If they don't control it like a utility they need to allow true opening of the market, which they failed to do correctly with the phone companies.
I've been told that the original purpose for utility monopolies was all the confusion generated by having several companies trying to run cables over public land. There were so many cables running over poles that no one could see the sky. And physical violence would break out between linemen for different companies.
If all of that is true, then there would seem to be a practical limit to a free market in utilities.
If someone charges far too much for bandwidth another company will charge less
The problem is that there won't BE any competition. Broadband is almost dead already. I may like playing RTCW with a low ping and grabbing the latest dev kernel in 5 minutes; unfortunately for my bank account, I'm definitely in the minority. Most people really couldn't care less how fast their connection to the Internet is because they don't do anything with their computers anyway. The only thing keeping the cable Internet business alive is the fact that cable companies have a viable alternate source of income.
Also, if you like SmallTalk, you might be interested in Cocoa/Objective C. With a little bit of planning (to make sure you aren't using QuickTime, or something proprietary like that) your application will be portable to all the platforms GNUstep supports (currently all UNIXes, and a Windows rendering backend is currently being worked on).
s a user of some GPLed binaries the scenario would be the same as buying propritary software. But as soon as I contribute I could become part of the problem.
I thought we WERE discussing people who only use the software, and not those who contribute.
Trying a suspect script out in a chrooted cage or a non-networked FreeBSD jail would be an idea too.
True. But what if the script doesn't do anything obviously harmful? What if it just phones home or installs a slightly modified binary that will phone home? A really obvious attack ('rm -rf') is actually less problematic than something subtle. Using your machine for illegal acts or slight modification of a database (think financial here) could be far worse.
The expertise should be at a conceptual level, not at a specific OS level anyway. I think most of us will agree, for example, that it is much more important for an admin to know how dhcp works than to know how to start the service on a specific OS, which can easily be found out.
Absolutely. That's what reference materials are there for: reference. Now if we could only get those in charge of our education system to learn this simple principle...
$40 to $80, then? Ok. Well, I think that if Aunt Cleo sees two computers priced that far apart and she doesn't know the reason for the price difference, she's going to buy the cheaper one.
Possibly. But only because she's a woman. A man would say that driving all the way back over to Wal-Mart wasn't *worth* 40 bucks and would just get the more expensive one. Then he'd go to McDonalds and get a couple of Big Macs to eat on the way home.
<patriotic voice>And *that* is what makes this country great, folks.</patriotic voice>
Aunt Cleo wants a computer that runs without crashing and one that doesn't need virus protection.
As much as I would like to think highly of Anut Cleo, I really don't think she gives a damn. She probably doesn't want a computer at all but the youngsters insisted on it.
An exaggeration, yes. It's not forced - no one is pointing a gun to your head. If you want a book or magazine to read, and you didn't bring it - you don't have much choice now, do you?
I don't know who they're marketed to either, but I think it's a weird conclusion to jump to, to think they might want Windows. Unless they take their office work home with them, they probably have no preference at all. Maybe it's Aunt Cleo, who just wants a machine to surf te web and email her nephew. Windows has no advantage for that sort of thing.
So what would Aunt Cleo want, exactly? BeOS, NeXTSTEP, Mac OS (on a PC)?
You may be right about the Microsoft tax. Although, that doesn't knock *that* much off the price, does it?
IMO musicians actually have an edge in this regard. Music is a requirement at any kind of catered affair.
Heh. These days, it's "A DJ (or Rapper) is a requirement at any kind of catered affair." Making a living as a traditional performer is extremely difficult.
If you want to make music and be heard, it HAS to be recorded. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that it has to be on a CD, of course. I'm seriously looking into Internet distribution as a way of communicating with an audience. Trouble is, it's STILL expensive to run a server.
Oh, BTW, I've done some audio engineering work too. I actually got more work doing that than I did as a musician (and I'm a better musician than an engineer!).
This isn't random - it's because they have found a way to force the product down peoples throats.
I think that's an exaggeration. No one is *forced* to buy the product. I certainly don't. Now, there aren't many other choices, but you don't HAVE to buy the product.
That's true. But it's mainly true because the money from CDs mainly goes to the record labels and middlemen. Oh, and the musicians have to pay back the record label for the cost of recording out of their own pocket *after* they get paid.
Not that I want to discourage you from trying out Linux (or *BSD or Hurd, for that matter) but customization of Linux is not as 'user-friendly' as customization of Mozilla. Now, I don't know your background in technology (I'm not really all that hard core and I certainly don't find customizing Linux to be too problematic) but depending on your knowledge and/or patience you may not be as delighted with Linux as you are with Mozilla.
Still, it never hurts to try new things. And there are quite a lot of people who are willing to help you learn (and learning is fun) so go for it!
The problem is that it *isn't* capitalism when the rich can write the laws.
Well, capitalism is a philosophy of private investment and doesn't really have anything to do with political philosophy per se. Also, I know some wealthy people who are pro-life. Obviously, only SOME rich people get to write these laws you're talking about.
Hollywood will most probably claim that recording their show, removing the commercials, and then showing it is copyright infringement.
Really, wouldn't it make more sense that putting commercials INTO the broadcast is in violation of copyright because the original program was conceived as a continuous whole? Of course, content creators are probably forced to sign over all rights to the networks similarly to the way musicians end up losing all rights to the record labels.
If you want something to look the same on all sites, use a PDF
Only if I'm going to print it out to read offline. If you expect me to attempt to read a PDF onscreen...pffffft. Why don't I just stare into the sun for a few hours and go blind that way?
What happens if I change the channel to watch a different commercial at the same time? Do the advertisers sue each other over audience thievery?
If so, every company in the country would end up going out of business. It would put our economy in the toilet. In fact YOU'RE REALLY A TERRORIST, AREN'T YOU?! BUT WE CAN SEE THROUGH YOUR EVIL PLAN! YOU WON'T GET US! EXPECT TO SEE AGENTS AT YOUR DOOR PROMPTLY!
Slashdot Mirror
I've been told that the original purpose for utility monopolies was all the confusion generated by having several companies trying to run cables over public land. There were so many cables running over poles that no one could see the sky. And physical violence would break out between linemen for different companies.
If all of that is true, then there would seem to be a practical limit to a free market in utilities.
The problem is that there won't BE any competition. Broadband is almost dead already. I may like playing RTCW with a low ping and grabbing the latest dev kernel in 5 minutes; unfortunately for my bank account, I'm definitely in the minority. Most people really couldn't care less how fast their connection to the Internet is because they don't do anything with their computers anyway. The only thing keeping the cable Internet business alive is the fact that cable companies have a viable alternate source of income.
NOFX, NiN, Nirvana, and Eminem are considered OBSCURE? Geez, I'd hate to hear whatever you would call mainstream.
Also, if you like SmallTalk, you might be interested in Cocoa/Objective C. With a little bit of planning (to make sure you aren't using QuickTime, or something proprietary like that) your application will be portable to all the platforms GNUstep supports (currently all UNIXes, and a Windows rendering backend is currently being worked on).
I thought we WERE discussing people who only use the software, and not those who contribute.
True. But what if the script doesn't do anything obviously harmful? What if it just phones home or installs a slightly modified binary that will phone home? A really obvious attack ('rm -rf') is actually less problematic than something subtle. Using your machine for illegal acts or slight modification of a database (think financial here) could be far worse.
OK. So why, in your opinion, doesn't BSD licensed software (or Artistic License, or whatever) have the same security problem?
Absolutely. That's what reference materials are there for: reference. Now if we could only get those in charge of our education system to learn this simple principle...
That's because the 'big guy with the beard' is a true UNIX guru. The beard part gives it away.
Possibly. But only because she's a woman. A man would say that driving all the way back over to Wal-Mart wasn't *worth* 40 bucks and would just get the more expensive one. Then he'd go to McDonalds and get a couple of Big Macs to eat on the way home.
<patriotic voice>And *that* is what makes this country great, folks.</patriotic voice>
As much as I would like to think highly of Anut Cleo, I really don't think she gives a damn. She probably doesn't want a computer at all but the youngsters insisted on it.
Right. But then, I don't make that mistake. :-)
So what would Aunt Cleo want, exactly? BeOS, NeXTSTEP, Mac OS (on a PC)?
You may be right about the Microsoft tax. Although, that doesn't knock *that* much off the price, does it?
Heh. These days, it's "A DJ (or Rapper) is a requirement at any kind of catered affair." Making a living as a traditional performer is extremely difficult.
If you want to make music and be heard, it HAS to be recorded. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that it has to be on a CD, of course. I'm seriously looking into Internet distribution as a way of communicating with an audience. Trouble is, it's STILL expensive to run a server.
Oh, BTW, I've done some audio engineering work too. I actually got more work doing that than I did as a musician (and I'm a better musician than an engineer!).
I think that's an exaggeration. No one is *forced* to buy the product. I certainly don't. Now, there aren't many other choices, but you don't HAVE to buy the product.
That's true. But it's mainly true because the money from CDs mainly goes to the record labels and middlemen. Oh, and the musicians have to pay back the record label for the cost of recording out of their own pocket *after* they get paid.
Yep. Looks good.
OK. Guess I overreacted. I'm just so tired of people expecting me to try to actually read information online in PDF format.
Still, it never hurts to try new things. And there are quite a lot of people who are willing to help you learn (and learning is fun) so go for it!
Yes.
Oh, BTW, you might want to modify your sig so that it becomes more obvious that it's a sig. No, I'm not nitpicking. :-)
It's nice to see someone who remembers the *real* meaning of troll....
Well, capitalism is a philosophy of private investment and doesn't really have anything to do with political philosophy per se. Also, I know some wealthy people who are pro-life. Obviously, only SOME rich people get to write these laws you're talking about.
Really, wouldn't it make more sense that putting commercials INTO the broadcast is in violation of copyright because the original program was conceived as a continuous whole? Of course, content creators are probably forced to sign over all rights to the networks similarly to the way musicians end up losing all rights to the record labels.
Only if I'm going to print it out to read offline. If you expect me to attempt to read a PDF onscreen...pffffft. Why don't I just stare into the sun for a few hours and go blind that way?
If so, every company in the country would end up going out of business. It would put our economy in the toilet. In fact YOU'RE REALLY A TERRORIST, AREN'T YOU?! BUT WE CAN SEE THROUGH YOUR EVIL PLAN! YOU WON'T GET US! EXPECT TO SEE AGENTS AT YOUR DOOR PROMPTLY!