I wasn't trying to imply that it was going to destroy the business model, nor that hording the documentation was the only way to make the money. I am fully aware of professional support, packaging, and non-open source software that is bundled with the open source software.
There is really a very lucritive market out there, even though the product itself is free or the documentation is freely available.
From what I know of the open source world, documentation is one area that people make money on the free product.
Although, I suppose it does make sense, given the fact that what is published could most likely be printed, bound, and sold, just the same as any other documentation.
I mean, I can see how it could be used as such, but what about the legitimate implementations of it? That's more like an ability of JavaScript that can be exploited.
Bad example, but it's no different than a firearm. Used properly, it can be used for protection and hunting game, but improperly it can be used to kill someone for no reason whatsoever.
FOD:
Foreign Object Damage or Foreign Object Debris. Involves items eg. shells, stones, plastic, building materials etc which may be ingested by an aircraft engine causing damage.
Source: Wellington Airport Information Glossary
IMHO, that does not mean that Windows/IE has no security flaws, and it does NOT mean that the issues are a fault of third-party software. Bill is lying to cover his own ass, simple as that.
I have to agree with cdtoad. Funding science is a wonderful thing, but who is it going to benefit when everyone is broke and/or dead? That money would be of much better use in the large sector of the country that can't afford health insurance.
I am considering changing from CIS to some health-related or physics-related field, because those are more consistent.
Sure, that's one of the thrills of IT: the suspense of it being different tomorrow. However, there comes a point in time where you have had enough games, enough migration to a new product, and enough headache.
I suppose the best way out of it would be to become a monk, but eh... There are certain "sinful" things in life that I enjoy way too much.
Does this give me the right to sue for timgarrison.com, considering that IS my real name?
Who cares if the book was titled the same as someone else's domain name. What about all these books that use "eBay" or "Google" in their titles? I really doubt many of the automotive repair manuals that you see on the market have gotten permission from the automotive manufacturers to use their brand in the title of the manual. I'm sure the major ones did, such as Chiltons and Haynes, but there's many others out there.
Taking this a step further, what if I write a book called "PHP: A step-by-step guide to web development", is Rasmus Lerdorf going to sue me because I'm using the name of his project in my book title?
This world is nothing but a vicious cycle of careless lawsuits.
If I had a penny for every time I've been called a name on a message board, flamed in IRC, or warned on AOL Instant Messenger, I'd have no need to pursue this CIS degree I'm currently working on.
Get over it man. There are some things in life you can't live with. For everything else, there's ignorance.
Slashdot Mirror
Does this mean that the internet is going to experience a mid-life crisis?
That's a good couple of points.
I wasn't trying to imply that it was going to destroy the business model, nor that hording the documentation was the only way to make the money. I am fully aware of professional support, packaging, and non-open source software that is bundled with the open source software.
There is really a very lucritive market out there, even though the product itself is free or the documentation is freely available.
From what I know of the open source world, documentation is one area that people make money on the free product.
Although, I suppose it does make sense, given the fact that what is published could most likely be printed, bound, and sold, just the same as any other documentation.
HELL NO!
I mean, I can see how it could be used as such, but what about the legitimate implementations of it? That's more like an ability of JavaScript that can be exploited.
Bad example, but it's no different than a firearm. Used properly, it can be used for protection and hunting game, but improperly it can be used to kill someone for no reason whatsoever.
FOD:
Foreign Object Damage or Foreign Object Debris. Involves items eg. shells, stones, plastic, building materials etc which may be ingested by an aircraft engine causing damage.
Source: Wellington Airport Information Glossary
My bad. Sorry.
IMHO, that does not mean that Windows/IE has no security flaws, and it does NOT mean that the issues are a fault of third-party software. Bill is lying to cover his own ass, simple as that.
Here in the US people pay for being able to see pornographic sites...
Over there they pay for people to find the sites to exterminate them?
This was either posted before or something similar was. At any rate, it is, uh... cool?
I have to agree with cdtoad. Funding science is a wonderful thing, but who is it going to benefit when everyone is broke and/or dead? That money would be of much better use in the large sector of the country that can't afford health insurance.
I am considering changing from CIS to some health-related or physics-related field, because those are more consistent. Sure, that's one of the thrills of IT: the suspense of it being different tomorrow. However, there comes a point in time where you have had enough games, enough migration to a new product, and enough headache. I suppose the best way out of it would be to become a monk, but eh... There are certain "sinful" things in life that I enjoy way too much.
Does this give me the right to sue for timgarrison.com, considering that IS my real name? Who cares if the book was titled the same as someone else's domain name. What about all these books that use "eBay" or "Google" in their titles? I really doubt many of the automotive repair manuals that you see on the market have gotten permission from the automotive manufacturers to use their brand in the title of the manual. I'm sure the major ones did, such as Chiltons and Haynes, but there's many others out there. Taking this a step further, what if I write a book called "PHP: A step-by-step guide to web development", is Rasmus Lerdorf going to sue me because I'm using the name of his project in my book title? This world is nothing but a vicious cycle of careless lawsuits.
If I had a penny for every time I've been called a name on a message board, flamed in IRC, or warned on AOL Instant Messenger, I'd have no need to pursue this CIS degree I'm currently working on. Get over it man. There are some things in life you can't live with. For everything else, there's ignorance.