I agree in principle with most of what has been said above... but go find another job if you don't like it.
However, in this economy, with unemployment over 10%, be wary of what you wish for. I bet there are plenty of people right now that would take a job with being "on-call" at any wage rate.
I've never gotten paid for anything I've written. I give it all away. The reward is called "Pride"
As a society we simply need to find a way to make sure people like Pranav Mistry have gainful employment while they devlop things like this. As long as I have a decent job that pays my bills and afords me the time to work on software, I will continue to do so. But when employment barely pays my rent and my managers expect me to come in early and work late to the point that I have no time to do anything rewarding at all, everyone suffers because I can not continue to work on things that may or may not be profitable in the end.
In my opinion the biggest obstacle in the way of innovation is profit.
I think you misunderstand the idea of what profit is. Re-read what you wrote,
"to the point that I have no time to do anything rewarding at all"
How are you profiting there?
"As long as I have a decent job that pays my bills and afords me the time to work on software"
You are profiting here. But by your logic, if profit stands in the way of innovation, your having a job would stand in the way of your working on this software.
"As a society we simply need to find a way to make sure people like Pranav Mistry have gainful employment while they develop things like this."
Not everyone values this as much as you may. If what he develops is truly valued by others, they will actually pay for it. You will give up some of your money - which came from time and effort on your part - to compensate him for his time and effort. Otherwise, its just talk. It would be as if I say I want a better environment, but I wouldn't want to pay for recycling. This stuff doesn't just come for free - its not some boon society has received - just as your time and effort probably don't come for free. Its fine if you want to work for free, but then the cost is all on you. Most people expect to be paid for their work. If someone wants to come get my recycling without me paying for it, I'm fine with that. But don't come to me later claiming you cannot afford your own bills and "barely pay your rent." That's how you know if I value it or not.
I know plenty of people may disagree, but then you are free to hire him for yourself to keep me quiet.
In all seriousness, this is why you keep copies of your own performance reviews. These are documents signed by both you and your employer showing the above average performance.
Given the above situation, I would respond by walking out the next day in response. Make sure to tell them you have no need of their "recommendation." You have what they believe in writing.
Although, an above poster had a good idea of working out those weeks at higher pay. See how much they actually value you.
The US can get ahead in the world economy by getting LESS education for it's populace. That way, we'll slowly start getting our manufacturing jobs back because India and China won't be able to compete.
You've GOT to be kidding. This is marked "insightful," but I'm wondering if people meant to hit "funny."
The reason jobs leave is these countries have people who are willing to work for LESS! Not because they are undereducated.
What is demand and how do you quantify it? Through a survey? Through a market expert? Demand is technically quantified as a quantity (seriously, take Econ 101... Economics is a social science, not a business class as most people might think). So the statement made in the summary is referring to the idea that for every 80 DVDs sold, 20 BluRay discs are sold as well. Technically, the quantity being demanded is dependent on some more factors though, namely price.
Now personally, I don't believe the numbers in the summary either, but these guys typically estimate such figures based on past sales data. I would be surprised if the guys doing the estimations weren't aware of all the arguments being posted here on the forums.
I would use this as some insight into what's going to happen with BluRay discs and players. If they think this will happen, they more than likely have things in place to make the switch (i.e. - dropping the prices of the discs and players in the near future).
Except by your reasoning, they should have already lowered the price just to sell more units to gain more profit. After all, more consoles == more people to sell games to == more profit. Matter of fact, they should just drop the price down to $1.00.
But that would be an over-simplification. They don't do that, because costs matter when calculating profits. As do revenues, which is dependent upon your price, your competitor's prices, incomes, etc. etc.
If the previous price dropped increased the sales of PS3s substantially, they probably have no need of a further price drop. If the sales are still lagging, then the situation is different. And even then why should they drop price if it looks like Bluray is about to win the format war?
More computers, menas more people you can sell to, means lower prices. Its hard to listen to arguments like the above one when they go straight AGAINST the laws of supply and demand. More people = more demand... more demand bids prices up, not down!
I understand we as individuals are entitled to be tried by a jury of our peers, but when one multinational corporation is suing another are eight Kansas City residents really "peers?" I tend to agree, however I find one flaw (at least in my own mind).
I prefer the economists to run the economy. I would prefer the computer scientists to run the internet (and so on and so forth). But does that mean I want the lawyers to run the courts (i.e. - for only lawyers to sit on the jury?)? If not them? Then who? Random people? (which I'm not saying is any better...) I'm not sure what the best answer is here.
I don't have mod points to mod you up, but at least someone else here finally understands the economics of the situations (the discriminating monopolist model). So I say thank you!
The fix to all bandwidth issues is to have a true level of competition in the market place. The issues of pricing/availability/speed would fix themselves if this were truly encouraged by the government.
I can see the need to have temporary monopoly power in the sense its a price to pay for growth. But when better tech exists elsewhere, and I'm paying $50/month for 5mbit down/384 kbit up, I'm fairly certain I'm not getting what's available at a reasonable price.
(ps - we should note that this model allocates as many resources as a perfectly competitive market, but it doesn't 'wipe out' consumer surplus, it converts it to producer surplus, i.e. no deadweight-loss. By all practical measurements, its just as efficient as perfect competition... although, you as the consumer get the worst prices possible).
Goals are over rated. Some of us still value the process and the effort. If this is truly the case, come work for me for no paycheck. We'll see how long you truly desire the effort with no reward.
While you may not be the exception to the rule, the fact stands that when the process has some type of reward (versus your no reward), we wind up having more of it. That way it doesn't matter what your intentions are, sheerly that it got done (where 'it' in this case is more innovation).
This is like saying if I pay for a membership at a local gun club and use those resources to break some law, I should be able to keep my membership.
Granted, downloading isn't the same has assault with a gun, or shooting someone, but breaking the law is the breaking the law. Why would you expect the University to consider letting students use THEIR network after the students have been shown they've used it improperly against their wishes?
Just paying for something doesn't give you exclusive rights to do anything you wish with anything.
Re:This is also the Pirate Party's stance
on
Patents Don't Pay
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So, what if you're dying from the 21st worst ailment on the list? What incentive is given for firms to find a cure for you then?
The government typically only does one thing well, and that thing is 'screw things up beyond belief.'
And honestly looking at FFXIII despite being a huge FF fanboy doesnt make me bite at all, not for 500 dollars. Same here. I think when FF 13, 14 & 15 are out and the price is $300, I'll bite.
The entire patent system should be abolished - if you want to reward "innovators" over and above the free market, find a way that doesn't deal a death of a thousand cuts to the freedom of hundreds of millions. The reward to the "innovators" is increased profits. I wouldn't increase the time to 40 years, but to understand the 20 years, you have to think beyond the tech industry. Some fields (medical field) can take far longer to bring a product to market (extensive, expensive and time consuming testing) and actually deserve some lengthier time frame as opposed to 1 year.
if i sell a virtual item for USD, that is income and it is already taxed. Guess what! If you own a furniture store, make chairs and sell them, chances are you have to collect sales tax, wouldn't you? And guess what! You still have to pay income tax on the cash you just made. No one said taxes made sense (er, should that be that politicians make good decisions?).
paying attention to what comes after the tld and disabling javascript for starters. While this is certainly true, for the individuals who think the internet is the 'little blue e' on their desktop, they have no idea what you are talking about. I've asked individuals to alter a URL by hand and they just give me blank stares (we are talking about more than 5 people at a time). The level of education you are referring to is in my opinion far more substantial than most realize.
While I see some complain that Starcraft2 is just like Starcraft...
Dude, SC1 was so huge, people are going bitch if its just like SC1 or completely different. There is NO WAY Blizzard won't take slack from people out there when chances are it will be a good game. Those people just don't know what's going on.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree in principle with most of what has been said above... but go find another job if you don't like it. However, in this economy, with unemployment over 10%, be wary of what you wish for. I bet there are plenty of people right now that would take a job with being "on-call" at any wage rate.
I've never gotten paid for anything I've written. I give it all away. The reward is called "Pride" As a society we simply need to find a way to make sure people like Pranav Mistry have gainful employment while they devlop things like this. As long as I have a decent job that pays my bills and afords me the time to work on software, I will continue to do so. But when employment barely pays my rent and my managers expect me to come in early and work late to the point that I have no time to do anything rewarding at all, everyone suffers because I can not continue to work on things that may or may not be profitable in the end. In my opinion the biggest obstacle in the way of innovation is profit.
I think you misunderstand the idea of what profit is. Re-read what you wrote,
"to the point that I have no time to do anything rewarding at all"
How are you profiting there?
"As long as I have a decent job that pays my bills and afords me the time to work on software"
You are profiting here. But by your logic, if profit stands in the way of innovation, your having a job would stand in the way of your working on this software.
"As a society we simply need to find a way to make sure people like Pranav Mistry have gainful employment while they develop things like this."
Not everyone values this as much as you may. If what he develops is truly valued by others, they will actually pay for it. You will give up some of your money - which came from time and effort on your part - to compensate him for his time and effort. Otherwise, its just talk. It would be as if I say I want a better environment, but I wouldn't want to pay for recycling. This stuff doesn't just come for free - its not some boon society has received - just as your time and effort probably don't come for free. Its fine if you want to work for free, but then the cost is all on you. Most people expect to be paid for their work. If someone wants to come get my recycling without me paying for it, I'm fine with that. But don't come to me later claiming you cannot afford your own bills and "barely pay your rent." That's how you know if I value it or not.
I know plenty of people may disagree, but then you are free to hire him for yourself to keep me quiet.
In fact, perhaps more correctly, hardware stores that sell knives help commit knife crimes but haven't been prosecuted for it.
Those knives actually have other purposes. What other purposes do torrents of copyrighted materials have?
In all seriousness, this is why you keep copies of your own performance reviews. These are documents signed by both you and your employer showing the above average performance.
Given the above situation, I would respond by walking out the next day in response. Make sure to tell them you have no need of their "recommendation." You have what they believe in writing. Although, an above poster had a good idea of working out those weeks at higher pay. See how much they actually value you.
All prices are based on both Supply and Demand. Not one or the other. Both of you, please remember this for your economic analysis.
The US can get ahead in the world economy by getting LESS education for it's populace. That way, we'll slowly start getting our manufacturing jobs back because India and China won't be able to compete.
You've GOT to be kidding. This is marked "insightful," but I'm wondering if people meant to hit "funny."
The reason jobs leave is these countries have people who are willing to work for LESS! Not because they are undereducated.
Let's see how it fares versus Starcraft 2 before making any wild accusations.
Demand is technically quantified as a quantity (seriously, take Econ 101... Economics is a social science, not a business class as most people might think). So the statement made in the summary is referring to the idea that for every 80 DVDs sold, 20 BluRay discs are sold as well. Technically, the quantity being demanded is dependent on some more factors though, namely price.
Now personally, I don't believe the numbers in the summary either, but these guys typically estimate such figures based on past sales data. I would be surprised if the guys doing the estimations weren't aware of all the arguments being posted here on the forums.
I would use this as some insight into what's going to happen with BluRay discs and players. If they think this will happen, they more than likely have things in place to make the switch (i.e. - dropping the prices of the discs and players in the near future).
Except by your reasoning, they should have already lowered the price just to sell more units to gain more profit. After all, more consoles == more people to sell games to == more profit. Matter of fact, they should just drop the price down to $1.00.
But that would be an over-simplification. They don't do that, because costs matter when calculating profits. As do revenues, which is dependent upon your price, your competitor's prices, incomes, etc. etc.
If the previous price dropped increased the sales of PS3s substantially, they probably have no need of a further price drop. If the sales are still lagging, then the situation is different. And even then why should they drop price if it looks like Bluray is about to win the format war?
Its hard to listen to arguments like the above one when they go straight AGAINST the laws of supply and demand. More people = more demand... more demand bids prices up, not down!
Are you new here? What is this "logic" you attempt to use on us poor slashdotters?
/.)
(in all seriousness, this may be the best reponse I've ever seen on
I prefer the economists to run the economy. I would prefer the computer scientists to run the internet (and so on and so forth). But does that mean I want the lawyers to run the courts (i.e. - for only lawyers to sit on the jury?)? If not them? Then who? Random people? (which I'm not saying is any better...) I'm not sure what the best answer is here.
Cool for them, now can someone recommend me my new search engine?
I don't have mod points to mod you up, but at least someone else here finally understands the economics of the situations (the discriminating monopolist model). So I say thank you!
The fix to all bandwidth issues is to have a true level of competition in the market place. The issues of pricing/availability/speed would fix themselves if this were truly encouraged by the government.
I can see the need to have temporary monopoly power in the sense its a price to pay for growth. But when better tech exists elsewhere, and I'm paying $50/month for 5mbit down/384 kbit up, I'm fairly certain I'm not getting what's available at a reasonable price.
(ps - we should note that this model allocates as many resources as a perfectly competitive market, but it doesn't 'wipe out' consumer surplus, it converts it to producer surplus, i.e. no deadweight-loss. By all practical measurements, its just as efficient as perfect competition... although, you as the consumer get the worst prices possible).
While you may not be the exception to the rule, the fact stands that when the process has some type of reward (versus your no reward), we wind up having more of it. That way it doesn't matter what your intentions are, sheerly that it got done (where 'it' in this case is more innovation).
And what happens when the music generated from my OWN DNA is a #1 hit?
This is like saying if I pay for a membership at a local gun club and use those resources to break some law, I should be able to keep my membership. Granted, downloading isn't the same has assault with a gun, or shooting someone, but breaking the law is the breaking the law. Why would you expect the University to consider letting students use THEIR network after the students have been shown they've used it improperly against their wishes? Just paying for something doesn't give you exclusive rights to do anything you wish with anything.
So, what if you're dying from the 21st worst ailment on the list? What incentive is given for firms to find a cure for you then?
The government typically only does one thing well, and that thing is 'screw things up beyond belief.'
I predict Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will go the way of DVD+R and DVD-R
Econ 101 - Cost does not equate to price.
Dude, SC1 was so huge, people are going bitch if its just like SC1 or completely different. There is NO WAY Blizzard won't take slack from people out there when chances are it will be a good game. Those people just don't know what's going on.