No, those laws similar to feudal fiefdoms. Limiting the supply of taxis keeps the cab fare rates very (artificially) high and sucks the working man's income into the pockets of those controlling these laws.
If you lease a car, do you think you have the right to drive it into a brick wall or sell it on ebay just because you made your monthly payment?
If you owned the car instead, would 10 or 100 other people also be individual owners of that car? Of course not, there is only one car and a 100 people can't all own that one car. You can sell your car only to one other person.
Yet for software, you can "resell/pirate" the software to hundreds or thousands of people. It's like cloning a car a thousand times with your 3d printer and then selling it to a thousand people, thereby screwing the car manufacturer of his potential sales. You don't have the right to do that because you only paid less than a millionth the car R&D and manufacturing cost when you bought your copy of the car.
you HAVE to do the cli a-la cisco if you want in, in the networking biz.
No, you don't HAVE to have it, it's Cisco's. Create your version. Things like UI and command line should have legal protection beyond the vanilla patent and copyright protections. We need new types of protections for each type of IP (command line for example).
Why couldn't they have written their own manual and command line structure? If you did this copying stuff at school, you'd be kicked out of the school. But in the real world, copying will get you bushels of green paper.
How portable do you think an Android app is to any other mobile platform?
I'm guessing here, but you could port your java android app to a mobile windows.net app. The java and.net APIs may be different, but both languages are remarkably similar.
Go is an open language and was created because while Python was very useful to Google, it was also quite slow. Hence they wanted a faster and more parallel version of Python (which runs single threaded even on multi-core CPU platforms).
Swift was baldly needed because the time taken to write an ios app in objective-c is too long. Also Apple does not want your iOS app to be easily portable to other mobile OSes (lock-in).
Why should they do more work? They've already done the work of creating a valuable commodity. If you're drawing salary working in a technical field, it's highly likely that some creative guys created components for a product or service your company is selling and is bringing your company (and therefore you) money, long after the work to create the component was done. Because the creator was paid a fixed, hourly wage, he no longer makes a profit off his own work. Instead, the company, and parasites who are employed by the company leech off someone else's work that was paid off years or decades ago.
IP work should not be compensated in the same manner as repetitive manual labor, that's pure theft. This is because the company selling products/services based on the IP work continues to profit from the work long after the work is done, whereas that's not true of repetitive, uncreative work.
Also, you're the parasite if you are unwilling to pay 1/4th the cost of cup of coffee for a song.
Even though most of what you say is true, concerts only work if the musician is already famous. Nobody is going to see a nobody perform. Before the internet, musicians had no choice but to accept whatever their music label offered them because the labels were the only channel between the musicians and the music lovers. That's no longer true. They could produce their album/single and put it on itunes earning 70% of sales. The only big cost would be advertising/marketing their band and songs -- well there's youtube and other sites for that already.
This "make money in a concert" model is retarded. What next? Movie actors should work for free and perform on stage to make money? That's ludicrous.
Except that Apple isn't the owner nor are they acting on behalf of the owner -- they are depriving you of your property on the sole basis that they want to hurt you
Suppose you buy an expensive watch from a guy operating from the back of a van. We can assume that the goods being sold are stolen and the transaction is illegal and that the buyer may have to return the stolen property. That's what's happening here, the illegal property (songs) is being destroyed.
I fail to see why this should be a mere class action suit and not a criminal proceeding
It could be, but in the reverse direction: Apple suing Real. Apple designed the proprietary DRM, and it's theirs (itunes, ipod, drm). What gives Real the right to sell music on Apple's platform? It's like you open a retail store in a mall, and a jealous competitor opens a mini-stall inside your store and then sues you when you toss him and his merchandise out of your store.
If multiple vendors want to sell music using the same platform, they need to create a standard spec and software, instead of leeching off other people's work.
How is apple supposed to make money if other companies can use their proprietary (and probably patented) DRM software without authorization?
If Apple does indeed own the proprietary DRM, other companies have no right to step on their turf. I was wondering how Real was able to sell songs to ipod users since the itunes-to-ipod protocols and code are likely closed.
Bars/concerts don't pay enough, it's too much unnecessary (they could be composing new songs instead) and tiring work. The sound quality at concerts nowhere near the quality of finished, fine tuned CD quality. And most of all, why do you think you have the right to consume someone's work without payment or permission?
And how is a music publisher and artist supposed to make money if they sell unprotected music to some customer and he in turn sends copies of that music to his family members, his friends, his workmates, his acquaintances, his web buddies, random strangers, etc.?
OK, then whatever profits Apple makes world wide throughout their empire throughout all associated companies, you've got to pay tax in my country on 6% of it.
That's just wrong. Say Apple's total annual sales is $100B, and $6B of that is from your country. But profit margin varies from product to product. Say another country also has $6B sales, but the average profit margin of Apple products is 30% in that country and 15% in yours. Say, also that the profit margin difference is not due to different pricing in each country, but because some products have a higher profit margin than others. Should Apple pay the same tax to both countries? That makes no sense at all.
IPad is not a computer. It's a dumb appliance or toy.
An iPad is just a laptop with the keyboard and mouse replaced with a touchscreen input. It also doesn't have other peripherals like hard disk, USB connectors etc. But it is still, just a regular computer that is more portable than a laptop.
Cashless is also stupid. Almost everybody has a credit/debit card. Then why do they also carry cash? Because the vendor accepts only cash, or his CC machine is faulty, your card is defective, or your cell phone has problems etc.
Nope, I refuse to give my money to alleged or proven scammers.
Their products are fantastic and it is no fault of the employees if the execs of the parent company, Moneual, committed the fraud.
From your link:
The reason for its bankruptcy isn't anything to do with its own products or performance, in fact this news may even come as a shock to Zalman employees. The reason the company has collapsed is due to the actions of its parent company Moneual, and more specifically its CEO and vice presidents.
You don't accomplish that with stupid make-work jobs.
Then why do some states not allow you to pump your own gas? And what do you propose we do with the low-skilled people when robots take over their jobs? Bus drivers, grocery store cashier/stocker, waitresses, etc, all jobs taken over by robots.
The main benefit of cursive is less effort/time required to write since you don't lift your pen/pencil from the page between characters. So it has a very practical use. It also is a part of culture, that is slowly being stripped away and being discarded.
Slashdot Mirror
Does that mean, no need pay patent licensing fees again to display .bpg images on your mobile device?
Higher manufacturing cost and therefore product price.
If nature prefers wide to tall, why do paper books, magazines, notepads, paper application forms, newspapers have narrow and tall dimensions?
Most of the space towards the left and right of a monitor is not used -- the viewer does not pay much attention to those areas of the monitor.
No, those laws similar to feudal fiefdoms. Limiting the supply of taxis keeps the cab fare rates very (artificially) high and sucks the working man's income into the pockets of those controlling these laws.
If you owned the car instead, would 10 or 100 other people also be individual owners of that car? Of course not, there is only one car and a 100 people can't all own that one car. You can sell your car only to one other person.
Yet for software, you can "resell/pirate" the software to hundreds or thousands of people. It's like cloning a car a thousand times with your 3d printer and then selling it to a thousand people, thereby screwing the car manufacturer of his potential sales. You don't have the right to do that because you only paid less than a millionth the car R&D and manufacturing cost when you bought your copy of the car.
No, you don't HAVE to have it, it's Cisco's. Create your version. Things like UI and command line should have legal protection beyond the vanilla patent and copyright protections. We need new types of protections for each type of IP (command line for example).
Why couldn't they have written their own manual and command line structure? If you did this copying stuff at school, you'd be kicked out of the school. But in the real world, copying will get you bushels of green paper.
I'm guessing here, but you could port your java android app to a mobile windows .net app. The java and .net APIs may be different, but both languages are remarkably similar.
Go is an open language and was created because while Python was very useful to Google, it was also quite slow. Hence they wanted a faster and more parallel version of Python (which runs single threaded even on multi-core CPU platforms).
Swift was baldly needed because the time taken to write an ios app in objective-c is too long. Also Apple does not want your iOS app to be easily portable to other mobile OSes (lock-in).
Why should they do more work? They've already done the work of creating a valuable commodity. If you're drawing salary working in a technical field, it's highly likely that some creative guys created components for a product or service your company is selling and is bringing your company (and therefore you) money, long after the work to create the component was done. Because the creator was paid a fixed, hourly wage, he no longer makes a profit off his own work. Instead, the company, and parasites who are employed by the company leech off someone else's work that was paid off years or decades ago.
IP work should not be compensated in the same manner as repetitive manual labor, that's pure theft. This is because the company selling products/services based on the IP work continues to profit from the work long after the work is done, whereas that's not true of repetitive, uncreative work.
Also, you're the parasite if you are unwilling to pay 1/4th the cost of cup of coffee for a song.
Even though most of what you say is true, concerts only work if the musician is already famous. Nobody is going to see a nobody perform. Before the internet, musicians had no choice but to accept whatever their music label offered them because the labels were the only channel between the musicians and the music lovers. That's no longer true. They could produce their album/single and put it on itunes earning 70% of sales. The only big cost would be advertising/marketing their band and songs -- well there's youtube and other sites for that already.
This "make money in a concert" model is retarded. What next? Movie actors should work for free and perform on stage to make money? That's ludicrous.
Suppose you buy an expensive watch from a guy operating from the back of a van. We can assume that the goods being sold are stolen and the transaction is illegal and that the buyer may have to return the stolen property. That's what's happening here, the illegal property (songs) is being destroyed.
It could be, but in the reverse direction: Apple suing Real. Apple designed the proprietary DRM, and it's theirs (itunes, ipod, drm). What gives Real the right to sell music on Apple's platform? It's like you open a retail store in a mall, and a jealous competitor opens a mini-stall inside your store and then sues you when you toss him and his merchandise out of your store.
If multiple vendors want to sell music using the same platform, they need to create a standard spec and software, instead of leeching off other people's work.
If Apple does indeed own the proprietary DRM, other companies have no right to step on their turf. I was wondering how Real was able to sell songs to ipod users since the itunes-to-ipod protocols and code are likely closed.
Bars/concerts don't pay enough, it's too much unnecessary (they could be composing new songs instead) and tiring work. The sound quality at concerts nowhere near the quality of finished, fine tuned CD quality. And most of all, why do you think you have the right to consume someone's work without payment or permission?
And how is a music publisher and artist supposed to make money if they sell unprotected music to some customer and he in turn sends copies of that music to his family members, his friends, his workmates, his acquaintances, his web buddies, random strangers, etc.?
Think Twice about using We Chat
That's just wrong. Say Apple's total annual sales is $100B, and $6B of that is from your country. But profit margin varies from product to product. Say another country also has $6B sales, but the average profit margin of Apple products is 30% in that country and 15% in yours. Say, also that the profit margin difference is not due to different pricing in each country, but because some products have a higher profit margin than others. Should Apple pay the same tax to both countries? That makes no sense at all.
An iPad is just a laptop with the keyboard and mouse replaced with a touchscreen input. It also doesn't have other peripherals like hard disk, USB connectors etc. But it is still, just a regular computer that is more portable than a laptop.
Cashless is also stupid. Almost everybody has a credit/debit card. Then why do they also carry cash? Because the vendor accepts only cash, or his CC machine is faulty, your card is defective, or your cell phone has problems etc.
It is (almost) anonymous, like cash. But it doesn't have the downside of cash, paying/receiving exact change. So it's like an anonymous debit card.
Their products are fantastic and it is no fault of the employees if the execs of the parent company, Moneual, committed the fraud.
From your link:
Then why do some states not allow you to pump your own gas? And what do you propose we do with the low-skilled people when robots take over their jobs? Bus drivers, grocery store cashier/stocker, waitresses, etc, all jobs taken over by robots.
Yes, new culture like "c u ltr kthxbye" SMS messages? That's not culture, more like rubbish.
I don't like noisy PCs either and there a couple of solutions:
a) Use a low-RPM, huge, CPU fan like Zalman along with a fanless power supply and video card. There should be very little noise from such a PC.
b) Go all the way and buy a water-cooled PC. No fans, no noise.
c) Buy an Apple laptop/desktop. These are noiseless except under heavy load.
The main benefit of cursive is less effort/time required to write since you don't lift your pen/pencil from the page between characters. So it has a very practical use. It also is a part of culture, that is slowly being stripped away and being discarded.