I look at this like so many of the other issues afflicting our existence. We have advanced so far with our technology that we've outpaced our cultural/social advancement. That is, we patent ideas that are not really new or unique because we simply have no legal/social/cultural mechanism to measure relevance. Add the general lack of technical knowledge in the courtrooms and boardrooms to the stunted cultural advancement and we've got ourselves many long years of struggle in this area.
The great thing is . . . as a technologist you can keep inventing while everyone else pushes paperwork around trying to claim ownership of technologies you've long since left behind.
In essence, rapid innovation makes the existing ideas surround patents irrelevent. Regardless of the law or patent papers, innovation marches on.
In this case, and someone already mentioned it, Liquid Audio will continue to fight this ridiculous battle while the world passes them by. Ultimately, it won't mean a thing to own a patent if your company (as the article states) blows through 4.9 million while only taking in 135K.
The assumptions presented in the article cannot be proved or disproved. What does it help us to state "Not Life has as much chance as life" or "Consider our existence as proof".
Although I tend to believe there is intelligent life in the universe outside of Earth, I'm not sure this argument serves as proof or even a good starting point for a proof.
I think we ought to just be content saying there might be a chance that other intelligent life exists and we'll get to proving it through empirical data. Then if everything checks out we can go applying theory, probability, and predictions. Until then, this stuff is simply philosophy - the earth was flat until we found out it was not.
This is a good move on their part. Forcing a move to one platform should help with a lot of things on their side and the consumer side. If they only have to focus on one release they should be able to catch more of the problems, produce better patches, and reduce confusion about which OS is for business/home/enterprise...
It also means competitors have only one standard to compete against. Now (or will be shortly) it's just head to head Linux vs. XP vs. MacOS.
Then again, what does this say about MS when you retire OSes after only 2.5 years? I am one of the MS fans but this is getting a tad out of control. Should have just skipped 2000 altogether and given people XP.
The editorial brings up a good point regarding the larger business role of the admin. The admin has done her job, it's up to the business/legal department to manage the relationship with the customers, vendors, and law enforcement people.
If the admin feels her company is not doing everything it can, she ought to be careful how she proceeds depending on her concern for her job and the legality of everything. If she's morally conflicted and the company violates her code of ethics even after she points out all the issues from her side, she ought to leave the company. Of course, that leaves the customers without an advocate within the company. However, we all know from the umpteen examples recently of the problems of being an internal whistleblower. The internal whistle-blower rarely changes things from within. It's only after the story breaks that everyone admits that the whistle-blower might have had a point.
Therefore, if she really cares about the customers and the company is clearly hurting the customers, she should leave the company and then break the story. If she doesn't want to participate in a company that doesn't match her ethics but she also doesn't want to risk legal and career problems for customer advocacy, she should still leave the company and go find a company that's more in tune with her. The point is that internal battles are almost always a losing proposition when you are talking about widely differing ethics.
Unfortunately, this puts a burden on the admin to do the right thing according to her gut and suffer the consequences. It's unfair that she has to change jobs or risk her career. That is the yoke of responsible individuals though.
Perhaps it doesn't matter. People will continue to create boundaries so they can violate them. We censor things so one day we can liberate them. In the end, anyone is free to do whatever they want.
Re:has the targeted demographic really changed?
on
Attack of the Clones
·
· Score: 1
Hey, I'm all for boy bands in Stars Wars as long as they give Britney a cameo and put her in a skimpy Carrie Fischer outfit and chain her to a yonger, thinner Jabba played by Meatloaf. Also I'd love it if Ewan MacGregor busts out some Moulin Rouge songs.
Harry Potter forever!
Undoubtedly every online services must respect the less abled user community. However, there's a certain "literacy" level that must be enforced. Services should be intuitive and straight forward. However, if you've hopped on the net and a particular OS you've assumed the responsibility of staying informed and skilled.
We're not talking about VCRs here. We're talking about a device that deals with the most private aspects of our lives - bank accounts, work, and personal conversations. You don't buy a boat you can't steer.
Without digging in too deeply to a semantic/philosohpic discussion, the issue here maybe more of problematic concept of "ownership" of intellectual property. Companies are spending billions of dollars on protection solutions that solve the trouble with traditional theft of intellectual property. However, I contest that's already an irrelevant approach. Few of us are flat out freeloaders. Instead we crave a different kind of ownership and authors of IP deserve a new process for compensation. The modern methods of IP creation and delivery demand a cultural, legal, and business revolution regarding consumer pricing, "packaging", and author compensation.
There are so many issues wrapped up in this it's ridiculous. Yet, something tells me if you rework everything from the root on up most of the trouble will disappear. The record companies should get together a think tank to contemplate the cultural revolution instead of reinventing another doomed-to-fail copy-protection scheme.
For example, why not consider the fact that people are willing to pay for superior audio/video experiences because mundane experiences are so easy to come by now. Roll me some removeable media that has 8 channels of sound that simply would not translate faithfully to a compressed, lossy format across non scsi disks and mediocre sound software. I'll buy that, just as I buy the other things that go above the norm. More importantly, release some Intellectual Property that is worth the price of admission. I support on principal alone the artists, authors, movie makers that consistently produce. The mediocre are lucky the public bothers to listen, rip, download, burn, and distribute.
(Note: who are we kidding here on CD/DVD protection? If you really want the data that bad either 1)you can find it somewhere from someone on the Internet and 2)Most audio/video hardware can output near, if not, perfect quality streams directly to another device that can record from an input stream. Oy.)
Slashdot Mirror
Now that would be a good read!
I look at this like so many of the other issues afflicting our existence. We have advanced so far with our technology that we've outpaced our cultural/social advancement. That is, we patent ideas that are not really new or unique because we simply have no legal/social/cultural mechanism to measure relevance. Add the general lack of technical knowledge in the courtrooms and boardrooms to the stunted cultural advancement and we've got ourselves many long years of struggle in this area.
The great thing is . . . as a technologist you can keep inventing while everyone else pushes paperwork around trying to claim ownership of technologies you've long since left behind.
In essence, rapid innovation makes the existing ideas surround patents irrelevent. Regardless of the law or patent papers, innovation marches on.
In this case, and someone already mentioned it, Liquid Audio will continue to fight this ridiculous battle while the world passes them by. Ultimately, it won't mean a thing to own a patent if your company (as the article states) blows through 4.9 million while only taking in 135K.
The assumptions presented in the article cannot be proved or disproved. What does it help us to state "Not Life has as much chance as life" or "Consider our existence as proof".
Although I tend to believe there is intelligent life in the universe outside of Earth, I'm not sure this argument serves as proof or even a good starting point for a proof.
I think we ought to just be content saying there might be a chance that other intelligent life exists and we'll get to proving it through empirical data. Then if everything checks out we can go applying theory, probability, and predictions. Until then, this stuff is simply philosophy - the earth was flat until we found out it was not.
This is a good move on their part. Forcing a move to one platform should help with a lot of things on their side and the consumer side. If they only have to focus on one release they should be able to catch more of the problems, produce better patches, and reduce confusion about which OS is for business/home/enterprise...
It also means competitors have only one standard to compete against. Now (or will be shortly) it's just head to head Linux vs. XP vs. MacOS.
Then again, what does this say about MS when you retire OSes after only 2.5 years? I am one of the MS fans but this is getting a tad out of control. Should have just skipped 2000 altogether and given people XP.
Wait a second, isn't this idea very very close to the Oop! idea in Douglas Coupland's "Microserfs"?
The editorial brings up a good point regarding the larger business role of the admin. The admin has done her job, it's up to the business/legal department to manage the relationship with the customers, vendors, and law enforcement people.
If the admin feels her company is not doing everything it can, she ought to be careful how she proceeds depending on her concern for her job and the legality of everything. If she's morally conflicted and the company violates her code of ethics even after she points out all the issues from her side, she ought to leave the company. Of course, that leaves the customers without an advocate within the company. However, we all know from the umpteen examples recently of the problems of being an internal whistleblower. The internal whistle-blower rarely changes things from within. It's only after the story breaks that everyone admits that the whistle-blower might have had a point.
Therefore, if she really cares about the customers and the company is clearly hurting the customers, she should leave the company and then break the story. If she doesn't want to participate in a company that doesn't match her ethics but she also doesn't want to risk legal and career problems for customer advocacy, she should still leave the company and go find a company that's more in tune with her. The point is that internal battles are almost always a losing proposition when you are talking about widely differing ethics.
Unfortunately, this puts a burden on the admin to do the right thing according to her gut and suffer the consequences. It's unfair that she has to change jobs or risk her career. That is the yoke of responsible individuals though.
Cool, now I can copy my "Crocodile Dundee II" soundtrack for my friends for $.50.
Perhaps it doesn't matter. People will continue to create boundaries so they can violate them. We censor things so one day we can liberate them. In the end, anyone is free to do whatever they want.
Hey, I'm all for boy bands in Stars Wars as long as they give Britney a cameo and put her in a skimpy Carrie Fischer outfit and chain her to a yonger, thinner Jabba played by Meatloaf. Also I'd love it if Ewan MacGregor busts out some Moulin Rouge songs. Harry Potter forever!
Undoubtedly every online services must respect the less abled user community. However, there's a certain "literacy" level that must be enforced. Services should be intuitive and straight forward. However, if you've hopped on the net and a particular OS you've assumed the responsibility of staying informed and skilled.
We're not talking about VCRs here. We're talking about a device that deals with the most private aspects of our lives - bank accounts, work, and personal conversations. You don't buy a boat you can't steer.
Happy Holidays!
Without digging in too deeply to a semantic/philosohpic discussion, the issue here maybe more of problematic concept of "ownership" of intellectual property. Companies are spending billions of dollars on protection solutions that solve the trouble with traditional theft of intellectual property. However, I contest that's already an irrelevant approach. Few of us are flat out freeloaders. Instead we crave a different kind of ownership and authors of IP deserve a new process for compensation. The modern methods of IP creation and delivery demand a cultural, legal, and business revolution regarding consumer pricing, "packaging", and author compensation.
There are so many issues wrapped up in this it's ridiculous. Yet, something tells me if you rework everything from the root on up most of the trouble will disappear. The record companies should get together a think tank to contemplate the cultural revolution instead of reinventing another doomed-to-fail copy-protection scheme.
For example, why not consider the fact that people are willing to pay for superior audio/video experiences because mundane experiences are so easy to come by now. Roll me some removeable media that has 8 channels of sound that simply would not translate faithfully to a compressed, lossy format across non scsi disks and mediocre sound software. I'll buy that, just as I buy the other things that go above the norm. More importantly, release some Intellectual Property that is worth the price of admission. I support on principal alone the artists, authors, movie makers that consistently produce. The mediocre are lucky the public bothers to listen, rip, download, burn, and distribute.
(Note: who are we kidding here on CD/DVD protection? If you really want the data that bad either 1)you can find it somewhere from someone on the Internet and 2)Most audio/video hardware can output near, if not, perfect quality streams directly to another device that can record from an input stream. Oy.)