Wow, talk about a chip on your shoulder. He likes to wear leather shoes that need shining to look good and get a haircut. Whoopty fuckin do. Forest for the trees there, agro. The point is not to get you to wear leather shoes, it's that if you invest the little bit of time to care a) what you look like and b) what other people think of what you look like, they'll treat you better.
That's where this dressing like a slob and not getting your haircut leads you to, in case you didn't know. Drug addiction, insanity, and no date on a Friday night.
That's so totally not true. I used to be a smelly shaggy IT guy with a cruel wife and a ton of self loathing, and my drug use was restricted to a little pot now and then. Now that I'm rid of the ol ball and chain and dressing nicely, my drug use has ballooned like mad. Now I'm doing things like taking esctacy and dancing till 7 in the morning or snorting coke with groups of naked hot blondes at house parties.
Trust me... stick with the shaggy look and stay away from showers. Showers lead to women, and women lead to drugs. Just say no.
That was exactly my point. A good question would be "Why does everyone want to kill Americans? Even Americans want to kill Americans. Why do they feel that way, and what can we do about it?"
Balance in and of itself can be wrong. Imagine a five minute news story about a shooting witnessed by 1000 people. You spend half the allotted TV time giving the criminal's story about the reasons he shot someone in front of 1000 witnesses. Is that balanced, or just a waste of viewer's time?
Is there anything else that's relevant beyond why? I want to know why he did it. I want those reasons dealt with so the next person won't feel that way. Who gives a shit what the witnesses have to say, I'm not the jury.
Customers getting ripped off by system makers with counterfeit hardware is completely unrelated to windows xp piracy. And there is no such thing as "counterfeit" software, unless you decided it was less work to rewrite a lookalike than to just copy the damn thing exactly. Counterfeit goods are a matter of selling you substandard manufacturing and materials as though they were of a higher quality. When you make a bit-for-bit copy of software, this issue doesn't exist.
DRM-enabled-crippleware aside, there isn't any disadvantage to the user if Microsoft didn't get paid.
The problem I see with AJAX is that IE doesn't reliably pass the session cookie from the browser session when it creates a XmlHttpRequest; sometimes it creates a new session instead of maintaining the old one. So if you're using sessions to create a secure user experience, you can't secure anything you interact with using AJAX. I personally find it a real pain in the ass.
What would happen if we invested heavily into developing factories to manufacture these, stuffed them into cheap durable nintendo style units, preload every book indexed by the google book project and every song we could lay our hands on and distributed them to every man, woman and child on earth?
"Well, lets just say that the world was far, far more enriched by the efforts of a single solitary man writing a book..."
Again, you just proved my point. "A single solitary man." And without that single, solitary man, that magnificent story would not exist.
Dude, Tolkien didn't write the lord of the rings for money. He did it to entertain children of his family. Digest that. He wrote the entirity of the LOTR because he enjoyed it. And he drew strongly from nordic myths. If those myths were protected the way current ideas are protected, LOTR would not exist. It exists because one dude was given free reign to play with those ideas, and created something inspired. It doesn't prove your point at all. It proves my point, which is that human beings are naturally creative creatures, and do not need any monetary motivation. It's my personal opinion that monetary motivation results in substandard work anyways. Individual pride and inspiration will bring you masterpieces, money will bring you "good enough to turn a profit".
Yes, ideas are plentiful. But the skill and talent and time and resources needed to successfully implement them... are not. And that, if it has value to you, is what you're really paying for...
Excepting, of course, that those brains, skills and talent are plentiful too. If not Edison, then Tesla, and in the end, only the robber barons who contributed nothing win.
And would the world be richer for the lord of the rings movie? Well, lets just say that the world was far, far more enriched by the efforts of a single solitary man writing a book for the children with no expectation of reward than by the untold amounts of resources wasted to create a schlocky repetition of that childrens story.
At the moment, they're being hosted out of my home with dynadns and a cable modem, so being that this is slashdot, I'm going to have to say no. At some point, I'll prob make better arrangements for hosting and add the link to my sig.
"Intellectual property concepts are deeply flawed, terribly inefficient and incredibly wasteful, and about as well suited to the modern world as horseshoes on my car."
Says the poster who has nothing to give.
That's funny, being that I share code freely, make it a condition of my employment contracts that I get to bring code I write from job to job, just give away large amounts of my previous work to my clients without charge and only charge for my time, have a jam band and release recordings of all our sessions for nothing, and still manage despite giving so much away to make a good living as a developer.
I create more than many, impose no restrictions on what I create and live by what I say. For example, as we speak, billions are gaining improved localized access to medical treatment, millions are ordering seafood for their table, and thousands are working 8 hours a day, all organized by code that I wrote and just gave to my various employers to accelerate development.
So, um, basically I'm saying the AC and any who agree with him can shove it. Good chance that someone you know has had their life improved in some minute but tangable way by stuff I've written and given freely, and I'm not a unique in that regard.
Rubbish. The market isn't a god, it's a mechanism, and a poor one for managing ideas. Ideas and creative works are something which are naturally plentiful; when you get right down to it, the moment they come into existance, their value (measured in terms of the benefit created) increases the more they propagate. Using the market to determine who gets funded and who doesn't and having artifical restraints on the propagation of these things is NOT a good system. It destroys a huge amount of the value of creative works in the name of rewarding and motivating the creator, and we'd all be much better off with a system that rewards and motivates creators without reducing the real world value of their creations in the process.
Intellectual property concepts are deeply flawed, terribly inefficient and incredibly wasteful, and about as well suited to the modern world as horseshoes on my car.
People more persuasive than I could try to argue that writing a check for money that you don't have (even if you will soon) could constitute fraud. Strictly speaking, you're supposed to have the money in the account when you write the check, which is a promise of money.
Considering that one of the services I and many others pay for is overdraft protection, strictly speaking, I'm not obliged to have money in the account when I write a cheque. If you could set up a situation where the overdraft was large, the fees small and the interest high, you might even be able to turn a legal profit at kiting.
Why wouldn't the banks just ensure that interest is stopped the date you wrote the cheque for and retroactively deducted from your account? That seems like the easiest answer.
Seriously, this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. A trademark is a mark of trade. It's so you know who you're dealing with. If you buy Kleenex (TM), you know you're getting it from the same organization you did last time.
So if you hear "Super Hero Comic", do you know which organization you're dealing with? No, you don't. It could be either of two competing organizations that produced it. So it's not a trademark, it's just two big companies trying to keep competitors out. This should not be permitted.
1. Never, ever pay for anything that you can download.
2. Make sure your friends and relatives know how to download stuff for free.
3. Make sure your friends and relatives know they cannot be caught or sued if they just download. Sharing or uploading is what all lawsuits have been based on.
4. Remember that if it is free, it is probably crap. But so is what you would pay for.
Um... didn't you notice that the demographic who download the most music buy the most music? Your friends who don't know how to download their music for free are the ones who don't care enough about music in the first place. They're not downloading it, but they're not buying much of it either. If you tried to teach them how, they'd probably say "What, take all this time to learn so I can get that one album a year that I purchase for free? Piss off!"
It would be a real shame if this were true. Like the article says, Alienware is committed to offering consumers and businesses with the best high-performance, innovative PC products on the market. Dell is not, and I don't see the Alienware corporate culture overrunning the Dell culture if this should happen. They'll just keep chugging out Dell stuff and take advantage of Alienware's good name until the public catches on to the fact that the name isn't what it was. In the corporate world, the value of a good reputation is how many fools you can sucker into buying shitty products at large margins before that reputation is used up.
That's why it's so popular. Older versions were fast and lightweight and $10/month hosting providers loved it because you couldn't bog their servers down with it because the features to do complex queries just weren't there. Because all the cheap hosting providers had it, everyone learned to use it for their rinky-dink little scripts. Postgres was always better, but it gave your ignorant little novice PHP scripters the power to run very complex queries that will put your server under load, and when you're trying to fit as many cheapo customers onto each server as possible, that's not good.
I don't think the "broken windows" analogy is a good one. A better one might be the tradition of some native american tribes to hold "wealth burning" parties, where the rich would demonstrate their wealth by burning it, thus necessitating the creation of more.
By taking a situation where there exists "plenty" and using legal fictions to create scarcity, they are clearly destroying wealth.
You may not see a negative, but the business community certainly does. Considering that the business community is the one paying for support for GPLed software and purchasing GPL products, I fully expect to see GPL v2 versions of any commercializable collaborative apps exist far into the future. Whether you release particular code under GPL v3 or not, others can examine the code, document its interfaces, describe its processes, and rewrite it under GPL v2. Give RMS credit where credit is due, because he has created a software license that even he himself cannot defeat.
Um... he hasn't tried yet. His efforts are still in the planning stages. And his GNU software might not be quite as prolific as the Linux kernal, but it's pretty close.
Linus is a reactionary. He plainly said so in the article when he made the statement
Hey, I'm flexible. Some people call it being indecisive, but personally, I think it's a sign of intelligence when a person is able to change his mind when circumstances change. So I always leave the door open, even if it's just a crack.
So yeah, he may not be pro-active about these "freedom" issues, but if/when the hardware manufacturers start fuck with his baby, you can bet that he'll sign on to the lovely license that RMS has worked so hard to have waiting for him. And in the meantime, he'll be as diplomatic as possible.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh.
:D
I really did snort coke with hot naked blondes this weekend.
Wow, talk about a chip on your shoulder. He likes to wear leather shoes that need shining to look good and get a haircut. Whoopty fuckin do. Forest for the trees there, agro. The point is not to get you to wear leather shoes, it's that if you invest the little bit of time to care a) what you look like and b) what other people think of what you look like, they'll treat you better.
Heh. Anyone who uses mouse gestures will be very underwhelmed with the close button feature.
That's where this dressing like a slob and not getting your haircut leads you to, in case you didn't know. Drug addiction, insanity, and no date on a Friday night.
That's so totally not true. I used to be a smelly shaggy IT guy with a cruel wife and a ton of self loathing, and my drug use was restricted to a little pot now and then. Now that I'm rid of the ol ball and chain and dressing nicely, my drug use has ballooned like mad. Now I'm doing things like taking esctacy and dancing till 7 in the morning or snorting coke with groups of naked hot blondes at house parties.
Trust me... stick with the shaggy look and stay away from showers. Showers lead to women, and women lead to drugs. Just say no.
That was exactly my point. A good question would be "Why does everyone want to kill Americans? Even Americans want to kill Americans. Why do they feel that way, and what can we do about it?"
Balance in and of itself can be wrong. Imagine a five minute news story about a shooting witnessed by 1000 people. You spend half the allotted TV time giving the criminal's story about the reasons he shot someone in front of 1000 witnesses. Is that balanced, or just a waste of viewer's time?
Is there anything else that's relevant beyond why? I want to know why he did it. I want those reasons dealt with so the next person won't feel that way. Who gives a shit what the witnesses have to say, I'm not the jury.
Who modded this crap insightful?
Customers getting ripped off by system makers with counterfeit hardware is completely unrelated to windows xp piracy. And there is no such thing as "counterfeit" software, unless you decided it was less work to rewrite a lookalike than to just copy the damn thing exactly. Counterfeit goods are a matter of selling you substandard manufacturing and materials as though they were of a higher quality. When you make a bit-for-bit copy of software, this issue doesn't exist.
DRM-enabled-crippleware aside, there isn't any disadvantage to the user if Microsoft didn't get paid.
The problem I see with AJAX is that IE doesn't reliably pass the session cookie from the browser session when it creates a XmlHttpRequest; sometimes it creates a new session instead of maintaining the old one. So if you're using sessions to create a secure user experience, you can't secure anything you interact with using AJAX. I personally find it a real pain in the ass.
The RIAA would sue us.
So what?
And also you are a huge dork.
You have an account on slashdot. STFU.
What would happen if we invested heavily into developing factories to manufacture these, stuffed them into cheap durable nintendo style units, preload every book indexed by the google book project and every song we could lay our hands on and distributed them to every man, woman and child on earth?
"Well, lets just say that the world was far, far more enriched by the efforts of a single solitary man writing a book..."
Again, you just proved my point. "A single solitary man." And without that single, solitary man, that magnificent story would not exist.
Dude, Tolkien didn't write the lord of the rings for money. He did it to entertain children of his family. Digest that. He wrote the entirity of the LOTR because he enjoyed it. And he drew strongly from nordic myths. If those myths were protected the way current ideas are protected, LOTR would not exist. It exists because one dude was given free reign to play with those ideas, and created something inspired. It doesn't prove your point at all. It proves my point, which is that human beings are naturally creative creatures, and do not need any monetary motivation. It's my personal opinion that monetary motivation results in substandard work anyways. Individual pride and inspiration will bring you masterpieces, money will bring you "good enough to turn a profit".
Yes, ideas are plentiful. But the skill and talent and time and resources needed to successfully implement them... are not. And that, if it has value to you, is what you're really paying for...
Excepting, of course, that those brains, skills and talent are plentiful too. If not Edison, then Tesla, and in the end, only the robber barons who contributed nothing win.
And would the world be richer for the lord of the rings movie? Well, lets just say that the world was far, far more enriched by the efforts of a single solitary man writing a book for the children with no expectation of reward than by the untold amounts of resources wasted to create a schlocky repetition of that childrens story.
At the moment, they're being hosted out of my home with dynadns and a cable modem, so being that this is slashdot, I'm going to have to say no. At some point, I'll prob make better arrangements for hosting and add the link to my sig.
"Intellectual property concepts are deeply flawed, terribly inefficient and incredibly wasteful, and about as well suited to the modern world as horseshoes on my car."
Says the poster who has nothing to give.
That's funny, being that I share code freely, make it a condition of my employment contracts that I get to bring code I write from job to job, just give away large amounts of my previous work to my clients without charge and only charge for my time, have a jam band and release recordings of all our sessions for nothing, and still manage despite giving so much away to make a good living as a developer.
I create more than many, impose no restrictions on what I create and live by what I say. For example, as we speak, billions are gaining improved localized access to medical treatment, millions are ordering seafood for their table, and thousands are working 8 hours a day, all organized by code that I wrote and just gave to my various employers to accelerate development.
So, um, basically I'm saying the AC and any who agree with him can shove it. Good chance that someone you know has had their life improved in some minute but tangable way by stuff I've written and given freely, and I'm not a unique in that regard.
Rubbish. The market isn't a god, it's a mechanism, and a poor one for managing ideas. Ideas and creative works are something which are naturally plentiful; when you get right down to it, the moment they come into existance, their value (measured in terms of the benefit created) increases the more they propagate. Using the market to determine who gets funded and who doesn't and having artifical restraints on the propagation of these things is NOT a good system. It destroys a huge amount of the value of creative works in the name of rewarding and motivating the creator, and we'd all be much better off with a system that rewards and motivates creators without reducing the real world value of their creations in the process.
Intellectual property concepts are deeply flawed, terribly inefficient and incredibly wasteful, and about as well suited to the modern world as horseshoes on my car.
People more persuasive than I could try to argue that writing a check for money that you don't have (even if you will soon) could constitute fraud. Strictly speaking, you're supposed to have the money in the account when you write the check, which is a promise of money.
Considering that one of the services I and many others pay for is overdraft protection, strictly speaking, I'm not obliged to have money in the account when I write a cheque. If you could set up a situation where the overdraft was large, the fees small and the interest high, you might even be able to turn a legal profit at kiting.
Why wouldn't the banks just ensure that interest is stopped the date you wrote the cheque for and retroactively deducted from your account? That seems like the easiest answer.
It could be either of two competing organizations that produced it? What the hell? No one else makes superhero comics?
Not legally, apparently.
Seriously, this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. A trademark is a mark of trade. It's so you know who you're dealing with. If you buy Kleenex (TM), you know you're getting it from the same organization you did last time.
So if you hear "Super Hero Comic", do you know which organization you're dealing with? No, you don't. It could be either of two competing organizations that produced it. So it's not a trademark, it's just two big companies trying to keep competitors out. This should not be permitted.
How to change their tune...
1. Never, ever pay for anything that you can download.
2. Make sure your friends and relatives know how to download stuff for free.
3. Make sure your friends and relatives know they cannot be caught or sued if they just download. Sharing or uploading is what all lawsuits have been based on.
4. Remember that if it is free, it is probably crap. But so is what you would pay for.
Um... didn't you notice that the demographic who download the most music buy the most music? Your friends who don't know how to download their music for free are the ones who don't care enough about music in the first place. They're not downloading it, but they're not buying much of it either. If you tried to teach them how, they'd probably say "What, take all this time to learn so I can get that one album a year that I purchase for free? Piss off!"
It requires two hands like a normal keyboard. So, um, where's the advance? Show me an affordable one that I can use with one hand, and I'll buy it.
It would be a real shame if this were true. Like the article says, Alienware is committed to offering consumers and businesses with the best high-performance, innovative PC products on the market. Dell is not, and I don't see the Alienware corporate culture overrunning the Dell culture if this should happen. They'll just keep chugging out Dell stuff and take advantage of Alienware's good name until the public catches on to the fact that the name isn't what it was. In the corporate world, the value of a good reputation is how many fools you can sucker into buying shitty products at large margins before that reputation is used up.
That's why it's so popular. Older versions were fast and lightweight and $10/month hosting providers loved it because you couldn't bog their servers down with it because the features to do complex queries just weren't there. Because all the cheap hosting providers had it, everyone learned to use it for their rinky-dink little scripts. Postgres was always better, but it gave your ignorant little novice PHP scripters the power to run very complex queries that will put your server under load, and when you're trying to fit as many cheapo customers onto each server as possible, that's not good.
I don't think the "broken windows" analogy is a good one. A better one might be the tradition of some native american tribes to hold "wealth burning" parties, where the rich would demonstrate their wealth by burning it, thus necessitating the creation of more.
By taking a situation where there exists "plenty" and using legal fictions to create scarcity, they are clearly destroying wealth.
You may not see a negative, but the business community certainly does. Considering that the business community is the one paying for support for GPLed software and purchasing GPL products, I fully expect to see GPL v2 versions of any commercializable collaborative apps exist far into the future. Whether you release particular code under GPL v3 or not, others can examine the code, document its interfaces, describe its processes, and rewrite it under GPL v2. Give RMS credit where credit is due, because he has created a software license that even he himself cannot defeat.
Um... he hasn't tried yet. His efforts are still in the planning stages. And his GNU software might not be quite as prolific as the Linux kernal, but it's pretty close.
Linus is a reactionary. He plainly said so in the article when he made the statement
Hey, I'm flexible. Some people call it being indecisive, but personally, I think it's a sign of intelligence when a person is able to change his mind when circumstances change. So I always leave the door open, even if it's just a crack.
So yeah, he may not be pro-active about these "freedom" issues, but if/when the hardware manufacturers start fuck with his baby, you can bet that he'll sign on to the lovely license that RMS has worked so hard to have waiting for him. And in the meantime, he'll be as diplomatic as possible.
Is this stuff available in a fashion where we might see it ported for use on standard x86 hardware? Is it GPL'd? I want this in my living room!