I thought the article was well worth reading, but the statement that browsers were a good complement commodity to servers seemed strange to me. How so? Server and browser software is independent of each other, interacting only through a well-defined and public (okay stop sniggering) protocol. Besides, browsers are a mass-market item while servers are for a far smaller segment. So how does market penetration of browsers support server sales, except for via brand recognition/mindshare of potential buyers? Or perhaps dirty tricks (like browser company "portals" as default homepages) to push products?
Maybe I answered my own question. (And did anyone else read "Stallmanism" as "Stalinism" the first go-around?)
What are the odds of xDSL providers going down an analogous path?
It would seem to me that as long as an unmetered option is available, people who want unmetered service (e.g. P2P users) will continue to have their bandwidth.
It's so obvious it's damn near tautological, but it seemed worth pointing out given the conclusions being made in the article, namely that poor Johnny KaZaa will have to go to the Megastore now.
By logical extension, perhaps you're right. But thankfully, legal thinking is different from programmer thinking -- law doesn't use a strictly logical filter to apply to rulings. Consideration of things like reasonable expectations are considered. For instance, with your cell phone voice mail example, you had a reasonable expectation that that was private, and with no privacy statement challenging that, just a EULA or ToS agreement saying they own what's on their servers, I think you'd have a good case against the cell phone company.
Moreover, stealing the ideas in a voicemail message (or data from an email, online service, &c.) isn't really analogous to what's happened in this case. Selling characters on a MMORPG is like selling your voicemail box to another user of the cell phone service provider. Would you expect to be able to do that? I don't think so. They provide use of the space to you as terms of your agreement with them -- it doesn't mean you own the space and have any claim to a right of 'first sale.' Same is true with characters in an online game -- they are basically just containers for data, right?
thanks unicron...is there a 'clearly missed the reference' meta moderation? Although i'd have been more correct to say "rotten in Denmark," rather than "fishy" -- perhaps we're dealing with a purist.
Has anyone made public a natural language interface to a CYC instance? It appears to come with an NL component, so it should be possible, but I'm too lazy/casually interested to attempt it.
I just wanna play Turing test chat bot with it a little...
Speaking of which, has anyone seen Mr. Mind, a chat bot which purports to engage in the "Blurring Test" -- a twist on the Turing test in which your task is to convince it that *you're* human? Kinda interesting.
That's just not right. He was a devout Christian, and the highest category of human existence for him, above the Aesthetic and the Moral, was the Spiritual.
But has the individual maintainer changed over time? This is one aspect of the open source development model(s) that their conclusion seems to be overlooking. Even though "mature" software seems to be mostly maintained by individuals, those maintainers tend to change over time.
Further, isn't this somewhat self-selecting? In other words, is mature software generally software that requires the least active development?
> As for expensive litigation, I'd think most
> companies would find Netscape/AOL/TW's lawyers
> more fearsome than the FSF's.
I think Eben Moglen would object to that sentiment! The man's a powerhouse.
This is true. But as I think many debian users (devotees, fanatics, etc) would attest, woody is quite stable enough right now to install. It's a marked advance over potato, and I'll suggest that no one needs hold off for the official release -- just update your sources.list now! Let's face it, Debian is notoriously conservative with its release program, and one mans 'unstable' is another's business as usual...
I for one see the official release as a non-event -- i's ready enough, and whatever deficiencies persist are just an apt-get away from oblivion...
Yup. Check out Free Geek -- they're a non-profit organization in portland oregon that has a similar program. It's all volunteer-based, and volunteers get free salvaged/reassembled linux machines and training. All in all a very nice system.
This is a totally standard disclaimer in the world of open source, but I've yet to hear of any computers being destroyed by it (OSS). The same *can't* be said for all proprietary software.
Don't mistake the character of an individual developer for a genuine assessment of the products "dangers." I'm sure he's quite proud of his work, would love to see it used widely, but just wants to cover his ass.
And hey, if you're afraid, just read the source!;)
On Katz and Dogs (was Re:Yes, you are)
on
Dog Bites Website
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Jon,
I have no problem with the use of a public online forum as a marketing tool, provided that there exists an organic relationship between the forum's focus and the product being touted, as well as a marked understanding of the audience/community by the marketer; in other words, the product should be of general interest to the community at hand, and the marketer should be a member of that community (e.g. no spammers).
I think you satisfy the second provision; while some might get all frothy upon seeing your name attached to articles, there's no doubting that you understand, and are a (not uncontroversial) part of the slashdot community. But the first requirement, that the product should fit organically within the context of the forum, just isn't met...I mean, sure, lots of folks love dogs, including slashdot readers, but, really, isn't a story about a book about a man and his dogs just Meta-Offtopic in the slashdot context?
This Offtopic-ness would certainly be enough for slashdot editors to reject a story from an (functionally, not literally) anonymous contributor. So while you extol the virtues of the "little guy" seizing the open-forum of the internet, this isn't in fact an example of that. This is an example of someone taking advantage of a privileged position vis a vis a particular forum, and using that advantage to publish the sort of advertisement that the general public wouldn't be able to publish.
So maybe what you advocating is that the "little guy" exploit privileged positions within institutions they may be a part of in order to sell whatever it is they're selling. This message, to me, is not so noble...
BasiliskII is a great Mac emulator, but, alas, it doesn't do PPC yet either, hence, no OS 9, which requires the PPC RISC architecture. It's free (speech and beer), under the GPL.
I've heard rumors that there a plans for a PPC emulating Basilisk in the works, though.
Wireless networks on planes? Should open up a lot of opportunities for would-be corporate spies...a whole ad-hoc, heterogenous "network neighborhood" to plunder...and frequent flier miles to boot!
In a perfect world it wouldn't be necessary, but I've found the best solution for troublesome pop-ups, unders, and everything in between is to use a filtering proxy.
I quite like the proximatron -- it's shonen-ware (basically free as in beer), and quite flexible...
And 3D glasses are just 2 dimensions for each eye. But then again, so is how we actually perceive three dimensions.
Similarly, this is not just 2 Z-planes as people keep dismissing it, but a way to display a slightly different image to each eye, allowing our brain to construct a 3D image of something, exactly as it does in "real life."
For this to work, of course, the renderer theoretically needs to know exactly how far away your eyes are, and in what position (including how wide the space between them is!), in order to vary the images on the two displays in precisely the way needed to create the effect. This is borne out by the testimony of folks that you need to be a) a precise distance from the screen, and b) not move around too much.
So, if the display came with some sort of stockade-like head mount, those of us who aren't Mena Suvari could all experience the very real and true illusion of 3D, albeit uncomfortably.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought the article was well worth reading, but the statement that browsers were a good complement commodity to servers seemed strange to me. How so? Server and browser software is independent of each other, interacting only through a well-defined and public (okay stop sniggering) protocol. Besides, browsers are a mass-market item while servers are for a far smaller segment. So how does market penetration of browsers support server sales, except for via brand recognition/mindshare of potential buyers? Or perhaps dirty tricks (like browser company "portals" as default homepages) to push products?
Maybe I answered my own question. (And did anyone else read "Stallmanism" as "Stalinism" the first go-around?)
What are the odds of xDSL providers going down an analogous path?
It would seem to me that as long as an unmetered option is available, people who want unmetered service (e.g. P2P users) will continue to have their bandwidth.
It's so obvious it's damn near tautological, but it seemed worth pointing out given the conclusions being made in the article, namely that poor Johnny KaZaa will have to go to the Megastore now.
Well, I own a PC. And I wanted an IPod. So I bought an Archos Jukebox.
Apple could've sold me hardware, but wasn't compatible with the hardware I already invested in, so I went elsewhere.
IANAL, but...
By logical extension, perhaps you're right. But thankfully, legal thinking is different from programmer thinking -- law doesn't use a strictly logical filter to apply to rulings. Consideration of things like reasonable expectations are considered. For instance, with your cell phone voice mail example, you had a reasonable expectation that that was private, and with no privacy statement challenging that, just a EULA or ToS agreement saying they own what's on their servers, I think you'd have a good case against the cell phone company.
Moreover, stealing the ideas in a voicemail message (or data from an email, online service, &c.) isn't really analogous to what's happened in this case. Selling characters on a MMORPG is like selling your voicemail box to another user of the cell phone service provider. Would you expect to be able to do that? I don't think so. They provide use of the space to you as terms of your agreement with them -- it doesn't mean you own the space and have any claim to a right of 'first sale.' Same is true with characters in an online game -- they are basically just containers for data, right?
thanks unicron...is there a 'clearly missed the reference' meta moderation? Although i'd have been more correct to say "rotten in Denmark," rather than "fishy" -- perhaps we're dealing with a purist.
or maybe that someone is towing the line that _nothing_ is rotten in denmark?
c'est la vie.
I knew something smelled fishy in Denmark...
Has anyone made public a natural language interface to a CYC instance? It appears to come with an NL component, so it should be possible, but I'm too lazy/casually interested to attempt it.
I just wanna play Turing test chat bot with it a little...
Speaking of which, has anyone seen Mr. Mind, a chat bot which purports to engage in the "Blurring Test" -- a twist on the Turing test in which your task is to convince it that *you're* human? Kinda interesting.
That's just not right. He was a devout Christian, and the highest category of human existence for him, above the Aesthetic and the Moral, was the Spiritual.
But has the individual maintainer changed over time? This is one aspect of the open source development model(s) that their conclusion seems to be overlooking. Even though "mature" software seems to be mostly maintained by individuals, those maintainers tend to change over time.
Further, isn't this somewhat self-selecting? In other words, is mature software generally software that requires the least active development?
> As for expensive litigation, I'd think most > companies would find Netscape/AOL/TW's lawyers > more fearsome than the FSF's. I think Eben Moglen would object to that sentiment! The man's a powerhouse.
This is true. But as I think many debian users (devotees, fanatics, etc) would attest, woody is quite stable enough right now to install. It's a marked advance over potato, and I'll suggest that no one needs hold off for the official release -- just update your sources.list now! Let's face it, Debian is notoriously conservative with its release program, and one mans 'unstable' is another's business as usual...
I for one see the official release as a non-event -- i's ready enough, and whatever deficiencies persist are just an apt-get away from oblivion...
it's true. my walls are covered with studio portraiture of lumps of coal and graphite.
Yup. Check out Free Geek -- they're a non-profit organization in portland oregon that has a similar program. It's all volunteer-based, and volunteers get free salvaged/reassembled linux machines and training. All in all a very nice system.
This is a totally standard disclaimer in the world of open source, but I've yet to hear of any computers being destroyed by it (OSS). The same *can't* be said for all proprietary software.
;)
Don't mistake the character of an individual developer for a genuine assessment of the products "dangers." I'm sure he's quite proud of his work, would love to see it used widely, but just wants to cover his ass.
And hey, if you're afraid, just read the source!
Jon,
I have no problem with the use of a public online forum as a marketing tool, provided that there exists an organic relationship between the forum's focus and the product being touted, as well as a marked understanding of the audience/community by the marketer; in other words, the product should be of general interest to the community at hand, and the marketer should be a member of that community (e.g. no spammers).
I think you satisfy the second provision; while some might get all frothy upon seeing your name attached to articles, there's no doubting that you understand, and are a (not uncontroversial) part of the slashdot community. But the first requirement, that the product should fit organically within the context of the forum, just isn't met...I mean, sure, lots of folks love dogs, including slashdot readers, but, really, isn't a story about a book about a man and his dogs just Meta-Offtopic in the slashdot context?
This Offtopic-ness would certainly be enough for slashdot editors to reject a story from an (functionally, not literally) anonymous contributor. So while you extol the virtues of the "little guy" seizing the open-forum of the internet, this isn't in fact an example of that. This is an example of someone taking advantage of a privileged position vis a vis a particular forum, and using that advantage to publish the sort of advertisement that the general public wouldn't be able to publish.
So maybe what you advocating is that the "little guy" exploit privileged positions within institutions they may be a part of in order to sell whatever it is they're selling. This message, to me, is not so noble...
I don't mean to be troll-ish, but why is Slashdot posting this blatant advertisement as a news story? Am I missing something?
Gentle corrections are welcomed.
It's released under the OPL and both an HTML version and a PDF version of the book are freely available.
I've heard rumors that there a plans for a PPC emulating Basilisk in the works, though.
I believe the article is referring to "business class", but rather private jets.
"The first market is corporate jets, but the builders hope to sell the system to airlines, too.
Wireless networks on planes? Should open up a lot of opportunities for would-be corporate spies...a whole ad-hoc, heterogenous "network neighborhood" to plunder...and frequent flier miles to boot!
I quite like the proximatron -- it's shonen-ware (basically free as in beer), and quite flexible...
Maybe some day.
If only they were actually popping up. It's the popping under that's more insidious.
And 3D glasses are just 2 dimensions for each eye. But then again, so is how we actually perceive three dimensions.
Similarly, this is not just 2 Z-planes as people keep dismissing it, but a way to display a slightly different image to each eye, allowing our brain to construct a 3D image of something, exactly as it does in "real life."
For this to work, of course, the renderer theoretically needs to know exactly how far away your eyes are, and in what position (including how wide the space between them is!), in order to vary the images on the two displays in precisely the way needed to create the effect. This is borne out by the testimony of folks that you need to be a) a precise distance from the screen, and b) not move around too much.
So, if the display came with some sort of stockade-like head mount, those of us who aren't Mena Suvari could all experience the very real and true illusion of 3D, albeit uncomfortably.