99% at best. You don't speak for me in this case. I have no problem and think that/. should remove some of the parts of the posts that do indeed obviously violate copyright laws. Feel free to note in your posts in the future you speak for everyone except me.
I should also note that your claim that you represent all of Slashdot's readers is somewhat of an odd claim. Since the MS people obviously had to read this too . . . and you don't speak for them.
Part I'm sure is development. With the DVD probs and all I'm sure it's easier to focus on one place and release there. Then if tech probs come up (like they did) it's easier if you got several thousands of disappointed customers, rather than Millions.
If Sony waited and stocked up so they could release to the world (I wonder how long that would take alone) then had a major malfunction, even a huge company like Sony would be hit hard in the bottom line, let alone consumer confidence.
Now even having said that. I think it sucks you guys get shafted as much as you do. Movies, other stuff too.
WOW. I remember when I was in the UK that CDs were terribly over priced compared to home (US), I even sold some to some people I met because I felt sorry for them. £300, that's terrible.
Of course I wasn't actually hosting Metalica mp3s, they were mp3s from the Sound of Music sound track renamed to Metalica songs (fun joke to play), but I still feel special.
"Could it be possible that, with the shift from marketing software to marketing services, the business suits are being forced out of the technology pipeline?"
I question that this business model is much different than those of some of the most successful computer companies. Granted some do not fit that model, but many already do so in one way or another. Take IBM for an example. Yes they market the software, and the hardware. IBM's big $ comes from the services they sell afterward. They may be consulting, programming, or even maintenance. IBM has strategically positioned it's self so that it's service is needed by most of it's customers (more $). Granted some people consider this unfair, but it's a huge cash cow (moo) for them. I should also note that they have plenty of "suits" still.
Outside of my IBM example, I have trouble seeing how much different the world would be if OSS dominated and the "suits" were all but gone. Granted I'm sure "suits" do some stupid stuff. However I'm not convinced that IT Business would be better with programmers or those providing the service running the show.
I'm also not convinced that the "suits" are the only ones responsible for making software buggy, bloated and premature. I know of several game companies that are run by their game programmers and designers realized total crap because they were low on $, or felt they had to release when they promised. I would use Maxis as an example. Just because a "suit" says "release now!" and the program isn't ready, doesn't mean that other non-suits would do any different or better.
My office got it this morning. Of course the "IT staff" referred to it as a "hacker attack" *sigh* Without fail I look in my inbox every time these e-mail "viruses" hit and I'm disappointed with the # of cow-workers whom I communicate with who seemed fairly intelligent to me, up until this very point.
"The lawyer, Martin Garbus, is going to be defending Eric Corley aka Emmanuel Goldstein, and is a/very sharp/ cookie. "
I heard the MPAA hired a guy who was described as "a very fudgie brownie"! Doesn't that trump a sharp cookie!?!? Or is that cold ice cream that does that?
Dang it I'm no good at this lawlyering stuff! I'm hungry!
RMS never fails to worry me sometimes. The Free Software Movement is great, but I always seem to be somewhat uncomfortable with some of his ideals.
"For the Free Software Movement, proprietary software is the problem, and free software is the solution. Free software is often very powerful and reliable, and I'm glad that adds to its appeal; but I would choose a bare-bones unreliable free program rather than a featureful and reliable proprietary program that doesn't respect my freedom."
"I think of right and wrong as based on how what we could do affects other people--the implications of imagining ourselves in the situation of the people our actions affect."
The reason I chose those two quotes is because to me they seem to conflict slightly. Firstly I really have a difficulty with the idea that a proprietary program somehow doesn't respect RMS or anyone's freedom. No you don't have the source, no you don't get it for free, but is that somehow violating your freedom? Let us assume so.
The problem I have is that (well most of the time) in free countries when someone's rights are violated, either individuals or the state steps in to protect those rights that people are entitled to, by either punishing or preventing those whom are violating someone's rights of doing so. Following that ideal, it would seem that often an undertone of RMS's advocacy seems not just to convince people of the value of Free Software, but if possible restore peoples rights by the same means we do so today. That would seem to follow into state enforced Free Software.
This leads to the second line I've quoted. I don't have a problem with Free Software, I also don't have a problem with those who want to create proprietary software and sell it. I believe they have a right to do so as much as The Free Software Movement and Open Source Movement (yes, I recognize there are differences between them) have the right to advocate their ideals. While RMS seems to note that we must always imagine ourselves in the situation of the people our actions affect. This does not seem to apply when the question of his rights being violated would supersede my right (if I exercised this one) to produce proprietary software and sell it.
It all seems to boil down to that line about his rights in the second question I guess. Perhaps I'm misreading and someone can enlighten me.
Perhaps it's the pragmatist in me that is the problem. I can't help but see parallels between the definite and strong feelings RMS has for the Free Software Movement and early those religious settlers in America. They didn't necessarily come for over all freedom, but the freedom to live how they wanted in very definite and strong social rules. Then the parallels between the Open Source Movement and the pragmatic education and government systems America developed into.
"if commercial code is closed-source, how can you spot stolen noncompliant code?"
When NT/Win2k/9x becomes stable:-)
Sorry, a very cheap shot there. I actually have no problems with MS myself. I just couldn't resist that little quip. In no way did I mean this as a credible argument against MS's software.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this should be handled in the proper Slashdot manner. There should be a poll.
A) Comply
B) Defy
C) Hemos
99% at best. You don't speak for me in this case. I have no problem and think that /. should remove some of the parts of the posts that do indeed obviously violate copyright laws. Feel free to note in your posts in the future you speak for everyone except me.
I should also note that your claim that you represent all of Slashdot's readers is somewhat of an odd claim. Since the MS people obviously had to read this too . . . and you don't speak for them.
Part I'm sure is development. With the DVD probs and all I'm sure it's easier to focus on one place and release there. Then if tech probs come up (like they did) it's easier if you got several thousands of disappointed customers, rather than Millions.
If Sony waited and stocked up so they could release to the world (I wonder how long that would take alone) then had a major malfunction, even a huge company like Sony would be hit hard in the bottom line, let alone consumer confidence.
Now even having said that. I think it sucks you guys get shafted as much as you do. Movies, other stuff too.
£300!?!?
WOW. I remember when I was in the UK that CDs were terribly over priced compared to home (US), I even sold some to some people I met because I felt sorry for them. £300, that's terrible.
I wonder if anyone else has been like me and been waiting for the PSX2 and not getting a DVD player since the PSX2 does both?
It seems an economical idea. Anyone see any possible problems with that plan?
The .dot actually sounds like a good idea to me.
Pronouncing things "Slashdot dot org" or "IBM dot com" just seems awful wordy. It's even worse when you have to say www first too.
I'd much prefer saying "website dot dot." Seems easier to say to me.
Of course i'd have to fight for the rights to dot.dot. I'd love that domain. "www dot dot dot"
I actually got banned!
I feel sort of special!
Of course I wasn't actually hosting Metalica mp3s, they were mp3s from the Sound of Music sound track renamed to Metalica songs (fun joke to play), but I still feel special.
This might be a stupid question. But I'll ask anyway (sort of obvious sine your reading this).
Of what use is this information Intel is giving out?
Some seem to bee behind. However I believe I've seen that prob in the past too at one time or another.
"Could it be possible that, with the shift from marketing software to marketing services, the business suits are being forced out of the technology pipeline?"
I question that this business model is much different than those of some of the most successful computer companies. Granted some do not fit that model, but many already do so in one way or another. Take IBM for an example. Yes they market the software, and the hardware. IBM's big $ comes from the services they sell afterward. They may be consulting, programming, or even maintenance. IBM has strategically positioned it's self so that it's service is needed by most of it's customers (more $). Granted some people consider this unfair, but it's a huge cash cow (moo) for them. I should also note that they have plenty of "suits" still.
Outside of my IBM example, I have trouble seeing how much different the world would be if OSS dominated and the "suits" were all but gone. Granted I'm sure "suits" do some stupid stuff. However I'm not convinced that IT Business would be better with programmers or those providing the service running the show.
I'm also not convinced that the "suits" are the only ones responsible for making software buggy, bloated and premature. I know of several game companies that are run by their game programmers and designers realized total crap because they were low on $, or felt they had to release when they promised. I would use Maxis as an example. Just because a "suit" says "release now!" and the program isn't ready, doesn't mean that other non-suits would do any different or better.
*Joke*
I would like to be the first to claim that Slashdot began to go bad when they went to this new server.
I've always pictured RMS sitting at the table eating alphabet soup reading a newspaper picking out all the other letters except G, N, and U.
"The person your spying on got mail!"
I'm having trouble finding any good ASCII porn to send to Kurt.
Anyone know of a good source of ASCII porn?
-----------------
This message brought to you by Doubleclick:
We know where you live, we know your blocking our cookies, back off!
Good thing you caught that.
I hate it when my HTML is showing and I don't notice. Everyone starring at you and all.
My office got it this morning.
Of course the "IT staff" referred to it as a "hacker attack" *sigh* Without fail I look in my inbox every time these e-mail "viruses" hit and I'm disappointed with the # of cow-workers whom I communicate with who seemed fairly intelligent to me, up until this very point.
"The lawyer, Martin Garbus, is going to be defending Eric Corley aka Emmanuel Goldstein, and is a /very sharp/ cookie. "
I heard the MPAA hired a guy who was described as "a very fudgie brownie"! Doesn't that trump a sharp cookie!?!? Or is that cold ice cream that does that?
Dang it I'm no good at this lawlyering stuff! I'm hungry!
LOL
Actually later i reconsidred and chose Sound Of Music clips.
I've had 27 downloads of 16 going on 17 aka "Fade to Black"
It's not pretty
In support of Metalica I'm renameing several Conway Twitty mp3s as Metalica mp3s and logging on to Napster!
Hey, don't we already get Spam offering the same services?
Why would I want to use these people?
The Internet Spy tells all!
"for those who want to see it"
See what? I'm just getting a login request. Not much of anything to see.
Oh no I can hear it now!
"Does this value of G make my butt look big in these pants? Well what if the value of G is this?"
RMS never fails to worry me sometimes. The Free Software Movement is great, but I always seem to be somewhat uncomfortable with some of his ideals.
"For the Free Software Movement, proprietary software is the problem, and free software is the solution. Free software is often very powerful and reliable, and I'm glad that adds to its appeal; but I would choose a bare-bones unreliable free program rather than a featureful and reliable proprietary program that doesn't respect my freedom."
"I think of right and wrong as based on how what we could do affects other people--the implications of imagining ourselves in the situation of the people our actions affect."
The reason I chose those two quotes is because to me they seem to conflict slightly. Firstly I really have a difficulty with the idea that a proprietary program somehow doesn't respect RMS or anyone's freedom. No you don't have the source, no you don't get it for free, but is that somehow violating your freedom? Let us assume so.
The problem I have is that (well most of the time) in free countries when someone's rights are violated, either individuals or the state steps in to protect those rights that people are entitled to, by either punishing or preventing those whom are violating someone's rights of doing so. Following that ideal, it would seem that often an undertone of RMS's advocacy seems not just to convince people of the value of Free Software, but if possible restore peoples rights by the same means we do so today. That would seem to follow into state enforced Free Software.
This leads to the second line I've quoted. I don't have a problem with Free Software, I also don't have a problem with those who want to create proprietary software and sell it. I believe they have a right to do so as much as The Free Software Movement and Open Source Movement (yes, I recognize there are differences between them) have the right to advocate their ideals. While RMS seems to note that we must always imagine ourselves in the situation of the people our actions affect. This does not seem to apply when the question of his rights being violated would supersede my right (if I exercised this one) to produce proprietary software and sell it.
It all seems to boil down to that line about his rights in the second question I guess. Perhaps I'm misreading and someone can enlighten me.
Perhaps it's the pragmatist in me that is the problem. I can't help but see parallels between the definite and strong feelings RMS has for the Free Software Movement and early those religious settlers in America. They didn't necessarily come for over all freedom, but the freedom to live how they wanted in very definite and strong social rules. Then the parallels between the Open Source Movement and the pragmatic education and government systems America developed into.
I suggest we organize our own paramilitary organization! Volunteers meet at my house Monday!
Wait . . . isn't the signup for the 2nd Diablo II beta on Monday? TUESDAY then!
"if commercial code is closed-source, how can you spot stolen noncompliant code?"
:-)
When NT/Win2k/9x becomes stable
Sorry, a very cheap shot there. I actually have no problems with MS myself. I just couldn't resist that little quip. In no way did I mean this as a credible argument against MS's software.