, where do they come from? Don't they have feelings? Is there some alternate world where virgins get a reward of being the property of a "suicide bomber" along with another X virgins?
>if there are a lot of emulators for WinCE, and a few for Palm, this would make a c64 emulator for Palm more newsworthy than another one for wince.
Not that newsworthy. Think about all the other stories (check out any tech news site) passed over for this one. Technically its cool, but how about putting it in Developers because it was a programming challange.
>Im really sick about all those apache, samba, linux kernel new posts, too. Been there done that.
>Dont agree?
Then what? Shut up? Why do we even have a comments section here?
>Is there any way openness could be less efficient than closed?
Set timelines. (Closed: I can set a deadline and everyone will work towards that goal. Open: Its done when its done.)
Definite commitment to the project. (Closed: people have alot invested to make sure that the project is a sucess. Open: I can leave the project at a drop of a hat and have very little repercussions)
Startup (closed: I just have to convince upper management that people should be working on my project. Open: I have to convince everyone that they should work on it)
>It's all about using the big words when you persuade them to switch.
Thats sort of thing will
1. Make you sound like a sales person more than someone who wants you to help. Yes MS and big corporations do it, but then you are using the methods of your "enemy". 2. Make you sound like arragont with no social skills. How about communicating at the level of your audience instead of baffling them with size of your frontal-lobe.
>I understand the author cites Risk Sharing as a primary reason why people aren't buying music.
I got that too and I don't believe it.
I feel no contract/bond with a record company. I download things because its free. Period. "Risk of me liking it or not" has nothing to do with it.
Lets take a look at singles or a entire cd I heard in a store or from a friend. I know exactly what I am going to get. No risk in buying music I may not like. I heard it all. Either I like it or I don't. There are lots of different ways before mp3 ever existed that you could have elminated the risk.
So now that I know I want it for my personnal use, do I pay $18 and get a nice cd with pictures or pay $0 and burn my own cd?
>If it's good enough for Jean Luc, it's good enough for me!
Great now we are going to crawl around the jeffy tubes in our car just so we can get to our 2 story high gasoline combustion engine riced-out in blue neon.
>i for one would rather have the company that installs the OS in my car actually know WTF is going on with it.
You assume that they care about it. If there is a problem wouldn't it be easier just to blame the code?
At least with MS they can pass on the legal responsibility. With OpenSource, they might as well write the OS from scratch since they will have to be responsible for it anyways.
Slashdot Mirror
Read up!
Thats my exact same experience.
I have RedHat 9 running on the same machine and although RH has a nicer UI, Windows runs faster and more integrated.
This is going to get really off topic.
>but a lot of human suffering goes into producing much of it,
Much? How do you define much? Lots are made in the US where there are laws and a whole lot of police and D.A. willing to work over-time to crack down on this stuff. Is the industry clean, Hell no. But "alot"?
> especially much of the cheap, street quality stuff.
Its all "cheap/street quality". Just because I spend money on better film and soft lighting doesn't mean that its not "cheap/street quality".
>Most of the characters are drugged/coerced into performing by their overlords,
Once again, "Most"?
> any many do it out of necessity, in order to get their square meals.
I think that says more about western society than one industry. Minimum wage is sometimes not enough.
> I think the police have their priorities right, if they're more worried about stopping the pr0n racket than protecting the rights of a multi-billion dollar company.
I would agree if you had said "stopping the degration of humans."
>And what does this have to do with anything?
I'm actually suggesting you do this. Your local resturant or mall or a subway car during rush hour will be an excellent lab to perform this social experiment on why its not a good idea to aways show your warts.
>Why hide the warts?
Walk up to a person in a crowded room and state you opinion on a technology issue you feel strongly about. Go into minute details and don't spare the personnal attacks. Make jokes about what you hate about the issue, don't forget to laugh at your own wittyness. Get it all out of your system. Then move on to another person in the room and repeat.
Can you see why showing warts/pettyness is a bad thing?
>Jerks who do not provide useful input will be purged.
Actually, jerks thrive on attention. Just like trolls (not implying anything here).
>No long term harm seems to have been inflicted due to free speech.
Its the way you say things that cause the long term harm.
>However, what are the chances of educating the average street Joe on the elegant art of writing code?
For years the average Joe has no clue about the elegant art of writing mathematical proofs. How is this different? Is there life really that much worse off? Isn't there much more important things to educate them with rather than your passion?
>Is it easy to get Joe to identify with the very real possibility that, at this moment, someone may be using his computer with its high-speed connection to harass their enemies
So he and everyone else moves to Linux, don't you think that crackers will move their attacks to Linux? But you can secure it better? Doesn't that end up in the hands of Joe Average to secure their own system, something he can do with Windows too? So what does getting him to change to Linux? Don't you just want him to secure his system?
>Windows bashing is the best sales pitch we have.
If that is the best, you might as well pack up and go home right now.
OpenSource, ClosedSource, free as in free speech, free as in free beer, GPL, Linux are all being used in the wrong way.
h p
You are right that the author is viewing OpenSource in the wrong way.
Unfortunately, he (and alot of other people) is getting his view from people trying to advocate OpenSource.
For example the traditional opposite of OpenSource is Microsoft. So therefore isn't OpenSource anti-Microsoft?
Another example is that GPL is OpenSource. Well not strictly http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition_plain.p
Any thing else than some person saying "Hey look at this spiffy neat-o code I created. Want to use it? Perhaps you can learn something from it." is really not OpenSource and is most likely the opinion of the speaker.
>What this author is really doing is digging up some nitpicks and embellishing them as signs of the end.
Maybe with points 1. to 3. but points 4. and 5 are pretty valid.
>I like the transparency of the open source community.
Not when it comes to pettyness. Just makes you look bad.
>I want to see the debates and bickering take place in public, where maybe just maybe I can provide some input.
Not when the other person is closed minded. And that is what points 4, 5 bring up.
The fact that its a partial award gets to me.
Virgins are humans, where do they come from? Don't they have feelings? Is there some alternate world where virgins get a reward of being the property of a "suicide bomber" along with another X virgins?
>if there are a lot of emulators for WinCE, and a few for Palm, this would make a c64 emulator for Palm more newsworthy than another one for wince.
Not that newsworthy. Think about all the other stories (check out any tech news site) passed over for this one. Technically its cool, but how about putting it in Developers because it was a programming challange.
>Im really sick about all those apache, samba, linux kernel new posts, too. Been there done that.
>Dont agree?
Then what? Shut up? Why do we even have a comments section here?
>Is there any way openness could be less efficient than closed?
Set timelines. (Closed: I can set a deadline and everyone will work towards that goal. Open: Its done when its done.)
Definite commitment to the project. (Closed: people have alot invested to make sure that the project is a sucess. Open: I can leave the project at a drop of a hat and have very little repercussions)
Startup (closed: I just have to convince upper management that people should be working on my project. Open: I have to convince everyone that they should work on it)
And just like how local US governments are going to Canada for cheaper drugs, so will they import these games to the US.
Get ready to crack open that Manderin/English dictonary!
From the original post:
>It's all about using the big words when you persuade them to switch.
Thats sort of thing will
1. Make you sound like a sales person more than someone who wants you to help. Yes MS and big corporations do it, but then you are using the methods of your "enemy".
2. Make you sound like arragont with no social skills. How about communicating at the level of your audience instead of baffling them with size of your frontal-lobe.
>After all, the closed source, security by obscurity, we can do it all ourselves model of software development is so superior,
"Security by obscurity" is protecting transmissions by not revealing how the protecting is done.
This problem is a bug. A "bug" is a flaw in code. This is not "Security by obscurity".
A "bug" can happen in OpenSource. A thousand programmers can look at the code and there could still be bugs in it, with either method.
>Just because their was another option doesn't mean Microsoft was any less of a monopoly.
Huh? Isn't that the definition of an monopoly? How does having another option NOT make it less an monopoly?
And I have bought 2 different computers with no Windows on it. And this was over 10 years ago.
When you are at work, you are "forced" to do alot of things.
If you don't like it, why don't you leave?
>I understand the author cites Risk Sharing as a primary reason why people aren't buying music.
I got that too and I don't believe it.
I feel no contract/bond with a record company. I download things because its free. Period. "Risk of me liking it or not" has nothing to do with it.
Lets take a look at singles or a entire cd I heard in a store or from a friend. I know exactly what I am going to get. No risk in buying music I may not like. I heard it all. Either I like it or I don't. There are lots of different ways before mp3 ever existed that you could have elminated the risk.
So now that I know I want it for my personnal use, do I pay $18 and get a nice cd with pictures or pay $0 and burn my own cd?
Thats what it comes down to.
Why should I want to contact a PR person?
What can they do?
I'll communicate with my wallet.
>If it's good enough for Jean Luc, it's good enough for me!
Great now we are going to crawl around the jeffy tubes in our car just so we can get to our 2 story high gasoline combustion engine riced-out in blue neon.
>i for one would rather have the company that installs the OS in my car actually know WTF is going on with it.
You assume that they care about it. If there is a problem wouldn't it be easier just to blame the code?
At least with MS they can pass on the legal responsibility. With OpenSource, they might as well write the OS from scratch since they will have to be responsible for it anyways.
>Authorities now have a sizable fraction of the technology possessed by big brother in the book 1984.
And we have tools to counter their tools to effectively make "1984" highly improbable. The authorities are just trying to keep up.
I'm not sure but there are lots of cd distros that might help you here
>if it was 'magnetic induction' and 'jockstrap'... .. then it would the perfect opportunity to base email spam business on.
>you're never going to be able to account for the wide varieties of situations that occur in the real world with one book full of templates.
Its a pattern, not a final soluton. Use it as a starting point/a headstart.
>Maybe someone can sell this point to me?
Number one reason I like patterns is because it gives me a warm feeling that someone already had to suffer through the same dammed problems as me.
>Engineering brought low by bean counters
How good is the engineering solution when it can be brought low by bean counters?