I am not sure if you are trolling or under a few misconceptions, but let's assume the latter. This is not intended as an ad hominem, I really don't know which it is.
And this kind of viral infiltration has been the intention of Richard Stallman and the OSS leadership all along. The intention is to increase the hurdle cost so that developing commercial, proprietary software up to the standard of OSS code will be prohibitively expensive, because development must be done from the bottom up, while OSS is based on marginal improvement, making it impossible to compete and killing off the proprietary software business. Once the complexity of OSS is at a certain level the only development in the area of that software will be the marginal improvement of hobbyists, again because the hurdle cost is too high to enter.
So you are saying that because some people collaborate, the cost for someone who does not want to collaborate may be higher, at some point? That may or may not be the case.
But what is wrong with that? There always was and always will be competition. Now there is a a very old kind of competitive advantage, collaboration, applied in a field where it has not been applied previously on this scale. No one is complaining that, due to the nature of the management structures, the closed source shops have an advantage in steering and setting milestones, either.
Different models have different advantages. This is not news.
It's no coincidence that Gandhi's saying, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" has such a high profile in the OSS environment. The strategy is designed 100% in line with it.
This is wrong, why?
If the OSS advocates were really acting in the public interest, they would permit resale of open source code. This would not damage OSS, but would increase the variety and quality of software on offer, either free or not free. Instead they have progressively taken the licence in the opposite direction. Embrace, extend, extinguish indeed.
You might want to research this claim. Resale of FLOSS is explicitly allowed. You just don't have the monopoly on selling it. Some licences allow you to close the derivates you create. This is what MS did with the FreeBSD TCP/IP Stack for Windows 2000.
Why the monopoly on selling something you did not create yourself is in the public interest is beyond me, by the way.
You spin me right round, like a record baby..
on
Web Singletons?
·
· Score: 1
Mac: I can't use some technologies because I have only one hardware manufacturer, which means they can control what you may use. And if you should shell out more for 'professional' features.
PC: I am manufactured by a myriad of companies. You can cherry-pick what you need and what you don't. No single company can control what you are able to buy.
Mac: I am also locked-in as the hardware monopolist is the software monopolist, as well.
PC: I used to have a similar problem, but I have been running Linux for a few years now.
There are only so many back-county backpackers who don't have access to clean water. Chuck in the military and you have more purchases, but still not enough.
Don't forget that P&G is huge. A margin they define as not viable is probably an amount of money you or I would quit or normal jobs over & start a business with.
If we were living near to each other, I would bet a crate of beer. As this is most likely not the case, you will just have to believe that I won't. Or you don't, which is fine as well:)
Not only nerds are intelligent. It makes sense that intelligent people take better care of themselves, have better health, etc (as I said, I am _not_ limiting to nerds). Also, people who used to be intelligent but drank/smoked/shot their brains out will also be less healthy.
Unhealthy people are unhealthy, which includes their sperm.
> It isn't the airlines that banned those things, it is unrelated but authoritative departments of government which did.
With considerable pressure of the airlines to keep cell-phones banned. Both because they want you to shell out for the in-flight system and because studies show that the majority of people would prefer not having some random guy babbling about his ulcer treatment during their flight to $expensive_location.
> Does Qantas' aircraft maintenance suck or does Airbus' quality control suck? Do both suck?
You hear a lot about Qantas failures, almost nothing about Airbus failures, at not any more than with the other companies. Without knowing much about Qantas, I suspect the mainly use Airbus & internal QA/maint sucks.
> So, why, why, why did they move away from Firefox and reinvent the wheel, instead? I saw no features that couldn't have been done as a Firefox Add-On.
I am referring to almost all cars, unfortunately.
The cars in the US seems to get long-drawn horsefaces, these days. So I guess it does not matter where I live, anyway. Cars are becoming uglier. Period.:p
This is important because if its the former, then the modern automobile industry is standing on thin foundations which may end up crumbling when severely undercut by the latest line of cheap Chinese cars, which can be glossed up just as easily as their western counterparts.
Not before the safety standard of those cars improves. A lot. To quote someone from some documentary about the whole thing "In this case, the driver would have been lucky. He would have been dead."
I for one do not fancy putting friends, family & myself in such danger.
No objection on the whole "cars are overprized" thing. Though I can't see how that is new in any way:p
On the other hand, pick a different complex machine that is in daily use for a dozen years or two with less than ideal treatment that will still basically work after all this time. Car manufacturers _do_ have some very good answers to questions I would never even think of asking.
A friend of mine told me he had a WotLK Beta key, but did not play WoW enough to use it. Asked me if I knew anyone who would want it. We ended up selling it for Euro 150 on ebay & splitting the profit. Go figure.
As a casual user, I used to think the same. But after a friend showed me _their_ Notes deployment...
Suffice it to say that Notes was way before its time (and it's ugly, in most cases). It is a full framework for all kinds of message-based interaction. _If_ you know how to use it, it is insanely powerful.
Not sure if you are flamebait or actually funny, but I will bite:)
* Irrelevant countries: One of the largest markets, most G8 members, a stable currency which the oil countries are moving their financial reserves to, etc pp. Of course, that is somewhat irrelevant as the GP said something about emptiness of political debates. Which is true, at least the stuff we over the pond see.
* 2 vs N-party system: With two parties handing of power to each other every few years, structures & mechanisms grow which you do not want. Sometimes, you need to rip out the head structures and have a fresh start. This has not been the case in the US for ages.
* World domination: Europe has not dominated the world during the last few hundred years. Over the last century, the U.S.A. rose to fame. But with the massive stupidity of everything in the last eight years, things might change. Not saying they will, but it's not impossible, either. Also, China & India are on the rise.
I am not saying Europe is perfect by any means. We have our own problems. But you need to do more than just replace a few words in an argument to make it yours. Funnily enough, I learned about something similar at school as 'US debating style'.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a few that prohibit resale, but none of the large & established ones do.
And this kind of viral infiltration has been the intention of Richard Stallman and the OSS leadership all along. The intention is to increase the hurdle cost so that developing commercial, proprietary software up to the standard of OSS code will be prohibitively expensive, because development must be done from the bottom up, while OSS is based on marginal improvement, making it impossible to compete and killing off the proprietary software business. Once the complexity of OSS is at a certain level the only development in the area of that software will be the marginal improvement of hobbyists, again because the hurdle cost is too high to enter.
So you are saying that because some people collaborate, the cost for someone who does not want to collaborate may be higher, at some point? That may or may not be the case.
But what is wrong with that? There always was and always will be competition. Now there is a a very old kind of competitive advantage, collaboration, applied in a field where it has not been applied previously on this scale. No one is complaining that, due to the nature of the management structures, the closed source shops have an advantage in steering and setting milestones, either.
Different models have different advantages. This is not news.
It's no coincidence that Gandhi's saying, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" has such a high profile in the OSS environment. The strategy is designed 100% in line with it.
This is wrong, why?
If the OSS advocates were really acting in the public interest, they would permit resale of open source code. This would not damage OSS, but would increase the variety and quality of software on offer, either free or not free. Instead they have progressively taken the licence in the opposite direction. Embrace, extend, extinguish indeed.
You might want to research this claim. Resale of FLOSS is explicitly allowed. You just don't have the monopoly on selling it. Some licences allow you to close the derivates you create. This is what MS did with the FreeBSD TCP/IP Stack for Windows 2000.
Why the monopoly on selling something you did not create yourself is in the public interest is beyond me, by the way.
'nuf said
Mac: Hi, I'm a Mac.
PC: And I'm a PC.
Mac: I can't use some technologies because I have only one hardware manufacturer, which means they can control what you may use. And if you should shell out more for 'professional' features.
PC: I am manufactured by a myriad of companies. You can cherry-pick what you need and what you don't. No single company can control what you are able to buy.
Mac: I am also locked-in as the hardware monopolist is the software monopolist, as well.
PC: I used to have a similar problem, but I have been running Linux for a few years now.
There are only so many back-county backpackers who don't have access to clean water. Chuck in the military and you have more purchases, but still not enough.
Don't forget that P&G is huge. A margin they define as not viable is probably an amount of money you or I would quit or normal jobs over & start a business with.
> You know you'll cave.
If we were living near to each other, I would bet a crate of beer. As this is most likely not the case, you will just have to believe that I won't. Or you don't, which is fine as well :)
* Linux clients should be done, at some point. Compability with WINE is a _must_.
* Open sourcing Lost Vikings would be great!
* If you make me shell out for battle.net, you just lost a sale
* I will not buy Starcraft 2 until a compilation which encompasses all three 'games' is released.
If anything, glossy displays let _more_ light through. And offsetting reflections is not a concern when you are in a dark room.
Most people (the ones I know, granted) are both driving and not driving on a regular basis.
My point was that, imo, this does not offer a benefit to anyone unless you take the insurance rebate into account.
> Maybe I missed the story that showed the proof on that, I could be wrong on.
I don't have any proof myself, but I read several stories about this. Both online and in print.
Of course he did.
Not only nerds are intelligent. It makes sense that intelligent people take better care of themselves, have better health, etc (as I said, I am _not_ limiting to nerds). Also, people who used to be intelligent but drank/smoked/shot their brains out will also be less healthy.
Unhealthy people are unhealthy, which includes their sperm.
Thanks for posting TFA, but even though they apparently thought it through, it's still a bad idea, imo.
Especially since the bad drivers & the ones who will likely get distracted will be, in my opinion, who shun the service.
> Of course they have. You can TURN IT OFF if you're a passenger.
Which is extremely nice and convenient to do all the time.
> It isn't the airlines that banned those things, it is unrelated but authoritative departments of government which did.
With considerable pressure of the airlines to keep cell-phones banned. Both because they want you to shell out for the in-flight system and because studies show that the majority of people would prefer not having some random guy babbling about his ulcer treatment during their flight to $expensive_location.
> Does Qantas' aircraft maintenance suck or does Airbus' quality control suck? Do both suck?
You hear a lot about Qantas failures, almost nothing about Airbus failures, at not any more than with the other companies. Without knowing much about Qantas, I suspect the mainly use Airbus & internal QA/maint sucks.
> So, why, why, why did they move away from Firefox and reinvent the wheel, instead? I saw no features that couldn't have been done as a Firefox Add-On.
Fully threaded tabs?
I am referring to almost all cars, unfortunately. The cars in the US seems to get long-drawn horsefaces, these days. So I guess it does not matter where I live, anyway. Cars are becoming uglier. Period. :p
I can't say I am happy about the more and more bubble-shaped cars we are seeing in Europe, but the PT Cruiser is just sick.
I guess that's why they offer different stuff, so people can choose what they like :)
This is important because if its the former, then the modern automobile industry is standing on thin foundations which may end up crumbling when severely undercut by the latest line of cheap Chinese cars, which can be glossed up just as easily as their western counterparts.
Not before the safety standard of those cars improves. A lot. To quote someone from some documentary about the whole thing "In this case, the driver would have been lucky. He would have been dead."
:p
I for one do not fancy putting friends, family & myself in such danger.
No objection on the whole "cars are overprized" thing. Though I can't see how that is new in any way
On the other hand, pick a different complex machine that is in daily use for a dozen years or two with less than ideal treatment that will still basically work after all this time. Car manufacturers _do_ have some very good answers to questions I would never even think of asking.
No one should ever trust a third party for generating their passwords. For no reason. Get pwgen.
A friend of mine told me he had a WotLK Beta key, but did not play WoW enough to use it. Asked me if I knew anyone who would want it. We ended up selling it for Euro 150 on ebay & splitting the profit. Go figure.
As a casual user, I used to think the same. But after a friend showed me _their_ Notes deployment...
Suffice it to say that Notes was way before its time (and it's ugly, in most cases). It is a full framework for all kinds of message-based interaction. _If_ you know how to use it, it is insanely powerful.
Not sure if you are flamebait or actually funny, but I will bite :)
* Irrelevant countries:
One of the largest markets, most G8 members, a stable currency which the oil countries are moving their financial reserves to, etc pp.
Of course, that is somewhat irrelevant as the GP said something about emptiness of political debates. Which is true, at least the stuff we over the pond see.
* 2 vs N-party system:
With two parties handing of power to each other every few years, structures & mechanisms grow which you do not want. Sometimes, you need to rip out the head structures and have a fresh start. This has not been the case in the US for ages.
* World domination:
Europe has not dominated the world during the last few hundred years. Over the last century, the U.S.A. rose to fame. But with the massive stupidity of everything in the last eight years, things might change. Not saying they will, but it's not impossible, either. Also, China & India are on the rise.
I am not saying Europe is perfect by any means. We have our own problems. But you need to do more than just replace a few words in an argument to make it yours. Funnily enough, I learned about something similar at school as 'US debating style'.
Having no idea what that limit is, I clicked the magic blue text.
836 messages 'sum it up well'? I think I will pass on knowing what this is all about, thanks ;)