I'm afraid this is going to get buried in all the responses about your proof of 0 = 0 x 0, but...
Yep, I should not have put that in there. I was just trying to show how something the oringinal poster might regard as intuitive wasn't always seen that way.
Bonus Proof
Theorem:
A ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness.
UGH! That's a bastard to correct just using english language. Clearly, English is a flawed language and should be replaced with something we can validate with formal proofs.
0=1x0
0=(0+1)x0
0=0x0+1x0 Distributive Law
0=0x0+0
0=0+0x0
0=0x0
The Distributive Law states that (a+b)c = ac + bc.
It is one of the axioms of mathematics and generally accepted in a proof without explanation. Having said that, I just knew that I should have put it in there or some smart arse would try and pull me up on it. Correction humbly accepted.
The Green Party in the UK has a well thought out policy on Software Patents and IPR. A quote from their site:
The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.
The only thing I'll add to their words is that the Green Party traditionally does well in the European Elections, so a vote for them can make a real difference. Also, where they don't get in, more votes for them is still more pressure on other parties to adopt similar policies.
The only other party that has a strong stance on this is the UK Independance Party, but that's only because they hate all foreigners. Greens are the saner (and less racist) option in the UK.
The strongest party in the UK against Software Patents is (as usual) the Green Party.
A quote from the party: The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.
Google for more info, but a couple of links are here:
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/index.php?nav=article s &n=68>First Link Second Link
The second link recommends either the UKIP or Green Party for restricting EU control over the UK, but vote Green for the less xenophobic, racist and altogether saner option.
It seems like the answer (well, we'll call it "i") has been proposed before anyone has shown if can really happen.
Great Cthulhu help me, but I'm going to try and answer this for you.
We have natural numbers - 1,2,3,... - and people are happy with this. It's an abstract way of
representing a real property. I have five oranges, I owe you four oranges. Natural.
And then we have Zero and once upon a time this disturbed people. You grew up with it, you're happy with it;
but we can see that it was less intuitive than 1,2,3,... because it developed so much later and the greeks
managed without it for quite a long time. It's not an abstraction in the same way that these other numbers
are. People used to ask questions such as, 'how can something exist and yet be nothing?' 'How can zero x zero =
zero since that means you have no zero's?' Can you prove that it does mathematically, right now? *
And yet, the discovery (or creation;) of Zero allowed people to abstract in new ways that produced real world
results. The same can be said of Negative numbers which are even less intuitive. If I give you those
four oranges mentioned earlier (not bloody likely since I'm writing this before breakfast), then that leaves me
with one. But suppose I owe you six oranges? We can't carry out that operation with oranges, but the operation
is useful in many other areas, the most obvious is probably money. You can be overdrawn for example - that's
applied negative numbers. Is there really anti-money in your account? Well, yes, why not? It's just
numbers, and numbers are an abstraction, a model of something if you like. It's perfectly normal to represent
some properties as negatives. Try basic Newtonian physics - two bodies moving in opposite directions towards
each other. You treat the momentum of one of them as negative and the other positive which lets you work out
which direction they're going in after collision.
Now perhaps at this point, you're nodding and saying 'yes, yes, I know that already.' If so, then good, because you've just understood the principle of a complex number. It's another abstraction that can't easily
be represented in the real world (nuclear physicists shut up, please). And yet, it has very real use in making
calculations.
If you're a programmer, think about how much code there is behind the scenes of a program to produce the result
you want from it. Suppose that your program counts how many oranges people have given you. Maybe it has the
line for (i=0; i < oranges_owed; i++) {}
Well i isn't physically real, it doesn't represent a physical aspect of what you are modelling (the oranges) but it's useful. And in the same way, i is also useful, even if
it's just part of a intellectual model.
For a mathematician: I think therefore i is.
The only thing remaining is to give you an example of how it is useful. Easily done - Quantum Physics. All
of it.;)
Hope this helps, IASNAM (I Am Surprisingly Not...)
I stay off Windows where possible, because it is better for society to have a strong competitor to Microsoft. Without the choice of other OS's Windows would be a poorer and more expensive product.
Furthermore, OSS ensures greater trust is possible. We can verify the source code. With Microsoft, we cannot do this and without a strong competitor they would have less incentive to keep things clean.
I use Linux, in short, because it prevents too much power accumulating with one small group.
A good deal of those OSS are maintained on European servers and thus subject to Euro law.
True, but that could change, how quickly? And given that other nations will want versions of software that are not adjusted for laws that they do not follow, then how can European law possibly enforce changes on OSS Projects?
I agree that it's stupid. I will actively avoid buying products where their adverts have annoyed me; but I think the logic is supposed to be as follows:
The target of the ad does not actively think "Wow - I really need that" but instead, when going to buy a product of that nature, they will go for the one that they've been exposed to the most. They don't buy the no-name deoderant, they buy the one with all the ads, etc, etc. I can tell you from experience in the food industry that often the difference between several products is just the labelling (and the price;)
The other explanation for it is the way that the businesses work. In the larger companies, advertising departments can have a lot of influence. They also have to justify themselves. I think there is a tendancy to view the public as a mindless force susceptible to their advertising. If they see that a lot of people are browsing the web rather than watching TV or reading magazines, then panic sets in - "Oh my $DEITY, we're not getting the coverage we were before. We must get it back."
I think it's this latter panic that is really the source of such bone-headed and irritating advertising.
Oh, there were massive differences between the Iliad and Troy. I was mostly just baiting you.
Then you Sir, are a master baiter. But not as much as the other guy who replied to my post. Now HE is funny (from a distance).
Anyway, as you clearly know what you're talking about and you still liked the movie, then perhaps I will go and see it... although I think I prefer this version.
I've no really strong opinions on this at the moment, but looking at the situation from a pragmatic point of view, isn't the pirating a good thing for the studios?
By passing around these low-quality versions, the studio gets free publicity by people wanting to see the movie 'properly.'
The only time they really lose is if the movie is crap and they were just relying on the marketing hype to... oh, yes, I see why they're bothered.
When it's a guy chanting the same story in Greek, it's high literature.
I've been trolled, I know it, but...
there are a number of differences between the Homer's story and what Hollywood produced. For one, Achilles was having a very passionate affair with his mate Patroclus which is why, when Patroclus is killed instead of him., Achilles is so wracked with guilt and anger. In legend they were even buried together.
Now, I haven't seen the film yet, so correct me if I'm wrong, but is Brad Pitt shagging Patroclus?
People, if this goes to court then we just have to bring one of these along. If a piece of plastic with a snap-button on the side isn't "limited hardware" then I don't know what is.
I used to have a little car that worked according to a handheld 'clicker.' You pressed the (rather relecutant to be clicked) button on the side of the control, which was shaped like a rather natty police radio and the car did different things. For example, two clicks really quickly put it in reverse.
This was in the very early eighties. I can barely remember it. Did anyone else have one of these, or did I dream it? If anyone can confirm it then this could even beat the airport lights.
sounds like some black/death metal stuff.;-) Makes me wonder, what band it happened to be...
Of course it was black/death metal stuff. I'm asking for trouble posting this info., but if you ever come across a band called Two Witches, see if they still have a depressed and kinky female keyboardist. If so, tell her there's a cute guy in the UK who's sorry he scared her and he still remembers her from their gig in Nottingham. Get her to post a reply to any of my comments.
I envy you your government. That sort of foresight is priceless.
I've only ever met five Finnish people (they were a band) and although four of them threatened to kill me (due to the fifth who was rather more friendly;), I must say I liked all of them.
A friend who lives there, described the country as a nation of alchoholic psychopaths, but he said it in a very affectionate way. All this and Linux too. What are your policies on immigration?
Sorry to reply to my own message, but I have a dodgy motherboard here, which the keyboard keeps freezing on. I was download something, so I couldn't just reboot.
The last couple of lines were cut and pasted from other lines one word / character at a time. I couldn't find a capital 'N' on the screen anywhere, which is why I never answered the last question with a 'No.' As I said in my original post, the success of this model depends on how in bed together the software and the hardware manufacturers are. The existence of a competing, non-subscription model market will always undermine the subscription-based one even if it is strongest outside the US and Europe.
It is still important for Linux to grab as much of a share of the market as it can before DRM style lock in becomes commonplace however.
For what it's worth, I agree with most of the replies to my original post. I raised these points to clarify exactly what the software companies hoped to get out of promoting this new business model. I'm still glad to see counter-arguments raised.
While I'm not sure that the marketing machines and the big companies cash reserves couldn't make this new model viable, there is one other point that should have occured to me when I was writing my original post but didn't:
What about the rest of the world? Shamefully, I drifted into a UK/USA perspective ignoring the fact that a huge proportion of the world's population get by with old, often recycled PCs, that do not have the resources to (or the intention of;) subsribe to a software licencing contract. For these people, pirate windows or Linux will be the way.
I have only one thing to add to what you said, but I think it worth mentioning.
Unlike your leasing a car analogy, there is still a great deal of progress in the computer industry. Okay, yes, new models of cars do come out, and [too] many people care about having the latest. But has the speed of cars doubled in the last four years? Has the size of their Hard Drive, I mean petrol tank increased every year?
This makes a stronger case for getting the new model than leasing an increasingly out of date older model.
I started this post out in a negative frame of mind, but I've just realized, that this would actually help Linux.
Sure, hardware will be so cheap it will be as-if it were free. But it will be running free software as well. I'm sure of that.
It will be. I'll fight tooth and nail to make sure of that with everyone I know.
BUT, I don't think the solution is as simple as you make out. The fact that, as you point out, there is no monopoly in hardware manufacturering means that hardware will be available independantly of the software. This I agree with. I also agree that open source software will be much cheaper (because it is free). However, you may find that 'untainted' hardware costs rise because the hardware you get "free" with the proprietary software is subsidised by the software company.
Think of it like buying a locked in cell phone that costs very little. I'm not sure if this happens in the US. I'm based in the UK at present. These phones are cheap because the network provider (e.g. T-Mobile, Vodaphone, etc) knows that you will be locked into their service for evermore with that phone. Conversely, a non-subsidized phone will cost you much more.
With so many special offers, with the OS merging with the hardware in the mind of the purchaser, you are dependent on the foresight of the customer.
"Sure," the buyer will say, "I could buy a more expensive computer so I could put Linux on it, but I can get this nifty 10GHz machine for half the price."
It's not whether there is a monopoly amongst the hardware manufacturers that will stop this, but how much in bed the big hardware sellers such as Dell are with the big software manufacturers.
Ooops. Looks like Linux has to get as big a market share as possible before this takes off because the hill is about to get steeper.
But in order to make this 'marketing trick' viable, the software provider must ensure that it is not possible to replace their software with an alternative. To do this requires Trusted (as in supervised) Computing - a DRM'd BIOS that is out of the user's control for example.
It would be "free" if the cost was not passed on to the customer. It is not free if the cost is rolled into the price of the software and passed on. The first will not happen.
But could the second one even happen? If there is an free (as in Debian) Open Source alternative, then how can a customer be tied down to a subscription based piece of propritary software? That could only happen if the hardware was not available to the user seperately from the propritary software. This would also require hardware that was not under the user's control such as with that trusted BIOS that Pheonix was working on.
So it's possible, but dependent on the uptake of hardware that is out of the user's control. And once this becomes established, then what controls exist to prevent the big software companies milking the consumer for every penny they have?
At least this is how it seems to me. Anyone thuoght about this further?
Again: invading a country for regime change is NOT ALLOWED in international law.
Wow! That shows just how effective continuous FUD can be. I'd forgotten that and I wrote a piece on this very issue a couple of months ago.
Yes, this is an even greater reason for the mendacity. Just to add to your point, the same applies to Blair. In fact, he si being charged with with war crimes. It's had little attention in the British press however. I'm not aware of anyone proesecuting Bush though.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm afraid this is going to get buried in all the responses about your proof of 0 = 0 x 0, but...
Yep, I should not have put that in there. I was just trying to show how something the oringinal poster might regard as intuitive wasn't always seen that way.
Bonus Proof
Theorem:
A ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness.
UGH! That's a bastard to correct just using english language. Clearly, English is a flawed language and should be replaced with something we can validate with formal proofs.
The Arabs gave us nothing.
;)
In which case we should all sincerely say to them, "Thanks for Nothing."
The Distributive Law states that (a+b)c = ac + bc.
It is one of the axioms of mathematics and generally accepted in a proof without explanation. Having said that, I just knew that I should have put it in there or some smart arse would try and pull me up on it. Correction humbly accepted.
The Green Party in the UK has a well thought out policy on Software Patents and IPR. A quote from their site:
The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.
The only thing I'll add to their words is that the Green Party traditionally does well in the European Elections, so a vote for them can make a real difference. Also, where they don't get in, more votes for them is still more pressure on other parties to adopt similar policies.
The only other party that has a strong stance on this is the UK Independance Party, but that's only because they hate all foreigners. Greens are the saner (and less racist) option in the UK.
The strongest party in the UK against Software Patents is (as usual) the Green Party.
A quote from the party:
The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.
Google for more info, but a couple of links are here:
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/index.php?nav=articl
Second Link
The second link recommends either the UKIP or Green Party for restricting EU control over the UK, but vote Green for the less xenophobic, racist and altogether saner option.
Great Cthulhu help me, but I'm going to try and answer this for you.
We have natural numbers - 1,2,3,
And then we have Zero and once upon a time this disturbed people. You grew up with it, you're happy with it; but we can see that it was less intuitive than 1,2,3,
And yet, the discovery (or creation
Now perhaps at this point, you're nodding and saying 'yes, yes, I know that already.' If so, then good, because you've just understood the principle of a complex number. It's another abstraction that can't easily be represented in the real world (nuclear physicists shut up, please). And yet, it has very real use in making calculations.
If you're a programmer, think about how much code there is behind the scenes of a program to produce the result you want from it. Suppose that your program counts how many oranges people have given you. Maybe it has the line
for (i=0; i < oranges_owed; i++) {}
Well i isn't physically real, it doesn't represent a physical aspect of what you are modelling (the oranges) but it's useful. And in the same way, i is also useful, even if it's just part of a intellectual model.
For a mathematician: I think therefore i is.
The only thing remaining is to give you an example of how it is useful. Easily done - Quantum Physics. All of it.
Hope this helps, IASNAM (I Am Surprisingly Not...)
* Proof that 0x0=0:
I stay off Windows where possible, because it is better for society to have a strong competitor to Microsoft. Without the choice of other OS's Windows would be a poorer and more expensive product.
Furthermore, OSS ensures greater trust is possible. We can verify the source code. With Microsoft, we cannot do this and without a strong competitor they would have less incentive to keep things clean.
I use Linux, in short, because it prevents too much power accumulating with one small group.
Also, it's free and more versatile.
A good deal of those OSS are maintained on European servers and thus subject to Euro law.
True, but that could change, how quickly? And given that other nations will want versions of software that are not adjusted for laws that they do not follow, then how can European law possibly enforce changes on OSS Projects?
And Euro-based anti-counterfeit measures mesh with the international nature of OSS projects and proprietary software markets... how?
I agree that it's stupid. I will actively avoid buying products where their adverts have annoyed me; but I think the logic is supposed to be as follows:
The target of the ad does not actively think "Wow - I really need that" but instead, when going to buy a product of that nature, they will go for the one that they've been exposed to the most. They don't buy the no-name deoderant, they buy the one with all the ads, etc, etc. I can tell you from experience in the food industry that often the difference between several products is just the labelling (and the price
The other explanation for it is the way that the businesses work. In the larger companies, advertising departments can have a lot of influence. They also have to justify themselves. I think there is a tendancy to view the public as a mindless force susceptible to their advertising. If they see that a lot of people are browsing the web rather than watching TV or reading magazines, then panic sets in - "Oh my $DEITY, we're not getting the coverage we were before. We must get it back."
I think it's this latter panic that is really the source of such bone-headed and irritating advertising.
Oh, there were massive differences between the Iliad and Troy. I was mostly just baiting you.
Then you Sir, are a master baiter. But not as much as the other guy who replied to my post. Now HE is funny (from a distance).
Anyway, as you clearly know what you're talking about and you still liked the movie, then perhaps I will go and see it... although I think I prefer this version.
I've no really strong opinions on this at the moment, but looking at the situation from a pragmatic point of view, isn't the pirating a good thing for the studios?
By passing around these low-quality versions, the studio gets free publicity by people wanting to see the movie 'properly.'
The only time they really lose is if the movie is crap and they were just relying on the marketing hype to... oh, yes, I see why they're bothered.
When it's a guy chanting the same story in Greek, it's high literature.
I've been trolled, I know it, but... there are a number of differences between the Homer's story and what Hollywood produced. For one, Achilles was having a very passionate affair with his mate Patroclus which is why, when Patroclus is killed instead of him., Achilles is so wracked with guilt and anger. In legend they were even buried together.
Now, I haven't seen the film yet, so correct me if I'm wrong, but is Brad Pitt shagging Patroclus?
I knew it! It wasn't just False Memory Syndrome.
People, if this goes to court then we just have to bring one of these along. If a piece of plastic with a snap-button on the side isn't "limited hardware" then I don't know what is.
I used to have a little car that worked according to a handheld 'clicker.' You pressed the (rather relecutant to be clicked) button on the side of the control, which was shaped like a rather natty police radio and the car did different things. For example, two clicks really quickly put it in reverse.
This was in the very early eighties. I can barely remember it. Did anyone else have one of these, or did I dream it? If anyone can confirm it then this could even beat the airport lights.
Thanks for the info.
sounds like some black/death metal stuff.
Of course it was black/death metal stuff. I'm asking for trouble posting this info., but if you ever come across a band called Two Witches, see if they still have a depressed and kinky female keyboardist. If so, tell her there's a cute guy in the UK who's sorry he scared her and he still remembers her from their gig in Nottingham. Get her to post a reply to any of my comments.
Just if you come across her, mind.
I'm curious - can you tell me which country this is? I like to keep my mental register of countries' position on the USA - Norway scale up to date.
(Currently, the UK is almost at the USA-level with Germany somewhere around the upper-middle of the scale)
I envy you your government. That sort of foresight is priceless.
I've only ever met five Finnish people (they were a band) and although four of them threatened to kill me (due to the fifth who was rather more friendly
A friend who lives there, described the country as a nation of alchoholic psychopaths, but he said it in a very affectionate way. All this and Linux too. What are your policies on immigration?
Sorry to reply to my own message, but I have a dodgy motherboard here, which the keyboard keeps freezing on. I was download something, so I couldn't just reboot.
The last couple of lines were cut and pasted from other lines one word / character at a time. I couldn't find a capital 'N' on the screen anywhere, which is why I never answered the last question with a 'No.' As I said in my original post, the success of this model depends on how in bed together the software and the hardware manufacturers are. The existence of a competing, non-subscription model market will always undermine the subscription-based one even if it is strongest outside the US and Europe.
It is still important for Linux to grab as much of a share of the market as it can before DRM style lock in becomes commonplace however.
For what it's worth, I agree with most of the replies to my original post. I raised these points to clarify exactly what the software companies hoped to get out of promoting this new business model. I'm still glad to see counter-arguments raised.
While I'm not sure that the marketing machines and the big companies cash reserves couldn't make this new model viable, there is one other point that should have occured to me when I was writing my original post but didn't:
What about the rest of the world? Shamefully, I drifted into a UK/USA perspective ignoring the fact that a huge proportion of the world's population get by with old, often recycled PCs, that do not have the resources to (or the intention of
Can this "free" model exist only in the UK/USA?
I have only one thing to add to what you said, but I think it worth mentioning.
Unlike your leasing a car analogy, there is still a great deal of progress in the computer industry. Okay, yes, new models of cars do come out, and [too] many people care about having the latest. But has the speed of cars doubled in the last four years? Has the size of their Hard Drive, I mean petrol tank increased every year?
This makes a stronger case for getting the new model than leasing an increasingly out of date older model.
I started this post out in a negative frame of mind, but I've just realized, that this would actually help Linux.
Sure, hardware will be so cheap it will be as-if it were free. But it will be running free software as well. I'm sure of that.
It will be. I'll fight tooth and nail to make sure of that with everyone I know.
BUT, I don't think the solution is as simple as you make out. The fact that, as you point out, there is no monopoly in hardware manufacturering means that hardware will be available independantly of the software. This I agree with. I also agree that open source software will be much cheaper (because it is free). However, you may find that 'untainted' hardware costs rise because the hardware you get "free" with the proprietary software is subsidised by the software company.
Think of it like buying a locked in cell phone that costs very little. I'm not sure if this happens in the US. I'm based in the UK at present. These phones are cheap because the network provider (e.g. T-Mobile, Vodaphone, etc) knows that you will be locked into their service for evermore with that phone. Conversely, a non-subsidized phone will cost you much more.
With so many special offers, with the OS merging with the hardware in the mind of the purchaser, you are dependent on the foresight of the customer.
"Sure," the buyer will say, "I could buy a more expensive computer so I could put Linux on it, but I can get this nifty 10GHz machine for half the price."
It's not whether there is a monopoly amongst the hardware manufacturers that will stop this, but how much in bed the big hardware sellers such as Dell are with the big software manufacturers.
Ooops. Looks like Linux has to get as big a market share as possible before this takes off because the hill is about to get steeper.
Don't fret too much
But in order to make this 'marketing trick' viable, the software provider must ensure that it is not possible to replace their software with an alternative. To do this requires Trusted (as in supervised) Computing - a DRM'd BIOS that is out of the user's control for example.
Excuse me, I have to go and fret now...
It would be "free" if the cost was not passed on to the customer. It is not free if the cost is rolled into the price of the software and passed on. The first will not happen.
But could the second one even happen? If there is an free (as in Debian) Open Source alternative, then how can a customer be tied down to a subscription based piece of propritary software? That could only happen if the hardware was not available to the user seperately from the propritary software. This would also require hardware that was not under the user's control such as with that trusted BIOS that Pheonix was working on.
So it's possible, but dependent on the uptake of hardware that is out of the user's control. And once this becomes established, then what controls exist to prevent the big software companies milking the consumer for every penny they have?
At least this is how it seems to me. Anyone thuoght about this further?
Again: invading a country for regime change is NOT ALLOWED in international law.
Wow! That shows just how effective continuous FUD can be. I'd forgotten that and I wrote a piece on this very issue a couple of months ago.
Yes, this is an even greater reason for the mendacity. Just to add to your point, the same applies to Blair. In fact, he si being charged with with war crimes. It's had little attention in the British press however. I'm not aware of anyone proesecuting Bush though.
interesting link
link
link