Like your statement that you need to abuse your monopoly to be a monopolist. So what does that make all those companies that have a monopoly and don't abuse it?
They are monopolies, but not abusive. They should be watched closely by regulators, but it doesn't do anyone any good to say "omg bad!"
And then there's the software they release, which indeed is not open source and only runs on Windows.
So? They respond to market forces. Should Ford be forced to continue making parts for Model-T cars because there are few out there? No.
This is coming from a Mac user, too. I may love my Mac, but I'm not going to force businesses to make dumb business decisions.
This is significant enough that there was (is?) serious consideration of adapting the GPL to prevent it in the future.
If you release stuff under the GPL, companies use it entirely legally, and then you complain that the license is too free... who the hell is at fault? YOU.
If you don't like that aspect of the GPL, again, USE ANOTHER LICENSE. Take the GPL and add in a clause saying "Big companies I criticize on Slashdot (but say 'not to say that there's anything wrong with that' while I do) may not use this software because it makes me sad." License it under the ShieldW0lf's Paranoia License. Whatever.
Just don't bitch about people using GPL'ed software entirely within the constraints of the GPL.
What exactly is the difference between releasing software-as-a-service with well documented APIs and releasing compiled code with well documented APIs?
If you release a service, the code is still entirely under your control. Your millions of dollars of research and development are not rendered instantly worthless by 200 identical copies of your system being available. People still get the benefit, but you get to feed your kids.
Do your hero a favour.
My hero? Hardly, and if they make stuff like this widespread I'll stop using Google's search and not look back. I'm just not going to go criticizing them for doing things that aren't at all wrong.
Remember, you don't have to be the only provider to have a monopoly, you just have to weild "monopoly power", that is the ability to control the market, and I think Google is getting damn close to that.
No, you have to abuse your monopoly power. MS didn't get in trouble for having one, they got in trouble for trying to keep it through nasty tactics.
As for "support for open source" wake when they have a Linux "Desktop Search", or Linux "google deskbar" or any of a number of other technologies they implement on Windows (and don't give source code away for).
So, what, OSS that doesn't work on Linux isn't OSS anymore?
Google releases useful code to the OSS community. They're basing Google Talk on the open Jabber format. They release useful services with public APIs.
They're "distributing" their software via a web server, but nobody gets to see the code behind the scenens, improve it, or fix bugs, or anything else.
Oh, honestly. If using a Linux server meant you have to release all code running on it, no one would use it.
Can the zealotry. If you don't like people being able to do what Google did, don't GPL it - write a more restrictive license for your code.
I had 500 bookmarks in Internet Explorer, yet I switched to Mozilla Firefox. Built in importing of data from competitors' products is a wonderful thing.
He'll see that Google can keep all his AIM friends while allowing him to add the people using MSN, ICQ, and Yahoo!, all while using a client designed by people who are generally very good at interfaces and unobtrusive ads (as opposed to AIM's occasional obnoxious video+sound ad).
The foods you eat today are genetically modified, just via a much slower, more error-prone method.
Indeterminate origin? I'd imagine the cells used for vat meat production will a) come from a known origin and b) be closely studied for years before making it onto the market. The FDA would have a field day if they weren't.
Milk and eggs come about as a biproduct of reproduction, and there are a heck of a lot of people, so any useful amount of milk and/or eggs has to come from a lot of reproduction going on (lots of gettin' busy).
Not at all true for eggs.
The eggs you buy in the supermarket are unfertilized. No one wants a chicken embryo in their omlette. No 'getting busy' involved.
I know they are all in that general part of the US so I'll take a guess at New Jersey, Virginia, and either Delaware or West Virginia... let's say Delaware.
Correction: New Jersey is neither state nor commonwealth; it's a shithole.
Having owned a Mini for about six months now, I can say a) much of the stuff there just isn't true, at least for 10.3 and b) the rest of it hasn't happened to me, so I find it unlikely that every single one of 'em happened to him.
Slashdot Mirror
Like your statement that you need to abuse your monopoly to be a monopolist. So what does that make all those companies that have a monopoly and don't abuse it?
They are monopolies, but not abusive. They should be watched closely by regulators, but it doesn't do anyone any good to say "omg bad!"
And then there's the software they release, which indeed is not open source and only runs on Windows.
So? They respond to market forces. Should Ford be forced to continue making parts for Model-T cars because there are few out there? No.
This is coming from a Mac user, too. I may love my Mac, but I'm not going to force businesses to make dumb business decisions.
This is significant enough that there was (is?) serious consideration of adapting the GPL to prevent it in the future.
If you release stuff under the GPL, companies use it entirely legally, and then you complain that the license is too free... who the hell is at fault? YOU.
If you don't like that aspect of the GPL, again, USE ANOTHER LICENSE. Take the GPL and add in a clause saying "Big companies I criticize on Slashdot (but say 'not to say that there's anything wrong with that' while I do) may not use this software because it makes me sad." License it under the ShieldW0lf's Paranoia License. Whatever.
Just don't bitch about people using GPL'ed software entirely within the constraints of the GPL.
What exactly is the difference between releasing software-as-a-service with well documented APIs and releasing compiled code with well documented APIs?
If you release a service, the code is still entirely under your control. Your millions of dollars of research and development are not rendered instantly worthless by 200 identical copies of your system being available. People still get the benefit, but you get to feed your kids.
Do your hero a favour.
My hero? Hardly, and if they make stuff like this widespread I'll stop using Google's search and not look back. I'm just not going to go criticizing them for doing things that aren't at all wrong.
And IBM was once A Bad Company, and the US was once A Free Country. Things change.
Note, also, that LinkedIn is in competition with Google's Orkut.
Remember, you don't have to be the only provider to have a monopoly, you just have to weild "monopoly power", that is the ability to control the market, and I think Google is getting damn close to that.
No, you have to abuse your monopoly power. MS didn't get in trouble for having one, they got in trouble for trying to keep it through nasty tactics.
As for "support for open source" wake when they have a Linux "Desktop Search", or Linux "google deskbar" or any of a number of other technologies they implement on Windows (and don't give source code away for).
So, what, OSS that doesn't work on Linux isn't OSS anymore?
Google releases useful code to the OSS community. They're basing Google Talk on the open Jabber format. They release useful services with public APIs.
They're "distributing" their software via a web server, but nobody gets to see the code behind the scenens, improve it, or fix bugs, or anything else.
Oh, honestly. If using a Linux server meant you have to release all code running on it, no one would use it.
Can the zealotry. If you don't like people being able to do what Google did, don't GPL it - write a more restrictive license for your code.
I had 500 bookmarks in Internet Explorer, yet I switched to Mozilla Firefox. Built in importing of data from competitors' products is a wonderful thing.
He'll see that Google can keep all his AIM friends while allowing him to add the people using MSN, ICQ, and Yahoo!, all while using a client designed by people who are generally very good at interfaces and unobtrusive ads (as opposed to AIM's occasional obnoxious video+sound ad).
Many non-technical users who are leery of software put out by groups they've never heard out might be more willing to install one from Google.
Also a couple for Perl...
E TAR.pm. 02/Report.pm
http://search.cpan.org/~jzawodny/Geo-METAR-1.14/M
http://search.cpan.org/~jbriggs/Aviation-Report-1
The foods you eat today are genetically modified, just via a much slower, more error-prone method.
Indeterminate origin? I'd imagine the cells used for vat meat production will a) come from a known origin and b) be closely studied for years before making it onto the market. The FDA would have a field day if they weren't.
Milk and eggs come about as a biproduct of reproduction, and there are a heck of a lot of people, so any useful amount of milk and/or eggs has to come from a lot of reproduction going on (lots of gettin' busy).
Not at all true for eggs.
The eggs you buy in the supermarket are unfertilized. No one wants a chicken embryo in their omlette. No 'getting busy' involved.
Could you eat it? Would you eat it?
Why not?
If it tastes good, and it was grown in a lab to avoid any ethical problems, I don't see why not.
I suspect beef would taste better than human, but I'd give it a try if offered.
I know they are all in that general part of the US so I'll take a guess at New Jersey, Virginia, and either Delaware or West Virginia... let's say Delaware.
Correction: New Jersey is neither state nor commonwealth; it's a shithole.
Fucking "Ajax". IT'S A CLEANING PRODUCT!
I think the Greeks had the cleaning product beaten by a couple thousand years.
who are you to second guess a majority of Americans?
Indeed!
Bush's overall job approval was at 42 percent, with 55 percent disapproving.
Yeah, that was a huge "what the fuck?" moment while reading the article.
But the one answer Science always fails is; What (or who) started it all? The creator is still a fully plausible explanation.
Christianity fails to answer that, too, as there's no explanation for how the Creator was created.
"God is eternal" doesn't work, either.
If you really don't like debating things ad nauseum, you're probably on the wrong website.
If you're doing the "I'm so disinterested in this topic I shall now procede to post fifty comments on it..." thing... heh.
Teens are getting pregnant all the time. For that reason, it's a higher priority than violence.
Teens get murdered, too, and that's a lot more final.
I'm fine with ripping off, I just don't want people claiming their ripped-off features as innovative. Microsoft seems to be particularly good at this.
IIRC MacOS8 or 9 had it, too... I seem to remember working with Photoshop on an old Quadra and having the image file icons be a preview.
Having owned a Mini for about six months now, I can say a) much of the stuff there just isn't true, at least for 10.3 and b) the rest of it hasn't happened to me, so I find it unlikely that every single one of 'em happened to him.
Entertaining antics, though.
Then don't complain when said users pronounce Linux not ready for their desktops.
Google Includes Search Results
Posted by CmdrTaco tomorrow
from the and-you-thought-we-were-reaching-yesterday dept.
De Mol writes "Google now offers search results. Search for something like "dupe" and you'll get a bunch of links to Slashdot! Nifty!"
The only thing this takes from the Google book is draging and overlays. AND, the Microsoft sat pics zoom in CLOSER than Googles.
In the US, yes.
Elsewhere, the opposite appears to be true. Try zooming in on Melbourne, Australia in both, for example.
s/you/your
Silly Mac/Firefox textarea bug...
How do you do "targeted offers" on you RSS feeds?