Who do you think pays for those TV shows to be created and produced? The networks. Where do you think the networks get their money? Not from you, the viewer.
Hell yes the commercials suck. Frequency as well as content. But they are the actual money source.
So what about electric cars? Or cars that run on home made bio diesel. As cars become more fuel efficient, the less revenue you make.
As electric cars rise in popularity, extra fees on electric rates will make up the shortfall. The cars will generally use the road to the same degree that current gas cars do, and so the roads will need creating and fixing.
homemade biodeisel? That's a non issue. The number of people who could and would actually do that would be far, far less than the number of people who currently ride, say, a bicycle to work. Collecting waste fryer oil from McDonalds doesn't scale well.
Your steps 1-3 do not agree with your first sentence. NASA was the organization to go from zero to Moon in 12 years. Yet you suggest that NASA get out of manned spaceflight, in favor of (...) that has zero experience in sending people into space.
Not sure how your #3 turns into profit, but you can continue to believe in that.
ps- If he got waxed by Olympic-caliber sprinters with the 'hot' limbs, that doesn't really change anything. It may be that he's not that good, but let him in and surely some runner will say they should be allowed to wear a prosthesis.
It may just mean his legs need to be retuned. Spring rate changed or whatever. He wasn't 'that good' before the legs.
More interestingly, what is the real difference between this guys mechanical legs, and a motor on a 'bicycle'? Both infer a mechanical advantage in operation.
There's another reason: it's a well-known phenomenon in America that many voters will tell pollsters they're going to vote for a minority candidate even if they're not just to avoid being called racist. The funny thing is that none of the pundits have mentioned it.
It's been mentioned several times, by such diverse people as Limbaugh and Diane Sawyer.
I'm building such a program now. About 1/3 of the eventual users will only use it once or twice a year, to do one simple task. It must be intuitive for them.
1. electronic voting machines might exist in greater numbers in affluent neighborhoods
2. affleunt people might be more reticent in telling an exit polster how they voted
Just like the differences in 2004. Democratic voters are typically younger and/or poorer. Also more vocal. Older/richer voters might not want to give out that info as much.
Just some possibilities. There are probably about 50 other parameters that could affect it.
If you need it, there's an USB-to-ethernet dongle available. But the point you may be missing, and that the parent certainly missed, is that this is an auxiliary computer.
$1800+ for a light use secondary machine is a bit much.
The main obstacle to mass encryption these days is Microsoft. I expect to be skating over Hell's frozen wasteland before Microsoft adopts encryption in Outlook/Hotmail.
You must be a pretty good skater by now. Outlook has supported encryption for at least a decade.
unless I want to watch movies in a VM on my laptop, instead of on my TV
Netflix streaming + spare laptop + video out + (gov surplus)projector + wall = 100" movies. Sorry if this doesn't work for you. All these parts are easy and cheap to come by. Yes, it is a bit esoteric for Joe SixPack, but not that bad.
Thanks for all your comments. Just one note: the actual, complete title of the piece is "How to turn into Free Software supporters people who couldn't care less".
On the DVD's I give out (referenced above, similar to TheOpenCD), I'm going to start printing "Give a copy of this to someone else. It's legal".
However, charge for the Windows binaries/installer. Most Windows users will pay $20 rather than have to figure out how to compile it.
For a financial app, presumably something to run my company on, $20 is laughable. I'd rather a free open source supported app, or a hugely expensive supported app than some BS in the middle for $20. Seriously.
For a minor plugin for Paintshop Pro or Photoshop, $20 is fine. For the life and reputation of my company, $20 feels like you don't think highly enough of your own product. Could be wrong, but that's what it feels like.
But if you charge more, it damn well better be good and complete. And updated. And accurate. And legal. Things that show where the juxtaposition of financials and open source fall down.
Someone I know gets a new PC, and very soon they ask "Do you know where I can get a copy of program X?" Generally, they're implying cheap or bootleg. I give them a DVD of a bunch of Windows apps that I've collected. Some FOSS, some not, but all legally free. Somewhat similar to the (now un updated) OpenCD project. "Try these". Paint.Net(which I find to be MUCH better than GIMP), OpenOffice, T-bird, Pidgin, IrfanView, audio editing, video editing, antivirus, etc, etc.
No evangelism, no preaching. Don't go on about the source code availability, 'giving back' to the community, just let the apps stand on their own. Their eyes will glaze over if you try too hard, because they don't really care. Yet.
They won't understand the underlying FOSS concepts, until they play with it for a while.
but I am sure computer and electronic manufacturers won't be disappointed by a mass upgrade cycle driven by a new (and higher performance) peripheral interconnect standard.
Mass upgrade? Because of a 'faster' speed for peripherals? NOT. None of my current USB peripherals would be replaced simply because a new one would talk to the pc faster. Scanner, mouse/keyboard, secondary printer, graphics tablet...will be replaced if/when they break, not because of USB 3.0.
No, I'm not dissin' DARPA, I just don't know of/haven't seen in the new an intended DOD effort that nearly-IMMEDIATELY spun off into commercial success.
umm...you're using it, dude.
DARPA isn't in the business of churning out commercial 'toys'. Medicine, aircraft, autonomous vehicles...all much longer range ideas. Stroll through their current list of projects. Some very interesting things.
The wingspan of a 747 may be 211 feet, but part that matters, the footprint on the runway, is considerably less. Maybe 30 feet. And there is a large cleared space on both sides of the runway. Let's take a 150' wide runway, compared to a 30' wide undercarriage footprint. He has more than twice the effective footprint width of his 'lane', on each side, to use if absolutely necessary. The car footprint is the same as the overall width.
That equates to a ~2.5' wide car in a standard 12' wide lane.
So missing the centerline by a few feet in an aircraft is not nearly so critical. And there isn't another 747, who may be 'off' by the same amount, on an adjacent 'lane'.
eventually, we will have fully automatic cars. The transition will be hell, though.
Slashdot Mirror
After I posted that, I realized it should have read:
"Who fronted the money for the studio time, etc..."
As a musician in a band about to have their album finished by the engineers and ready for pressing
Question: Who paid for your studio time and the engineers?
Why should I bother with TV when I could be writing, reading, playing games, or just curling up with my wife and listening to her talk about her day?
That's why I have a TV!
Who do you think pays for those TV shows to be created and produced? The networks. Where do you think the networks get their money? Not from you, the viewer.
Hell yes the commercials suck. Frequency as well as content. But they are the actual money source.
If there is a well-done TV show, I'll just download it off the bittorrent and watch it on the bus on the way to and from work.
That is not "the web replacing TV".
It is merely taking a small TV and VCR-like object on the bus with you, watching something you recorded earlier.
So what about electric cars? Or cars that run on home made bio diesel. As cars become more fuel efficient, the less revenue you make.
As electric cars rise in popularity, extra fees on electric rates will make up the shortfall. The cars will generally use the road to the same degree that current gas cars do, and so the roads will need creating and fixing.
homemade biodeisel? That's a non issue. The number of people who could and would actually do that would be far, far less than the number of people who currently ride, say, a bicycle to work. Collecting waste fryer oil from McDonalds doesn't scale well.
Your steps 1-3 do not agree with your first sentence. NASA was the organization to go from zero to Moon in 12 years. Yet you suggest that NASA get out of manned spaceflight, in favor of (...) that has zero experience in sending people into space.
Not sure how your #3 turns into profit, but you can continue to believe in that.
ps- If he got waxed by Olympic-caliber sprinters with the 'hot' limbs, that doesn't really change anything. It may be that he's not that good, but let him in and surely some runner will say they should be allowed to wear a prosthesis.
It may just mean his legs need to be retuned. Spring rate changed or whatever. He wasn't 'that good' before the legs.
More interestingly, what is the real difference between this guys mechanical legs, and a motor on a 'bicycle'? Both infer a mechanical advantage in operation.
I always wonder why these sort of discussions leave out public libraries.
Possibly because a LOT of public libraries have a piss poor selection of DVD's. Like mine.
There's another reason: it's a well-known phenomenon in America that many voters will tell pollsters they're going to vote for a minority candidate even if they're not just to avoid being called racist. The funny thing is that none of the pundits have mentioned it.
It's been mentioned several times, by such diverse people as Limbaugh and Diane Sawyer.
Yeah, if you only need to use a program once.
I'm building such a program now. About 1/3 of the eventual users will only use it once or twice a year, to do one simple task. It must be intuitive for them.
1. electronic voting machines might exist in greater numbers in affluent neighborhoods
2. affleunt people might be more reticent in telling an exit polster how they voted
Just like the differences in 2004. Democratic voters are typically younger and/or poorer. Also more vocal. Older/richer voters might not want to give out that info as much.
Just some possibilities. There are probably about 50 other parameters that could affect it.
If you need it, there's an USB-to-ethernet dongle available. But the point you may be missing, and that the parent certainly missed, is that this is an auxiliary computer.
$1800+ for a light use secondary machine is a bit much.
That's why you give them fake information. They think my card is linked to some little old lady in Atlanta who lives in a fraternity house.
Assuming you always pay cash and never, ever use a check, or credit/debit card with that 'savings card'.
The main obstacle to mass encryption these days is Microsoft. I expect to be skating over Hell's frozen wasteland before Microsoft adopts encryption in Outlook/Hotmail.
You must be a pretty good skater by now. Outlook has supported encryption for at least a decade.
Who cares
Probably 95% of the Netflix customer base.
unless I want to watch movies in a VM on my laptop, instead of on my TV
Netflix streaming + spare laptop + video out + (gov surplus)projector + wall = 100" movies. Sorry if this doesn't work for you. All these parts are easy and cheap to come by.
Yes, it is a bit esoteric for Joe SixPack, but not that bad.
None of the movies I'd be interested in are provided by Netflix.
Really? Nothing? Seeing as they do have a pretty wide selection, that's interesting.
What do you like, specifically?
Thanks for all your comments. Just one note: the actual, complete title of the piece is "How to turn into Free Software supporters people who couldn't care less".
On the DVD's I give out (referenced above, similar to TheOpenCD), I'm going to start printing "Give a copy of this to someone else. It's legal".
But first you have to make them users.
However, charge for the Windows binaries/installer. Most Windows users will pay $20 rather than have to figure out how to compile it.
For a financial app, presumably something to run my company on, $20 is laughable. I'd rather a free open source supported app, or a hugely expensive supported app than some BS in the middle for $20. Seriously.
For a minor plugin for Paintshop Pro or Photoshop, $20 is fine. For the life and reputation of my company, $20 feels like you don't think highly enough of your own product. Could be wrong, but that's what it feels like.
But if you charge more, it damn well better be good and complete. And updated. And accurate. And legal.
Things that show where the juxtaposition of financials and open source fall down.
Thanks for recommending Paint.NET.
And back atcha for Kompozer. Thanks.
Someone I know gets a new PC, and very soon they ask "Do you know where I can get a copy of program X?" Generally, they're implying cheap or bootleg. I give them a DVD of a bunch of Windows apps that I've collected. Some FOSS, some not, but all legally free. Somewhat similar to the (now un updated) OpenCD project. "Try these". Paint.Net(which I find to be MUCH better than GIMP), OpenOffice, T-bird, Pidgin, IrfanView, audio editing, video editing, antivirus, etc, etc.
No evangelism, no preaching. Don't go on about the source code availability, 'giving back' to the community, just let the apps stand on their own. Their eyes will glaze over if you try too hard, because they don't really care. Yet.
They won't understand the underlying FOSS concepts, until they play with it for a while.
but I am sure computer and electronic manufacturers won't be disappointed by a mass upgrade cycle driven by a new (and higher performance) peripheral interconnect standard.
Mass upgrade? Because of a 'faster' speed for peripherals? NOT. None of my current USB peripherals would be replaced simply because a new one would talk to the pc faster. Scanner, mouse/keyboard, secondary printer, graphics tablet...will be replaced if/when they break, not because of USB 3.0.
No, I'm not dissin' DARPA, I just don't know of/haven't seen in the new an intended DOD effort that nearly-IMMEDIATELY spun off into commercial success.
umm...you're using it, dude.
DARPA isn't in the business of churning out commercial 'toys'. Medicine, aircraft, autonomous vehicles...all much longer range ideas. Stroll through their current list of projects. Some very interesting things.
The wingspan of a 747 may be 211 feet, but part that matters, the footprint on the runway, is considerably less. Maybe 30 feet. And there is a large cleared space on both sides of the runway. Let's take a 150' wide runway, compared to a 30' wide undercarriage footprint. He has more than twice the effective footprint width of his 'lane', on each side, to use if absolutely necessary. The car footprint is the same as the overall width.
That equates to a ~2.5' wide car in a standard 12' wide lane.
So missing the centerline by a few feet in an aircraft is not nearly so critical. And there isn't another 747, who may be 'off' by the same amount, on an adjacent 'lane'.
eventually, we will have fully automatic cars. The transition will be hell, though.