OK, I would've modded this one funny (it's funny because it's true.) But there are countless startups that are highly successful without the dire patent ire you speak of. In fact, some of them build patent portfolios themselves (*cough* amazon.com *cough* one-click *cough). It's true that if you go out and try to start a car company right now, you're going to run into some patents. People've been thinking about car parts for a long time now. The same thing goes for most industries. If you're first to market and you patent your idea - you get a twenty year monopoly on it. The truth is though, you'd be more able to build a car due to expired patents than you would an electrical device or piece of compression software. In most cases it's not even as heinous as you make it out. Many times using a patent comes down to a typical "build it or buy it" business decision. The patent may not be the only way to solve the problem but many times it's the cheapest due to lack of R&D. The fact you couldn't legally use the patent without paying for it is irrelevent in business. As long as it costs less than the R&D required to develop a solution; you have an easy business decision.
RTFA, he rarely compares the United States against "developing" countries. Most of his comparisons are with Eastern europe (the UK, Belgium, France, etc.) In the few cases where he does compare the US with developing countries he had a very legitimate reason to do so. India, for example is well known for it's rapid technological advancement.
With that in mind, I do agree with your opinion. I've been to every country in the E.U. (as well as Switzerland and the Czech Republic) and must conclude that America (or at least Missouri, where I'm from) is a developing country comparatively. It's utter foolishness for us Americans to think we have an inherent advantage simply due to our geographic place of birth. The one thing we do have is more capitalist (or entrepreneurial if you don't like the evil c word) minded people per-capita. It's predominatly a cultural difference. Everyone I've talked with in France (just to pick one country) has a very paternalistic mindset when it comes to government and business. This is their culture (the small segment of French people that I've been exposed to, which I take to be indicative of the larger culture), for better or for worse.
But innovations are not created by collectives. In all the towns and all the cities there are no monuments to any committees. Even though it takes a team to form a startup it always comes down to the vision of one or two men. And without their vision, there would be no company.
When a culture begins to recognize this and rewards men who take risks and lay it all on the line for a pipe dream, it is then that the culture get's a silicon valley. How many dot-com risk takers are selling burgers? Not everyone was a Steve Bezos or Jeff Skoll. Cultures that decide to take the money from Big Evil Corporations because they have successfully made money are a bit like a World Poker Tour that forcibly redistributed winnings to losing players.
But there's ABSOLUTELY no reason why America will have a lasting lead in the startups market. If anything we're growing more anti-success (i.e. GWB and the current Republican congressional spending) in our philosophy in parellel with Europe's increasingly capitalist outlook. In the end the losers won't be able to steal the winners money for too much longer in either case. The tired pretense that losers can never become winners and therefore the winners should be forced to pay them to stay where they are in life will not stand.
More importantly to the topic, as someone who is founding a startup, I would move to a different country if it more firmly espoused the startup-friendly (and people friendly, really) policies outlined in TFA. I'm proud to be an American but I don't suffer from the foolish notion that I'm better because of it, simply because some other guy invented and marketed a lightbulb before anyone else. I didn't invent the lightbulb (yes I know of the prior art in 7 other countries before Edison) or the airplane or the cotton gin or the iPod. An American is no better off simply because he was born in a country where someone else happens to have done so. He is better off because he lives in a country where he's likely to be paid handsomely if he (or she) does something so equally grand.
I have mod points but would rather make a point here. America is not very good at creating job drones. This is despite the foundation (a public education system designed to create factory workers) laid by Henry Ford, John Dewey and others who specifically had this as a goal. America has always shined when it came to creating entrepreneurs. This is not limited to the super successful mega-rich. If you don't (or do) like big corporations and what they do then go out and beat them at their own game. They're old and slow. Or better yet, find a new market, service or product and run with it. As Henry Ford said "You'll never make any money working for somebody else." And this is absolutely true, you'll always be paid exactly what you're worth or just a bit less. If you're not then you're working for a company that won't be around very long.
So BA lays some workers off in the States. You don't need a big corporation to take care of you, corporations aren't surrogate fathers. I've known some incredibly sharp Hindustani people and I'm really glad that more of them can get jobs. If BA makes a profit good for them. Some people seem to think profit is a dirty word. News flash that's what business is about, profit. In the relative economy the workers are making a great profit as well.
So to summarize.
You don't need to work for the man (beat him at his own game.)
Remember the TIOBE index is the predominantly the number of people having problems with a language. You usually don't see hundreds of people going out and posting on forums just to mention that they're using the language. Usually it's because they have some arcane problem with it they're hoping to get an answer on. Which explains why Java is king! (j/k, I'm bitter after tracing exceptions, sorry.)
I realize this is old, didn't notice you're reply until just now. I'll respond anyway, why not?
wow. that's some fine entitlement you have going on there. It's funny that you think your thoughts trump my property rights. I wonder how acceptable you would find it if Starbucks told you how to drink your coffee, or that you couldn't give your coffee to someone else, or that because Starbucks sells coffee, no one else is allowed...
Ummm, yes, I'd find that acceptable. Starbucks makes the coffee, they can stipulate it's use however the fsck they want. If they require it only be taken when it's hot - anally - then I'd have no problem with their doing so. I probably wouldn't do business with them anymore. But thy do indeed have that right. They produced it, and they can sell it on their terms. It's up to me to decide whether or not I accept those terms.
The so-called "intellectual property" is not a right. And don't confuse "making a billionare" with rarely [making] any money. Lots of people make a living writing software either on a one-off basis, a custom basis, or on a corporate basis, working on (essentially) an hourly wage. In fact, those that make the 'billions' are not only not the norm, they're generally not the programmers: it's the marketers.
Actually I believe it is a right. It depends on where you get your definition of a right from. I would call a right "that which is necessary for a man in the persuit of life, liberty and happiness". In that case I believe it is in fact, a right. If I spend my life aquireing knowledge by means of work I am in fact placing a large amount of value into "intellectual property". I spend the days of my life writing my software, it's entirely mine. It is you who are proclaiming entitlements where there are none. You have done nothing to create my software (to use that example again) and therefore you have no claim to it. It is you who have no rights.
As to the concerns with billionaires, who the hell cares? If you can go out and make a billion dollars, good for you! I fully intend to. My chances are slim but if I play my cards right, work hard and have a little luck - I might just be able to do it. You might just be able to do it. Anyone can. Why you'd be all sour about people becoming billionaires, I have no idea. Perhaps you think you're not good enough to do it? Is it a sour grapes mentality at work here. I don't understand.
Again with the sense of entitlement. Like somehow you are entitled to work for an hour, but get paid forever. I'm not making light of the hours you (might) put into software development - I'm just pointing out the current model makes no relation between total sales and hours worked. What it does do is reward even if you stop producing. In a competitive environment producers need to keep producing... worker bees get paid by the hour - why should you be different?
Again with the sense of entitlement. Why the hell do you have a right to say what I get paid per hour? The customer is the one who decides how much I get paid per-hour - not you. If she will pay $500 for my product and it only took me an hour to program then that's what my time's worth. If she'll only pay $10 then that's what I get paid. If I can get her to pay $10,000 then all the better. If that's what the software is worth to her - then that's what I get paid. Why do you feel that you have a right to decide that I should be paid less? Who the fsck made you king?
The people selling this pipe dream are the current monopoly, making monpoly profits that they want to protect. They push for legislation that helps themselves... they don't give a sh*t about what's best for the little guy, regardless of how well they are able to spin it.
You sir, don't give a shit about the little guy. It's these kind of protections that allow the little guy to exist at all. Microsoft doesn't fear pirate
Why in the world is this modded insightful? Because children aren't being forced to pay for lazy people's health care. I mean c'mon. Any person can get a decent enough job to get health care. I have a friend who's paraplegic and he takes care of himself with money he gets from real estate - that he bought winning online poker tournaments. That's a preposterously delicious example but it's still true. There are so few people who can't get jobs, charities could easily pay for their health care. A thousand times over.
The thing that I don't understand is when we began looking over at our neighbors and getting greedy for their money. When did this happen in America? I wouldn't accept help from someone I didn't know. I certainly wouldn't try to pass laws forcing them to help me.
Um, excuse me sir. Why is it that you believe someone has a right to health care, from anyone? Why should any man be a slave to another? Rich or poor that's exactly what you're suggesting. That one man must pay for another's health care just because he's more successful.
Why do you believe this and how can you call this persuit of liberty? It's not persuit of liberty, it's persuit of slavery.
As a beer "connoisseur", I can honestly attest that Heinken is horrible here in the states but in the Netherlands it's actually quite good. I mean, not as good as most of the other beers in the Netherlands but a lot better than it is here. Unlike American Budweiser (as opposed to Czech Budweiser, which isn't bad). I live in Missouri, about an hour from the Budweiser brewery and Budweiser is still terrible.
Same thing with Guinness, it's not nearly as good here as it is in Ireland. My guess is it ferments a bit on the ship over here.
All the Austrialians I've talked to about it have told me that Fosters is "Austrialian for pisswater" and the country has some fantastic beers. I haven't yet been able to try them, but I don't doubt it.
My current favorite U.S. beer is 1554 from the New Belgium Brewing Company out of Ft. Collins. It's the closest thing I've been able to find to good beer outside of Belgium. But then, I like a nice dark beer.
Why is it that you only find crap American beers in Europe? Maybe for the same reasons we get Fosters here? I can't imagine, I've been in every country in the EU and you rarely see more than Miller Genuine Draft and Budweiser over there. Two of the middle-worst beers in the states. Maybe we could one-up the Aussies on bad beer by exporting Pappy's Blue Ribbon, Stag, Keystone or Milwakee's Best? In fact I say it's our duty as Americans. If every country is competing to export the dog nastiest beer. I say America has a technological advantage is this field.
Why this isn't modded Flamebait, I don't know. C'mon "Trecherous Computing", are we all in pre-school now? If you honestly believe that intel will not allow developers to release free products for their platform, you're certifiably insane. Which is unfortunate, since I think it would be GREAT. As much as I love free software (I'm typeing this on Slackware 10.1), I'm also a professional software developer. I would LOVE to prevent people from stealing my software. If you refuse to use my software under my terms, then you should not have access to it. It's that's simple. A system that prevented people from running unsigned code would be the greatest boon for the development community possible. No more would you find yourself paying for thousands of people to download your product - only to crack it and not pay you. Listen to me programmers! As much fun as Open Source projects are, you rarely make any money with them. Money is necessary in life to pay for the costs you incurr as you live. A small time developer would actually be able to quit side jobs and just sell their software if the wacko Trecherous Computing is addopted. Hooray for Trecherous Computing!!
I'm not sure about all of that (quite long post) but I think you have certain parts of it right. The laptop is fairly useless. I'm not sure you'd be able to capture the people's imagination with it. Secondly, while I don't use Windows, I can say that Gates has a good hold on marketability (first) and usability (second) - in that order. If he's being honest in his opinion then it would be wise for MIT to revise their laptop.
Secondly, there is always the danger in a plan like this of altruistic insanity. Some guy is building his own ego by using other people's money to buy "laptops". There is also the danger that giving them a single "laptop" will only make them believe you'll give them a second one. On the other hand, look at poverty in Japan post world war 2. With a little work and 20 years these poor people can be schooling Japan, China, the EU and the US in how to make electronics.
You know what? You're right. The law should be a popularity contest. All rich, famous and popular people should be given immediate pardon. Politicians live their ENTIRE lives looking out for the good of society! And an infraction of the law could hurt their image. It may even destroy their career. Those idiot Americans would actually charge these wonderful right-thinking citizens with an infraction of the law. Oh, the shame.
Please read Animal Farm by George Orwelle (a British fellow.)
While this may be a a nice ethical system to run governments on. I'm afraid it's not the way we Americans run ours. Here's why. We have what's called the rule of law. This means that the law is not a popularity contest. If you break the law to obtain information against a serial killer you are liable for prosecution. Even though he may go to jail for life, you will be given at least a minimum penalty. Why? Because our society has already set minimum and maximum costs for that crime. A penalty is applied regardless of your intentions. You broke the law to obtain information, and he broke the law in killing people. So you ARE liable for whatever punishment society has already deemed necessary (at least the minimum.) This relies on the fact that the criminal system is set up to decide guilty or not guilty. Not laudible or not laudible. It's (thoeretically, forgetting how rich/black you are, *cough*, OJ Simpson, *cough*.) not a popularity contest. And I'm quite happy about this, actually.
As a long time Unix/Linux programmer I've used a lot of software frameworks. Everything from web based frameworks such as Ruby on Rails, JSF, Zope and PageKit (my favorite.) To desktop application frameworks/toolkits like wxWidgets (wxPerl and native c++), AWT, GTK#/GTK+/Guile, QT, VB.NET/Visual Studio.NET and FLTK.
As I've begun writing applications for a living I've gradually been looking for a easy easy easy method of application development. Something that is truly RAD. For desktop applications I've settled on an old Amiga BASIC language and cross platform application framework called PureBASIC that's been ported for Linux, Windows and Mac OS X. However for web toolkits I still haven't found that "magic bullet" that makes things truly and absolutely simple.
One of the things I like about PureBasic is that it is a high level language that is at the same time compiled directly to machine code (with optional inline assembly language.) The resulting binaries are usually under 60k. Despite this it has a full featured Widget set that uses native widgets (and a GUI designer on Windows.) I kinda wish there was a (cross platform) web development language/framework out that was like this. You could write your application in it and you could instantly compile it to:
A apache 1.x or 2.x compatible.so/.dll module.
A ISAPI module for IIS.
A CGI application.
The language would have built in session managment. You could get arguments as built in variables that would be created automagically by the compiler based on the target. This idea really would work.
I was so enthused by this prospect that I pulled out flex and bison and began writing a grammar for the language. Of course, I had just finished arithmetic operations and string functions (and began reading the ISAPI documentation) when I realized the magnatude of what I was beginning. I just don't have time to get this done in the next year (even compiling to C and using MinGW/gcc/GC as I was planning.)
But if it WAS finished it would truly be an awesome tool. You might even build in a template toolkit, possibly even a content management system. And the whole application would be a tinly little 60k.so file or cgi. And it wouldn't care which! You could have your cake and eat it too. It would be both RAD and memory/CPU efficient. Why such a tool hasn't been created I do not know but it would be cool. Am I missing something? Maybe there is such a thing already?
What about the people financing these acts of terrorism? Generally it's the mega rich sheeks and dictators. Arguing that Christian fundamentalists would go around bombing people if they had the money is absurd. Relatively the people who finance Al-Queida are vastly more rich than any Christians in the mid-west.
Islam has a long well documented history of fanaticism that involves killing. Mohammed himself killed thousands in all the battles for Jihad (i.e. taking over all countries until Islam is universal.) To quote from a Hindu source about Mohammed's war atrocities.
You must remember, without Charlemagne it's quite possible that Arabic would be the dominant language in the EU right now.
And while you can claim the crusades as a Christian example of war atrocities. I think you'd find it to be one of the only cases in history. Very few modern Christians would consider the cruisades to be in line with their faith, even remotely. Nowhere in the New Testament does it suggest to go out and try and conquer countries in the name of Christ.
So I want to develop a cross platform application in a post-Sun-screwup world? Well first I need a cross platform Widget set. Hello 3-6MB of WxWidgets, QT etc. I want to do so in a RAD language? Hello 2-5 MB of interpreter (python, perl, ruby, etc.) I want to make the silly thing network transparent? Hello hellish cross platform threading, mysterious lockups and incompatible socket libraries.
Coupled with this my employer will probably be using Microsoft.NET or MFC, so the knowledge I gain in creating my application won't have a market value.
This is what makes creating an application in a document display platform almost appear appealing. I can be reasonably sure (if I write it well) that my AJAX application will work cross platform, will be network enabled for remote access, will not require tens of megabytes for an installer and will have a large userbase that already has the display platform and interpreter (a web browser.)
It's not quite RAD but with a prebuilt javascript widget library (and a session managment library on the CGI/ASP/PHP side) it's almost.
Thank you Sun, you screwed the pooch and the pooch has screwed us all.
"Intellectual property" has been the US's chief export for past 150 years. As nice as is it to think that the new and shiny product you buy is not intellectual property at all, this is simply not the case. It is the idea that allows the product to be made at all that is important. If you come up with an idea first then it is not fair to have your competitors steal your idea and begin producing your product without paying you. This is what gives R&D a ROI -- the key thing that makes the vast cost of R&D justified. Remember, companies don't need new technology to sell their products. All they need is a spiffy name with EXTREME in it and possibly a selection of different colors.
The notion of an idea creating company is excellent for the progress of technology. This would push R&D onto a special kind of company that simply came up with new technologies and licensened their ideas out to producers (who run the actual factories and market the technology.)
It's unfortunate that NTP is being such an ass about this. I suspect that they're using the threat of shutting off all U.S. Blackberries as a bargaining tool. Nothing to see here.
So I have to disagree, I think the U.S. and all countries that support intellectual property will be the ones prospering in the future -- they always have been.
This is where the true support for these formats will remain - open source. If you want support, you have the freedom to write it yourself.
Of course, if memory serves me right non-free Paint Shop Pro still has IFF support as well. Hmmm. This page seems to say so. I seem to remember Photoshop having IFF support, but that was 3.0 or 4.0ish many moons ago onna MacOS classic box.
In an ideal capitalist world (how's that for a contradictio in terminis) companies would only compete 'fairly', that is, on the value of the goods they provide, thus creating the greatest customer value possible.
Well, that's one way to put it. However, I have to make the point that the "ideal" nature of the system doesn't relate to producers creating the greatest value to the customer. The idea behind the system is that customers don't have a right to a company's products. You don't have a right to a word processor from anybody, you have the right to create your own word processor or choose someone else's. The system may or may not create the best products (because people may not choose the best products.) But can bloody well pick the best available or write your own.
This is where Microsoft's actions come in. Ordinarily monopolies can't exist in a capitalist system because there is choice. The only way you can be forced to do something is by physical force and in a non-anarchist government the government has a monopoly on physical force. By removing choice from the marketplace via government edict (patents) Microsoft is becoming a *true* monopoly (because they can put other people in jail if they violate their patent.) So Microsoft is no longer operating in a capitalist system at all. They have become a state mandated company. It's almost fascism except the government's only pay is the patent application fee.
You have this exactly right when you use the qualifier "in lefty terms". I'll add my little "righty cult" slant to it.:-)
Capitalism = market based, means of production are owned by those who created them Mutualism=market based, means of production are owned by whoever has political power (think physical force) Communism = non market based, means of production are owned by whoever has political power Stalinism = non market based, means of production are owned by whoever has political power
Now that that's said. I consider myself a staunch capitalist philosophically, yet I devote most of my time using and developing FOSS. Capitalists donate money to charity all the time right (Bill Gates??) There is no philosophical contradiction between FOSS and capitalism.
It can even be argued that developing open source software could be in your "rational self interest", which some capitalist writers (notably Ayn Rand) have named as the driving force behind capitalism.
I've tried most of the photo services and I can say that PBase is probably the best. One really cool thing about it is being able to search by digital camera. You can find pictures in the 10,000,000+ set by almost any digital camera. This is great when you're buying a new camera and want to get a good idea how it's photos will turn out in a variety of situations. Oh and this part is free.
I don't use PBase anymore since I have a lot more photos than most people 7,000+ (after sorting and deleting.) And they're all taken mainly with a Sony Mavica CD400 and weigh in at 1.5MB each. I found a non-nutjob host that offers $6.95 a month service for 1GB of storage and I just pay for my extra storage. Not affiliated (except my site is hosted there) but I use OsGen.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, I would've modded this one funny (it's funny because it's true.) But there are countless startups that are highly successful without the dire patent ire you speak of. In fact, some of them build patent portfolios themselves (*cough* amazon.com *cough* one-click *cough). It's true that if you go out and try to start a car company right now, you're going to run into some patents. People've been thinking about car parts for a long time now. The same thing goes for most industries. If you're first to market and you patent your idea - you get a twenty year monopoly on it. The truth is though, you'd be more able to build a car due to expired patents than you would an electrical device or piece of compression software. In most cases it's not even as heinous as you make it out. Many times using a patent comes down to a typical "build it or buy it" business decision. The patent may not be the only way to solve the problem but many times it's the cheapest due to lack of R&D. The fact you couldn't legally use the patent without paying for it is irrelevent in business. As long as it costs less than the R&D required to develop a solution; you have an easy business decision.
doh,
WESTERN -- WESTERN Europe
That's what I meant. I was thinking of how to incorporate China when I wrote that bit. Somehow I guess I got fixed on the East.
Man, I'd make a sucky diplomat.
RTFA, he rarely compares the United States against "developing" countries. Most of his comparisons are with Eastern europe (the UK, Belgium, France, etc.) In the few cases where he does compare the US with developing countries he had a very legitimate reason to do so. India, for example is well known for it's rapid technological advancement.
With that in mind, I do agree with your opinion. I've been to every country in the E.U. (as well as Switzerland and the Czech Republic) and must conclude that America (or at least Missouri, where I'm from) is a developing country comparatively. It's utter foolishness for us Americans to think we have an inherent advantage simply due to our geographic place of birth. The one thing we do have is more capitalist (or entrepreneurial if you don't like the evil c word) minded people per-capita. It's predominatly a cultural difference. Everyone I've talked with in France (just to pick one country) has a very paternalistic mindset when it comes to government and business. This is their culture (the small segment of French people that I've been exposed to, which I take to be indicative of the larger culture), for better or for worse.
But innovations are not created by collectives. In all the towns and all the cities there are no monuments to any committees. Even though it takes a team to form a startup it always comes down to the vision of one or two men. And without their vision, there would be no company.
When a culture begins to recognize this and rewards men who take risks and lay it all on the line for a pipe dream, it is then that the culture get's a silicon valley. How many dot-com risk takers are selling burgers? Not everyone was a Steve Bezos or Jeff Skoll. Cultures that decide to take the money from Big Evil Corporations because they have successfully made money are a bit like a World Poker Tour that forcibly redistributed winnings to losing players.
But there's ABSOLUTELY no reason why America will have a lasting lead in the startups market. If anything we're growing more anti-success (i.e. GWB and the current Republican congressional spending) in our philosophy in parellel with Europe's increasingly capitalist outlook. In the end the losers won't be able to steal the winners money for too much longer in either case. The tired pretense that losers can never become winners and therefore the winners should be forced to pay them to stay where they are in life will not stand.
More importantly to the topic, as someone who is founding a startup, I would move to a different country if it more firmly espoused the startup-friendly (and people friendly, really) policies outlined in TFA. I'm proud to be an American but I don't suffer from the foolish notion that I'm better because of it, simply because some other guy invented and marketed a lightbulb before anyone else. I didn't invent the lightbulb (yes I know of the prior art in 7 other countries before Edison) or the airplane or the cotton gin or the iPod. An American is no better off simply because he was born in a country where someone else happens to have done so. He is better off because he lives in a country where he's likely to be paid handsomely if he (or she) does something so equally grand.
So BA lays some workers off in the States. You don't need a big corporation to take care of you, corporations aren't surrogate fathers. I've known some incredibly sharp Hindustani people and I'm really glad that more of them can get jobs. If BA makes a profit good for them. Some people seem to think profit is a dirty word. News flash that's what business is about, profit. In the relative economy the workers are making a great profit as well.
So to summarize.
Remember the TIOBE index is the predominantly the number of people having problems with a language. You usually don't see hundreds of people going out and posting on forums just to mention that they're using the language. Usually it's because they have some arcane problem with it they're hoping to get an answer on. Which explains why Java is king! (j/k, I'm bitter after tracing exceptions, sorry.)
Ummm, yes, I'd find that acceptable. Starbucks makes the coffee, they can stipulate it's use however the fsck they want. If they require it only be taken when it's hot - anally - then I'd have no problem with their doing so. I probably wouldn't do business with them anymore. But thy do indeed have that right. They produced it, and they can sell it on their terms. It's up to me to decide whether or not I accept those terms.
Actually I believe it is a right. It depends on where you get your definition of a right from. I would call a right "that which is necessary for a man in the persuit of life, liberty and happiness". In that case I believe it is in fact, a right. If I spend my life aquireing knowledge by means of work I am in fact placing a large amount of value into "intellectual property". I spend the days of my life writing my software, it's entirely mine. It is you who are proclaiming entitlements where there are none. You have done nothing to create my software (to use that example again) and therefore you have no claim to it. It is you who have no rights.
As to the concerns with billionaires, who the hell cares? If you can go out and make a billion dollars, good for you! I fully intend to. My chances are slim but if I play my cards right, work hard and have a little luck - I might just be able to do it. You might just be able to do it. Anyone can. Why you'd be all sour about people becoming billionaires, I have no idea. Perhaps you think you're not good enough to do it? Is it a sour grapes mentality at work here. I don't understand.
Again with the sense of entitlement. Why the hell do you have a right to say what I get paid per hour? The customer is the one who decides how much I get paid per-hour - not you. If she will pay $500 for my product and it only took me an hour to program then that's what my time's worth. If she'll only pay $10 then that's what I get paid. If I can get her to pay $10,000 then all the better. If that's what the software is worth to her - then that's what I get paid. Why do you feel that you have a right to decide that I should be paid less? Who the fsck made you king?
You sir, don't give a shit about the little guy. It's these kind of protections that allow the little guy to exist at all. Microsoft doesn't fear pirate
It'll be just for Australian beers!
- JJ
http://www.xxxx.com.au/
Why in the world is this modded insightful? Because children aren't being forced to pay for lazy people's health care. I mean c'mon. Any person can get a decent enough job to get health care. I have a friend who's paraplegic and he takes care of himself with money he gets from real estate - that he bought winning online poker tournaments. That's a preposterously delicious example but it's still true. There are so few people who can't get jobs, charities could easily pay for their health care. A thousand times over.
The thing that I don't understand is when we began looking over at our neighbors and getting greedy for their money. When did this happen in America? I wouldn't accept help from someone I didn't know. I certainly wouldn't try to pass laws forcing them to help me.
It truly is a position with no dignity.
Um, excuse me sir. Why is it that you believe someone has a right to health care, from anyone? Why should any man be a slave to another? Rich or poor that's exactly what you're suggesting. That one man must pay for another's health care just because he's more successful.
Why do you believe this and how can you call this persuit of liberty? It's not persuit of liberty, it's persuit of slavery.
As a beer "connoisseur", I can honestly attest that Heinken is horrible here in the states but in the Netherlands it's actually quite good. I mean, not as good as most of the other beers in the Netherlands but a lot better than it is here. Unlike American Budweiser (as opposed to Czech Budweiser, which isn't bad). I live in Missouri, about an hour from the Budweiser brewery and Budweiser is still terrible.
Same thing with Guinness, it's not nearly as good here as it is in Ireland. My guess is it ferments a bit on the ship over here.
All the Austrialians I've talked to about it have told me that Fosters is "Austrialian for pisswater" and the country has some fantastic beers. I haven't yet been able to try them, but I don't doubt it.
My current favorite U.S. beer is 1554 from the New Belgium Brewing Company out of Ft. Collins. It's the closest thing I've been able to find to good beer outside of Belgium. But then, I like a nice dark beer.
Why is it that you only find crap American beers in Europe? Maybe for the same reasons we get Fosters here? I can't imagine, I've been in every country in the EU and you rarely see more than Miller Genuine Draft and Budweiser over there. Two of the middle-worst beers in the states. Maybe we could one-up the Aussies on bad beer by exporting Pappy's Blue Ribbon, Stag, Keystone or Milwakee's Best? In fact I say it's our duty as Americans. If every country is competing to export the dog nastiest beer. I say America has a technological advantage is this field.
Why this isn't modded Flamebait, I don't know. C'mon "Trecherous Computing", are we all in pre-school now? If you honestly believe that intel will not allow developers to release free products for their platform, you're certifiably insane. Which is unfortunate, since I think it would be GREAT. As much as I love free software (I'm typeing this on Slackware 10.1), I'm also a professional software developer. I would LOVE to prevent people from stealing my software. If you refuse to use my software under my terms, then you should not have access to it. It's that's simple. A system that prevented people from running unsigned code would be the greatest boon for the development community possible. No more would you find yourself paying for thousands of people to download your product - only to crack it and not pay you. Listen to me programmers! As much fun as Open Source projects are, you rarely make any money with them. Money is necessary in life to pay for the costs you incurr as you live. A small time developer would actually be able to quit side jobs and just sell their software if the wacko Trecherous Computing is addopted. Hooray for Trecherous Computing!!
I'm not sure about all of that (quite long post) but I think you have certain parts of it right. The laptop is fairly useless. I'm not sure you'd be able to capture the people's imagination with it. Secondly, while I don't use Windows, I can say that Gates has a good hold on marketability (first) and usability (second) - in that order. If he's being honest in his opinion then it would be wise for MIT to revise their laptop.
Secondly, there is always the danger in a plan like this of altruistic insanity. Some guy is building his own ego by using other people's money to buy "laptops". There is also the danger that giving them a single "laptop" will only make them believe you'll give them a second one. On the other hand, look at poverty in Japan post world war 2. With a little work and 20 years these poor people can be schooling Japan, China, the EU and the US in how to make electronics.
This post makes me wish there was a "Interesting but Bulsh*t" mod setting. :-D
You know what? You're right. The law should be a popularity contest. All rich, famous and popular people should be given immediate pardon. Politicians live their ENTIRE lives looking out for the good of society! And an infraction of the law could hurt their image. It may even destroy their career. Those idiot Americans would actually charge these wonderful right-thinking citizens with an infraction of the law. Oh, the shame.
Please read Animal Farm by George Orwelle (a British fellow.)
As I've begun writing applications for a living I've gradually been looking for a easy easy easy method of application development. Something that is truly RAD. For desktop applications I've settled on an old Amiga BASIC language and cross platform application framework called PureBASIC that's been ported for Linux, Windows and Mac OS X. However for web toolkits I still haven't found that "magic bullet" that makes things truly and absolutely simple.
One of the things I like about PureBasic is that it is a high level language that is at the same time compiled directly to machine code (with optional inline assembly language.) The resulting binaries are usually under 60k. Despite this it has a full featured Widget set that uses native widgets (and a GUI designer on Windows.) I kinda wish there was a (cross platform) web development language/framework out that was like this. You could write your application in it and you could instantly compile it to:
The language would have built in session managment. You could get arguments as built in variables that would be created automagically by the compiler based on the target. This idea really would work.
I was so enthused by this prospect that I pulled out flex and bison and began writing a grammar for the language. Of course, I had just finished arithmetic operations and string functions (and began reading the ISAPI documentation) when I realized the magnatude of what I was beginning. I just don't have time to get this done in the next year (even compiling to C and using MinGW/gcc/GC as I was planning.)
But if it WAS finished it would truly be an awesome tool. You might even build in a template toolkit, possibly even a content management system. And the whole application would be a tinly little 60k
What about the people financing these acts of terrorism? Generally it's the mega rich sheeks and dictators. Arguing that Christian fundamentalists would go around bombing people if they had the money is absurd. Relatively the people who finance Al-Queida are vastly more rich than any Christians in the mid-west.
a l_atro.html
Islam has a long well documented history of fanaticism that involves killing. Mohammed himself killed thousands in all the battles for Jihad (i.e. taking over all countries until Islam is universal.) To quote from a Hindu source about Mohammed's war atrocities.
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/mogh
You must remember, without Charlemagne it's quite possible that Arabic would be the dominant language in the EU right now.
And while you can claim the crusades as a Christian example of war atrocities. I think you'd find it to be one of the only cases in history. Very few modern Christians would consider the cruisades to be in line with their faith, even remotely. Nowhere in the New Testament does it suggest to go out and try and conquer countries in the name of Christ.
Amen to that.
.NET or MFC, so the knowledge I gain in creating my application won't have a market value.
So I want to develop a cross platform application in a post-Sun-screwup world? Well first I need a cross platform Widget set. Hello 3-6MB of WxWidgets, QT etc. I want to do so in a RAD language? Hello 2-5 MB of interpreter (python, perl, ruby, etc.) I want to make the silly thing network transparent? Hello hellish cross platform threading, mysterious lockups and incompatible socket libraries.
Coupled with this my employer will probably be using Microsoft
This is what makes creating an application in a document display platform almost appear appealing. I can be reasonably sure (if I write it well) that my AJAX application will work cross platform, will be network enabled for remote access, will not require tens of megabytes for an installer and will have a large userbase that already has the display platform and interpreter (a web browser.)
It's not quite RAD but with a prebuilt javascript widget library (and a session managment library on the CGI/ASP/PHP side) it's almost.
Thank you Sun, you screwed the pooch and the pooch has screwed us all.
"Intellectual property" has been the US's chief export for past 150 years. As nice as is it to think that the new and shiny product you buy is not intellectual property at all, this is simply not the case. It is the idea that allows the product to be made at all that is important. If you come up with an idea first then it is not fair to have your competitors steal your idea and begin producing your product without paying you. This is what gives R&D a ROI -- the key thing that makes the vast cost of R&D justified. Remember, companies don't need new technology to sell their products. All they need is a spiffy name with EXTREME in it and possibly a selection of different colors.
The notion of an idea creating company is excellent for the progress of technology. This would push R&D onto a special kind of company that simply came up with new technologies and licensened their ideas out to producers (who run the actual factories and market the technology.)
It's unfortunate that NTP is being such an ass about this. I suspect that they're using the threat of shutting off all U.S. Blackberries as a bargaining tool. Nothing to see here.
So I have to disagree, I think the U.S. and all countries that support intellectual property will be the ones prospering in the future -- they always have been.
Hey, someone else has had this problem too. Fortunately, free software to the rescue. and this plugin works nicely.
This is where the true support for these formats will remain - open source. If you want support, you have the freedom to write it yourself.
Of course, if memory serves me right non-free Paint Shop Pro still has IFF support as well. Hmmm. This page seems to say so. I seem to remember Photoshop having IFF support, but that was 3.0 or 4.0ish many moons ago onna MacOS classic box.
In an ideal capitalist world (how's that for a contradictio in terminis) companies would only compete 'fairly', that is, on the value of the goods they provide, thus creating the greatest customer value possible.
Well, that's one way to put it. However, I have to make the point that the "ideal" nature of the system doesn't relate to producers creating the greatest value to the customer. The idea behind the system is that customers don't have a right to a company's products. You don't have a right to a word processor from anybody, you have the right to create your own word processor or choose someone else's. The system may or may not create the best products (because people may not choose the best products.) But can bloody well pick the best available or write your own.
This is where Microsoft's actions come in. Ordinarily monopolies can't exist in a capitalist system because there is choice. The only way you can be forced to do something is by physical force and in a non-anarchist government the government has a monopoly on physical force. By removing choice from the marketplace via government edict (patents) Microsoft is becoming a *true* monopoly (because they can put other people in jail if they violate their patent.) So Microsoft is no longer operating in a capitalist system at all. They have become a state mandated company. It's almost fascism except the government's only pay is the patent application fee.
You have this exactly right when you use the qualifier "in lefty terms". I'll add my little "righty cult" slant to it. :-)
Capitalism = market based, means of production are owned by those who created them
Mutualism=market based, means of production are owned by whoever has political power (think physical force)
Communism = non market based, means of production are owned by whoever has political power
Stalinism = non market based, means of production are owned by whoever has political power
Now that that's said. I consider myself a staunch capitalist philosophically, yet I devote most of my time using and developing FOSS. Capitalists donate money to charity all the time right (Bill Gates??) There is no philosophical contradiction between FOSS and capitalism.
It can even be argued that developing open source software could be in your "rational self interest", which some capitalist writers (notably Ayn Rand) have named as the driving force behind capitalism.
If you "View Source" for some weird reason the real address shows up in the title bar.
I've tried most of the photo services and I can say that PBase is probably the best. One really cool thing about it is being able to search by digital camera. You can find pictures in the 10,000,000+ set by almost any digital camera. This is great when you're buying a new camera and want to get a good idea how it's photos will turn out in a variety of situations. Oh and this part is free.
http://www.pbase.com/cameras
I don't use PBase anymore since I have a lot more photos than most people 7,000+ (after sorting and deleting.) And they're all taken mainly with a Sony Mavica CD400 and weigh in at 1.5MB each. I found a non-nutjob host that offers $6.95 a month service for 1GB of storage and I just pay for my extra storage. Not affiliated (except my site is hosted there) but I use OsGen.
http://www.osgen.net/
SCO is in the 81-90 section? Number 83. Seems to be a little low on the list... but then I would've put it at #1.