Today's DRM is so much more complicated than it needs to be. That complexity wastes everyone's time and money, and it creates unnecessary barriers to competition and innovation.
Since DRM rarely stops anyone who wants to bypass it anyway, it would make far more sense to just publish a standard for embedding licensing information into the media as RDF (Creative Commons provides an excellent example of how to do this), and do away with the pointless proprietary pseudo-cryptographic data-obfuscation systems that currently plague the industry.
In other words, make DRM restrictions advisory, rather than attempting (and failing) to make them mandatory. The downside of this approach is that a lot of people would undoubtedly un-check the "Obey DRM" checkboxes in their software. However, many of these people would bypass DRM restrictions anyway, and this needs to be weighed against the fact that we would finally get an *industry standard DRM* that everyone---including the open-source crowd---could live with.
Because you can't run a proper company based primarily on the wishes of employees, or else everyone would work two days a week on full pay, have twenty weeks holiday a year and be provided with free hookers and beer at lunchtime?
He's already talking about supporting Windows, OSX, and Fedora. Letting employees choose between them isn't going to create a significant amount of extra work, and it would remove the need to shove things like WINE down the throats of people who don't want it.
Rather than dictating to people what they have to run on their desktops, why not let them choose and support them (within reason) on whatever they've decided to run? Ultimately, the goal is to help them get their jobs done.
"the U.S. holds rare earth ore reserves of up to 13 million metric tons. By contrast, the entire world produced just 124,000 metric tons in 2009". That means we have roughly 104 years worth of rare earth ore reserves, I think we'll be just fine.
'Google loves to characterize Android as "open" and iOS and iPhone as "closed." We find this a bit disingenuous, and clouding the real difference between our two approaches,' said Jobs. 'Android is very fragmented. Many Android [manufacturers], including the two largest, HTC and Motorola, install proprietary user interfaces to differentiate themselves from the commodity Android experience. The user's left to figure it out. Compare this to iPhone, where every handset works the same.'
In other words...Android is open and iOS and iPhone are closed.
When selling to users who want their devices to just work...
Funny. My Android phone just worked as soon as I got it. No iTunes required.
Also, since Leopard Server (and Snow Leopard Server), I know better than to trust that anything from Apple with "just work".
Oh, and Android's SDK just worked on my Linux box. No $99 developer fee or other bullshit. Getting my own version of K-9 built and installed on my phone, with zero knowledge about the Android SDK, took under an hour.
And we also think our developers can be more innovative if they can target a singular platform rather than a hundred variants.
Oh yes, because hearing about how other developers created something, only to be told that they couldn't sell it on the App Store for arbitrary reasons is so encouraging.
I know who Theo de Raadt is, but that's no reason to think Theo says the BSDL isn't GPL-compatible. I'm pretty sure he doesn't, because he actually understands licensing.
I remember that. It wasn't that the BSD code was GPL-incompatible, it's that some developers stripped off the copyright notices altogether and replaced them with their own.
According to Wikipedia, it tended only to be called that by later historians:
Renaissance editors sometimes added AUC to Roman manuscripts they published, giving the false impression that the Romans usually numbered their years using the AUC system. In fact, modern historians use AUC much more frequently than the Romans themselves did. The dominant method of identifying Roman years in Roman times was to name the two consuls who held office that year. The regnal year of the emperor was also used to identify years, especially in the Byzantine Empire after 537 when Justinian required its use.
I don't care whether "consumers typically have more than just two providers to choose from". A competitive market means that no single provider can arbitrary manipulate the equilibrium price for a good or service. Wireless service doesn't work that way.
Slashdot Mirror
x = 0
furple = 1
foo = (onevariablename
+ anothervariablename
+ athirdvariablename)
THANK YOU. You are my hero.
...teh patent system PROTEHCTS inventors!
It shows a Google Finance graph, with a list of providers: "Google Finance", "Yahoo Finance", "MSN Money", "DailyFinance", "CNN Money", "Reuters".
See this screenshot.
Today's DRM is so much more complicated than it needs to be. That complexity wastes everyone's time and money, and it creates unnecessary barriers to competition and innovation.
Since DRM rarely stops anyone who wants to bypass it anyway, it would make far more sense to just publish a standard for embedding licensing information into the media as RDF (Creative Commons provides an excellent example of how to do this), and do away with the pointless proprietary pseudo-cryptographic data-obfuscation systems that currently plague the industry.
In other words, make DRM restrictions advisory, rather than attempting (and failing) to make them mandatory. The downside of this approach is that a lot of people would undoubtedly un-check the "Obey DRM" checkboxes in their software. However, many of these people would bypass DRM restrictions anyway, and this needs to be weighed against the fact that we would finally get an *industry standard DRM* that everyone---including the open-source crowd---could live with.
It's fine, as long as you never ever want to transcode it.
DEB. Seriously, have you ever looked at rpmbuild? It needs to die a horrible, horrible death.
Because you can't run a proper company based primarily on the wishes of employees, or else everyone would work two days a week on full pay, have twenty weeks holiday a year and be provided with free hookers and beer at lunchtime?
He's already talking about supporting Windows, OSX, and Fedora. Letting employees choose between them isn't going to create a significant amount of extra work, and it would remove the need to shove things like WINE down the throats of people who don't want it.
Rather than dictating to people what they have to run on their desktops, why not let them choose and support them (within reason) on whatever they've decided to run? Ultimately, the goal is to help them get their jobs done.
What happens if MS sells the patents to a third party, who decides to sue? Would promissory estoppel apply in that case?
No, their databases *are* awful. You can't even store an empty string in a VARCHAR column.
...and I'm supposed to be complaining?
"the U.S. holds rare earth ore reserves of up to 13 million metric tons. By contrast, the entire world produced just 124,000 metric tons in 2009". That means we have roughly 104 years worth of rare earth ore reserves, I think we'll be just fine.
Exponential growth curves do not work that way.
'Google loves to characterize Android as "open" and iOS and iPhone as "closed." We find this a bit disingenuous, and clouding the real difference between our two approaches,' said Jobs. 'Android is very fragmented. Many Android [manufacturers], including the two largest, HTC and Motorola, install proprietary user interfaces to differentiate themselves from the commodity Android experience. The user's left to figure it out. Compare this to iPhone, where every handset works the same.'
In other words...Android is open and iOS and iPhone are closed.
When selling to users who want their devices to just work...
Funny. My Android phone just worked as soon as I got it. No iTunes required.
Also, since Leopard Server (and Snow Leopard Server), I know better than to trust that anything from Apple with "just work".
Oh, and Android's SDK just worked on my Linux box. No $99 developer fee or other bullshit. Getting my own version of K-9 built and installed on my phone, with zero knowledge about the Android SDK, took under an hour.
And we also think our developers can be more innovative if they can target a singular platform rather than a hundred variants.
Oh yes, because hearing about how other developers created something, only to be told that they couldn't sell it on the App Store for arbitrary reasons is so encouraging.
Bite my shiny metal ass, Steve.
Corporations aren't people. No matter what your supreme court tells you.
They're groups of people. Are you suggesting that people lose their rights when they get into groups? The supreme court said they don't.
Brilliant! I approve!
Why should anyone get recognition if they keep their discovery a secret?
I know who Theo de Raadt is, but that's no reason to think Theo says the BSDL isn't GPL-compatible. I'm pretty sure he doesn't, because he actually understands licensing.
I remember that. It wasn't that the BSD code was GPL-incompatible, it's that some developers stripped off the copyright notices altogether and replaced them with their own.
What are you talking about?
GPLv2 doesn't. GPLv3 actually has a list of restrictions that you are allowed to add.
It says nothing about software.
I think it was called 753 AUC
According to Wikipedia, it tended only to be called that by later historians:
Renaissance editors sometimes added AUC to Roman manuscripts they published, giving the false impression that the Romans usually numbered their years using the AUC system. In fact, modern historians use AUC much more frequently than the Romans themselves did. The dominant method of identifying Roman years in Roman times was to name the two consuls who held office that year. The regnal year of the emperor was also used to identify years, especially in the Byzantine Empire after 537 when Justinian required its use.
A fork is the best thing that could happen to the platform.
I don't care whether "consumers typically have more than just two providers to choose from". A competitive market means that no single provider can arbitrary manipulate the equilibrium price for a good or service. Wireless service doesn't work that way.