Re:It needs more professionalism
on
Why Software is Hard
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
.....There is no single answer to why software is hard......
Maybe the biggest reason is that writing software is an art rather than a science, more akin to writing a symphony or poem. There are PRECISE mathematical formulas and design rules which an engineer of physical things, such as a bridge, for example, can apply. Software, being non-physical, is fundamentally different from any physical device or machine which can be 'engineered' by precise mathematical procedures. Perhaps the very term "software engineer" is a misnomer in the same way that applying the term "engineer" would be to a musician.
The hardest sort of software to write is that which is intended to interoperate with people. Computers are precise, mathematical, deterministic machines, whereas people are not. No amount of "maturing" of the software industry will ever change the fact that writing most software is not and never will be an exact science. Folks here at/. shouldn't be too harsh on MS and their trials and tribulations with VISTA.
......Software programming in general is hard for 2 reasons......
Actually there is only one master reason. So far, there is no mathematical way to prove that a given non trivial software program will actually work as intended. When designing a physical thing, such as a bridge, machine or electrical circuit, there are precise mathematical formulas which can be applied that give a reasonable expectation that the building or machine etc. will perform according to expectations. There are no mathematics that can be applied that will show to even a ballpark accuracy that a given complex software system, such as an OS, will perform as its designers hoped. That is why there are alpha, beta and all sorts of other test versions where users are asked to try out the programs. My theory is that this is so, because software is not physical, but a pure product of mind to which different rules apply. Human minds do not operate nor communicate with the mathematical precision that computers and machines do. This is in fact what makes us human. All software begins in a human mind which operates in a much different manner than computers. Translating one human language to another human language is hard. Translating human thought patterns into computer instructions, which then have to usually interact with other human thought patterns is even harder.
....Those 140,000 "exploits" are largely redundant.....
Indeed they are very redundant, running on millions of Windows zombie machines clogging the Internet and filling everyone's email boxes with with terabytes of SPAM and other digital trash every day.
.....elementary school retards and PC users like real coders.......
That's exactly the problem. Most adult computer users know about as much or less about computers that an elementary school kid. To get good use out of a PC you have to be a "real coder" or at least an elementary school kid. However, even computer retards can get useful work done on a Mac in a relatively short time.
That is because they have not needed to. It isn't the number of theoretical possible exploits, but the percentage of the installed base of computers that have gotten hosed by some of the huge variety of malware actually circulating on the net. By that measure, the number of Macs thus affected is next to nothing. No OS and no other human creation is perfect, but thus far at least, from a practical perspective, Macs have no problem with malware and Mac users don't have to spend unneeded time and money for installing and maintaining special anti-virus programs. Mac computers also don't have to phone home to get their software registered and authorized. When we decided to double the RAM and HD space on a XP box, it had to call home for new 'activation'. Doing the same thing to an old Mac did not need such crappy exercises. From my readings, VISTA is even worse than XP in this regard. When you have a Windows computer, especially VISTA, it seems that you don't really own it, but it is controlled by someone else. First Microsoft and for millions of unwitting users, by one or more 'botherders' and spyware outfits. Why should even ONE Mac user care WHY there isn't the flood of malware attacking their computer? Who cares WHAT the reason is! Maybe it IS the low market share. So WHAT! It is the bottom line: Macs and their OSX are MUCH more secure that Windows PCs. Apple can truthfully advertise that fact.
.....Like Macs are actually diffrent from PC's......
Yes, they are PC's that actually "just work"(tm) and don't get viruses and all sorts of other malware. The essence of a computer is not the hardware, but the software. Apple is the only PC maker that makes both, to work seamlessly for a good user experience. For many, that makes one working Mac more desirable than two temperamental sometimes work and sometimes don't work Windows machines. In addition, users can easily install and run Windows (including VISTA) running as a virtual OS under Parallels. That makes one Mac like two computers in one which actually makes Macs cheaper than any equivalent Windows only hardware.
The God I am talking about is the biggest God, beyond time and space. He simply exists and has always existed. We all have a hard time with that concept. Moses at the burning bush did. That is a concept only faith can fully grasp. You either CHOOSE to believe that or don't. This faith is beyond logic, but not illogical. Nobody can force you to believe anything, but can want to believe or not want to. You have been created by God with a will. You may freely exercise that will to believe or not believe Him. You mention a child. Why yes, Jesus said that if we do not approach God in simple trust, He will not be found. (Luke 18:16-17)
.......If you're going to try to convince me of the existence of God.......
I don't think anyone can be convinced to believe anything they don't WANT to believe. I was and am not trying to convince you there is a God nor fool you. You either want to believe or don't. It is evidently something you do not want to do, at least at this time. However, it is not something you cannot do.
(....that an all powerful creator is JUST AS RIDICULOUS as the universe just spontaneously appearing. They're BOTH absurd.).....
Actually neither are absurd, but both are beliefs. However the belief in a Creator, unlike most of the faith in evolution, is at least not trying to masquerade as science and get supported by tax dollars. The so called "scientific" big bang theory proposes that this big bang suddenly appeared out of nothing. The Creation theory says that God created the universe out of nothing. Both of these are faith and both are beyond any science, past, present and future, unless someone invents a time machine. Science is observation and experiment in the present. That kind of I science I like because that is the kind of science I as part of at Stanford University for over thirty years. I probably know more about real, experimental science than many here on/. even dream about. Genuine faith in a transcendent Creator God and real science are not incompatible, but compliment each other.
A gift is something you did nor earn. You obviously have a sharp mind. Where did you get that? Did you expend any effort to obtain it? Is it not part of your genetic code? Why is it so difficult for you to admit that you did not work to obtain your intelligence? You are a thinking human being. Every such thinking person eventually seeks to find answers to at least four important questions. 1) Who am I? 2) Where did I come from? 3) Why am I here? 4) Where am I going when I die? Science can help, but ultimately only faith can give satisfactory answers.
.....so he can punish us with increasing temperatures.......
These people did not come up with this idea. The Bible has references to severely increasing heat from the sun as part of God's punishments for human evil, reserved for the last days. One of these is found in the Old Testament in Isaiah 30:26, where we are informed that the sun will be seven times hotter and another is found in Revelation 16:8-9. There it says that people will be scorched by the sun and curse God because of the great heat. The passage in Revelation is just before the part about the final battle of the final war, the battle at Armageddon.
To many here, the Bible represents fiction and fairy tales. However, an all out global war and the resulting world wide upheaval, along with havoc from nature is not impossible. We humans like to believe, both corporately and individually that we are the captains of our ship and the masters of our fate. From a sudden death of a loved one, to history of great natural disasters and from the very real possibility of global thermonuclear and other technologically advanced warfare, that belief and hope is ill founded. Global warming, human caused or not, can only add to this nightmare. Could it be that we really are NOT in charge after all?
.....If you'd ever bothered to understand the actual scientific argument behind evolution theory, you'd realize it's not merely an attempt by atheists to cloak their beliefs in the mantle of science..........
Science is based on objective observations and experiment. No science can explain or fathom the ultimate cause of the effect called the universe. Logic dictates that every result must have a reason or cause. The universe either 1) created itself, which is absurd, 2) always existed or 3) was cause to exist by an agent or agents beyond itself. Reason two has been ruled out by modern cosmological observations, such as the cosmic background radiation. There was a "big bang", or as I prefer, a creation event. The cause of this event is beyond science and in the realm of faith. If the ultimate cause of he universe is beyond science, then certain, now unobserved and unduplicated processes must of necessity also be. One of these is how living things arose from non-living. We can conjecture about sparks and chemicals, but nobody has ever DEMONSTRATED how a living cell can happen by any process we can imagine. Science is great and can explain a lot of things, but it is limited.
Name me ONE thing that you have that you were not given? You might object by saying that you worked hard for everything you have. Where did you get life, health and a sound mind? Who gives you the air you breathe and lets the sun shine on you? Your rights are like that. If you got them from a human source, by works or as a gift, then that human source has the right to take them back, justly or unjustly. If you were given these rights by the giver of life, then our rights, ultimately your life, can still be taken by another human, but only unjustly.
.....So personally, even though I'm an atheist, I don't give a rat's ass about the fact that the Declaration of Independence used the word "Creator" to frame the concept that human rights transcend any human authority. As long as that concept doesn't fall by the wayside......
People have many ideas about how the universe and we humans got here. Logic dictates that the universe did not make itself. Every effect demands a cause. The effect of the universe and by extension, we humans, has a first cause, which itself must be uncaused. This is VERY hard for anyone to grasp. There really is no such a thing as an atheist. Atheist means without god just as amoral means without moral. It says nothing about any particular god. Everybody, and that includes you, is not amoral and also has some idea or belief of how things came to be what we observe them to be. Many today BELIEVE that everything is the result of the action of mindless chance. They then clothe this belief in a white lab coat and call it science. Others believe that there is a mind as the cause of the universe, in the same way that a mind is the cause for an automobile or a computer program.
Whatever you believe to be the original cause behind the cosmos and your own ultimate existence and destiny, that is your god. This god, if he/she/it is a god, is also the one that MUST transcend human authority. It must be this god also who endowed us humans with the inherent rights, as recognized by the writers of the declaration of independence. Abraham Lincoln also recognized the idea of "the proposition that all men are created equal" in his famous Gettyburg address. You might read the whole thing sometime.
Of all human concepts of god, the one put forth in the Bible is the one that meets the specs of a God that transcends all human authority as well a all time and space. In the Bible alone, we are told that God is a real person who inhabits eternity, has always existed and possesses all wisdom, power and authority. It is this God, whom Lincoln and the writers of the declaration of independence had in mind, as the giver of life and all rights inherent in that gift. You may not believe in that God, but that doesn't make you an atheist.
.....but, if it did, it would probably give either party the option of nullifying all of the contract......
There MIGHT be a clause in their contract that allows for unilateral cancellation, but I doubt very much that the content companies would suddenly forego online sales not only on ITMS an but all other legal downloads. Since some people in certain countries are agitating for open digital interchange, the ones doing this should lobby their governments to outlaw all DRM. The ONLY reason that ALL digital content is NOT universally compatible is because of DRM. Of course, the content makers may successfully lobby to maintain the status quo. Apple however should just tell the ones getting on their case, that they would have never instituted DRM if the labels had not demanded it before they would allow online sales. Back then, the labels were in the driver's seat, but now Apple is. The only option the labels have now is to totally cancel the one download service they make the most money on. Since money is their god, they are unlikely to do that.
.....Take the right to life; if it is truely inalienable, it means you cannot trade it away or forfeit it in any way.......
Since only God can give life, only He has the right to take it or determine the rules by which a person may forfeit their own life. You are correct in recognizing that rights and duty are inseparable. The One giver of life has imposed the duty to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. If all people really paid attention to this one simple rule, most of our problems in life would vanish. Certainly, governments would only be needed to formulate certain conventions, such as what side of the road to drive on and other societal conveniences.
...It was in the declaration of independence, but not the constitutio......
Which came before and was the reason for the constitution. Like I said, all rights stem from the right to life. Humans cannot create life. They can only take it away. Only the One who can give rights has the ultimate right to also take them. No Government can give life.
.....Who would Ihear from is I made a lens adapter ring for my Canon?.....
Nobody. If you obtained a legit copy of OSX for Intel and installed that on your Dell, Apple would not send the lawyers. Right now of course it is impossible to obtain a legal copy of OSX that will run on an Intel chip unless you also buy a Mac. In that case, Apple should not care if you erase OSX on the Mac and install it on YOUR Dell. There is no copyright on a lens adaptor you might make and sell, but there is on OSX. If you made and sold a software kit that allowed installation of OSX by anyone on a Dell, you would hear from Apple's lawyers unless Apple were selling OSX for Intel standalone on the open market so you could get a legal copy thereof.
.....ones that violate the Red Book standards (invalid data tracks, bogus checksum data, whatever) are more sinister.......
Ever CD/DVD I have ever tried, mounts fine on my external DVD drive using the TOAST program. Some would not mount with the finder, but the finder would recognize the disk once mounted. Some garbage labeled files would give error messages if clicked on, but all the sound tracks were good.
....you are not guaranteed the right to habeus corpus......
Since when has *any* government or founding document ever GIVEN a right to anyone? All governments without a single exception have always TAKEN rights away from people. The founding fathers knew this. There are certain INALIENABLE rights all people have, given to them by the only one who is able to give rights, namely our CREATOR. The ultimate right a government can take away from a person, such as the unborn or a so called criminal, is the right to live. Once life is taken, no human can bring it back. In the constitution, the founding father made a good attempt to prevent the US government from taking these God given rights away from the people. Too bad, that the courts have slowly destroyed the constitution over the intervening years.
At least not for the consumer? Fine of course for the big, greedy companies who bought protection of the government for themselves in the DMCA and similar laws in other countries. If government had stayed out of the protection racket for these outfits, we would have dozens of legal DRM eliminating programs to choose from. There cannot EVER be *any* DRM scheme that will NOT be broken. Even in theory, DRM is IMPOSSIBLE as long as any such supposedly "protected" content is playable on a programmable device.
.......Because the goal is to create a fair and competitive market.....
Exactly how would eliminating all DRM not create more competition? It is the various DRM schemes that enable, yes mandate the lack of true competition. Without DRM there would be plenty of true competition. Even the Zune might have a chance. Maybe you were fascetious?
....Slightly more work, yet also incontrovertibly legal.....
No work at all if you have a Mac. Macs don't pay attention to any of these hare-brained DRM protection put on CDs. Macs ignore Sony's root kits also. Just pop in the CD and rip as usual. If you have a PC, just hold down the shift key as you insert the CD and then rip as always. All the CD protection schemes are a big laugh.
.....I have bought the product. Who are they to tell me how and where I can use it?........
So you bitch because you bought a lens for your expensive SLR Nikon and it will not fit your cheaper Canon? OSX is made for Apple computers. If you are a smart/. nerd you might be able to make OSX run your cheap Dell with enough effort. If you are a good machinist and a good mechanic, you might be able to make the Nikon lens work on you Canon also. Just don't expect Apple to make it easy for you. Also don't make and sell kits to make OSX run on a Dell. You'd hear from Apple's lawyers.
.....Apple may be primarily a hardware company, but they still make software......
Honda is primarily a car company, but they also make engines. Therefore they ought to be forced sell their engines to other car makers as well? Apple makes their OSX for Apple computer hardware. Why should they sell their engines (OSX) to other computer makers or make it easy for consumers to install Honda engines in their Fords?
....If they were a standard music store that sold music for every platform, iPod sales would likely fall as some people would buy cheaper devices.....
That would only be true if the majority of music stored on ipods came from downloads. Check your own ipod (if you have one) for the proportion of content from ITMS vs all other sources, legal and illegal. To fill even a nano with songs from the ITMS would be about $2000. How many here in the relatively affluent/. readership have that much money invested in downloaded music? Most music on ipods comes from CD, owned by the player owner or friends.
Apple should encourage all countries to pass laws to disallow DRM on the ITMS and other music stores. After such laws are on the books, Apple turns off the DRM on the ITMS. Everything else stays exactly the same. If the content providers scream breach of contract, Apple could tell them, nay, the laws of the land trump any contract with you. Go take your problem up with the respective lawmakers. iTunes and the ITMS would still work seamlessly with all ipods and Apple could release the specs for iPods (without the DRM) to other player makers. Apple might sell a few less ipods that way, but would still sell more players than all others put together. The users of other players could then also use iTunes and the ITMS. The content companies would get more money from the added sales and probably recall their lawyers who would be pretty powerless anyway because of the anti-DRM laws in the affected countries. The music companies would at least have to wait until their contracts came up for renewal. However, since nobody else would be allowed to use a closed DRM system either, Apple and their ITMS would still be top dog and have plenty of clout against the content providers. Many of the latter are beginning to toy with the idea of dispensing with DRM anyway. This scenario would give them a strong push in that direction.
Not really. Nobody is going to walk off with the store, but only with certain desirable items therein. MS and other IP producers know that intrinsically, digital bits are easily copied. This is not possible with physical things. If nobody did this copying of IP then there would be no need to protect it, anymore than there would be a need to protect physical stuff from being taken out of a store without getting paid for, if there were no thieves.
It is sad and unfortunate, that these IP protection measures adversely affect all the honest paying customers. This just a digital symptom of the fact that a few rogue, ill behaved people have a huge negative effect on the vast majority of decent folks. The act of a very few people on 9/11 has had incalculable impact on our freedoms and the world as a whole. It is a fact that the makers of products of mind, such as software, have to protect their work from those who would want to benefit from such work without paying. So far, the means of effecting this protection leave much to be desired.
Slashdot Mirror
.....There is no single answer to why software is hard ......
/. shouldn't be too harsh on MS and their trials and tribulations with VISTA.
Maybe the biggest reason is that writing software is an art rather than a science, more akin to writing a symphony or poem. There are PRECISE mathematical formulas and design rules which an engineer of physical things, such as a bridge, for example, can apply. Software, being non-physical, is fundamentally different from any physical device or machine which can be 'engineered' by precise mathematical procedures. Perhaps the very term "software engineer" is a misnomer in the same way that applying the term "engineer" would be to a musician.
The hardest sort of software to write is that which is intended to interoperate with people. Computers are precise, mathematical, deterministic machines, whereas people are not. No amount of "maturing" of the software industry will ever change the fact that writing most software is not and never will be an exact science. Folks here at
......Software programming in general is hard for 2 reasons......
Actually there is only one master reason. So far, there is no mathematical way to prove that a given non trivial software program will actually work as intended. When designing a physical thing, such as a bridge, machine or electrical circuit, there are precise mathematical formulas which can be applied that give a reasonable expectation that the building or machine etc. will perform according to expectations. There are no mathematics that can be applied that will show to even a ballpark accuracy that a given complex software system, such as an OS, will perform as its designers hoped. That is why there are alpha, beta and all sorts of other test versions where users are asked to try out the programs. My theory is that this is so, because software is not physical, but a pure product of mind to which different rules apply. Human minds do not operate nor communicate with the mathematical precision that computers and machines do. This is in fact what makes us human. All software begins in a human mind which operates in a much different manner than computers. Translating one human language to another human language is hard. Translating human thought patterns into computer instructions, which then have to usually interact with other human thought patterns is even harder.
....Those 140,000 "exploits" are largely redundant.....
Indeed they are very redundant, running on millions of Windows zombie machines clogging the Internet and filling everyone's email boxes with with terabytes of SPAM and other digital trash every day.
.....elementary school retards and PC users like real coders.......
That's exactly the problem. Most adult computer users know about as much or less about computers that an elementary school kid. To get good use out of a PC you have to be a "real coder" or at least an elementary school kid. However, even computer retards can get useful work done on a Mac in a relatively short time.
....Apple hasn't done any of those things......
That is because they have not needed to. It isn't the number of theoretical possible exploits, but the percentage of the installed base of computers that have gotten hosed by some of the huge variety of malware actually circulating on the net. By that measure, the number of Macs thus affected is next to nothing. No OS and no other human creation is perfect, but thus far at least, from a practical perspective, Macs have no problem with malware and Mac users don't have to spend unneeded time and money for installing and maintaining special anti-virus programs. Mac computers also don't have to phone home to get their software registered and authorized. When we decided to double the RAM and HD space on a XP box, it had to call home for new 'activation'. Doing the same thing to an old Mac did not need such crappy exercises. From my readings, VISTA is even worse than XP in this regard. When you have a Windows computer, especially VISTA, it seems that you don't really own it, but it is controlled by someone else. First Microsoft and for millions of unwitting users, by one or more 'botherders' and spyware outfits. Why should even ONE Mac user care WHY there isn't the flood of malware attacking their computer? Who cares WHAT the reason is! Maybe it IS the low market share. So WHAT! It is the bottom line: Macs and their OSX are MUCH more secure that Windows PCs. Apple can truthfully advertise that fact.
.....Like Macs are actually diffrent from PC's......
Yes, they are PC's that actually "just work"(tm) and don't get viruses and all sorts of other malware. The essence of a computer is not the hardware, but the software. Apple is the only PC maker that makes both, to work seamlessly for a good user experience. For many, that makes one working Mac more desirable than two temperamental sometimes work and sometimes don't work Windows machines. In addition, users can easily install and run Windows (including VISTA) running as a virtual OS under Parallels. That makes one Mac like two computers in one which actually makes Macs cheaper than any equivalent Windows only hardware.
.....Or was he created by a bigger god?......
The God I am talking about is the biggest God, beyond time and space. He simply exists and has always existed. We all have a hard time with that concept. Moses at the burning bush did. That is a concept only faith can fully grasp. You either CHOOSE to believe that or don't. This faith is beyond logic, but not illogical. Nobody can force you to believe anything, but can want to believe or not want to. You have been created by God with a will. You may freely exercise that will to believe or not believe Him. You mention a child. Why yes, Jesus said that if we do not approach God in simple trust, He will not be found. (Luke 18:16-17)
.......If you're going to try to convince me of the existence of God.......
/. even dream about. Genuine faith in a transcendent Creator God and real science are not incompatible, but compliment each other.
I don't think anyone can be convinced to believe anything they don't WANT to believe. I was and am not trying to convince you there is a God nor fool you. You either want to believe or don't. It is evidently something you do not want to do, at least at this time. However, it is not something you cannot do.
(....that an all powerful creator is JUST AS RIDICULOUS as the universe just spontaneously appearing. They're BOTH absurd.).....
Actually neither are absurd, but both are beliefs. However the belief in a Creator, unlike most of the faith in evolution, is at least not trying to masquerade as science and get supported by tax dollars. The so called "scientific" big bang theory proposes that this big bang suddenly appeared out of nothing. The Creation theory says that God created the universe out of nothing. Both of these are faith and both are beyond any science, past, present and future, unless someone invents a time machine. Science is observation and experiment in the present. That kind of I science I like because that is the kind of science I as part of at Stanford University for over thirty years. I probably know more about real, experimental science than many here on
A gift is something you did nor earn. You obviously have a sharp mind. Where did you get that? Did you expend any effort to obtain it? Is it not part of your genetic code? Why is it so difficult for you to admit that you did not work to obtain your intelligence? You are a thinking human being. Every such thinking person eventually seeks to find answers to at least four important questions. 1) Who am I? 2) Where did I come from? 3) Why am I here? 4) Where am I going when I die? Science can help, but ultimately only faith can give satisfactory answers.
.....so he can punish us with increasing temperatures.......
These people did not come up with this idea. The Bible has references to severely increasing heat from the sun as part of God's punishments for human evil, reserved for the last days. One of these is found in the Old Testament in Isaiah 30:26, where we are informed that the sun will be seven times hotter and another is found in Revelation 16:8-9. There it says that people will be scorched by the sun and curse God because of the great heat. The passage in Revelation is just before the part about the final battle of the final war, the battle at Armageddon.
To many here, the Bible represents fiction and fairy tales. However, an all out global war and the resulting world wide upheaval, along with havoc from nature is not impossible. We humans like to believe, both corporately and individually that we are the captains of our ship and the masters of our fate. From a sudden death of a loved one, to history of great natural disasters and from the very real possibility of global thermonuclear and other technologically advanced warfare, that belief and hope is ill founded. Global warming, human caused or not, can only add to this nightmare. Could it be that we really are NOT in charge after all?
.....If you'd ever bothered to understand the actual scientific argument behind evolution theory, you'd realize it's not merely an attempt by atheists to cloak their beliefs in the mantle of science..........
Science is based on objective observations and experiment. No science can explain or fathom the ultimate cause of the effect called the universe. Logic dictates that every result must have a reason or cause. The universe either 1) created itself, which is absurd, 2) always existed or 3) was cause to exist by an agent or agents beyond itself. Reason two has been ruled out by modern cosmological observations, such as the cosmic background radiation. There was a "big bang", or as I prefer, a creation event. The cause of this event is beyond science and in the realm of faith. If the ultimate cause of he universe is beyond science, then certain, now unobserved and unduplicated processes must of necessity also be. One of these is how living things arose from non-living. We can conjecture about sparks and chemicals, but nobody has ever DEMONSTRATED how a living cell can happen by any process we can imagine. Science is great and can explain a lot of things, but it is limited.
Name me ONE thing that you have that you were not given? You might object by saying that you worked hard for everything you have. Where did you get life, health and a sound mind? Who gives you the air you breathe and lets the sun shine on you? Your rights are like that. If you got them from a human source, by works or as a gift, then that human source has the right to take them back, justly or unjustly. If you were given these rights by the giver of life, then our rights, ultimately your life, can still be taken by another human, but only unjustly.
.....So personally, even though I'm an atheist, I don't give a rat's ass about the fact that the Declaration of Independence used the word "Creator" to frame the concept that human rights transcend any human authority. As long as that concept doesn't fall by the wayside......
People have many ideas about how the universe and we humans got here. Logic dictates that the universe did not make itself. Every effect demands a cause. The effect of the universe and by extension, we humans, has a first cause, which itself must be uncaused. This is VERY hard for anyone to grasp. There really is no such a thing as an atheist. Atheist means without god just as amoral means without moral. It says nothing about any particular god. Everybody, and that includes you, is not amoral and also has some idea or belief of how things came to be what we observe them to be. Many today BELIEVE that everything is the result of the action of mindless chance. They then clothe this belief in a white lab coat and call it science. Others believe that there is a mind as the cause of the universe, in the same way that a mind is the cause for an automobile or a computer program.
Whatever you believe to be the original cause behind the cosmos and your own ultimate existence and destiny, that is your god. This god, if he/she/it is a god, is also the one that MUST transcend human authority. It must be this god also who endowed us humans with the inherent rights, as recognized by the writers of the declaration of independence. Abraham Lincoln also recognized the idea of "the proposition that all men are created equal" in his famous Gettyburg address. You might read the whole thing sometime.
Of all human concepts of god, the one put forth in the Bible is the one that meets the specs of a God that transcends all human authority as well a all time and space. In the Bible alone, we are told that God is a real person who inhabits eternity, has always existed and possesses all wisdom, power and authority. It is this God, whom Lincoln and the writers of the declaration of independence had in mind, as the giver of life and all rights inherent in that gift. You may not believe in that God, but that doesn't make you an atheist.
.....but, if it did, it would probably give either party the option of nullifying all of the contract......
There MIGHT be a clause in their contract that allows for unilateral cancellation, but I doubt very much that the content companies would suddenly forego online sales not only on ITMS an but all other legal downloads. Since some people in certain countries are agitating for open digital interchange, the ones doing this should lobby their governments to outlaw all DRM. The ONLY reason that ALL digital content is NOT universally compatible is because of DRM. Of course, the content makers may successfully lobby to maintain the status quo. Apple however should just tell the ones getting on their case, that they would have never instituted DRM if the labels had not demanded it before they would allow online sales. Back then, the labels were in the driver's seat, but now Apple is. The only option the labels have now is to totally cancel the one download service they make the most money on. Since money is their god, they are unlikely to do that.
.....Take the right to life; if it is truely inalienable, it means you cannot trade it away or forfeit it in any way.......
Since only God can give life, only He has the right to take it or determine the rules by which a person may forfeit their own life. You are correct in recognizing that rights and duty are inseparable. The One giver of life has imposed the duty to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. If all people really paid attention to this one simple rule, most of our problems in life would vanish. Certainly, governments would only be needed to formulate certain conventions, such as what side of the road to drive on and other societal conveniences.
...It was in the declaration of independence, but not the constitutio......
Which came before and was the reason for the constitution. Like I said, all rights stem from the right to life. Humans cannot create life. They can only take it away. Only the One who can give rights has the ultimate right to also take them. No Government can give life.
.....Who would Ihear from is I made a lens adapter ring for my Canon?.....
Nobody. If you obtained a legit copy of OSX for Intel and installed that on your Dell, Apple would not send the lawyers. Right now of course it is impossible to obtain a legal copy of OSX that will run on an Intel chip unless you also buy a Mac. In that case, Apple should not care if you erase OSX on the Mac and install it on YOUR Dell. There is no copyright on a lens adaptor you might make and sell, but there is on OSX. If you made and sold a software kit that allowed installation of OSX by anyone on a Dell, you would hear from Apple's lawyers unless Apple were selling OSX for Intel standalone on the open market so you could get a legal copy thereof.
.....ones that violate the Red Book standards (invalid data tracks, bogus checksum data, whatever) are more sinister.......
Ever CD/DVD I have ever tried, mounts fine on my external DVD drive using the TOAST program. Some would not mount with the finder, but the finder would recognize the disk once mounted. Some garbage labeled files would give error messages if clicked on, but all the sound tracks were good.
....you are not guaranteed the right to habeus corpus......
Since when has *any* government or founding document ever GIVEN a right to anyone? All governments without a single exception have always TAKEN rights away from people. The founding fathers knew this. There are certain INALIENABLE rights all people have, given to them by the only one who is able to give rights, namely our CREATOR. The ultimate right a government can take away from a person, such as the unborn or a so called criminal, is the right to live. Once life is taken, no human can bring it back. In the constitution, the founding father made a good attempt to prevent the US government from taking these God given rights away from the people. Too bad, that the courts have slowly destroyed the constitution over the intervening years.
.....Please Government! Save me.......
At least not for the consumer? Fine of course for the big, greedy companies who bought protection of the government for themselves in the DMCA and similar laws in other countries. If government had stayed out of the protection racket for these outfits, we would have dozens of legal DRM eliminating programs to choose from. There cannot EVER be *any* DRM scheme that will NOT be broken. Even in theory, DRM is IMPOSSIBLE as long as any such supposedly "protected" content is playable on a programmable device.
.......Because the goal is to create a fair and competitive market.....
Exactly how would eliminating all DRM not create more competition? It is the various DRM schemes that enable, yes mandate the lack of true competition. Without DRM there would be plenty of true competition. Even the Zune might have a chance. Maybe you were fascetious?
....Slightly more work, yet also incontrovertibly legal.....
No work at all if you have a Mac. Macs don't pay attention to any of these hare-brained DRM protection put on CDs. Macs ignore Sony's root kits also. Just pop in the CD and rip as usual. If you have a PC, just hold down the shift key as you insert the CD and then rip as always. All the CD protection schemes are a big laugh.
.....I have bought the product. Who are they to tell me how and where I can use it?........
/. nerd you might be able to make OSX run your cheap Dell with enough effort. If you are a good machinist and a good mechanic, you might be able to make the Nikon lens work on you Canon also. Just don't expect Apple to make it easy for you. Also don't make and sell kits to make OSX run on a Dell. You'd hear from Apple's lawyers.
So you bitch because you bought a lens for your expensive SLR Nikon and it will not fit your cheaper Canon? OSX is made for Apple computers. If you are a smart
.....Apple may be primarily a hardware company, but they still make software......
Honda is primarily a car company, but they also make engines. Therefore they ought to be forced sell their engines to other car makers as well? Apple makes their OSX for Apple computer hardware. Why should they sell their engines (OSX) to other computer makers or make it easy for consumers to install Honda engines in their Fords?
....If they were a standard music store that sold music for every platform, iPod sales would likely fall as some people would buy cheaper devices.....
/. readership have that much money invested in downloaded music? Most music on ipods comes from CD, owned by the player owner or friends.
That would only be true if the majority of music stored on ipods came from downloads. Check your own ipod (if you have one) for the proportion of content from ITMS vs all other sources, legal and illegal. To fill even a nano with songs from the ITMS would be about $2000. How many here in the relatively affluent
.....if they just shut off the iTMS store......
Apple should encourage all countries to pass laws to disallow DRM on the ITMS and other music stores. After such laws are on the books, Apple turns off the DRM on the ITMS. Everything else stays exactly the same. If the content providers scream breach of contract, Apple could tell them, nay, the laws of the land trump any contract with you. Go take your problem up with the respective lawmakers. iTunes and the ITMS would still work seamlessly with all ipods and Apple could release the specs for iPods (without the DRM) to other player makers. Apple might sell a few less ipods that way, but would still sell more players than all others put together. The users of other players could then also use iTunes and the ITMS. The content companies would get more money from the added sales and probably recall their lawyers who would be pretty powerless anyway because of the anti-DRM laws in the affected countries. The music companies would at least have to wait until their contracts came up for renewal. However, since nobody else would be allowed to use a closed DRM system either, Apple and their ITMS would still be top dog and have plenty of clout against the content providers. Many of the latter are beginning to toy with the idea of dispensing with DRM anyway. This scenario would give them a strong push in that direction.
.....they protect the store, not the items.......
Not really. Nobody is going to walk off with the store, but only with certain desirable items therein. MS and other IP producers know that intrinsically, digital bits are easily copied. This is not possible with physical things. If nobody did this copying of IP then there would be no need to protect it, anymore than there would be a need to protect physical stuff from being taken out of a store without getting paid for, if there were no thieves.
It is sad and unfortunate, that these IP protection measures adversely affect all the honest paying customers. This just a digital symptom of the fact that a few rogue, ill behaved people have a huge negative effect on the vast majority of decent folks. The act of a very few people on 9/11 has had incalculable impact on our freedoms and the world as a whole. It is a fact that the makers of products of mind, such as software, have to protect their work from those who would want to benefit from such work without paying. So far, the means of effecting this protection leave much to be desired.