but there is *zero* evidence that the fields involved in the EMP press do any of this.
You know that this is a logic fallacy do you? Zero evidence does not equal zero effect. It can. It can not. You just don’t know. That is what “zero evidence means”. It is no argument for either side. So please don’t employ the techniques of the very loonies you want to counter with your comment.:) It only puts you in the same bag of crazy people. Whether you’re crazy one way or the other really doesn’t matter.;)
Another good example is how most doctors think: When they simply don’t know how to heal, they will often say something like “it’s impossible, there is no cure”. Which is the same fallacy. Because they obviously don’t know it there is a cure that they simply haven’t found yet. Or worse: Don’t know about, or choose to ignore. You rarely see a doctor say the honest words “I just don’t know.“. I mean, after all he’s just a human too. Nothing bad about not knowing everything.
But acting as if you know everything, if it’s you, your “opponents” or doctors, is always a bad idea.
Why do website designers still support it? Because too many users still use it. Right? And why do users still use it? Because website designers still support it, and so: Because they can. No why does this obvious feedback loop not break and crash? Because there are way too many people parroting the mindset of “it will never die” into other people’s heads.
All you three groups: STOP IT! Every single one of you. You’re pathetic to just always blame the others. Be a man, take a first step. If you act in a way that shows you’re sure about yourself, others will automatically follow. Lead.
Yes, you can kill IE6 today. Just dare to stand out of the mass.
I certainly did. I just write proper XHTML, modern JS and CSS. I do not even care to show a “your browser is outdated” message. Because after years of having worked in that business, I learned that if I just stop caring about those still use it, nothing bad will happen at all. If they care enough, they will make it work with my site. If not, I don’t need them anyway. Because people who are that backwards, cost more effort, than they are worth.:)
Question: With all the time it took to come up with this, and set it all up... and all the money it cost because of this... you sure got a huge inertia of laziness to finally switch to something else...
It’s crazy how far people will go to just “keep what they have”. Even when it does not make any sense at all.
I don’t know if you were living in a rock the last time this was discussed, or if you are just trolling.
The list of known problems does not equal the list of actual problems. Especially not for closed-source browsers of a company that threatens and sues every site that tries to track long-standing security holes.
And if you ever actually would have tried to write any web application for the IE, you would know that Trident is a horrible horrible piece of spaghetti shit in an upside-down pyramid of architecture that can’t really be described with words. Then it would be clearly obvious why IE is so much worse. Microsoft knows this too. They know that unless they do a complete rewrite, that will only become worse. But their management thinks that a complete rewrite will take forever. And the chance for it to result in a profit is extremely small. So they will keep what they can, and either slowly let IE die if they don’t think it’s gonna bring them some profit, or wait until there’s really really nothing to save anymore, and then do a complete re-start with the least possible effort and quality.
Also on top of that: Using IE brings you the hate of EVERY web developer out there. No exceptions. I worked in that business for five years. Believe me, if those web developers get any chance from their management or clients, to punish you for using IE, they will! Web application developers might even cry tears of joy and relief about it.
It’s just as much an unwise choice to use IE to surf websites, than it is to insult your cook at a restaurant.;)
That would be like saying Chernobyl has some pretty good built-in protections that domestic nuclear plants lack, because they have to wrap another new sarcophagus around it every couple of years!
If’t not at all about who it could have happened to. It’s about the fact that with no other browser developer would dare to still not have a patch available. The Mozilla team would probably have released a patch in about 3 hours of a furious team effort. The Opera team maybe even more because their business depends on these things. And even Apple and Google would not dare taking that long.
Then again, knowing what a huge mess of spaghetti code of an upside-down pyramid the Trident engine is, I’d not be surprised if it simply takes that long to find a bug in there. It would be like finding a straw in a haystack.;)
Yes, the fundamental architectural flaws definitely make it easier to find a hole. Like finding one in a sieve. Just look.;)
Did it occur to you, that maybe the reason for their “non-reaction” is that either A) They are the ones who chose for those holes to be in there in the first place? B) MS and those TLAs got so many revolving doors that they are practically one? C) Somethingsomething... PROFIT?;)
To me, the rule is simple: I can’t adhere to something that I don’t know. Even if I would want to. Which I don’t.
So what is the goal? Either they gonna open it up, as soon as it is quietly signed into law.
Or they employ the same tactic that churches use to control people: Make everything a sin, especially what people really wanna do. Because if everybody can be a sinner, but does not know when, they all have to do exactly as you say, to not be “caught”. Basically turning it around so that you have to prove you’re not guilty, with no chance of you doing that.
[...] and those lawyers in the room and on the panel who had seen one small part of it were under a nondisclosure agreement.
First I thought: How is it not illegal to have a non-disclosure about something of national law-making scale. And then I remembered, that we’re still living the law of the jungle. No change at all, boys. Just a huge illusion wrapped around it. Yay.
P.S.: Get into mass psychology, rhetorics and social engineering, if you want to become the future power behind the puppets.
I only hire applicants that wear a bikini, I only talk about movies during the interview, I do not require any CV, I don’t care what they think the job includes, and I always have a spot for one more, you insensitive clod!
With today’s genetic analysis, I recommend a black full-body-suit with only a hole for your face. Where a gas mask with stereo wide-angle night vision should be. But no shoes. (Most quiet).
You know a better way? Trough the front door. At the middle of day. With social engineering. You’re the new guy from the cleaning company. Make it believable.
And even better? Get some idiot to do one of those solutions.
But the best way off all, is to crash the economy, get a giant bailout, buy them with that bailout, and THEN walk in trough the front door. Make it believable. Get some idiot to blame. Next go to a nice island. (Most quiet.) But no shoes!
I worked at a pretty big corporation. And I’ll never do it again.
The simple reason it, that humans are not made for such big social/power structures (yes, that counts for countries too). And the reason for that is, that above a certain number, most of the other people in the group become faceless entities. Which means certain social feedback mechanisms are missing.
Think about what a person in a 30 people tribe (or your group of friends and family) can do and not do, versus what someone in a 300,000 people corporation can do and not do, and you know what I mean.
This mechanisms get replaced by endless meetings over meetings about meetings, micromanaged policies, and people who are banned from having any personal interest in the company as a whole, because they can’t control its direction at all. (Or at least never see an effect.) So they mostly end up doing it for the money. Passively.
While the bosses, having to become experts in management, and lacking proper feedback from their employees (including what’s a bad idea), then make bad decisions.
Now I’m of course not saying that this is always and without exception the case. (Only stupid people are talking in absolutes, or think by default that others do.) But that is the only result that fits with all experience I got, be it first, second or third hand.
In my eyes, those companies are always already dead. The only reason they still are still moving, is their giant inertia. Like a supertanker needs 10 nautical miles at full speed backwards, to get to a halt. Like a giant dinosaur, that takes half a year to completely cool down to ambient temperature.
Exactly. And it’s obvious that people who actually believe in gods, wonders, and other stuff that is detached from reality, are more easily caught in such a delusion. Doesn’t mean they are bad humans. (Mainly because there is no “bad” or “good”. It just is what it is.)
If you want to do something about it, try to find out why they flee from reality into a fantasy world, and fix that. I think that’s nicer than just calling them idiots...
Starting you “argument” with an “ad hominem” fallacy. Way to fail...;)
Oh, it’s so heavy to support old version? Well tough, cause you’re supposed to do it. That’s the point of branches. But you only fix things that do not require functionality or architecture changes. Or in other words 0.0.0.x changes. Because the fix to problems that are caused by functionality and architecture, is the new x.x.x.0 version. So it usually is by itself getting less and less, while you’re polishing the last kinks. As a developer I think that’s just how good developers work. It’s the natural way of working to me.
You see, it’s not all black and white in reality.:)
Well, 3.x to 4.0 would not be skipping anything. The major version number usually denotes changes in the architecture that do not try to keep compatibility. The minor number is more for smaller, gradual changes. (The third number would be for bugfixes. And the zeroth number, which for most projects usually means a name change and/or a complete rewrite (SeaMonkey -> Firefox), is unfortunately often not talked about.)
So I don’t see the problem you have here. Maybe a misunderstanding. Care to explain?
The overall experience is the point! Story is just one way to get to an experience. And the only way that books have. One of two ways that films have. But for games, gameplay is also a way.
Yet, yes one should not emphasize one part too much. Why not make every element great? (I guess that’s the art...:)
My favorite game ever — System Shock ” is my favorite game, because of the atmosphere. The feeling. It was reaaally creepy. System Shock 2 too, but SS1 was not creepy in that horror movie way. It was more that you got really drawn in, and felt how it was to be there, with that crazy Shodan who felt nearly alive. Things like hearing the audio log of some girl, and then finding her cut off head in an air duct. While you were still stunned, a crazy robot startled you, and your only reaction was, to throw the head at it!! You rarely get such experiences nowadays. (Yes I was disappointed by the oversimplified BioShock.)
I’m sorry? Could someone explain to me, how my above comment can be seen as a troll? Because I don’t get it? I’ll gladly take back if I insulted anyone or told something not true. But I don‘t think so. I rather think that some uninformed troll or infiltrating media industry guy got mod points, but no arguments (because he’s wrong).:)
Be grown up. Share your opinion.:)
And yes: Openly calling something “losses” which are in fact not losses at all, because they were never earnings, would never have been, equals being “full of shit” (= a deliberate liar), if I can assume, that the writer knows this fact.
You know, sometimes the architecture that you originally designed (and that was great and the right thing back then) does not fit your current needs anymore. You get slower and slower, everything becomes bloated and messy, and starts to look like an upside-down pyramid (Windows ME syndrome).
And that’s the time, where it’s good to think about not just making the next version. But about making the next generation. Like a complete rewrite, but not. More like forgetting everything and designing a good and more future-proof system from the ground up. Which usually results in not much loss of work, because you notice how much falls into that new design as if it were made for it, because you lose the coding around that you previously had do employ. (Which also is the indicator that a new generation was the better decision: When it is less work than what the other choice.)
Has anyone else the feeling, that we’re pretty close to that with Firefox right now?
It’s strange how many experienced developers think they can just pile up version after version of major new goals onto the same architecture.
I myself would at this point make two branches: One called Firefox. And one called Firefox Two / Firefox II / SomethingCompletelyDifferent. (As in “SomeMovie 2”, not as in “SomeSoftware 2.0.” One level higher.)
Well, there are just not many people around who own armed ships nowadays.;) (Hint: You just helped the **AA, spread their lies and FUD, by using that word. Don’t do it, please.)
I have tons of downloaded apps on my system. In fact everything that is not a good game, or part of my Linux systems, is downloaded. Because it does not make sense to pay thousands of dollars for Adobe’s Master Suite CS4, when all you do is the occasional photoshopping. It hurts nobody, because I would and could not buy it anyway. In fact it even helps Adobe, as I’m now trained in using their software, instead of e.g. Gimp.
Also, as I said: Apps are not a product. Ever. They are information that resulted from a service. Not a physical object. That companies choose to use a business model that has nothing to do with physical reality, is their problem. They should have asked money for the service.
Because they would not have been sold in the first place! That is a false assumption.
It’s like me opening a sausage stand, and suing anyone passing by, because I lost money, because they did not buy my overpriced sausages!
Except of course, that ideas/information are no product/good in the first place. They are the result of a service. You can ask money for that service. But the information is free. As soon as it’s out there, it’s gone, and you’re done. And if you don’t let it out there, you can’t prove that it exists at all. So if you want money from it, you make damn sure to get money to put it out there the first time. And expect that to be the only time you get money from it. (Yes, that is realistic, and I know more than one business model that can work that way, without one person having to buy it. Just imagine replacing the investor/producer by the end customers, cutting out the middle man, and you got an example.:) From then on, everybody “owns” that information, and can do with it whatever he wants.
It’s sad that even nowadays, the headlines here on Slashdot are so full of shit!
I remember when I worked with a guy with good connections to all (then five) big music companies (who did all the deals for us, because he was an insider). He usually was on the phone with these big music managers, loudly joking, and setting up meetings of talking about deals.
In the industry, it’s all about connections. A small group of people who know each other.
And this was, how he once described the typical “business meeting” to me: (I think in this example it was the EMI boss.) He took the elevator to the top floor. The guy greeted him and offered him lines of coke as thick as your finger, on a mirror. Then he ordered some hookers. And then it was time for business. According to him, that was rather normal, and in no way an exception.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree with your general view,
but there is *zero* evidence that the fields involved in the EMP press do any of this.
You know that this is a logic fallacy do you? :) It only puts you in the same bag of crazy people. Whether you’re crazy one way or the other really doesn’t matter. ;)
Zero evidence does not equal zero effect. It can. It can not. You just don’t know. That is what “zero evidence means”. It is no argument for either side.
So please don’t employ the techniques of the very loonies you want to counter with your comment.
Another good example is how most doctors think:
When they simply don’t know how to heal, they will often say something like “it’s impossible, there is no cure”.
Which is the same fallacy. Because they obviously don’t know it there is a cure that they simply haven’t found yet. Or worse: Don’t know about, or choose to ignore.
You rarely see a doctor say the honest words “I just don’t know.“. I mean, after all he’s just a human too. Nothing bad about not knowing everything.
But acting as if you know everything, if it’s you, your “opponents” or doctors, is always a bad idea.
Hey, think about it this way:
Why do website designers still support it? Because too many users still use it. Right?
And why do users still use it? Because website designers still support it, and so: Because they can.
No why does this obvious feedback loop not break and crash? Because there are way too many people parroting the mindset of “it will never die” into other people’s heads.
All you three groups: STOP IT!
Every single one of you. You’re pathetic to just always blame the others.
Be a man, take a first step. If you act in a way that shows you’re sure about yourself, others will automatically follow. Lead.
Yes, you can kill IE6 today. Just dare to stand out of the mass.
I certainly did. I just write proper XHTML, modern JS and CSS. I do not even care to show a “your browser is outdated” message. Because after years of having worked in that business, I learned that if I just stop caring about those still use it, nothing bad will happen at all. If they care enough, they will make it work with my site. If not, I don’t need them anyway. :)
Because people who are that backwards, cost more effort, than they are worth.
Question: With all the time it took to come up with this, and set it all up... and all the money it cost because of this... you sure got a huge inertia of laziness to finally switch to something else...
It’s crazy how far people will go to just “keep what they have”. Even when it does not make any sense at all.
I don’t know if you were living in a rock the last time this was discussed, or if you are just trolling.
The list of known problems does not equal the list of actual problems.
Especially not for closed-source browsers of a company that threatens and sues every site that tries to track long-standing security holes.
And if you ever actually would have tried to write any web application for the IE, you would know that Trident is a horrible horrible piece of spaghetti shit in an upside-down pyramid of architecture that can’t really be described with words. Then it would be clearly obvious why IE is so much worse. Microsoft knows this too. They know that unless they do a complete rewrite, that will only become worse. But their management thinks that a complete rewrite will take forever. And the chance for it to result in a profit is extremely small. So they will keep what they can, and either slowly let IE die if they don’t think it’s gonna bring them some profit, or wait until there’s really really nothing to save anymore, and then do a complete re-start with the least possible effort and quality.
Also on top of that: Using IE brings you the hate of EVERY web developer out there. No exceptions. I worked in that business for five years.
Believe me, if those web developers get any chance from their management or clients, to punish you for using IE, they will!
Web application developers might even cry tears of joy and relief about it.
It’s just as much an unwise choice to use IE to surf websites, than it is to insult your cook at a restaurant. ;)
That would be like saying Chernobyl has some pretty good built-in protections that domestic nuclear plants lack, because they have to wrap another new sarcophagus around it every couple of years!
And because all of them will explode sometime.
Yeah, great argument! ;)
If’t not at all about who it could have happened to.
It’s about the fact that with no other browser developer would dare to still not have a patch available.
The Mozilla team would probably have released a patch in about 3 hours of a furious team effort. The Opera team maybe even more because their business depends on these things. And even Apple and Google would not dare taking that long.
Then again, knowing what a huge mess of spaghetti code of an upside-down pyramid the Trident engine is, I’d not be surprised if it simply takes that long to find a bug in there. It would be like finding a straw in a haystack. ;)
Yes, the fundamental architectural flaws definitely make it easier to find a hole. Like finding one in a sieve. Just look. ;)
Did it occur to you, that maybe the reason for their “non-reaction” is that either ;)
A) They are the ones who chose for those holes to be in there in the first place?
B) MS and those TLAs got so many revolving doors that they are practically one?
C) Somethingsomething... PROFIT?
In conclusion: XOR reg,reg and MOV reg,0 have set their Facebook relationship status to “it’s complicated”? ^^
To me, the rule is simple: I can’t adhere to something that I don’t know. Even if I would want to. Which I don’t.
So what is the goal? Either they gonna open it up, as soon as it is quietly signed into law.
Or they employ the same tactic that churches use to control people: Make everything a sin, especially what people really wanna do. Because if everybody can be a sinner, but does not know when, they all have to do exactly as you say, to not be “caught”. Basically turning it around so that you have to prove you’re not guilty, with no chance of you doing that.
Hell, remember that couple who sued people for copyright infringement, only because they talked about a photo shown on a show? With ACTA they could get their “right” right away. No questions asked.
You could make anything up. Like “Hey, you! Do you hear me?”, “Yes!”, “Then I’ll sue you for copying my speech into your brain!”
The “sky” is the limit.
I begin to think that signing it quietly into law is the less bad way... Or maybe I’ve got too much imagination? :/
[...] and those lawyers in the room and on the panel who had seen one small part of it were under a nondisclosure agreement.
First I thought: How is it not illegal to have a non-disclosure about something of national law-making scale.
And then I remembered, that we’re still living the law of the jungle.
No change at all, boys. Just a huge illusion wrapped around it.
Yay.
P.S.: Get into mass psychology, rhetorics and social engineering, if you want to become the future power behind the puppets.
I only hire applicants that wear a bikini,
I only talk about movies during the interview,
I do not require any CV,
I don’t care what they think the job includes,
and I always have a spot for one more,
you insensitive clod!
Yours,
Ron Jeremy
With today’s genetic analysis, I recommend a black full-body-suit with only a hole for your face. Where a gas mask with stereo wide-angle night vision should be. But no shoes. (Most quiet).
You know a better way? Trough the front door. At the middle of day. With social engineering. You’re the new guy from the cleaning company. Make it believable.
And even better? Get some idiot to do one of those solutions.
But the best way off all, is to crash the economy, get a giant bailout, buy them with that bailout, and THEN walk in trough the front door. Make it believable. Get some idiot to blame. Next go to a nice island. (Most quiet.) But no shoes!
Hmm, maybe I’ve seen too many movies...
I worked at a pretty big corporation. And I’ll never do it again.
The simple reason it, that humans are not made for such big social/power structures (yes, that counts for countries too). And the reason for that is, that above a certain number, most of the other people in the group become faceless entities. Which means certain social feedback mechanisms are missing.
Think about what a person in a 30 people tribe (or your group of friends and family) can do and not do, versus what someone in a 300,000 people corporation can do and not do, and you know what I mean.
This mechanisms get replaced by endless meetings over meetings about meetings, micromanaged policies, and people who are banned from having any personal interest in the company as a whole, because they can’t control its direction at all. (Or at least never see an effect.) So they mostly end up doing it for the money. Passively.
While the bosses, having to become experts in management, and lacking proper feedback from their employees (including what’s a bad idea), then make bad decisions.
Now I’m of course not saying that this is always and without exception the case. (Only stupid people are talking in absolutes, or think by default that others do.) But that is the only result that fits with all experience I got, be it first, second or third hand.
In my eyes, those companies are always already dead. The only reason they still are still moving, is their giant inertia. Like a supertanker needs 10 nautical miles at full speed backwards, to get to a halt. Like a giant dinosaur, that takes half a year to completely cool down to ambient temperature.
Exactly. And it’s obvious that people who actually believe in gods, wonders, and other stuff that is detached from reality, are more easily caught in such a delusion. Doesn’t mean they are bad humans. (Mainly because there is no “bad” or “good”. It just is what it is.)
If you want to do something about it, try to find out why they flee from reality into a fantasy world, and fix that. I think that’s nicer than just calling them idiots...
~ $ head -n 2 mozilla-installer-3.7.sh
#!/bin/sh
date `date +%m%d%H%M2009.%S` # make sure it's 2009
Starting you “argument” with an “ad hominem” fallacy. Way to fail... ;)
Oh, it’s so heavy to support old version? Well tough, cause you’re supposed to do it. That’s the point of branches. But you only fix things that do not require functionality or architecture changes. Or in other words 0.0.0.x changes. Because the fix to problems that are caused by functionality and architecture, is the new x.x.x.0 version.
So it usually is by itself getting less and less, while you’re polishing the last kinks.
As a developer I think that’s just how good developers work. It’s the natural way of working to me.
You see, it’s not all black and white in reality. :)
Well, 3.x to 4.0 would not be skipping anything. The major version number usually denotes changes in the architecture that do not try to keep compatibility. The minor number is more for smaller, gradual changes. (The third number would be for bugfixes. And the zeroth number, which for most projects usually means a name change and/or a complete rewrite (SeaMonkey -> Firefox), is unfortunately often not talked about.)
So I don’t see the problem you have here. Maybe a misunderstanding. Care to explain?
Tick... And with every second... tick... the likeliness of you stepping... tick... on a mine, gets... BOOOM! ;)
Oh, damn. You’re right about that. They DID pass the valley! I did not think about that.
Wow, if we now got to that point, the... oh boy, we’ll be in for a ride, guys! :D
Ah, now I get what we both mean:
The overall experience is the point! Story is just one way to get to an experience. And the only way that books have. One of two ways that films have. But for games, gameplay is also a way.
Yet, yes one should not emphasize one part too much. Why not make every element great? (I guess that’s the art... :)
My favorite game ever — System Shock ” is my favorite game, because of the atmosphere. The feeling. It was reaaally creepy. System Shock 2 too, but SS1 was not creepy in that horror movie way. It was more that you got really drawn in, and felt how it was to be there, with that crazy Shodan who felt nearly alive. Things like hearing the audio log of some girl, and then finding her cut off head in an air duct. While you were still stunned, a crazy robot startled you, and your only reaction was, to throw the head at it!! You rarely get such experiences nowadays. (Yes I was disappointed by the oversimplified BioShock.)
I’m sorry? Could someone explain to me, how my above comment can be seen as a troll? Because I don’t get it? :)
I’ll gladly take back if I insulted anyone or told something not true. But I don‘t think so. I rather think that some uninformed troll or infiltrating media industry guy got mod points, but no arguments (because he’s wrong).
Be grown up. Share your opinion. :)
And yes: Openly calling something “losses” which are in fact not losses at all, because they were never earnings, would never have been, equals being “full of shit” (= a deliberate liar), if I can assume, that the writer knows this fact.
You know, sometimes the architecture that you originally designed (and that was great and the right thing back then) does not fit your current needs anymore. You get slower and slower, everything becomes bloated and messy, and starts to look like an upside-down pyramid (Windows ME syndrome).
And that’s the time, where it’s good to think about not just making the next version. But about making the next generation. Like a complete rewrite, but not. More like forgetting everything and designing a good and more future-proof system from the ground up. Which usually results in not much loss of work, because you notice how much falls into that new design as if it were made for it, because you lose the coding around that you previously had do employ. (Which also is the indicator that a new generation was the better decision: When it is less work than what the other choice.)
Has anyone else the feeling, that we’re pretty close to that with Firefox right now?
It’s strange how many experienced developers think they can just pile up version after version of major new goals onto the same architecture.
I myself would at this point make two branches: One called Firefox. And one called Firefox Two / Firefox II / SomethingCompletelyDifferent. (As in “SomeMovie 2”, not as in “SomeSoftware 2.0.” One level higher.)
I hope the team makes the best decision.
Well, there are just not many people around who own armed ships nowadays. ;)
(Hint: You just helped the **AA, spread their lies and FUD, by using that word. Don’t do it, please.)
I have tons of downloaded apps on my system. In fact everything that is not a good game, or part of my Linux systems, is downloaded.
Because it does not make sense to pay thousands of dollars for Adobe’s Master Suite CS4, when all you do is the occasional photoshopping. It hurts nobody, because I would and could not buy it anyway. In fact it even helps Adobe, as I’m now trained in using their software, instead of e.g. Gimp.
Also, as I said: Apps are not a product. Ever. They are information that resulted from a service. Not a physical object. That companies choose to use a business model that has nothing to do with physical reality, is their problem. They should have asked money for the service.
Because they would not have been sold in the first place!
That is a false assumption.
It’s like me opening a sausage stand, and suing anyone passing by, because I lost money, because they did not buy my overpriced sausages!
Except of course, that ideas/information are no product/good in the first place. :)
They are the result of a service. You can ask money for that service. But the information is free. As soon as it’s out there, it’s gone, and you’re done. And if you don’t let it out there, you can’t prove that it exists at all.
So if you want money from it, you make damn sure to get money to put it out there the first time. And expect that to be the only time you get money from it.
(Yes, that is realistic, and I know more than one business model that can work that way, without one person having to buy it. Just imagine replacing the investor/producer by the end customers, cutting out the middle man, and you got an example.
From then on, everybody “owns” that information, and can do with it whatever he wants.
It’s sad that even nowadays, the headlines here on Slashdot are so full of shit!
I remember when I worked with a guy with good connections to all (then five) big music companies (who did all the deals for us, because he was an insider). He usually was on the phone with these big music managers, loudly joking, and setting up meetings of talking about deals.
In the industry, it’s all about connections. A small group of people who know each other.
And this was, how he once described the typical “business meeting” to me: (I think in this example it was the EMI boss.)
He took the elevator to the top floor. The guy greeted him and offered him lines of coke as thick as your finger, on a mirror.
Then he ordered some hookers. And then it was time for business.
According to him, that was rather normal, and in no way an exception.