The honest answer is that we just don't know, other than that overwhelming evidence shows that this is how the Universe seems to behave. This is why it's referred to as a "law" - not because it was proven as an absolute certainty (as some people mistakenly assume "law" to mean), but because it's a generalisation derived from observation.
That's neither of the two straw man answers that the blog claims, and I'm not sure how my answer supports any of the nonsense in that blog.
The grandparent is an idiot who has read too much science fiction, but his ideas are theoretically sound.
No, they are not. Just because you are correct that uniform acceleration would feel as if we were in zero gravity, doesn't mean that what he talks about in his blog is theoretically sound.
Right now there are: IPhone OS which is very closed. Windows mobile also very closed and not sexy. Android which is open and has lots of backing by lot's of different builders. Many other smaller options. Moblin look very open too but.. when it will show up, Android should already available from every cellular providers.
You list Apple, and everyone smaller than them. What about Blackberry? Nokia? All the billions of Java phones out there?
I don't disagree with you, but note a difference with the 80s computing analogy is that aside from the ones trying to push an operating system, there are also loads of less expensive (and yes, not as good, but you get what you pay for, and still fulfil most people's needs), that make up the vast majority of the market.
Of course, there were a lot of computer makes around in the 80s, but the other difference is that these phones today do support a common standard, mainly thanks to Java, and also due to functionality being offered on websites). It's not perfect, but it's way better than the bad old days of computing where you needed a different version for every make and model on the market. Now a single application runs on pretty much any phone.
Except then along comes the Iphone, and changes that by specificially not allowing Java. So now we have to return to the days where special "For Your Iphone" applications are needed, to do what the rest of us were doing for years before. It's great marketing for Apple though, because people see these "Posted using XXX for Iphone" everywhere - all the people using ordinary phones are using open standards (either a Java app, or via the website itself), and thus don't get the free advertising spam for that make of phone.
What is funny in that mobile war is the position of Apple. Pretty much like when the first Mac came by at the begining of the 80s. They have a great product. But they are too closed. So it's going to be everybody against them. They can't win. Dell, HTC, Lenovo, Motorola, Philips, Samsung, Sony Ericson (on the open side this time) , and many others already have android phones.
I predict that soon when you'll want to build a mobile application, it will have to run on Android first.
I agree, and I hope so. I loved the Amiga back in the day, but looking back, it seems obvious that from a hardware point of view, the PC would be the winner, ever since it became a standard for business use in the early 80s. It was just a case of what OS it ran.
One problem however is that there is yet to be an open standard for mobile hardware. In some sense, there doesn't need to be, if systems like Java or Android are used. But I still have a worry Apple may be able to gain a monopoly on the hardware, because there's no open standard for potential new companies to use for mobile hardware.
The PC won because when every company said "Hey, let's get into making computers", most of them took the easy option and built PCs. With phones, they're left struggling to come up with their own hardware, or more likely, not bother at all.
I agree - the usual point is that the rules are different for Microsoft because they're a monopoly, but in the market of portable music players, Apple are a monopoly. And how is Itunes not using their monopoly in one market, to try to influence another?
Difference number 2: MS was hated by many geeks, and by geek sites such as Slashdot, or at least criticised for these actions. Apple on the other hand are loved, even by geeks, with these actions twisted around to be good things, and with sites given no end of free advertising and hype ("You can read this webpage On Your Iphone" as we once had, or witness yesterday's non-story of "Someone releases a second application for the Iphone"...)
If Apple actually did become big - e.g., the hype around the Iphone becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and in 10 years time, mobile computer is dominated by a monopoly that completely locks down the platform, locks out competitors, and where Apple need to give permission for you to run a 3rd party application on the mobile computer you've bought - will this attitude changed?
I'd argue that the creation of the EU was a far bigger factor. The series of conflicts over the centuries, that cumulated in two world wars, were European wars (most notably French and Germany). The EU was primarily created because nobody wanted another one, after World War 2.
The cold war between the US and USSR was something entirely new, and I don't know how we can say how things would've been worse or not, without nuclear weapons.
Indeed - how would this apply to things like simply adjusting brightness of an image? It'll be the new "This product may contain nuts".
And on another note, commercial ads are one thing - would this ruling apply to any published image? What is "artistic" supposed to cover? Even someone uploading a pic to their website/Facebook/etc? That kind of censorship would be very worrying. It would mean you no longer have control over even you own
And for all the "Think of the anorexics" nonsense, anorexics themselves would risk being hit with an absurd £30,000 fine if they uploaded such an image.
It doesn't matter that it wasn't his first "app" (sic) - it may be his second application, but it's the first application that "Just Works". Because his first application must have been crap, and didn't work at all. Or something.
Agreed - and this is also a counter-argument to those who whine "but you could just disable Apple stories if you don't like them". This story is in mobile.
I know Microsoft is frustrated and terrified that Apple is more popular than they are amongst the general public
Your evidence for this claim, in the face of overwhelming sales figures that suggest otherwise? A minority shouting louder doesn't make it more true.
Of course, lots of people joke about Microsoft, but you hear a biased sample, as you don't take into account the large majority who are quite happy. Plus, the most popular product will always draw the most number of critics - because everyone's used it, every knows its flaws, where as if a Mac or RISCOS fan makes up stuff about how good his platform is, no one can challenge it, as no bugger's used it. Also it will draw the criticism that people would make of computers in general.
This happened with the Spectrum in the 80s, the Amiga in the 80s/90s, and back then I predicted it would happen to PCs and Windows as they became more popular. Don't mistake this for any meaningful measure of popularity - on the contrary, the criticism is precisely because they are popular.
I just cannot see someone selling Vista Home Basic Edition or Zune No One Wants Me Edition with the same passion as they would an iPod, iPhone or a MacBook Pro.
An Iphone? They're not competing with MS - for there, check out Nokia.
In the end this will be just one more nail in Microsoft's coffin.
Has netcraft comfirmed it yet? This is even more unlikely than the "Apple's is going bust" claims we've had for years.
Microsoft has copied or tried to copy almost everything that Apple does
Such as? Docks have been around in numerous platforms - I was using one in AmigaOS years ago. Lots of companies produced mp3 players, so suggesting MS copied them is nonsense. Lots of companies have retail shops, last time I looked. And "steal the staff" - could your bias be any less obvious? People are free to work for who they like, and Microsoft are free, just like every other company in existence, to offer whatever benefits and jobs they like. Unless you have evidence of illegal theft, this phrase is even less sensible than the claim that people are "stealing" mp3s.
Imagine if it was the other way round? You'd be first in line, praising Apple for how generous they were to workers, and citing it as proof that no one wants to work for MS!
Don't you have that backwards? Although the ideal is to let these works become public domain upon the artist's death, the second best choice for holder of the copyrights should be the SON of the creator, not some cold soulless corporation.
I don't see how that is true - do you have evidence to support this claim?
They're as bad as each other. And this "heirs" nonsense, what is this, Lord of the Rings? "Hello, I'm Jack Kirby Jr, son of Jack, come to claim my rightful heir of the work I never did."
As romantic as they may seem in fantasy, I'd like to think we finally gave up on the idea of heredity entitlement from the state.
If someone truly owns his property, then it is his to do with as he sees fit.
There's your problem right there.
Yes, in capitalism you're free to give something to who you like, but in laissez-faire capitalism, there's also no Government to legislate against people who have made copies of information that you've chosen to distribute.
Part of why parents work so hard is to provide for their children. Is it ok for parents to provide for their children? What about parents who die when the children are still young? Should the money be taken back as soon as they are 18?
Nice straw man.
When I see you giving a hundred million of YOUR inheritance back to the state so you can live off your own labor, I'll consider your ideas seriously. Until then, I'll accept that they are just the result of class envy.
So how much hundred million have Jack Kirby Heirs given to the state? None? So why should we take them seriously when they claim they want to keep something from the public domain?
I agree, and I'm failing to see the news in the story here - the pro-Apple spin ("poaching" etc) is painfully apparent.
(I bet if this was the other way round, the story would be citing it as proof that employees want to work for Apple, and saying that therefore Apple were great employers, and how nice they are.)
I'm also confused at the snide dig of "besides copying Apple's retail formula" - so they invented some special retail now? My, is there anything that Apple didn't "invent"?
People seem to be ignoring that if news gathering becomes a volunteer-only effort, we're going to get crappy, slanted news -- far worse than anything we see today. Anyone with an agenda is going to put "reporters" on the scene who will deliver precisely the message they want you to hear, dressed up as "news".
Similarly with life-extension. When I was younger, I remembering being excited at reading how they'd extended the life expectancy of a fly by about 50%. But it seems things aren't progressing beyond that:(
Indeed - I look forward to in ten years' time, when we'll be celebrating 60 years of modern Cryptography, 1959-2019.
"Modern" is "within the last 60 years", don't you know. If we dig up a Slashdot article from 1999, we'll probably find a "60 years of crytography, 1939-1999", which will fairly report all of the British achievements in the 40s, as ten years ago they were still considered modern.
The good news is that for those who can't wait bear to wait another ten years, next year we'll be celebrating the extra special anniversary of 1950-2010. However, I'm afraid that Claude Shannon won't get a mention anymore, as 1949 won't be modern anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
The honest answer is that we just don't know, other than that overwhelming evidence shows that this is how the Universe seems to behave. This is why it's referred to as a "law" - not because it was proven as an absolute certainty (as some people mistakenly assume "law" to mean), but because it's a generalisation derived from observation.
That's neither of the two straw man answers that the blog claims, and I'm not sure how my answer supports any of the nonsense in that blog.
The grandparent is an idiot who has read too much science fiction, but his ideas are theoretically sound.
No, they are not. Just because you are correct that uniform acceleration would feel as if we were in zero gravity, doesn't mean that what he talks about in his blog is theoretically sound.
Right now there are: IPhone OS which is very closed. Windows mobile also very closed and not sexy. Android which is open and has lots of backing by lot's of different builders. Many other smaller options. Moblin look very open too but.. when it will show up, Android should already available from every cellular providers.
You list Apple, and everyone smaller than them. What about Blackberry? Nokia? All the billions of Java phones out there?
I don't disagree with you, but note a difference with the 80s computing analogy is that aside from the ones trying to push an operating system, there are also loads of less expensive (and yes, not as good, but you get what you pay for, and still fulfil most people's needs), that make up the vast majority of the market.
Of course, there were a lot of computer makes around in the 80s, but the other difference is that these phones today do support a common standard, mainly thanks to Java, and also due to functionality being offered on websites). It's not perfect, but it's way better than the bad old days of computing where you needed a different version for every make and model on the market. Now a single application runs on pretty much any phone.
Except then along comes the Iphone, and changes that by specificially not allowing Java. So now we have to return to the days where special "For Your Iphone" applications are needed, to do what the rest of us were doing for years before. It's great marketing for Apple though, because people see these "Posted using XXX for Iphone" everywhere - all the people using ordinary phones are using open standards (either a Java app, or via the website itself), and thus don't get the free advertising spam for that make of phone.
What is funny in that mobile war is the position of Apple. Pretty much like when the first Mac came by at the begining of the 80s. They have a great product. But they are too closed. So it's going to be everybody against them. They can't win. Dell, HTC, Lenovo, Motorola, Philips, Samsung, Sony Ericson (on the open side this time) , and many others already have android phones.
I predict that soon when you'll want to build a mobile application, it will have to run on Android first.
I agree, and I hope so. I loved the Amiga back in the day, but looking back, it seems obvious that from a hardware point of view, the PC would be the winner, ever since it became a standard for business use in the early 80s. It was just a case of what OS it ran.
One problem however is that there is yet to be an open standard for mobile hardware. In some sense, there doesn't need to be, if systems like Java or Android are used. But I still have a worry Apple may be able to gain a monopoly on the hardware, because there's no open standard for potential new companies to use for mobile hardware.
The PC won because when every company said "Hey, let's get into making computers", most of them took the easy option and built PCs. With phones, they're left struggling to come up with their own hardware, or more likely, not bother at all.
And when they change the format on newer versions, to break compatibility with your application?
(They've been doing these tricks since the BeOS days.)
I agree - the usual point is that the rules are different for Microsoft because they're a monopoly, but in the market of portable music players, Apple are a monopoly. And how is Itunes not using their monopoly in one market, to try to influence another?
Difference number 2: MS was hated by many geeks, and by geek sites such as Slashdot, or at least criticised for these actions. Apple on the other hand are loved, even by geeks, with these actions twisted around to be good things, and with sites given no end of free advertising and hype ("You can read this webpage On Your Iphone" as we once had, or witness yesterday's non-story of "Someone releases a second application for the Iphone"...)
If Apple actually did become big - e.g., the hype around the Iphone becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and in 10 years time, mobile computer is dominated by a monopoly that completely locks down the platform, locks out competitors, and where Apple need to give permission for you to run a 3rd party application on the mobile computer you've bought - will this attitude changed?
About as naive as claiming that nuclear weapons will stop wars.
Correlation is not causation.
I'd argue that the creation of the EU was a far bigger factor. The series of conflicts over the centuries, that cumulated in two world wars, were European wars (most notably French and Germany). The EU was primarily created because nobody wanted another one, after World War 2.
The cold war between the US and USSR was something entirely new, and I don't know how we can say how things would've been worse or not, without nuclear weapons.
In order to work out a trillion congruent numbers, they must be using some Very Deep Maths!
Well math is usually all for fun anyway.
I think maths is fun, sure, but I do hope you're not suggesting that's all it's usually good for?
That would be the legal grounds that apply if it's the US wanting to extradite someone from the UK, but not the other way round?
Indeed - how would this apply to things like simply adjusting brightness of an image? It'll be the new "This product may contain nuts".
And on another note, commercial ads are one thing - would this ruling apply to any published image? What is "artistic" supposed to cover? Even someone uploading a pic to their website/Facebook/etc? That kind of censorship would be very worrying. It would mean you no longer have control over even you own
And for all the "Think of the anorexics" nonsense, anorexics themselves would risk being hit with an absurd £30,000 fine if they uploaded such an image.
But it's on the Iphone!
It doesn't matter that it wasn't his first "app" (sic) - it may be his second application, but it's the first application that "Just Works". Because his first application must have been crap, and didn't work at all. Or something.
What's an "iPhone"?
I'll remember that next time you get goatse'd: it's your fault for installing a computer that could display such images.
Agreed - and this is also a counter-argument to those who whine "but you could just disable Apple stories if you don't like them". This story is in mobile.
I know Microsoft is frustrated and terrified that Apple is more popular than they are amongst the general public
Your evidence for this claim, in the face of overwhelming sales figures that suggest otherwise? A minority shouting louder doesn't make it more true.
Of course, lots of people joke about Microsoft, but you hear a biased sample, as you don't take into account the large majority who are quite happy. Plus, the most popular product will always draw the most number of critics - because everyone's used it, every knows its flaws, where as if a Mac or RISCOS fan makes up stuff about how good his platform is, no one can challenge it, as no bugger's used it. Also it will draw the criticism that people would make of computers in general.
This happened with the Spectrum in the 80s, the Amiga in the 80s/90s, and back then I predicted it would happen to PCs and Windows as they became more popular. Don't mistake this for any meaningful measure of popularity - on the contrary, the criticism is precisely because they are popular.
I just cannot see someone selling Vista Home Basic Edition or Zune No One Wants Me Edition with the same passion as they would an iPod, iPhone or a MacBook Pro.
An Iphone? They're not competing with MS - for there, check out Nokia.
In the end this will be just one more nail in Microsoft's coffin.
Has netcraft comfirmed it yet? This is even more unlikely than the "Apple's is going bust" claims we've had for years.
Microsoft has copied or tried to copy almost everything that Apple does
Such as? Docks have been around in numerous platforms - I was using one in AmigaOS years ago. Lots of companies produced mp3 players, so suggesting MS copied them is nonsense. Lots of companies have retail shops, last time I looked. And "steal the staff" - could your bias be any less obvious? People are free to work for who they like, and Microsoft are free, just like every other company in existence, to offer whatever benefits and jobs they like. Unless you have evidence of illegal theft, this phrase is even less sensible than the claim that people are "stealing" mp3s.
Imagine if it was the other way round? You'd be first in line, praising Apple for how generous they were to workers, and citing it as proof that no one wants to work for MS!
Don't you have that backwards? Although the ideal is to let these works become public domain upon the artist's death, the second best choice for holder of the copyrights should be the SON of the creator, not some cold soulless corporation.
I don't see how that is true - do you have evidence to support this claim?
They're as bad as each other. And this "heirs" nonsense, what is this, Lord of the Rings? "Hello, I'm Jack Kirby Jr, son of Jack, come to claim my rightful heir of the work I never did."
As romantic as they may seem in fantasy, I'd like to think we finally gave up on the idea of heredity entitlement from the state.
If someone truly owns his property, then it is his to do with as he sees fit.
There's your problem right there.
Yes, in capitalism you're free to give something to who you like, but in laissez-faire capitalism, there's also no Government to legislate against people who have made copies of information that you've chosen to distribute.
Part of why parents work so hard is to provide for their children. Is it ok for parents to provide for their children? What about parents who die when the children are still young? Should the money be taken back as soon as they are 18?
Nice straw man.
When I see you giving a hundred million of YOUR inheritance back to the state so you can live off your own labor, I'll consider your ideas seriously. Until then, I'll accept that they are just the result of class envy.
So how much hundred million have Jack Kirby Heirs given to the state? None? So why should we take them seriously when they claim they want to keep something from the public domain?
I agree, and I'm failing to see the news in the story here - the pro-Apple spin ("poaching" etc) is painfully apparent.
(I bet if this was the other way round, the story would be citing it as proof that employees want to work for Apple, and saying that therefore Apple were great employers, and how nice they are.)
I'm also confused at the snide dig of "besides copying Apple's retail formula" - so they invented some special retail now? My, is there anything that Apple didn't "invent"?
It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it?
What, you mean a flawed argument?
You should hope, for your argument's sake, that it isn't like Pascal's Wager at all!
People seem to be ignoring that if news gathering becomes a volunteer-only effort, we're going to get crappy, slanted news -- far worse than anything we see today. Anyone with an agenda is going to put "reporters" on the scene who will deliver precisely the message they want you to hear, dressed up as "news".
And the differerence to how it is now is...?
Similarly with life-extension. When I was younger, I remembering being excited at reading how they'd extended the life expectancy of a fly by about 50%. But it seems things aren't progressing beyond that :(
Does this mean that hand-writing passwords on the post-it attached to your monitor will soon become a secure method of encrypting them?
Assuming you still remember how to write, of course.
Indeed - I look forward to in ten years' time, when we'll be celebrating 60 years of modern Cryptography, 1959-2019.
"Modern" is "within the last 60 years", don't you know. If we dig up a Slashdot article from 1999, we'll probably find a "60 years of crytography, 1939-1999", which will fairly report all of the British achievements in the 40s, as ten years ago they were still considered modern.
The good news is that for those who can't wait bear to wait another ten years, next year we'll be celebrating the extra special anniversary of 1950-2010. However, I'm afraid that Claude Shannon won't get a mention anymore, as 1949 won't be modern anymore.