The publishers aren't completely stupid. Yes, paper has a better UI than electronic, but electronic is a lot more portable. So as ebook readers get better, paper's advantage will go away. The latest Kindle is pretty sweet, aside from the DRM.
The problem for the publishers is, okay, paper's going the way of all things. What to do? I think that what Richard Sarnoff said was the most insightful thing in the NY TImes article: release ebooks at a fair price, like on iTunes, and people will pay. Too bad Amazon isn't able to follow that strategy.
The OCZ "barebones" laptop is nice because they sell it to you without a hard drive or RAM, so you don't have to throw out the ones that come with it, but it's hardly bare bones in the sense that we normally think of when we hear the term - you can't get different motherboards, or different displays, or anything like that.
This is true. However, a majority of the people who live in the U.S. live in those areas. So just because this doesn't work for you, doesn't mean that on average it doesn't work for most people. Furthermore, the reason this argument is being made is to argue in favor of an improved public transit infrastructure - the idea is to increase the number of people who are covered.
Yeah, I knew it was zombies, but it was funnier the way I wrote it. And it is indeed deeply disquieting how much we remember of these ancient episodes. That aside, I am sure that weight loss remedies will not bring about the apocalypse. It will be a misguided attempt to move the earth to a different orbit to compensate for global warming. Mark my words.
Yeah, that's almost like that episode of Sliders with the vampires. Or zombies. I forget which. Anyway, yeah, that's a really good reason why we shouldn't ever release any new medicine. It's just too dangerous to humanity as a whole!:')
Yup, this is basically an infomercial for the next laetrile. Oh noes! We have to test the treatment to see if it works before we try it on live subjects! Regulation is bad! Don't you *want* three arms?
That's not a closed loop. A closed loop is when the toner cartridge is used to make a new toner cartridge. Making wood out of the cartridge depends on their being demand for the fake wood.
We have a rooftop solar hot water heater. It's actually a really nice technology - works even in the northeast, gets the water piping hot, and avoids the whole solar electric cycle, so it's a lot more efficient. We do have an electric instant hot heater on the tail end for times when there isn't enough sun, but in general the main thing it does is to mix in cold water, because the water coming out of the solar heater is too hot.
There is no killer application for IPv6, since its just infrastructure.
Not true, and you mentioned the killer app in the very next sentence: end-to-end connectivity. Having real, working end-to-end connectivity is a big deal, but most people don't know it because they're accustomed to living on a network where there is no end-to-end connectivity.
So if you want to see more IPv6 deployment, start developing apps on top of Miredo/Teredo that really make use of it. When there's enough encapsulated IPv6 running across your ISP's network, it'll actually save them money to switch to native IPv6.
Sadly, there are cases where you get this effect, usually not because you are unplugged, but because you are plugged into a network that's broken in some way, and all kinds of processes on your computer block waiting for replies that never arrive. This is utterly pathetic, and should never happen, but it does.
Are you saying that when you went to this site, you experienced a brownout, and your computer jittered and froze? Perhaps this is all part of their nefarious plan...:')
Yup, and now we're experiencing monetary brownouts, and the financial system is freezing. Oh wait, no, that was because of the streaming peer-to-peer profits in the banking industry! If we don't do something fast, all our industries will crash!
That's true in theory, but doesn't really match my experience. Although maybe my patches just sucked...:')
My big worry if I were to do a project like this would be that someone would sign the agreement, but then represent something as their work that wasn't, and I'd be left holding the bag. For small patches, that would be unlikely, but anything substantial would be really difficult to accept. However, I will admit that I am thinking like an individual, not like an LLC. In the latter case, I might feel a little less paranoid.
It's actually pretty difficult to contribute to dual-license GPL projects - they'd rather do the changes themselves and not risk legal hassles. What they want is bug reports.
When I was maintaining the ISC DHCP distribution (BSD license, BTW), I dreaded getting large patches, because I'd have to go through the whole damned patch and figure out what it actually did, and correct it. I much preferred bug reports. The idea that patches are why people open source things is really a red herring - sure, if you get a regular contributor who's really good, you can start to trust their work, but that only works for projects like linux where you have a huge number of interested geeks.
So really, what's going on with a dual-licensed model is that the owner of the copyright is using the FUD of the GPL to get people who don't trust open source or don't want to open source their own code to pay for non-GPL copies. At the same time they are offering the GPL version to the community of people who like the GPL, which spurs adoption. It's a win for everyone.
The problem with the BSD license is that the only way to get money out of it is charity, because there is no license FUD. Nothing wrong with charity, but it can make paying the bills a bit difficult.
No, no, a thousand times no! Disclosure is not neutrality. ISPs have monopolies. You can't choose a better deal. So disclosure makes no difference.
Furthermore, bandwidth caps, particularly when they are asymmetric, mean you are a consumer of content, not a producer. How neutral is that?
It's true that bandwidth sharing isn't *solely* a net neutrality issue--there are real problems with hogs. But when a desire to retain a cable franchise motivates an ISP to deliver a slow, capped connection, that _is_ very clearly a net neutrality issue.
The problem with this is that then TWC can buy them and raise the rates, which is what has happened over and over again with small ISPs that provide competition for the big guys.
People talk about the evils of big government and the power of the free market. This is actually a classic example of that problem, except that here we can see that it's not government that's the problem - it's *bad* government. The local government here has set up a socialist model of providing service, which is working for people. TWC is engaging with the state government in a classic example of fascism - government of the people, for the corporations, by the corporations.
So it's not the case that government=bad, free market=good, but rather that fascism=bad, !fascism=good.
Actually, almost anything can be abused. You seem to be implying that therefore we should never do anything. Obviously, this is a silly conclusion. Often even when something is abused, and no corrective measures are taken, you are better off than if that thing were never used. Sometimes you are not; in those cases, a feedback loop to control the abuse is a good solution. Only when the thing isn't useful, or the feedback loop can't be made to work and consequently the thing does more harm than good, does it make sense to put a stop to it.
The challenge in this situation is that obviously this is something that *could* do more harm than good. And it's also something that *could* do more good than harm. So it's a classic case for a good citizen's oversight system. And the fact that the EFF was able to get information about it using the FOIA suggests that the situation is not desperate - that the sunshine laws are in fact working in this case.
Full disk encryption is of no use if someone succeeds in making an exploit happen. What you need is interapplication firewalling, so that an exploit of a single application does not compromise the whole system.
Slashdot Mirror
The publishers aren't completely stupid. Yes, paper has a better UI than electronic, but electronic is a lot more portable. So as ebook readers get better, paper's advantage will go away. The latest Kindle is pretty sweet, aside from the DRM.
The problem for the publishers is, okay, paper's going the way of all things. What to do? I think that what Richard Sarnoff said was the most insightful thing in the NY TImes article: release ebooks at a fair price, like on iTunes, and people will pay. Too bad Amazon isn't able to follow that strategy.
The OCZ "barebones" laptop is nice because they sell it to you without a hard drive or RAM, so you don't have to throw out the ones that come with it, but it's hardly bare bones in the sense that we normally think of when we hear the term - you can't get different motherboards, or different displays, or anything like that.
This is true. However, a majority of the people who live in the U.S. live in those areas. So just because this doesn't work for you, doesn't mean that on average it doesn't work for most people. Furthermore, the reason this argument is being made is to argue in favor of an improved public transit infrastructure - the idea is to increase the number of people who are covered.
You live in a place where insurance is cheap. Lucky you!
Yeah, I knew it was zombies, but it was funnier the way I wrote it. And it is indeed deeply disquieting how much we remember of these ancient episodes. That aside, I am sure that weight loss remedies will not bring about the apocalypse. It will be a misguided attempt to move the earth to a different orbit to compensate for global warming. Mark my words.
Yeah, that's almost like that episode of Sliders with the vampires. Or zombies. I forget which. Anyway, yeah, that's a really good reason why we shouldn't ever release any new medicine. It's just too dangerous to humanity as a whole! :')
Yup, this is basically an infomercial for the next laetrile. Oh noes! We have to test the treatment to see if it works before we try it on live subjects! Regulation is bad! Don't you *want* three arms?
That's not a closed loop. A closed loop is when the toner cartridge is used to make a new toner cartridge. Making wood out of the cartridge depends on their being demand for the fake wood.
The dioxins in the white paper are probably more of a problem for your compost pile than the polymer in the toner.
We have a rooftop solar hot water heater. It's actually a really nice technology - works even in the northeast, gets the water piping hot, and avoids the whole solar electric cycle, so it's a lot more efficient. We do have an electric instant hot heater on the tail end for times when there isn't enough sun, but in general the main thing it does is to mix in cold water, because the water coming out of the solar heater is too hot.
Of course not. They just know that their app doesn't work.
Superior Dutch technology wins again. Who knew the drones could fly so far? And against stiff ocean breezes, no less!
DD-WRT. Of course, this assumes you aren't running one of the crippled Linksys routers that don't have enough memory to support a Linux kernel...
Not true, and you mentioned the killer app in the very next sentence: end-to-end connectivity. Having real, working end-to-end connectivity is a big deal, but most people don't know it because they're accustomed to living on a network where there is no end-to-end connectivity.
So if you want to see more IPv6 deployment, start developing apps on top of Miredo/Teredo that really make use of it. When there's enough encapsulated IPv6 running across your ISP's network, it'll actually save them money to switch to native IPv6.
Sadly, there are cases where you get this effect, usually not because you are unplugged, but because you are plugged into a network that's broken in some way, and all kinds of processes on your computer block waiting for replies that never arrive. This is utterly pathetic, and should never happen, but it does.
Are you saying that when you went to this site, you experienced a brownout, and your computer jittered and froze? Perhaps this is all part of their nefarious plan... :')
Yup, and now we're experiencing monetary brownouts, and the financial system is freezing. Oh wait, no, that was because of the streaming peer-to-peer profits in the banking industry! If we don't do something fast, all our industries will crash!
That's true in theory, but doesn't really match my experience. Although maybe my patches just sucked... :')
My big worry if I were to do a project like this would be that someone would sign the agreement, but then represent something as their work that wasn't, and I'd be left holding the bag. For small patches, that would be unlikely, but anything substantial would be really difficult to accept. However, I will admit that I am thinking like an individual, not like an LLC. In the latter case, I might feel a little less paranoid.
It's actually pretty difficult to contribute to dual-license GPL projects - they'd rather do the changes themselves and not risk legal hassles. What they want is bug reports.
When I was maintaining the ISC DHCP distribution (BSD license, BTW), I dreaded getting large patches, because I'd have to go through the whole damned patch and figure out what it actually did, and correct it. I much preferred bug reports. The idea that patches are why people open source things is really a red herring - sure, if you get a regular contributor who's really good, you can start to trust their work, but that only works for projects like linux where you have a huge number of interested geeks.
So really, what's going on with a dual-licensed model is that the owner of the copyright is using the FUD of the GPL to get people who don't trust open source or don't want to open source their own code to pay for non-GPL copies. At the same time they are offering the GPL version to the community of people who like the GPL, which spurs adoption. It's a win for everyone.
The problem with the BSD license is that the only way to get money out of it is charity, because there is no license FUD. Nothing wrong with charity, but it can make paying the bills a bit difficult.
Irony is dead.
No, no, a thousand times no! Disclosure is not neutrality. ISPs have monopolies. You can't choose a better deal. So disclosure makes no difference.
Furthermore, bandwidth caps, particularly when they are asymmetric, mean you are a consumer of content, not a producer. How neutral is that?
It's true that bandwidth sharing isn't *solely* a net neutrality issue--there are real problems with hogs. But when a desire to retain a cable franchise motivates an ISP to deliver a slow, capped connection, that _is_ very clearly a net neutrality issue.
The problem with this is that then TWC can buy them and raise the rates, which is what has happened over and over again with small ISPs that provide competition for the big guys.
People talk about the evils of big government and the power of the free market. This is actually a classic example of that problem, except that here we can see that it's not government that's the problem - it's *bad* government. The local government here has set up a socialist model of providing service, which is working for people. TWC is engaging with the state government in a classic example of fascism - government of the people, for the corporations, by the corporations.
So it's not the case that government=bad, free market=good, but rather that fascism=bad, !fascism=good.
Actually, almost anything can be abused. You seem to be implying that therefore we should never do anything. Obviously, this is a silly conclusion. Often even when something is abused, and no corrective measures are taken, you are better off than if that thing were never used. Sometimes you are not; in those cases, a feedback loop to control the abuse is a good solution. Only when the thing isn't useful, or the feedback loop can't be made to work and consequently the thing does more harm than good, does it make sense to put a stop to it.
The challenge in this situation is that obviously this is something that *could* do more harm than good. And it's also something that *could* do more good than harm. So it's a classic case for a good citizen's oversight system. And the fact that the EFF was able to get information about it using the FOIA suggests that the situation is not desperate - that the sunshine laws are in fact working in this case.
Full disk encryption is of no use if someone succeeds in making an exploit happen. What you need is interapplication firewalling, so that an exploit of a single application does not compromise the whole system.
unlike the ones that run on Windows, which have no vulnerabilityes?