What has the manned space program done for us recently? You cannot live forever on past achievements, especially when your life support costs other people billions of dollars a year.
Come one people, this has *nothing* to do with Flash as a media player - this issue is to do with Apple denying Adobe Flash as a development platform for the iPhone, which is completely different to the age old (well, since 2007 anyhow) issue of a lack of flash in Mobile Safari.
Apple are denying Flash as a development platform, and instead requiring the use of their own development platform.
What about the other frameworks that Apples ruling has affected, such as MonoTouch? Before this ruling, it was easy for a.Net house to cater to a customers requirements for a related iPhone app - now, they have to either become experienced in another language or outsource the work.
And to be honest, I have never seen a complaint about one of our iPhone apps written in MonoTouch (and we have several complex ones) - people cannot notice the difference between one and a native app.
IIS is a bad example since all of the GUI configuration tools actually run off of XML configuration files (web.config, metabase, machine.config et al).
Will we eventually see the day where Microsoft has a central location for shared libraries in Windows (writable only by "root") and also a decent package management system, you know, like apt/rpm?
Like the Global Assembly Cache? Central location (C:\Windows\assembly\) and only writable by the admin. It also handles versioning of assemblies as well.
On every install I have done for at least the past 2 years, the automatic updates option has been on by default, and set to download and automatically install firefox updates. I have verified this for past discussions on the subject by creating a brand new Windows 7 VM (just fire up a sysprepped one) and installing the latest install from the Mozilla website.
No, but then again we aren't talking about the Holocaust, we are talking about specific crimes that were carried out by both parties, but only the losing side got punished for. Holding the Holocaust up as a catch-all get out of jail card is simply not acceptable.
Ok, how is any of this going to free the delivery channels? It isn't - the Pirate Parties manifesto will not bring anything to the table that an artist cannot do voluntarily anyway. They aren't going to force the media companies to air your own favourite small time band, and that band can allow non-commercial sharing already but obviously its not that successful...
So what has your little rant added at all, other than voiced your opinion about the media companies?
The Grateful Dead allowed fans to tape their live shows and share those recordings - not official productions or albums. Sorry but your example falls flat on its face.
As for your assertion that the RIAA et al control restriction of bad reviews, I would love to know what you are smoking.
Again, I assert that I do not believe in the so called 'non-commercial sharing' right.
The bombing of Dresden has never been legally classified as a war crime. There are plenty of people who believe it is, plenty of people who believe it isn't and even more people who have no opinion either way. Whether it would be classified as a war crime if it were "on trial" is a matter for discussion:)
It wasn't classified as a war crime simply because the perpetrators of said attack were on the winning side.
A prime example of that is some of the charges that Admiral Donitz faced regarding the sinking of neutral and unarmed shipping even though both the British and the Americans waged a similar campaign tactic against both Germany and Japan.
Why hasn't Firefox been pilloried for their phone-home system that is enabled by default?
I am of course talking about their automatic upgrade feature, which is enabled by default and set to carry out upgrades by default, with no prompting to enable or disable the feature (or even mention that it will happen) during the application installation. This is the sort of thing Microsoft would have been vilified for doing (I remember the discussion on Slashdot several years ago regarding Microsoft considering it), but Mozilla seems to get away with it.
And thats not even considering the whole Google home page tie up...
Yup, I have just read that and its a pile of crap - the whole idea seems to be to reward those who are successful less and less, and reward those who are failing more. Why are those who are popular less deserving of those who are not?
So you would prefer the current system, where 0.1% of the artists are driving around in million dollar cars to their fifty million dollar mansions and getting one or two DUIs on the way while the other 99.9% are barely making a living and thus have to get a day job and only have 3-5 hours every day to actually be creating stuff? Less social inequality is good.
How is that any different to any other profession? Why are artists entitled to unequal and enforced support from their industry, and welders or seamstresses are not? What makes an unsuccessful artist more worthy than an unsuccessful teacher?
(...) why not simply stick to sharing those things you are allowed to? But oh no, that's not good enough - the 'people' must be allowed to share *everything*.
(Sith) Lord Mandelson, is that you? Please enlighten us what we are allowed and not allowed to share!
Its called copyright, and you are more than welcome to create something of your own and grant permission to others to distribute it - why this overwhelming sense of entitlement about needing to be able to distribute other peoples works against their will?
I see my other post is marked as a troll - interesting how dissenting viewpoints and opinions simply aren't allowed here any more.
The argument against copyright is a fair one - but it almost completely seems to orientate around other peoples copyrighted works, and being able to distribute those works freely. Its certainly has a sense of 'I want what they are selling, but I don't want to pay them what they are asking for it, they should take what I am willing to offer and nothing else, but in any case I should still be entitled to their work' and I don't like that one little bit.
"Sharing is good" - I love how Stallman is once again so open with other peoples creations as well as his own. If you want to share, why not simply stick to sharing those things you are allowed to? But oh no, that's not good enough - the 'people' must be allowed to share *everything*.
My 1992 proposal for a special tax to be distributed to artists, with the money partly shifted from the most popular ones towards those not quite so successful, is still applicable.
Yup, I have just read that and its a pile of crap - the whole idea seems to be to reward those who are successful less and less, and reward those who are failing more. Why are those who are popular less deserving of those who are not? This isn't some politically correct playschool, where everyone holds hands to cross the line together at sports day rather than crown a sole winner - no, this is real life.
Now, I am against this Bill (and have written, faxed and phoned by MP - she will be calling for more discussion and consultation), but Stallman and his stance isn't the answer.
1 - Ever hear of support? Product for free, support for $. Lots of companies solely thrive on this concept of support ( of others products ). They often call it 'professional services'. I suggest you look it up sometime. There is no reason it cant work if you support your own products that you give away.
Congratulations, now a company has to create two enticing products instead of one.
I wish that a modal dialog window in one tab wouldn't block the entire browser - cannot switch tabs, cannot do anything other than acknowledge and dismiss the dialog window, which kind of fucks everything up when the modal dialog is caused by infinitely looping code:(
Slashdot Mirror
What has the manned space program done for us recently? You cannot live forever on past achievements, especially when your life support costs other people billions of dollars a year.
Come one people, this has *nothing* to do with Flash as a media player - this issue is to do with Apple denying Adobe Flash as a development platform for the iPhone, which is completely different to the age old (well, since 2007 anyhow) issue of a lack of flash in Mobile Safari.
Apple are denying Flash as a development platform, and instead requiring the use of their own development platform.
What about the other frameworks that Apples ruling has affected, such as MonoTouch? Before this ruling, it was easy for a .Net house to cater to a customers requirements for a related iPhone app - now, they have to either become experienced in another language or outsource the work.
And to be honest, I have never seen a complaint about one of our iPhone apps written in MonoTouch (and we have several complex ones) - people cannot notice the difference between one and a native app.
They only put the answer at the bottom of pages when you have a Google referrer, not if you go directly or via another means.
Go to hell. (note to self: change sig, no longer valid)
Amazon can't do anything about the lack of a feature, all they can do is refund.
IIS is a bad example since all of the GUI configuration tools actually run off of XML configuration files (web.config, metabase, machine.config et al).
How do you know the same isn't true of any other software you use?
Will we eventually see the day where Microsoft has a central location for shared libraries in Windows (writable only by "root") and also a decent package management system, you know, like apt/rpm?
Like the Global Assembly Cache? Central location (C:\Windows\assembly\) and only writable by the admin. It also handles versioning of assemblies as well.
On every install I have done for at least the past 2 years, the automatic updates option has been on by default, and set to download and automatically install firefox updates. I have verified this for past discussions on the subject by creating a brand new Windows 7 VM (just fire up a sysprepped one) and installing the latest install from the Mozilla website.
No, but then again we aren't talking about the Holocaust, we are talking about specific crimes that were carried out by both parties, but only the losing side got punished for. Holding the Holocaust up as a catch-all get out of jail card is simply not acceptable.
Ok, how is any of this going to free the delivery channels? It isn't - the Pirate Parties manifesto will not bring anything to the table that an artist cannot do voluntarily anyway. They aren't going to force the media companies to air your own favourite small time band, and that band can allow non-commercial sharing already but obviously its not that successful...
So what has your little rant added at all, other than voiced your opinion about the media companies?
The Grateful Dead allowed fans to tape their live shows and share those recordings - not official productions or albums. Sorry but your example falls flat on its face.
As for your assertion that the RIAA et al control restriction of bad reviews, I would love to know what you are smoking.
Again, I assert that I do not believe in the so called 'non-commercial sharing' right.
And your point is? I never saw any Allied personnel stand trial for the crimes Donitz was accused of, despite occurrences being well documented.
The fact remains that both sides carried out atrocities, and only one side was punished - the losing side.
Unfortunately I do not agree with the whole 'legalise non-commercial sharing' aspect, so the Pirate Party remains one I cannot support.
The bombing of Dresden has never been legally classified as a war crime. There are plenty of people who believe it is, plenty of people who believe it isn't and even more people who have no opinion either way. Whether it would be classified as a war crime if it were "on trial" is a matter for discussion :)
It wasn't classified as a war crime simply because the perpetrators of said attack were on the winning side.
A prime example of that is some of the charges that Admiral Donitz faced regarding the sinking of neutral and unarmed shipping even though both the British and the Americans waged a similar campaign tactic against both Germany and Japan.
Why hasn't Firefox been pilloried for their phone-home system that is enabled by default?
I am of course talking about their automatic upgrade feature, which is enabled by default and set to carry out upgrades by default, with no prompting to enable or disable the feature (or even mention that it will happen) during the application installation. This is the sort of thing Microsoft would have been vilified for doing (I remember the discussion on Slashdot several years ago regarding Microsoft considering it), but Mozilla seems to get away with it.
And thats not even considering the whole Google home page tie up...
Uhm, no. You don't have the authority to brand something as Apple, so that (often repeated) suggestion is totally false.
So my time is worthless if its spent creating something on a computer or with a microphone, as opposed to a hammer?
Yup, I have just read that and its a pile of crap - the whole idea seems to be to reward those who are successful less and less, and reward those who are failing more. Why are those who are popular less deserving of those who are not?
So you would prefer the current system, where 0.1% of the artists are driving around in million dollar cars to their fifty million dollar mansions and getting one or two DUIs on the way while the other 99.9% are barely making a living and thus have to get a day job and only have 3-5 hours every day to actually be creating stuff? Less social inequality is good.
How is that any different to any other profession? Why are artists entitled to unequal and enforced support from their industry, and welders or seamstresses are not? What makes an unsuccessful artist more worthy than an unsuccessful teacher?
The problem is, Stallman isn't talking here about sharing *your* effort, hes talking about sharing *other peoples* effort, regardless of their wishes.
(Sith) Lord Mandelson, is that you? Please enlighten us what we are allowed and not allowed to share!
Its called copyright, and you are more than welcome to create something of your own and grant permission to others to distribute it - why this overwhelming sense of entitlement about needing to be able to distribute other peoples works against their will?
I see my other post is marked as a troll - interesting how dissenting viewpoints and opinions simply aren't allowed here any more.
The argument against copyright is a fair one - but it almost completely seems to orientate around other peoples copyrighted works, and being able to distribute those works freely. Its certainly has a sense of 'I want what they are selling, but I don't want to pay them what they are asking for it, they should take what I am willing to offer and nothing else, but in any case I should still be entitled to their work' and I don't like that one little bit.
My 1992 proposal for a special tax to be distributed to artists, with the money partly shifted from the most popular ones towards those not quite so successful, is still applicable.
Yup, I have just read that and its a pile of crap - the whole idea seems to be to reward those who are successful less and less, and reward those who are failing more. Why are those who are popular less deserving of those who are not? This isn't some politically correct playschool, where everyone holds hands to cross the line together at sports day rather than crown a sole winner - no, this is real life.
Now, I am against this Bill (and have written, faxed and phoned by MP - she will be calling for more discussion and consultation), but Stallman and his stance isn't the answer.
1 - Ever hear of support? Product for free, support for $. Lots of companies solely thrive on this concept of support ( of others products ). They often call it 'professional services'. I suggest you look it up sometime. There is no reason it cant work if you support your own products that you give away.
Congratulations, now a company has to create two enticing products instead of one.
I wish that a modal dialog window in one tab wouldn't block the entire browser - cannot switch tabs, cannot do anything other than acknowledge and dismiss the dialog window, which kind of fucks everything up when the modal dialog is caused by infinitely looping code :(