Oh my - absolutely true. I hadn't thought of that... but my wife was the one who signed up for Cable, and my internet access is a rider on that. So my wife runs the 5 internet connected machines in my household (and logs on to check Email once a week or so).
Sorry if I took the post out of context, but it appears that as a percentage of Gross National Product, or as a percentage against population the statistics are amazing.
Yes, I realize that this prooves your point and does qualify as, "How to lie with statistics". But the growth trend does make a point (great-great grandfather at this time) that other contries besides the US _do_ have an impact on the global market
In many markets that the US is comfortably in the lead, other contries are catching up. I think the better reading on this is in another section of this same thread. They are at least closer to on topic for the article.
Really, until decided in court, and judged by history, it's all anecdotal.
probably old enough a story to not get any zealots screaming at me...
SCO: If they really think that they own all rights to UNIX, there are certainly things in Linux that are reverse engineered out of UNIX (Intellectual Property [IP]), and there are definately (since re-written) parts of UNIX (copyright) that have shown up in various forks of the Linux kernel. If they own the IP rights to some of the stuff that Linux is doing, then BSD will feel the burn, too. It appears that the copyright issue itself is moot, with the evidence in the public, now... But this is too current to have decent perspective.
DMCA? The fact that the DMCA is being used to protect otherwise uncopyrightable data could be quashing competitive things. Certainly This story and the comments that go with it point to that possibility. But also, mostly anecdotal.
So to defend any single entity that feels they are being hurt, the arguments can go both ways. The issues get confused. Every side thinks that they are doing the right thing. For this reason, I lean on history (and up until my post, nobody else had been pointing out that perspective).
At least you and I put thought into our posts. <egotist>I don't have excellent Karma for nothing.</egotist>:-D
I use historical perspective because it's always difficult to see the impact of current actions without loking at the historic implications of similar actions.
I use Henry Ford and the Ford Motor Company because in general, most people know who Henry Ford is (though they may not know that his business almost failed under the crushing weight of bogus law-suits brought on by his competitors). I also believe, that like Henry Ford, the right person has a good chance of getting the credit for thier own innovations. I try to not be a pessimist.
That brings me to another historic point. The IP issue is actually very well illustrated by Tesla and Marconi. Marconi was given full patent to the Radio, but as Tesla said, "Let him continue. He is using seventeen of my patents.". This is actually a case where NOT defending one's IP led to failure.
I do not think that IP rights should be abandoned, but I believe that changing laws (or using laws in creative ways) to try to stifle a competitive market is very wrong and hurtful.
Finally, the stronger argument that I do NOT point out (because it's so over-used on Slashdot, that even I don't want to hear about it anymore) is the negative impact of the DMCA [Digital Millenium Copyright Act]. I'll let the others continue on about the current impact of the DMCA. The problem is as 4of12's comment (above) points out, such current impact is hard to proove.
You read it corectly, but maybe not fully in context... Yet, Hollywood is still the leader (money made, not necessarily quality). And as another comment points out, other countries, like India, are quickly catching up.
I don't disagree with any of what you are saying. Afterall, I am an American moviegoer. I try my best to avoid the formula crap that Hollywood tries to shovel my way.
That said - look at my comment in the context of the grandparent post. I'm trying to convince someone whom is dismissive of foreign influence on entertainment that they are misguided.
Finally, the success of the initial release of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (fully spoken in Mandarin, and sub-titled) was my first indication that maybe, just maybe, my fellow countrymen can read during movie entertainment. Still, it's always preferable to release a movie in the region's native language, as it helps an audience identify with the characters on screen.
And on the technology and hardware side, we send the specs overseas to licensed manufacturing "partners", and they send the specs to their in-laws at the factory down the street, and the product gets copied for zero R&D and is sold for half the cost.
The point is exactly right from the way I see it. When corporations try to change laws to keep new innovators out of there market, then everyone suffers. This is not a new idea either. It happened to Henry Ford back in 1906 when the other established car-makers tried to squash him.
The good news, Ford made it. The bad news, is it took a huge toll on him before he was able to sell his "horribly unsafe" car (usafe is the reasoning back then to quash his ability to sell cars.)
Already though Taiwan, Hong Kong, Brazil and yes... mainland China are starting to innovate by improving the technologies that they are "illegally" copying. Selling exact copies of a product to pay for the R&D dollars so that they can make their own improved product that they can uniquely call their own, and sell in the US.
What these companies do is extreme, and it's real innovation that's being squashed here - not the inflated innovation done by reverse engineering. Yet legal or not, these other countries will innovate on thier own.
What I'm saying here is... just like movies the US is defininately way in the lead, but the rest of the world is catching up... slowly. There's no reason to allow large companies to save their short term profits by quashing US innovations forcing the the rest of the world to be catching up faster.
That's what you get when you take a ~45 page Philip K. Dick short story and try to turn it into a feature film. Same problem that you have with 'Paycheck', way to much filler for the producer to over-produce.
Buy a kit. Though this (of course) is not practical - and many of the kits need a chassis of an existing car anyway...
This question brings me to an interesting point of this discussion. Many automakers publish these codes under copyright in a service manual (extra price). This is still proprietary - but accessible.
Unless you are made of money, it could be quite expensive to buy these for every model year of every vehicle type known to US dealerships.
And - yes - it's still proprietary (via copyright), but these have all the stuff that Chilton and Hayes can't publish about a car.
As much info as I have gathered, I couldn't find anybody who actually talks about full disclosure of ODBII system diagnostic codes. Only the several sources for common error codes. And this book. So, I can't answer your exact question (which bothers me). I can only continue on the line of my original suggestion. Instead of taking it to the dealership, have your local mechanic seek an alternative fix.
I'll concede that the legality of aftermarket carberators is questionable - moreso in states that have emissions testing (76 is the year you're poking for -- 1980 is the dead-cutoff).
I pointed out the after-market computer replacements that are available for most cars as well. Again, legallity is questionable. With the notable exception of California (where illegal street mods seem most popular), most states wont notice mods.
Here in Minnesota, I was given the carberator choice by a reputable mechanic for a 1999 Kia. Basically it was a $800 job for a $600 "fix it the right way". I went with the right way by price, not preference.
Yeah, I covered that option in another post - and my point remains the same. You have a choice. (Though often the new computer choice doesn't appear until your car is at least 3 years old).
The only car that I can think of that may not be able to deal with a carberator at all would be the Mazda RX (Rotary eXprimental) engines.
I also fully agree that replacing all of the electronics is cheaper. Although there are also many "pseudo-open" after-market replacement computers.
I'm also not saying that I don't like the bill that they are pushing through congress. I hate closed stuff in cars as much as I hate the "Trusted Computing" initiatives (and for much the same reasons). I think this bill is a good start.
Tell that to these guys. They seem to make a pretty penny putting lots of horsepower into a small space.
There are obviously physical limitations to how much you can put UNDER the hood (and still see), but you'd be surprised at how customizable new cars are.
Nothing is stopping you from opening up the hood of your car (YET), throwing out the fuel injection, and putting in a carberator, distributor cap and a mechanical gas petal line. Edelbrook and others make fine carberators that fit happily onto modern engines... but then it's not stock.
If it pisses you off, do nothing (huh? but seriously) - when your car gets older and starts having problems, don't take it to the dealer. Take it to your local mechanic, and tell him you want a carberator installed and to go ahead and throw out the fuel injector.
It may be more expensive the first time through, but that way you won't have problems with 20 year old computer equipment - that your mechanic doesn't know how to fix without using junk-yard parts anyway.
Many have said it before, and others will say it again - if it displeases you... vote with your wallets.
Robotech (or enter any one of a dozen later Anime storylines here) style mental control over machinery interfaces. I wonder if they'll give a nod to the "Tatsunoko Studios" once they have war machines that run on this mental interface.
What's really sad, is that I've fully bought that they will probably get it to work effectively, and that this type of weaponry will actually come to fruition. Boy did they have an effect on my childhood. Hmph.
Way back (late 70s) BASF was well known for manufacturing really cheap - marginal quality cassette tapes.
They are a "chemicals" conglomerate, like Dow Corning, or S.C.Johnson.
Just now, I realise that nobody is likely to care, but I answered the question already, so I'm posting the answer anyway.
Troll or not troll your post borders on being off-topic. Especially how it's worded as an advertisement.
I should also point out that some people have trouble supporting the Qt licence that KDE is built on. Qt is open (sort of) and closed (sort of), and there seems to be little concensus about how open it is -- having read the license myself, I'm still not sure. Thus the reason why the Desktop Linux project isn't supporting it.
A better way to work your post is that the Gnome 2.6 beta screenshots appear to take great strides in catching up to where KDE was several months ago.
The internal architecture of a phone that runs GSM is vastly different from TDMA. A phone would literally have to be half again as big (were talking the size of a NexTel [Motorola iDen] phone). Basically, (at the parent post is getting to) these are not marketable.
Having set up AT&T wireless for my entire company, the GSM and TDMA billing systems are also completely different. I don't think this was on purpose, I just think that nobody bothered integrating the two systems when they initially set up... with a company as big as AT&T WS - will probably never happen
Final thought, TDMA still has a much larger coverage area than GSM in the US. GSM has coverage in all major metropolitans, but the smaller cities and outlying suburbs are often not yet serviced by reliable GSM signal. Until this changes... I can't have my company switch to GSM. And with problems like this, I'm glad I haven't done so for more than just that reason!
First off, the HP technology is called iRank, whish is similar to Google's PageRank. So HP starts a research about lack of original ideas by modifying an idea from something else. Hmm...
But what I really wanted to say was that there is no method to verify if the same person posted the blog idea to several different sites. It's quite common that someone would post an idea on their personal Blog, and subsequently submit it to SlashDot and Yahoo, etc.
I'm trying to say that it's not necessarily plagurism, but it certainly opens up new discussion on some long standing questions about information ownership. Oh, wait, that means my whole post was a re-used idea. Hmph. So much for innovation..
Oh, and the obligatory... In related news, it was found that some people post the content of entire articles that were pointed to by the story itself, sometimes attributed, sometimes not.
They tested the explosion theory, too. See the [quicktime (or xine) required]
center-tank explosion test.
I didn't bother researching any of this until the (great-great-grandparent) post by corebreech.
Since then, I read (well skimmed) the NTSB's (PDF) final Flight 800 report. The report is 350 pages of detailed fact finding and experimentation. The report convinced me that these people are professionals who really do know what they are doing.
Otherwise, I agree about the privacy down the drain thing, you can see my other post (actually on subject) below (or at this link).
I'll go so far to concede that the article would have actually been more usefull with a fuller review. I wouldn't necessarily call it 'poor journalism', as I doubt the author of the page was considering his actions from that point of view.
None the less, I have a headache this-afternoon, and don't trust my level of irritation as rational. Thus I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt.
Maybe so, maybe not - but you can't change anything as an "Anonymous Coward".
It's so easy to get involved. Go to your local (independance, green, socialist, communist, etc, etc) party meetings, and take charge. Give them a direction, and have them send you to the respective national convention. Do that a few times, then run for office. Make a stand for yourself, don't just compain, and say, it will always suck. That sort of defeatist attitude will guarantee that this country will always suck.
Actually, the tide is turning. Remember the Super Tuesday primaries actually had record turnouts.
I'm a proud voter, and I'm happy to see that more people are taking the 5 minutes required to do the same.
And as another post-er already pointed out, the failure of DivX based DVD players was a consumer shug-the-shoulders, "I wonder who would buy that," response. But those consumers did not buy that.
Slashdot Mirror
In most companies everyone outside of the facilities dept. gets an internet connected computer.
Oh my - absolutely true. I hadn't thought of that... but my wife was the one who signed up for Cable, and my internet access is a rider on that. So my wife runs the 5 internet connected machines in my household (and logs on to check Email once a week or so).
Yes, I realize that this prooves your point and does qualify as, "How to lie with statistics". But the growth trend does make a point (great-great grandfather at this time) that other contries besides the US _do_ have an impact on the global market
In many markets that the US is comfortably in the lead, other contries are catching up. I think the better reading on this is in another section of this same thread. They are at least closer to on topic for the article.
Really, until decided in court, and judged by history, it's all anecdotal.
probably old enough a story to not get any zealots screaming at me...
SCO: If they really think that they own all rights to UNIX, there are certainly things in Linux that are reverse engineered out of UNIX (Intellectual Property [IP]), and there are definately (since re-written) parts of UNIX (copyright) that have shown up in various forks of the Linux kernel. If they own the IP rights to some of the stuff that Linux is doing, then BSD will feel the burn, too. It appears that the copyright issue itself is moot, with the evidence in the public, now... But this is too current to have decent perspective.
DMCA? The fact that the DMCA is being used to protect otherwise uncopyrightable data could be quashing competitive things. Certainly This story and the comments that go with it point to that possibility. But also, mostly anecdotal.
So to defend any single entity that feels they are being hurt, the arguments can go both ways. The issues get confused. Every side thinks that they are doing the right thing. For this reason, I lean on history (and up until my post, nobody else had been pointing out that perspective).
At least you and I put thought into our posts. <egotist>I don't have excellent Karma for nothing.</egotist> :-D
I use Henry Ford and the Ford Motor Company because in general, most people know who Henry Ford is (though they may not know that his business almost failed under the crushing weight of bogus law-suits brought on by his competitors). I also believe, that like Henry Ford, the right person has a good chance of getting the credit for thier own innovations. I try to not be a pessimist.
That brings me to another historic point. The IP issue is actually very well illustrated by Tesla and Marconi. Marconi was given full patent to the Radio, but as Tesla said, "Let him continue. He is using seventeen of my patents.". This is actually a case where NOT defending one's IP led to failure.
I do not think that IP rights should be abandoned, but I believe that changing laws (or using laws in creative ways) to try to stifle a competitive market is very wrong and hurtful.
Finally, the stronger argument that I do NOT point out (because it's so over-used on Slashdot, that even I don't want to hear about it anymore) is the negative impact of the DMCA [Digital Millenium Copyright Act]. I'll let the others continue on about the current impact of the DMCA. The problem is as 4of12's comment (above) points out, such current impact is hard to proove.
I don't disagree with any of what you are saying. Afterall, I am an American moviegoer. I try my best to avoid the formula crap that Hollywood tries to shovel my way.
That said - look at my comment in the context of the grandparent post. I'm trying to convince someone whom is dismissive of foreign influence on entertainment that they are misguided.
Finally, the success of the initial release of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (fully spoken in Mandarin, and sub-titled) was my first indication that maybe, just maybe, my fellow countrymen can read during movie entertainment. Still, it's always preferable to release a movie in the region's native language, as it helps an audience identify with the characters on screen.
Sadly that's how it is.
The good news, Ford made it. The bad news, is it took a huge toll on him before he was able to sell his "horribly unsafe" car (usafe is the reasoning back then to quash his ability to sell cars.)
Already though Taiwan, Hong Kong, Brazil and yes... mainland China are starting to innovate by improving the technologies that they are "illegally" copying. Selling exact copies of a product to pay for the R&D dollars so that they can make their own improved product that they can uniquely call their own, and sell in the US.
What these companies do is extreme, and it's real innovation that's being squashed here - not the inflated innovation done by reverse engineering. Yet legal or not, these other countries will innovate on thier own.
What I'm saying here is ... just like movies the US is defininately way in the lead, but the rest of the world is catching up... slowly. There's no reason to allow large companies to save their short term profits by quashing US innovations forcing the the rest of the world to be catching up faster.
That's what you get when you take a ~45 page Philip K. Dick short story and try to turn it into a feature film. Same problem that you have with 'Paycheck', way to much filler for the producer to over-produce.
This question brings me to an interesting point of this discussion. Many automakers publish these codes under copyright in a service manual (extra price). This is still proprietary - but accessible.
For instace, I found these sites:
Unless you are made of money, it could be quite expensive to buy these for every model year of every vehicle type known to US dealerships.
And - yes - it's still proprietary (via copyright), but these have all the stuff that Chilton and Hayes can't publish about a car.
As much info as I have gathered, I couldn't find anybody who actually talks about full disclosure of ODBII system diagnostic codes. Only the several sources for common error codes. And this book. So, I can't answer your exact question (which bothers me). I can only continue on the line of my original suggestion. Instead of taking it to the dealership, have your local mechanic seek an alternative fix.
I pointed out the after-market computer replacements that are available for most cars as well. Again, legallity is questionable. With the notable exception of California (where illegal street mods seem most popular), most states wont notice mods.
Here in Minnesota, I was given the carberator choice by a reputable mechanic for a 1999 Kia. Basically it was a $800 job for a $600 "fix it the right way". I went with the right way by price, not preference.
Yeah, I covered that option in another post - and my point remains the same. You have a choice. (Though often the new computer choice doesn't appear until your car is at least 3 years old).
I also fully agree that replacing all of the electronics is cheaper. Although there are also many "pseudo-open" after-market replacement computers.
I'm also not saying that I don't like the bill that they are pushing through congress. I hate closed stuff in cars as much as I hate the "Trusted Computing" initiatives (and for much the same reasons). I think this bill is a good start.
Bottom line, you've got choices.
There are obviously physical limitations to how much you can put UNDER the hood (and still see), but you'd be surprised at how customizable new cars are.
If it pisses you off, do nothing (huh? but seriously) - when your car gets older and starts having problems, don't take it to the dealer. Take it to your local mechanic, and tell him you want a carberator installed and to go ahead and throw out the fuel injector.
It may be more expensive the first time through, but that way you won't have problems with 20 year old computer equipment - that your mechanic doesn't know how to fix without using junk-yard parts anyway.
Many have said it before, and others will say it again - if it displeases you... vote with your wallets.
What's really sad, is that I've fully bought that they will probably get it to work effectively, and that this type of weaponry will actually come to fruition. Boy did they have an effect on my childhood. Hmph.
Just now, I realise that nobody is likely to care, but I answered the question already, so I'm posting the answer anyway.
I should also point out that some people have trouble supporting the Qt licence that KDE is built on. Qt is open (sort of) and closed (sort of), and there seems to be little concensus about how open it is -- having read the license myself, I'm still not sure. Thus the reason why the Desktop Linux project isn't supporting it.
A better way to work your post is that the Gnome 2.6 beta screenshots appear to take great strides in catching up to where KDE was several months ago.
Having set up AT&T wireless for my entire company, the GSM and TDMA billing systems are also completely different. I don't think this was on purpose, I just think that nobody bothered integrating the two systems when they initially set up... with a company as big as AT&T WS - will probably never happen
Final thought, TDMA still has a much larger coverage area than GSM in the US. GSM has coverage in all major metropolitans, but the smaller cities and outlying suburbs are often not yet serviced by reliable GSM signal. Until this changes... I can't have my company switch to GSM. And with problems like this, I'm glad I haven't done so for more than just that reason!
and most of the world knows that the US does not pay it's UN dues (at least not on time).
But what I really wanted to say was that there is no method to verify if the same person posted the blog idea to several different sites. It's quite common that someone would post an idea on their personal Blog, and subsequently submit it to SlashDot and Yahoo, etc.
I'm trying to say that it's not necessarily plagurism, but it certainly opens up new discussion on some long standing questions about information ownership. Oh, wait, that means my whole post was a re-used idea. Hmph. So much for innovation..Oh, and the obligatory... In related news, it was found that some people post the content of entire articles that were pointed to by the story itself, sometimes attributed, sometimes not.
I didn't bother researching any of this until the (great-great-grandparent) post by corebreech. Since then, I read (well skimmed) the NTSB's (PDF) final Flight 800 report. The report is 350 pages of detailed fact finding and experimentation. The report convinced me that these people are professionals who really do know what they are doing.
Otherwise, I agree about the privacy down the drain thing, you can see my other post (actually on subject) below (or at this link).
None the less, I have a headache this-afternoon, and don't trust my level of irritation as rational. Thus I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt.
It's so easy to get involved. Go to your local (independance, green, socialist, communist, etc, etc) party meetings, and take charge. Give them a direction, and have them send you to the respective national convention. Do that a few times, then run for office. Make a stand for yourself, don't just compain, and say, it will always suck . That sort of defeatist attitude will guarantee that this country will always suck.
I'm a proud voter, and I'm happy to see that more people are taking the 5 minutes required to do the same.
And as another post-er already pointed out, the failure of DivX based DVD players was a consumer shug-the-shoulders, "I wonder who would buy that," response. But those consumers did not buy that.