if you have a recent version of apt, and you put the following lines into/etc/apt/prefences it will get unstable packages when there is no testing version.
--- begin cut here ---
Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 50
--- end cut here ---
keep in mind, this technology doesn't have to be perfect. if it's cheap for them to do, and stops piracy just a little bit, then it's a worthwhile move, from their perspective.
it's like the registration requirements on 'doze xp. it'll keep people from "casually" grabbing the cd from work and using it on their home computer. anybody really motivated can work around it.
-- p
i'm sorry, but i've heard this too many times now. another altruistic thief who only has the best interests of the artist at heart.
it's very convenient to claim to be pro-artist and anti-evil-RIAA. so why are the artists signing this so-called horrible deals anyway?
if you want to steal music, fine, but don't pretend your doing the artist any favors.
i take issue with some of the sentiments here:
---
Fallacy 3: Computers Increase Productivity
- The sound effects in this presentation will make all the difference
- It only took five hours to format this memo
- The shading on this pie chart is simply superb
- The icons on my desktop are lined up perfectly
[sound of car screeching to a halt for each bullet point]
---
well, people have a certain actions to choose from, and a certain amount of resources (time, etc.) to allocate. choosing not to work further on your presentation is one type of action to take. another is to gussy it up with wierd sound effects and alpha channels. clearly, what's going on is, there more value in continuing to gussying-up than to doing something else. so yes, computers have increased productivity, in the sense that the total value what the person can do in a day has gone up, BUT, people have very strange utility functions.
---
Fallacy 5: If It's Graphical, It's Easy
- Single click, double click?
- Where is the #$%^@!! menu??
- Which part of the UI does *not* do something?
- With a GUI, anyone can be a
- System administrator
- Programmer
- Typesetter
- Accountant
- Statistician
-...
---
well, thanks to modern tools, very bad system administrators and programmers can be made into
moderately bad administrators and programmers. this is a _huge economic boon_, since good system administrators and programmers are rare and expensive, and will only get better as the tools improve to the point where very bad is transformed into mediocre.
my whole job is to make statistics and informatics tools for biologists (non statisticians, non computer scientists). yes it works, and it's a huge boon.
---
Fallacy 6: Computers are Getting Faster
- How long does it take for your PC to boot?
- How long does it take to
- start your word processor?
- load a web page?
- compile a program?
- how long did it take
- five years ago?
- ten years ago?
---
this relates to the presentation point above, but basically, the utility of booting faster than X is very low for most people, so computers settle upon the minimum and then stop improving
that piece (just like a computer or tv or cd player or car cheaper than $Y is of little utility, so the cheapest computers/tvs/cd players/cars are always about the same price but have better technology.)
---
Fallacy 10: Open Source is the Answer
- Economic model is doubtful
- Source code is useless
- Motivation for Open Source is inappropriate for most software
- Nerd culture is counter-productive
---
but nerd culture is _motivated_, just by a different metric than money. because of that motivation, nerds will and have eventually realized that boring things like ease of use and installation make the difference between adoption and non-adoption of their favorite technology, hence gnome, kde, etc.
it's an alternative economy, but it is productive, in some ways more productive than the mainstream economy.
---
Fallacy 11: Standards all the Solution
- Usable standards are created only years after the fact
- Standards are foul compromises
---
this is total crap. i'm sorry, but it is. standards need to be designed with extensibility and the next generation of standards in mind, but please. tcp/ip? a foul compromise? usable only years after the internet exploded? no... it could be argued that tcp/ip was a major reason the internet could explode (the other being http, which has also undergone many revisions, but that's the beauty about a _standard_, people can start talking about _the same thing_.)
more problems with this, but i'll stop here.
-- p
the quid-quo-pro of the patent system is disclosure for _limited time_ monopoly. by offering patents, we incentive people to discover and reveal literally life-saving things about them in exchange for being able to solely exploit this knowledge for 20 years. 20 years later, anyone can exploit the knowledge.
it is unfortunate if strict licensing agreements prohibit some people from affording detection of breast cancer, but this must be balanced against the alternative that without the promise of patent protection, the knowledge underlying the screen might still be unknown.
prior art of the form "my cell contains this" is not relevant here. the patents most people are shooting are "composition of matter" patents, which are relevant to natural products that are purified or isolated from their natural state. in other words, public policy recognizes that finding a needle in a natural haystack and understanding the functional importance of the needle constitutes a genuine advance in the state of human knowledge. otherwise many things (industrial chemicals, drugs, etc.) which can be found in nature _if you know where to look_, would not be patentable.
finally, many of the early patents on genes were actually patents on cDNA, which is an image of the gene as cleaned up by the cell (think of it as an executable that has had strip run on it). these patents are neither considered very strong or very valuable, and companies (e.g. incyte) that pursued a patent heavy strategy are now struggling to find the value and are invariably moving towards more interesting achievements (aka advancing up the drug development chain). to some degree, the patent system is GIGO.
are there some harms associated with granting patent monopolies? yes. are there goods associated with granting patent monopolies? yes. the patent is a compromise.
Slashdot Mirror
if you have a recent version of apt, and you put the following lines into /etc/apt/prefences it will get unstable packages when there is no testing version.
--- begin cut here ---
Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 50
--- end cut here ---
enjoy,
-- p
keep in mind, this technology doesn't have to be perfect. if it's cheap for them to do, and stops piracy just a little bit, then it's a worthwhile move, from their perspective.
it's like the registration requirements on 'doze xp. it'll keep people from "casually" grabbing the cd from work and using it on their home computer. anybody really motivated can work around it.
-- p
i'm sorry, but i've heard this too many times now. another altruistic thief who only has the best interests of the artist at heart. it's very convenient to claim to be pro-artist and anti-evil-RIAA. so why are the artists signing this so-called horrible deals anyway? if you want to steal music, fine, but don't pretend your doing the artist any favors.
...
-- p
kissing my karma goodbye
i take issue with some of the sentiments here: ...
... it could be argued that tcp/ip was a major reason the internet could explode (the other being http, which has also undergone many revisions, but that's the beauty about a _standard_, people can start talking about _the same thing_.)
---
Fallacy 3: Computers Increase Productivity
- The sound effects in this presentation will make all the difference
- It only took five hours to format this memo
- The shading on this pie chart is simply superb - The icons on my desktop are lined up perfectly [sound of car screeching to a halt for each bullet point]
---
well, people have a certain actions to choose from, and a certain amount of resources (time, etc.) to allocate. choosing not to work further on your presentation is one type of action to take. another is to gussy it up with wierd sound effects and alpha channels. clearly, what's going on is, there more value in continuing to gussying-up than to doing something else. so yes, computers have increased productivity, in the sense that the total value what the person can do in a day has gone up, BUT, people have very strange utility functions.
---
Fallacy 5: If It's Graphical, It's Easy
- Single click, double click?
- Where is the #$%^@!! menu??
- Which part of the UI does *not* do something?
- With a GUI, anyone can be a
- System administrator
- Programmer
- Typesetter
- Accountant
- Statistician
-
---
well, thanks to modern tools, very bad system administrators and programmers can be made into moderately bad administrators and programmers. this is a _huge economic boon_, since good system administrators and programmers are rare and expensive, and will only get better as the tools improve to the point where very bad is transformed into mediocre.
my whole job is to make statistics and informatics tools for biologists (non statisticians, non computer scientists). yes it works, and it's a huge boon.
---
Fallacy 6: Computers are Getting Faster
- How long does it take for your PC to boot?
- How long does it take to
- start your word processor?
- load a web page?
- compile a program?
- how long did it take
- five years ago?
- ten years ago?
---
this relates to the presentation point above, but basically, the utility of booting faster than X is very low for most people, so computers settle upon the minimum and then stop improving that piece (just like a computer or tv or cd player or car cheaper than $Y is of little utility, so the cheapest computers/tvs/cd players/cars are always about the same price but have better technology.)
---
Fallacy 10: Open Source is the Answer
- Economic model is doubtful
- Source code is useless
- Motivation for Open Source is inappropriate for most software
- Nerd culture is counter-productive
---
but nerd culture is _motivated_, just by a different metric than money. because of that motivation, nerds will and have eventually realized that boring things like ease of use and installation make the difference between adoption and non-adoption of their favorite technology, hence gnome, kde, etc.
it's an alternative economy, but it is productive, in some ways more productive than the mainstream economy.
---
Fallacy 11: Standards all the Solution
- Usable standards are created only years after the fact
- Standards are foul compromises
---
this is total crap. i'm sorry, but it is. standards need to be designed with extensibility and the next generation of standards in mind, but please. tcp/ip? a foul compromise? usable only years after the internet exploded? no
more problems with this, but i'll stop here.
-- p
there are several things to note here.
the quid-quo-pro of the patent system is disclosure for _limited time_ monopoly. by offering patents, we incentive people to discover and reveal literally life-saving things about them in exchange for being able to solely exploit this knowledge for 20 years. 20 years later, anyone can exploit the knowledge.
it is unfortunate if strict licensing agreements prohibit some people from affording detection of breast cancer, but this must be balanced against the alternative that without the promise of patent protection, the knowledge underlying the screen might still be unknown.
prior art of the form "my cell contains this" is not relevant here. the patents most people are shooting are "composition of matter" patents, which are relevant to natural products that are purified or isolated from their natural state. in other words, public policy recognizes that finding a needle in a natural haystack and understanding the functional importance of the needle constitutes a genuine advance in the state of human knowledge. otherwise many things (industrial chemicals, drugs, etc.) which can be found in nature _if you know where to look_, would not be patentable.
finally, many of the early patents on genes were actually patents on cDNA, which is an image of the gene as cleaned up by the cell (think of it as an executable that has had strip run on it). these patents are neither considered very strong or very valuable, and companies (e.g. incyte) that pursued a patent heavy strategy are now struggling to find the value and are invariably moving towards more interesting achievements (aka advancing up the drug development chain). to some degree, the patent system is GIGO.
are there some harms associated with granting patent monopolies? yes. are there goods associated with granting patent monopolies? yes. the patent is a compromise.