I'm not 100% sure what to make of this comment, but I'll assume good faith, even though it has a vaguely FUD-dish smell.
The answer is that it's just like with Linux. You can build everything yourself and save tons of money, but you'll also have noone to call and yell at when things go wrong, or you can use a distribution - which you'll have to pay for, of course, but which will include a support contract and the like (think RHEL etc).
I don't know if there are vendors using this stuff as a basis for their products yet, but saying "[d]oubt you'll get that kind of service here, and that's what you pay for with Cisco" is like saying "doubt you'll get that kind of service with Linux, and that's what you pay for with Microsoft": it simply isn't true.
Wow! Just 15 million bucks to make a movie? That truly *is* independent...
Seriously, what seems to be happening, as evidenced by Lucas' statement, is not the demise of the movie industry; rather, the movie industry realises that people start shying away from "Hollywood" movies, and that "independent" films are the current trend. So what's happening, naturally, is that they're trying to commercialise those - it's the same thing as with "alternative" music. What started out as a true alternative is merely a marketing label today, but it takes people quite a while to realise that, so until the "independent" or "alternative" label will be worn out in a couple of years or decades, the industry will still make good money.
And when it wears out... the same thing will happen again. New trend crops up; industry seizes new trend and starts to market their own stuff under the new label; most consumers [1] are too stupid to realise that it's the same old shit being fed to them by the same old industry; industry continues to make money; label wears out; lather, rinse, repeat, ad infinitum or - maybe more appropriate - ad nauseam.
Lucas really is just playing the game here. Does anyone really think that when he talks about "independent" films, he wants some young people with new ideas to make movies with hardly any budget, simply by investing a lot of work and love? Of course not; he wants to continue selling his own crap, so the "independent" label is just a way for him to justify that - a way to avoid being labelled one of the old dinosaurs who're dying out. It's quite shameless, but that isn't really surprising, either, of course.
1. Except for those who actually cared and started the whole new thing, of course; those will turn away in disgust and look for something else, but they're a small minority.
Depends on the game. Take Second Life, for example - in there, exchanging real-life money for in-game money is not only possible, it's actually encouraged and can be done through the developing company (Linden) itself. And what's more, the way the game is set up otherwise makes it pretty impossible for you to seriously get into it unless you do it.
I think Linden has pretty much figured out the second step on the road to Profit!!!, but since it's at the expense of pretty much everyone who otherwise might be interested in the game, I also dare say that they won't be able to continue with this forever.
But then, maybe that's not what they want to do, anyway - a few millions right here and now are nice enough already, right?
Overhyped? Of course it was overhyped. Goodness, that's what companies do - it's called advertising, marketing, PR, or whatever you want to call it. If you don't take everything that companies trying to sell you something tell you about the products they're trying to sell with a large grain of salt, then it's your own fault really.
Thanks for the info.:) If it's OK, I'll just refer you to my comment further above in the thread, so there're not two threads with the same contents.:)
Thanks. That doesn't sound too bad, actually, but - just to be sure - wouldn't that mean that outgoing calls are limited to those who also use the same Asterisk server? One thing that's nice about Skype is that you're not limited to a specific group of users; you can (potentially) talk to anyone whose nickname you have.
That guy would be Bram Cohen. And quoting from Wikipedia:
"In late 2003, Cohen was hired by Valve Software to work on Steam, their digital distribution system introduced for Half-Life 2. However, by early 2005 he was no longer at Valve, and his primary source of income once again became donations from BitTorrent users."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Cohen) So yes, they did hire him, but he's not working there anymore, and Steam isn't P2P from what I know, either (and certainly, one cannot assume that it is just because Bram worked on it, anyway).
OK... I want a program that I can give to my windows-only, not-computer-savvy friends that comes with a simple installer, is free, that "just works" without the need for configuration and that's reliable. Can Asterisk do that?
On a side note, that's not a rhetorical question meant to point out real or perceived flaws in Asterisk - it's a real question, since I'm genuinely curious. I don't really know anything about Asterisk, but if it does do the above things, then I'd certainly look into it as a Skype replacement.
I think it's more of an effort to thwart reverse-engineering and the creation of compatible third-party clients than anything else. Encrypting the binary is just one thing; they also try to pull some other tricks, such as refusing to run when SoftICE is installed on your system, and so on.
No, they won't just stop. No matter what they say, as long as they're making even the slightest amount of money, they won't stop. They will *tell* you that they might stop in order to scare you, of course, but that's just another way of squeezing more money from you.
Ultimately, they cannot win. Contrary to what you say, we do not need the entertainment industry; until less than 200 years ago, they didn't even exist, yet humanity was doing quite fine. Did Bach, Mozart or Beethoven need the RIAA in order to be able to compose their works? Did Shakespeare need the Author's Guild in order to write? Did da Vinci need, well, whoever in order to pain the Mona Lisa? Not at all.
It's important to realise that. The entertainment industry is a convenience, but not a strict necessity, and it would be well-advised to not let things reach a point where they're more annoying than convenient. People don't need the entertainment industry, but the entertainment industry very much needs people. Without consumers, they literally would not exist.
Ah, man: never encumbered by second thoughts about exploiting animals for warfare. Sometimes, I really think "homo arrogans" would be more appropriate (and often quite literally, actually) than "homo sapiens".
Please name one technology that was developed solely for "piracy" (I assume you're referring to copyright infringement there), spam or exploitation and that has no legitimate uses at all whatsoever.
Re:Do we have evidence that Intel coerced...
on
AMD Subpoenas Skype
·
· Score: 1
Intel abusing market power to (re)cement a monopoly, maybe? Deliberate hindering of competitors through shady deals with third parties? Punishing consumers by artificially limiting what they can do just because they didn't buy from the right vendor?
Are there *any* security tools that actually are in the public domain? Last time I checked, stuff like nmap, hping2 and the like was all copyrighted (and licensed under free licenses, of course, but decidedly not in the public domain).
Sam & Max (the comic) was brilliant, of course, but the video game wasn't quite as good as other LucasArts games, so just in case you haven't done so yet, be sure to check out Monkey Island 2 and Day of the Tentacle in particular. Those are easily among my most favourite games of all times.
Whoa, you almost had me fooled into thinking you were serious there. (Which, thinking about it, is in itself a testament to the sad state of the world we live in today).
"There are a number of influential legislators who believe you evolved from an ape," Buttars said following the vote. "I didn't.""
The funny thing about that is that he's actually correct. He didn't evolve from an ape, but that's due to a lack of evolution, not due to a lack of an ape... ^_~
If pointing out things that you think could/should be improved (no matter whether they're serious bugs or cosmetic issues) makes you "part of the problem", then I think it's actually *you* who's got a much bigger problem.
But fortunately, you (most likely) don't speak for the Gentoo developers, who, while maybe disagreeing about the issue at hand (or not), I think will at least welcome discussion and honest attempts to improve things.
Think about it. The "you hoser" thing itself may or may not be a problem, but calling someone part of the problem just because he dares mention that something is NOT perfect, in his opinion... sheesh.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not 100% sure what to make of this comment, but I'll assume good faith, even though it has a vaguely FUD-dish smell.
The answer is that it's just like with Linux. You can build everything yourself and save tons of money, but you'll also have noone to call and yell at when things go wrong, or you can use a distribution - which you'll have to pay for, of course, but which will include a support contract and the like (think RHEL etc).
I don't know if there are vendors using this stuff as a basis for their products yet, but saying "[d]oubt you'll get that kind of service here, and that's what you pay for with Cisco" is like saying "doubt you'll get that kind of service with Linux, and that's what you pay for with Microsoft": it simply isn't true.
Those crazy Germans.
Wow! Just 15 million bucks to make a movie? That truly *is* independent...
Seriously, what seems to be happening, as evidenced by Lucas' statement, is not the demise of the movie industry; rather, the movie industry realises that people start shying away from "Hollywood" movies, and that "independent" films are the current trend. So what's happening, naturally, is that they're trying to commercialise those - it's the same thing as with "alternative" music. What started out as a true alternative is merely a marketing label today, but it takes people quite a while to realise that, so until the "independent" or "alternative" label will be worn out in a couple of years or decades, the industry will still make good money.
And when it wears out... the same thing will happen again. New trend crops up; industry seizes new trend and starts to market their own stuff under the new label; most consumers [1] are too stupid to realise that it's the same old shit being fed to them by the same old industry; industry continues to make money; label wears out; lather, rinse, repeat, ad infinitum or - maybe more appropriate - ad nauseam.
Lucas really is just playing the game here. Does anyone really think that when he talks about "independent" films, he wants some young people with new ideas to make movies with hardly any budget, simply by investing a lot of work and love? Of course not; he wants to continue selling his own crap, so the "independent" label is just a way for him to justify that - a way to avoid being labelled one of the old dinosaurs who're dying out. It's quite shameless, but that isn't really surprising, either, of course.
1. Except for those who actually cared and started the whole new thing, of course; those will turn away in disgust and look for something else, but they're a small minority.
Depends on the game. Take Second Life, for example - in there, exchanging real-life money for in-game money is not only possible, it's actually encouraged and can be done through the developing company (Linden) itself. And what's more, the way the game is set up otherwise makes it pretty impossible for you to seriously get into it unless you do it.
I think Linden has pretty much figured out the second step on the road to Profit!!!, but since it's at the expense of pretty much everyone who otherwise might be interested in the game, I also dare say that they won't be able to continue with this forever.
But then, maybe that's not what they want to do, anyway - a few millions right here and now are nice enough already, right?
I take it that you're volunteering to help out, then? Great, welcome aboard!
Overhyped? Of course it was overhyped. Goodness, that's what companies do - it's called advertising, marketing, PR, or whatever you want to call it. If you don't take everything that companies trying to sell you something tell you about the products they're trying to sell with a large grain of salt, then it's your own fault really.
Of course, Vodafone is actually a British company.
Good points. Thanks again! :)
Thanks for the info. :) If it's OK, I'll just refer you to my comment further above in the thread, so there're not two threads with the same contents. :)
Thanks. That doesn't sound too bad, actually, but - just to be sure - wouldn't that mean that outgoing calls are limited to those who also use the same Asterisk server? One thing that's nice about Skype is that you're not limited to a specific group of users; you can (potentially) talk to anyone whose nickname you have.
Of course, I just may be missing something there.
That guy would be Bram Cohen. And quoting from Wikipedia:
"In late 2003, Cohen was hired by Valve Software to work on Steam, their digital distribution system introduced for Half-Life 2. However, by early 2005 he was no longer at Valve, and his primary source of income once again became donations from BitTorrent users."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Cohen) So yes, they did hire him, but he's not working there anymore, and Steam isn't P2P from what I know, either (and certainly, one cannot assume that it is just because Bram worked on it, anyway).
OK... I want a program that I can give to my windows-only, not-computer-savvy friends that comes with a simple installer, is free, that "just works" without the need for configuration and that's reliable. Can Asterisk do that?
On a side note, that's not a rhetorical question meant to point out real or perceived flaws in Asterisk - it's a real question, since I'm genuinely curious. I don't really know anything about Asterisk, but if it does do the above things, then I'd certainly look into it as a Skype replacement.
I think it's more of an effort to thwart reverse-engineering and the creation of compatible third-party clients than anything else. Encrypting the binary is just one thing; they also try to pull some other tricks, such as refusing to run when SoftICE is installed on your system, and so on.
Ah, the Nuremberg defense... always a great way of rationalising one's spinelessness and getting rid of those pesky moral qualms.
No, they won't just stop. No matter what they say, as long as they're making even the slightest amount of money, they won't stop. They will *tell* you that they might stop in order to scare you, of course, but that's just another way of squeezing more money from you.
Ultimately, they cannot win. Contrary to what you say, we do not need the entertainment industry; until less than 200 years ago, they didn't even exist, yet humanity was doing quite fine. Did Bach, Mozart or Beethoven need the RIAA in order to be able to compose their works? Did Shakespeare need the Author's Guild in order to write? Did da Vinci need, well, whoever in order to pain the Mona Lisa? Not at all.
It's important to realise that. The entertainment industry is a convenience, but not a strict necessity, and it would be well-advised to not let things reach a point where they're more annoying than convenient. People don't need the entertainment industry, but the entertainment industry very much needs people. Without consumers, they literally would not exist.
Ah, man: never encumbered by second thoughts about exploiting animals for warfare. Sometimes, I really think "homo arrogans" would be more appropriate (and often quite literally, actually) than "homo sapiens".
Please name one technology that was developed solely for "piracy" (I assume you're referring to copyright infringement there), spam or exploitation and that has no legitimate uses at all whatsoever.
Intel abusing market power to (re)cement a monopoly, maybe? Deliberate hindering of competitors through shady deals with third parties? Punishing consumers by artificially limiting what they can do just because they didn't buy from the right vendor?
Are there *any* security tools that actually are in the public domain? Last time I checked, stuff like nmap, hping2 and the like was all copyrighted (and licensed under free licenses, of course, but decidedly not in the public domain).
Plain text postcards are better than HTML postcards.
Sam & Max (the comic) was brilliant, of course, but the video game wasn't quite as good as other LucasArts games, so just in case you haven't done so yet, be sure to check out Monkey Island 2 and Day of the Tentacle in particular. Those are easily among my most favourite games of all times.
Whoa, you almost had me fooled into thinking you were serious there. (Which, thinking about it, is in itself a testament to the sad state of the world we live in today).
The funny thing about that is that he's actually correct. He didn't evolve from an ape, but that's due to a lack of evolution, not due to a lack of an ape... ^_~
If pointing out things that you think could/should be improved (no matter whether they're serious bugs or cosmetic issues) makes you "part of the problem", then I think it's actually *you* who's got a much bigger problem.
But fortunately, you (most likely) don't speak for the Gentoo developers, who, while maybe disagreeing about the issue at hand (or not), I think will at least welcome discussion and honest attempts to improve things.
Think about it. The "you hoser" thing itself may or may not be a problem, but calling someone part of the problem just because he dares mention that something is NOT perfect, in his opinion... sheesh.