Who will be the last site standing under the Slashling bum-rush? Who can continue serving pages the longest? What site will be the first to return only an apology?
You're right, there's no real reason the money should be given to schools and not someone else - though I think it would be hard to divvy up exactly who's been damaged. Those with specific grievances should be filing suit themselves.
Schools seems like a good plan because:
A: schools need money
B: MS will agree to a larger dollar amount if it's going to schools (as it gives them PR instead of highlighting criminality). While this makes the settlement less punitive, money for schools is undeniably a good thing. And it's certainly a better plan than software donation.
That said, I think whatever number comes up should be large enough to have punitive effect - and the real meat of the settlement should be efforts to prevent abusive behavior on the part of MS in the future.
MS should have to give up cash, as that's what schools need.
However, I think they should also be forced to lower their prices for educational customers. Dramatically. This way schools have a choice - and a little bit more in the piggy bank either way.
I wish that moderators would also leave replies to comments. I don't particularly disagree with the idea that my post here is a Troll (as I'm an idiot and prone to say stupid things).
But I'd like to know if the moderator has some sort of insight here.
I think that Jini was fine. As is Jxta, I'm sure (though I've only briefly looked at the thing). The problem is Sun.
They come down off the mountain with these standards like they were revelations. I think this puts a lot of people on the defensive. No matter how open the standard is, Sun wants to keep reminding us that it was their idea.
In part it's also a chicken and egg problem. JXTA will have more value as it becomes a standard, but until then it has only marginal benefits over whatever proprietary system people use (and thus its adoption is slow).
I think people should concentrate on SOAP. There's no reason P2P couldn't be implemented this way instead.
The chip I had needed a clock signal in order to go through the sampling cycle - there are likely those that don't, and they might be more suited to this application. Actually the Intersil ADC0802LCN looks like it might work very well...
I tried using the parallel port itself to generate the clock signal using one of the status lines - but it didn't work as well (random errors). I don't have enough design knowledge to know why.
In any case, a fun project for a programmer like myself.
You're right - he didn't make a terribly good case that MS's case is like these others.
He did, however, give me a different perspective on antitrust in general. It clarified in my mind that having a monoply is a different thing than abusing a monoply.
I think MS has abused its monoply - and it should be punished for specific items, and punished hard enough that it quits abusing.
And if it then manages to keep it's large market share then I think it, like Alcoa, should not be harassed.
My objection to MS writing Office for Linux is the mechanics. Who's going to do it?
As you suggest, MS has a stake in Linux not having a good Office. I think you'd have a hard time forcing MS to write good software for Linux (and as you mention Mac is not really a counter example, it's a different situation).
If they put it out to bid (as I believe the article suggests), who's going to bite that actually has the means to produce a good piece of software? Sun might - but they wouldn't call it MS Office for Linux, they'd call it Star Office.
Basically whatever company got the bid would get the specs for Office docs, source code and internals. But who's going to:
A: do a good enough job
B: want to admit they're developing a MS product
C: win the bid
A better solution is to force them to release specs to everyone.
I built one a while back out of a A/D chip and a few transistors. The only other part was a clock chip and crystal. I didn't bother to sync everything perfectly - I just let the clock chip flap away and read whatever was on the lines.
Worked pretty well. It even worked as a video in(though it didn't get much resolution).
This is a really fun project if that's what you're looking for - and it's good enough for simple electronics. You'll certainly be able to see simple wave shapes. That said, you'd have to do some work if you were
1. Were worried about accuracy
2. Needed fast sampling
3. Deal with large ranges of voltages. Mine dealt only in 0-5 volts.
Here's an interesting article on Reason on antitrust workings through the ages. It gives me sort of a different perspective on MS's antitrust woes.
I think the solution to the MS problem is to regulate their real problem behavior. Don't let them do illegal things. Don't let them sign crazy exclusive deals. Don't let them control (down to a single icon) exactly what's installed on a machine.
Making MS release Office for Linux is a step down the wrong road. And what do you do when it's crappy? Force them to make it better?
While there's certainly pitfalls to treating music like software, I think there's benefits in terms of clarification of rights.
When I buy software, I get physical media (which is becoming less and less important) and a license to use the software in certain ways. Music could be released under all sorts of different licenses - maybe in several versions at once (per client/seat, free, free-but-no-internet-sharing, etc...)
Now here's the question: Is this a serious suggestion, or am I poking fun at how bad software licenses are? Will the idiot who's been marking all my posts as flamebait find me here?
I assume someone looked at it, and didn't like it for a reason like:
1. He was trying to be funny, but I didn't laugh
2. XBox isn't portable. Gamecube rules!
3. GROUTY!
4. He was making a point via sarcasm and humor, which is no longer allowed on here.
Don't think this is the place for meta-moderation? Just write some replies!
When we brought in a new graphics guy here, he wanted a Mac. We gave him a PC. He noticed that PhotoShop 6 is pretty much the same either way (and he likes having more buttons on his mouse).
You should be able to get away with a 900 MHz P3 (go with Pentiums here, there are silly optimizations). You'll need about 256 megs of ram (someone might say you need more, but you'll survive with this).
The part that will screw you is the monitor - if she really needs color accuracy you can forget about $1000.00
I think you can do it. Depending on what you can get PhotoShop for (and you will have to buy PhotoShop, unless you steal it - it's much more entrenched than even Mac is in the graphic art world).. Do they have educational licenses? (WinXP educational licenses are certainly the way to go - no checks and 1/4 the price... though most likely you'll get it with the machine anywho.)
Maybe quantum computing will be the point the simulation breaks down. Maybe there's nobody watching it - and we'll just always wonder why it didn't work.
I know there's one bug in the simulation - there's way too much lint. What's with all the lint?
And sharks could have these on their foreheads!
on
Battlefield Lasers
·
· Score: 1
Hmm.. not much to say here now. Congo was a poor movie. No sea bass.
It's natural that the quantum state of a particle is not known until it's observed. Why would you render all this detail out when nobody's watching? It would be the same as Quake rendering things behind you.
The same situation would explain why sometimes objects behavior only makes sense at a macro-level - objects are only being rendered out that far. Quake doesn't compute motion for each polygon - it moves things in groups.
Only when we're looking at one pixel (I mean particle...) does the universe render itself out that far.
It's natural that the quantum state of a particle is not known until it's observed. Why would you render all this detail out when nobody's watching? It would be the same as Quake rendering things behind you.
The same situation would explain why sometimes things only seem to work on a macro-scale - they're only being rendered out that far. Quake doesn't compute motion for each polygon - it moves an object.
Only when we're looking at one pixel (I mean particle...) is it fully rendered.
Anyone remember the ST:TNG episode I'm thinking of? It was a horrendously bad episode, but relevant here.
Here's what I wonder: why wasn't holodeck addiction rampant? Can we expect gaming addictions to do anything but multiply over coming years (especially as continuing revenue models catch hold more)?
Perhaps the best test as to whether you're addicted to a game is whether you still enjoy it.
If you honestly enjoy playing a game into the wee hours of the morning, you're doing fine. If you do this 30 days in a row, and you're still having lots of fun (and you still have your job) - you've got yourself a happy life (and what game is this?). I wish I had a hobby like that.
If you stay up because you feel like you have to level up one more time, you're addicted - quit playing.
Slashdot Mirror
Who will be the last site standing under the Slashling bum-rush? Who can continue serving pages the longest? What site will be the first to return only an apology?
I'm Canadian as well...
You're right, there's no real reason the money should be given to schools and not someone else - though I think it would be hard to divvy up exactly who's been damaged. Those with specific grievances should be filing suit themselves.
Schools seems like a good plan because:
A: schools need money
B: MS will agree to a larger dollar amount if it's going to schools (as it gives them PR instead of highlighting criminality). While this makes the settlement less punitive, money for schools is undeniably a good thing. And it's certainly a better plan than software donation.
That said, I think whatever number comes up should be large enough to have punitive effect - and the real meat of the settlement should be efforts to prevent abusive behavior on the part of MS in the future.
He's using sarcasm to make a point. Quick, someone say he's flamebaiting!
Or perhaps he's flamebaitbaiting. Mark him as Offtopic.
MS should have to give up cash, as that's what schools need.
However, I think they should also be forced to lower their prices for educational customers. Dramatically. This way schools have a choice - and a little bit more in the piggy bank either way.
You're right, file sharing is still a killer app. But it's no longer one that Sun can exploit to sell Jxta.
Though I'm sure the RIAA would love to see it try.
I wish that moderators would also leave replies to comments. I don't particularly disagree with the idea that my post here is a Troll (as I'm an idiot and prone to say stupid things).
But I'd like to know if the moderator has some sort of insight here.
And yes, I can stand to lose some Karma...
I think that Jini was fine. As is Jxta, I'm sure (though I've only briefly looked at the thing). The problem is Sun.
They come down off the mountain with these standards like they were revelations. I think this puts a lot of people on the defensive. No matter how open the standard is, Sun wants to keep reminding us that it was their idea.
In part it's also a chicken and egg problem. JXTA will have more value as it becomes a standard, but until then it has only marginal benefits over whatever proprietary system people use (and thus its adoption is slow).
I think people should concentrate on SOAP. There's no reason P2P couldn't be implemented this way instead.
JXTA - means of identifying and communicating with objects. Uses HTTP and XML. Brought to you by Sun. P2P! P2P!
SOAP/UDDI - means of identifying and communicating with objects. Uses HTTP and XML. Widely deployed standard. Use for anything you'd like.
Unless a new technology:
A: Means I can do something I currently cannot (and want to do)
or
B: Does something so much better as to make my old methods obsolete
it doesn't excite me much. I think sharing illegal files was the killer app of P2P.
How dare you bring facts into this - even going so far as to suggest others do the same!
For shame - what's left to argue when everything is "statistics" and "valid reasoning"?
I think he could play a PROTOSS. Would be a good movie too.
Who'd play Kerrigan?
The chip I had needed a clock signal in order to go through the sampling cycle - there are likely those that don't, and they might be more suited to this application. Actually the Intersil ADC0802LCN looks like it might work very well...
I tried using the parallel port itself to generate the clock signal using one of the status lines - but it didn't work as well (random errors). I don't have enough design knowledge to know why.
In any case, a fun project for a programmer like myself.
You're right - he didn't make a terribly good case that MS's case is like these others.
He did, however, give me a different perspective on antitrust in general. It clarified in my mind that having a monoply is a different thing than abusing a monoply.
I think MS has abused its monoply - and it should be punished for specific items, and punished hard enough that it quits abusing.
And if it then manages to keep it's large market share then I think it, like Alcoa, should not be harassed.
My objection to MS writing Office for Linux is the mechanics. Who's going to do it?
As you suggest, MS has a stake in Linux not having a good Office. I think you'd have a hard time forcing MS to write good software for Linux (and as you mention Mac is not really a counter example, it's a different situation).
If they put it out to bid (as I believe the article suggests), who's going to bite that actually has the means to produce a good piece of software? Sun might - but they wouldn't call it MS Office for Linux, they'd call it Star Office.
Basically whatever company got the bid would get the specs for Office docs, source code and internals. But who's going to:
A: do a good enough job
B: want to admit they're developing a MS product
C: win the bid
A better solution is to force them to release specs to everyone.
I built one a while back out of a A/D chip and a few transistors. The only other part was a clock chip and crystal. I didn't bother to sync everything perfectly - I just let the clock chip flap away and read whatever was on the lines.
Worked pretty well. It even worked as a video in(though it didn't get much resolution).
This is a really fun project if that's what you're looking for - and it's good enough for simple electronics. You'll certainly be able to see simple wave shapes. That said, you'd have to do some work if you were
1. Were worried about accuracy
2. Needed fast sampling
3. Deal with large ranges of voltages. Mine dealt only in 0-5 volts.
-Dave
Here's an interesting article on Reason on antitrust workings through the ages. It gives me sort of a different perspective on MS's antitrust woes.
I think the solution to the MS problem is to regulate their real problem behavior. Don't let them do illegal things. Don't let them sign crazy exclusive deals. Don't let them control (down to a single icon) exactly what's installed on a machine.
Making MS release Office for Linux is a step down the wrong road. And what do you do when it's crappy? Force them to make it better?
While there's certainly pitfalls to treating music like software, I think there's benefits in terms of clarification of rights.
When I buy software, I get physical media (which is becoming less and less important) and a license to use the software in certain ways. Music could be released under all sorts of different licenses - maybe in several versions at once (per client/seat, free, free-but-no-internet-sharing, etc...)
Now here's the question: Is this a serious suggestion, or am I poking fun at how bad software licenses are? Will the idiot who's been marking all my posts as flamebait find me here?
I don't think people know what flamebait means.
I assume someone looked at it, and didn't like it for a reason like:
1. He was trying to be funny, but I didn't laugh
2. XBox isn't portable. Gamecube rules!
3. GROUTY!
4. He was making a point via sarcasm and humor, which is no longer allowed on here.
Don't think this is the place for meta-moderation? Just write some replies!
When we brought in a new graphics guy here, he wanted a Mac. We gave him a PC. He noticed that PhotoShop 6 is pretty much the same either way (and he likes having more buttons on his mouse).
You should be able to get away with a 900 MHz P3 (go with Pentiums here, there are silly optimizations). You'll need about 256 megs of ram (someone might say you need more, but you'll survive with this).
The part that will screw you is the monitor - if she really needs color accuracy you can forget about $1000.00
I think you can do it. Depending on what you can get PhotoShop for (and you will have to buy PhotoShop, unless you steal it - it's much more entrenched than even Mac is in the graphic art world).. Do they have educational licenses? (WinXP educational licenses are certainly the way to go - no checks and 1/4 the price... though most likely you'll get it with the machine anywho.)
Maybe quantum computing will be the point the simulation breaks down. Maybe there's nobody watching it - and we'll just always wonder why it didn't work.
I know there's one bug in the simulation - there's way too much lint. What's with all the lint?
Hmm.. not much to say here now. Congo was a poor movie. No sea bass.
I believe the universe is a simulation.
It's natural that the quantum state of a particle is not known until it's observed. Why would you render all this detail out when nobody's watching? It would be the same as Quake rendering things behind you.
The same situation would explain why sometimes objects behavior only makes sense at a macro-level - objects are only being rendered out that far. Quake doesn't compute motion for each polygon - it moves things in groups.
Only when we're looking at one pixel (I mean particle...) does the universe render itself out that far.
I believe the universe is a simulation.
It's natural that the quantum state of a particle is not known until it's observed. Why would you render all this detail out when nobody's watching? It would be the same as Quake rendering things behind you.
The same situation would explain why sometimes things only seem to work on a macro-scale - they're only being rendered out that far. Quake doesn't compute motion for each polygon - it moves an object.
Only when we're looking at one pixel (I mean particle...) is it fully rendered.
Anyone remember the ST:TNG episode I'm thinking of? It was a horrendously bad episode, but relevant here.
Here's what I wonder: why wasn't holodeck addiction rampant? Can we expect gaming addictions to do anything but multiply over coming years (especially as continuing revenue models catch hold more)?
Perhaps the best test as to whether you're addicted to a game is whether you still enjoy it.
If you honestly enjoy playing a game into the wee hours of the morning, you're doing fine. If you do this 30 days in a row, and you're still having lots of fun (and you still have your job) - you've got yourself a happy life (and what game is this?). I wish I had a hobby like that.
If you stay up because you feel like you have to level up one more time, you're addicted - quit playing.