We used to joke about Linux being a boot loader for Emacs, but soon we're going to have to joke about Linux being a boot loader for Google!
I see no joke. The job of the operating system is to provide a hardware abstraction layer, the job of an application platform is to make development better. Via KISS principle, the two domains are better served by (at least) two different layers.
It will be Netscape vs. Internet Explorer all over again. Except that instead of two giants fighting it out, it will be Microsoft against everyone else. And when everyone else happens to be giants in their own right, Microsoft's prospects will start looking rather grim.
* You underestimate the amount of computing power your 100 billion neurons can muster. * You underestimate how 800 cores computers will become common consummer goods within the next 10 years. The challenge for these computers is not to build them, but to find problems and algorithms that need that kind of power to produce useful results. As the Go example indicates there are such problems, and we are starting to figure out how to solve them.
I would also pay for a good search/mapping service, and completely go away with ads. But how many of us are out there? How rich does Google want to be? A very optimistic guesstimate: 10$/month * 100M * 12 months =~ 12B/year revenue. Right now Google is at 16B/year and Microsoft makes 60B/year. If Google's ambition is to take on Microsoft, 12B is nowhere near enough.
But there is no centralized copyright holder. Linux is the work of a loose knitted world-wide community of contributors. Who is going to get a change approval from every single one of them?
I'm not sure I understand how one can change the GPL terms of licensing. Isn't GPL supposed to be viral, i.e. any and all code that touches GPL code will become GPL? This viral process happens regardless of the will of the original author. Unless Linux envisiones a rewrite from scratch, how is this supposed to work?
There are more shades of grey in the world that just completely shutting off the TV. The shade of grey missing here is that ads have no pre-announced schedule. If one sees the War-Of-Worlds in the TV Guide, one may keep his/her kids away of the TV for the duration. But the ads may come our of the nowhere in the middle of any random program, and effectively prevent one from choosing between individual TV programs.
(Side discussion: This also indicates a certain fundamentally dishonest nature of ads, which is implicitly admitted by the perpetrators as they avoid to be fully open about the ad schedule).
It's not only about searches. It's about *everything* on the Web becoming an advertisement dissemination vehicle, instead of providing clean information. Brought to you by Gooooooogle. And by everybody else.
'Everyone' is a sum of individuals. I am one of them. Don't pretend I don't exist. We are past the age of mass disemination of ads, err infomation, i.e. tv age. Customize your software to cater to all. Including people who value their brains.
Ads requires me to AVOID looking at them. I really don't like being brainwashed. Just give me the service I'm looking for and leave my brain alone. It is not yours to try to tamper with.
Just look at what are/were the most advertized things around: Cigarettes (Thank god we finally got laws to keep those off) Soft Drinks Fast Food SUVs All total crap that we would live much better without. But they hang around by blatantly manipulating innocent bystanders brains with constant exposure to absolutely unsubstantiated messages.
Ads are a fucking insult, thank you very much. And there is no excuse for them. You claim to be the smartest guys in the room, solve the damn pay-per-use problem already. It's not rocket science!
How come advertising is an acceptable business model in polite company?! How come thumping one's chest with no backup data is an acceptable form of communication?! I'm getting REALLY tired by all the Web wannabes that think advertisement is a valid business model. Just give me a clean per-pay service for once!
A similar argument can be made by the phone companies. Don't use our services and we will not record and listen to your conversations. Fortunately, there are laws to prevent that.
Google is willingly trespassing the line between public information - what can be found on the open internet - and private information, i.e. what is *not* in the open.
Will Google delete my emails? My documents? My search history?
No, no and no. That's where their money come from. Targetted advertising based on invading my privacy.
Savings from fucking up workers:
100 million over 5 years = 20 million / year. Income of (only one! of) the blood suckers:
BoA CEO pay (in 2003) = 20 million. --- Class war at its best.
By the way, have you ever looked at the profits that are made by the company that employs you? They are public, as well as the number of employees. Now do the division and compare with your salary. Do both after taxes for the real kicks, since profits are taxed less than wages. I get about 1/4-1/3 of the pie, depending on how you count it. And that figure is not even counting the blood sucked by upper management figures. Trickle down economy, I love thee!
Uninformed bs. Other basic stuff that goes up and up: a. housing b. groceries (the healthy variant, not cheap frankenfoods you are so fond of). c. energy Actually the only things that do *not* go up out of the roof are stuff made by proto-slaves for dimes a dollar in third world countries (i.e. clothing, electronics & autos).
Chinese factories produce widgets. Americans buy them. Americans don't produce anything the Chinese can't make themselves for less.
Right. First consequence: fully robotized plants. That make widgets for even less than any slave wage in China.
Second consequence: hourly wages as main economic way for people to gain their subsistence don't work anymore. The owners class finally does not need any pesky workers to get whatever they desire. Only a small number of engineers/designers. That's when the fun really begins.
That's fine, as long as you are ready to accept the consequences. There are plenty of creative people out there that make their lives because they can control the distribution of the product of their creativity and get a revenue stream back. Take that from them and you force them to flip burgers at MacDonalds. The final consequence is that nobody, except for the rich people, will be able to make creativity the center of their lives. That will stiffle both engineering and arts. Welcome to stagnation.
Slashdot remains popular because it costs relatively little to mantain and it does not make any worth mentioning profit, if any. Try to actually make some money out of slashdot, to pay bills & medical insurance for your kids, and see for your self how fast the audience will flock to the competition.
Watch only these exceptionally creative movies made by fringe independent artists. Nobody is forcing you to spend 10$ to see any Hollywood movie. It's your own personal choice.
Since you are really sure you know what the faults of the movie industry are, why don't you start your own media company to make, distribute and promote movies made with normal, middle-class actors, good plots, sparring special effects, good bands & the works.
Scenario: I write program which builds on GPLed code. But I choose to distribute my program as a binary patch. The end user needs to get the GPLed code/binary from somewhere else, then he applies the binary patch and gets my functionality. Is my code bounded by GPL or not? I would claim that it does not, but feel free to cntradict me and make me understand more about GPL.
Slashdot Mirror
We used to joke about Linux being a boot loader for Emacs, but soon we're going to have to joke about Linux being a boot loader for Google!
I see no joke. The job of the operating system is to provide a hardware abstraction layer, the job of an application platform is to make development better. Via KISS principle, the two domains are better served by (at least) two different layers.
It will be Netscape vs. Internet Explorer all over again. Except that instead of two giants fighting it out, it will be Microsoft against everyone else. And when everyone else happens to be giants in their own right, Microsoft's prospects will start looking rather grim.
Just like the UNIX wars...
* You underestimate the amount of computing power your 100 billion neurons can muster.
* You underestimate how 800 cores computers will become common consummer goods within the next 10 years. The challenge for these computers is not to build them, but to find problems and algorithms that need that kind of power to produce useful results. As the Go example indicates there are such problems, and we are starting to figure out how to solve them.
I would also pay for a good search/mapping service, and completely go away with ads. But how many of us are out there? How rich does Google want to be? A very optimistic guesstimate:
10$/month * 100M * 12 months =~ 12B/year revenue.
Right now Google is at 16B/year and Microsoft makes 60B/year. If Google's ambition is to take on Microsoft, 12B is nowhere near enough.
But there is no centralized copyright holder. Linux is the work of a loose knitted world-wide community of contributors. Who is going to get a change approval from every single one of them?
I'm not sure I understand how one can change the GPL terms of licensing. Isn't GPL supposed to be viral, i.e. any and all code that touches GPL code will become GPL? This viral process happens regardless of the will of the original author. Unless Linux envisiones a rewrite from scratch, how is this supposed to work?
There are more shades of grey in the world that just completely shutting off the TV. The shade of grey missing here is that ads have no pre-announced schedule. If one sees the War-Of-Worlds in the TV Guide, one may keep his/her kids away of the TV for the duration. But the ads may come our of the nowhere in the middle of any random program, and effectively prevent one from choosing between individual TV programs.
(Side discussion: This also indicates a certain fundamentally dishonest nature of ads, which is implicitly admitted by the perpetrators as they avoid to be fully open about the ad schedule).
It's not only about searches. It's about *everything* on the Web becoming an advertisement dissemination vehicle, instead of providing clean information. Brought to you by Gooooooogle. And by everybody else.
'Everyone' is a sum of individuals. I am one of them. Don't pretend I don't exist. We are past the age of mass disemination of ads, err infomation, i.e. tv age. Customize your software to cater to all. Including people who value their brains.
Ads requires me to AVOID looking at them. I really don't like being brainwashed. Just give me the service I'm looking for and leave my brain alone. It is not yours to try to tamper with.
Just look at what are/were the most advertized things around:
Cigarettes (Thank god we finally got laws to keep those off)
Soft Drinks
Fast Food
SUVs
All total crap that we would live much better without. But they hang around by blatantly manipulating innocent bystanders brains with constant exposure to absolutely unsubstantiated messages.
Ads are a fucking insult, thank you very much. And there is no excuse for them. You claim to be the smartest guys in the room, solve the damn pay-per-use problem already. It's not rocket science!
How come advertising is an acceptable business model in polite company?! How come thumping one's chest with no backup data is an acceptable form of communication?! I'm getting REALLY tired by all the Web wannabes that think advertisement is a valid business model. Just give me a clean per-pay service for once!
A similar argument can be made by the phone companies. Don't use our services and we will not record and listen to your conversations. Fortunately, there are laws to prevent that.
Google is willingly trespassing the line between public information - what can be found on the open internet - and private information, i.e. what is *not* in the open.
Will Google delete my emails? My documents? My search history? No, no and no. That's where their money come from. Targetted advertising based on invading my privacy.
Savings from fucking up workers:
100 million over 5 years = 20 million / year.
Income of (only one! of) the blood suckers:
BoA CEO pay (in 2003) = 20 million.
---
Class war at its best.
By the way, have you ever looked at the profits that are made by the company that employs you? They are public, as well as the number of employees. Now do the division and compare with your salary. Do both after taxes for the real kicks, since profits are taxed less than wages. I get about 1/4-1/3 of the pie, depending on how you count it. And that figure is not even counting the blood sucked by upper management figures. Trickle down economy, I love thee!
--"no one expects applications to have a back"--
I suppose no one expects applications to have undo/redo either...
Uninformed bs. Other basic stuff that goes up and up:
a. housing
b. groceries (the healthy variant, not cheap frankenfoods you are so fond of).
c. energy
Actually the only things that do *not* go up out of the roof are stuff made by proto-slaves for dimes a dollar in third world countries (i.e. clothing, electronics & autos).
Don't forget, if your apendix goes out in flames, you ought to educate yourself and learn some surgery and then perform it on yourself.
Right. First consequence: fully robotized plants. That make widgets for even less than any slave wage in China.
Second consequence: hourly wages as main economic way for people to gain their subsistence don't work anymore. The owners class finally does not need any pesky workers to get whatever they desire. Only a small number of engineers/designers. That's when the fun really begins.
technically Scheme brought lexical closures for the masses, around 1975. LISPs of the time were dynamic scoping nightmares.
Watch only these exceptionally creative movies made by fringe independent artists. At which theater? Download it.
That's fine, as long as you are ready to accept the consequences. There are plenty of creative people out there that make their lives because they can control the distribution of the product of their creativity and get a revenue stream back. Take that from them and you force them to flip burgers at MacDonalds. The final consequence is that nobody, except for the rich people, will be able to make creativity the center of their lives. That will stiffle both engineering and arts. Welcome to stagnation.
Slashdot remains popular because it costs relatively little to mantain and it does not make any worth mentioning profit, if any. Try to actually make some money out of slashdot, to pay bills & medical insurance for your kids, and see for your self how fast the audience will flock to the competition.
Since you are really sure you know what the faults of the movie industry are, why don't you start your own media company to make, distribute and promote movies made with normal, middle-class actors, good plots, sparring special effects, good bands & the works.
Scenario: I write program which builds on GPLed code. But I choose to distribute my program as a binary patch. The end user needs to get the GPLed code/binary from somewhere else, then he applies the binary patch and gets my functionality. Is my code bounded by GPL or not? I would claim that it does not, but feel free to cntradict me and make me understand more about GPL.
Where would we be if this had happened 15 years ago? two years until the patents expire and it's free-for-all. ;-)