"All the profit in the world"...you do know that, to a company and its shareholders, earnings are a hell of a lot more important than marketshare? It's only console fanboys who think that "being #1" is the most important thing out there.
The guy just got his company back (he ran it as a startup and then sold it when it got crushed), and also new evidence that allegedly proves MS behaved in an anti-competitive manner in its dealings with Go recently surfaced in other lawsuits.
I agree with you (I'm from British Columbia -- thanks to the softwood lumber dispute, I know almost firsthand what US-style "free trade" really means), but I was just wondering what the parent meant by "make them" in his post -- if he realised the animosity that sort of thinking earns his country.
And tell me, to what lengths would go to to enforce that? The Norweigan government has made their choice, and they are a sovereign and legitimate government. Would you really piss them -- and probably a lot of other people who already resent US bullying -- off by not cooperating, or by engaging in some petty trade war?
Insisting on open standards *is* practical. How pragmatic is it to lock up all of your *own* data in proprietary formats that will eventually be inaccessible -- or at the least accessible only after paying perpetual licensing fees? I think that that is what is impractical, especially for a democratic government that is obligated to ensure that the data it records is accessible to the public, not just the segment of the public that is paying licensing fees to a specific company.
The Bitkeeper scenario illustrates, in a limited way, how proprietary solutions can only be considered practical in the short-term, but never in the long.
Dear god, I hope the day never comes when people can talk about using nuclear fucking weapons on *people* without talking about morality and politics. Get your head out of your ass, that is what is important.
Whoa, it sounds like *you're* the one with an axe to grind. First of all, the headline was misleading -- asking "top spot WHERE" is a totally valid question that the summary didn't address. The headline seems to imply that a market cap of $80b makes Google the biggest corporation period, when that is obviously incorrect.
Anyways, as I said, you seem to be the one with an axe to grind; you sound like one of those people trying to defend their social privelege by whining about postmodernism and "moral relativism". My apologies if I'm wrong, but that's how you came across.
Having lost a day once trying to get gentoo installed, I have absolutely come to appreciate the convenience of a good distro.
To me, this is one of the spiffiest things about Free OSs. I'm in a similar position as you -- I'm a user, I want my computer to let me do the work I want or need to do. For me right now, that means Mandrake. I'd like to do a Gentoo install sometime to help me figure some more stuff out, but that would purely be as a hobby, for shits and giggles.
GNU/Linux allows me have a functional, convenient desktop, and it also allows for people to really figure out the whole system. In fact, that I can do the former is a result of the latter. The fact that it's Free can make it many things to many people.
The problem really is only that people seem to be unaware that it is going on. I can understand why; people are so used to seeing a non-negotiable sticker price on consumer goods. I agree with an earlier poster who called for full disclosure from companies with regards to their data collection policies. Even the most rabid free marketeers understand that it can only work if customers are well informed.
You can't patent general ideas. Someone might be able to patent a specific implementation of a fighting game, or the software to render the fighters quickly. They couldn't patent 2 guys fighting in a game.
Isn't this the whole problem with software patents, though? They often seem to be patening the idea itself; copyright already protects the actual implementation.
I totally agree; look at the example given in the blurb, for example. It doesn't seem *completely* self-evident to me that people who, say, obsessively weigh the pros and cons of a career will choose a more satisfying one than someone who goes after the first thing that comes into their minds. "First thought, best thought" and so forth.
There's no such thing as "common sense", only "shared assumptions".
Well, I don't think the GPs point was that they *only* need people skills, but that could be a better measure of "separating the wheat from the chaff" than pure abstract thinking. Maybe a bunch of talented people working really really well together *are* better than a bunch of really really talented people working alone and resenting each other. Of course, those are the extremes; there are people with both set of skills, so both models will have both type of employees. But maybe the emphasis on teamwork can lead to successful development.
Corporations should be subject to potentially having their corporate charter revoked. Theoretically corporations are people -- so why should "they" not be subject to the equivalent of life imprisonment (or the death penalty, depending on the jurisdiction)?
It irritates me too when people complain about the supposed repetetiveness of franchise games like Zelda or Mario. There has been more genuine innovation in those franchises than any other video game company can boast of. Mario 64 pioneered 3-D gameplay -- Mario defined 2-D platformers -- and damnit, Windwaker is the most gorgeous game I've ever played.
I mean, what are these people comparing it too? Not many game developers (because that's what Nintendo is, primarily) have a track record like theirs.
Well, I agree that this is unlikely to spark a new renaissance, but I think you're missing the point if all you're looking at is technology. The Renaissance wasn't about tech, it was about ideas.
Slashdot Mirror
"All the profit in the world"...you do know that, to a company and its shareholders, earnings are a hell of a lot more important than marketshare? It's only console fanboys who think that "being #1" is the most important thing out there.
Ummm...do you have any idea what OPEC is and what it does? Here's a clue: it has nothing to with the taxes you pay at the pump.
The guy just got his company back (he ran it as a startup and then sold it when it got crushed), and also new evidence that allegedly proves MS behaved in an anti-competitive manner in its dealings with Go recently surfaced in other lawsuits.
I agree with you (I'm from British Columbia -- thanks to the softwood lumber dispute, I know almost firsthand what US-style "free trade" really means), but I was just wondering what the parent meant by "make them" in his post -- if he realised the animosity that sort of thinking earns his country.
And tell me, to what lengths would go to to enforce that? The Norweigan government has made their choice, and they are a sovereign and legitimate government. Would you really piss them -- and probably a lot of other people who already resent US bullying -- off by not cooperating, or by engaging in some petty trade war?
The Bitkeeper scenario illustrates, in a limited way, how proprietary solutions can only be considered practical in the short-term, but never in the long.
It isn't that simple for everyone -- for example, those running a 64-bit distro on top of an AMD64.
Dear god, I hope the day never comes when people can talk about using nuclear fucking weapons on *people* without talking about morality and politics. Get your head out of your ass, that is what is important.
"Just following orders" is not an acceptable defense, according to the Nuremberg trials at least.
Whoa, it sounds like *you're* the one with an axe to grind. First of all, the headline was misleading -- asking "top spot WHERE" is a totally valid question that the summary didn't address. The headline seems to imply that a market cap of $80b makes Google the biggest corporation period, when that is obviously incorrect. Anyways, as I said, you seem to be the one with an axe to grind; you sound like one of those people trying to defend their social privelege by whining about postmodernism and "moral relativism". My apologies if I'm wrong, but that's how you came across.
To me, this is one of the spiffiest things about Free OSs. I'm in a similar position as you -- I'm a user, I want my computer to let me do the work I want or need to do. For me right now, that means Mandrake. I'd like to do a Gentoo install sometime to help me figure some more stuff out, but that would purely be as a hobby, for shits and giggles.
GNU/Linux allows me have a functional, convenient desktop, and it also allows for people to really figure out the whole system. In fact, that I can do the former is a result of the latter. The fact that it's Free can make it many things to many people.
The problem really is only that people seem to be unaware that it is going on. I can understand why; people are so used to seeing a non-negotiable sticker price on consumer goods. I agree with an earlier poster who called for full disclosure from companies with regards to their data collection policies. Even the most rabid free marketeers understand that it can only work if customers are well informed.
Isn't this the whole problem with software patents, though? They often seem to be patening the idea itself; copyright already protects the actual implementation.
There's no such thing as "common sense", only "shared assumptions".
"Divisive pride." A "counter to Google's own library scheme." Psh. Way to miss the point, submitter.
Well, I don't think the GPs point was that they *only* need people skills, but that could be a better measure of "separating the wheat from the chaff" than pure abstract thinking. Maybe a bunch of talented people working really really well together *are* better than a bunch of really really talented people working alone and resenting each other. Of course, those are the extremes; there are people with both set of skills, so both models will have both type of employees. But maybe the emphasis on teamwork can lead to successful development.
Corporations should be subject to potentially having their corporate charter revoked. Theoretically corporations are people -- so why should "they" not be subject to the equivalent of life imprisonment (or the death penalty, depending on the jurisdiction)?
Well, sure, but their tech will still be subject to the patents in any country that recognises software patents.
Great song. Amazing.
I mean, what are these people comparing it too? Not many game developers (because that's what Nintendo is, primarily) have a track record like theirs.
It's already starting to happen. I know that Need for Speed: Underground, for example, had paid-for real life advertising on its billboards.
Another WWII era tech that seems particularly relevant to this discussion: rocketry!
Well, I agree that this is unlikely to spark a new renaissance, but I think you're missing the point if all you're looking at is technology. The Renaissance wasn't about tech, it was about ideas.
The Spock's Brain episode makes the Lincoln episode look like genius...3rd season classic Trek has some *real* stinkers.
This sort of research could be tremendously important to physically disabled people.