Well, maybe we need to give up on the whole "star" business. I, for one, would much rather see a business model where there was a greater emphasis on local acts then artificially constructed international stars. Yes, there may not be so many multi-millionaire musicians, but I think any gigging musician would trade the slight chance of making it really big in exchange for consistent, steady work that gave a comfortable income.
(BTW, I'm pretty sure the labels rarely end up actually paying for the promotional costs -- it gets subtracted from the band's cut.)
If a real war ever breaks out in space, confining ourselves to the surface of the Earth would probably be the least of our concerns. Just *surviving* on that surface would likely be difficult enough.
What's that saying about World War IV being fought with sticks and stones...
But my point is: this really has nothing to do with Linux.
It seems to me like it does -- this is another attempt by MS to legally enforce their de facto monopoly, in this case by making it more difficult to buy computers with Linux preinstalled or with no OS. This FUD is aimed at making it harder to buy a computer without buying Windows, something many Linux users have some interest in.
Yes, thank you. Quite frankly, I've been a little shocked (although I really shouldn't be, I suppose) at the number of suggestions similar to the grandparent's.
I think the idea is that copyright already protects software adequately. Copyright laws already prevent someone from directly copying your implementation --which is what patents do for physical devices! The *idea* itself shouldn't be protected.
Think about a physical device; let's say a car. You can design a car and patent your specific implementations of the engine, steering column, etc (assuming it meets the other criteria of patentability -- originality, non-obviousness, etc), but you can't patent the *idea* of a vehicle that moves on four wheels. Do you see how the *specific implementation* of a software idea is already protected by copyright? Patenting software is like patenting "a vehicle that moves on four wheels" -- it doesn't encourage people to innovate new vehicles, it simply prevents them from attempting a new and innovative implementation.
Of course, IANAL, and I'm really just talking out of my ass, but that is my understanding.
it's all indicative of guys in charge not really giving a shit about public perception
I don't think it's that they don't care about public perception; it's that they trust the propaga^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmainstream media to keep people in line.
The thing is, there doesn't seem to be a really good reason why the Chinese government is persecuting them so strongly. They claim that it is a subversive and violent cult, but no other country (they have followers around the world) seems to have any problem with them. It really just looks like the Chinese government cracking down on a spiritual movement that preaches anti-materialism -- and, in particular, an organization that was extremely popular, grew very quickly, and existed outside of state control. Quasi-fascist governments such as China's don't have a great deal of tolerance for organizations that do not conform to state ideology. Also, this wouldn't be the first religious group the Chinese government has persecuted for no concrete reason (other than to focus people's loyalty entirely to the State).
Here are some quick links:
Uh.. The Indians and Chinese are sending their best and brightest university students here all the time to be in our "inferior" school system.
That's not entirely true, at least in India's case -- the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) are amongst the most well-respected technical universities in the world.
Your mother-in-law's report sounds like it came straight out of the Chinese government's press package. The group is actively being suppressed by the Chinese government; it was legally outlawed in 1999 and its leadership and members are being persecuted. In Vancouver there has been a non-stop protest against this outside of the Chinese embassy for several years now.
Absolutely -- what bugs me is the blind devotion Google receives from its followers, and the constant apologetics which they issue. These same people generally are (rightfully) distrustful of large corporations (ie Microsoft), but discard that distrust when it comes to Google.
China is a sovreign nation and just because we don't agree with how they plan on running their country doesn't mean we can't find a way to do business within their constraints.
So the world should have kept on trading with Iraq under Saddam Hussein, then? Sanctions as a method of deploying international pressure should be completely scrapped, right? After all, if the Market tells us to do it...!
If you don't play by their rules, you're removed from a one billion person market quite quickly.
Ahhh, the reason comes out: greed. China should be engaged because there's profit to be made, but America can *afford* to not do business with, say, Cuba. Nothing but doublethink.
As regarding Google, it is understandable, from the perspective of greed, why they would do this; but it puts the lie to their "Do no Evil" slogan.
...or does this guy come across as a total ass? "Pirate2Pirate"? Blaming the users? I mean, isn't *he* paid to enable *them* to do their jobs, not the other way around?
(Of course, the actual article is/.ed, so maybe it's just the summary that gives me that impression.)
You're right; Google is a company, and I don't really blame them here. What does rankle me, though, is that they have some perpetual halo over their head as seen by the nerd community (-ies, actually). Lots of people take their "Do no evil" thing seriously, instead of realizing that it's only Yet Another Marketing Slogan.
I know someone involved with the US Iraq authority shutting down various media outlets and IIRC it is pretty much because they were being used to organize ambushes and attacks against the US and/or instigate further crimes against the troops.
This is absolutely one of the most blatant examples of doublethink I have ever heard. Can you imagine what you you or your "someone involved" would say if China used that excuse? Or the old Soviet Union? Or Iraq before the invasion? You'd call it exactly what it is: bullshit.
The crazy thing is is that it doesn't even looked like a glorified PC -- more like a stripped and locked down PC that probably won't even be able to play current A-list games effectively (check out HardOCP's recent hardware analysis), let alone A-list games a couple of years into its life cycle.
The *only* possible way I can see something like this succeeding is if they can get it in hotel rooms or something like that.
You, sir, are correct. If I remember correctly too, that was only the first citation of Catch-22 in the book; it kept on popping up in other places.
"There was only one catch...Catch-22."
Ahh, good stuff.
Google is now a publicly traded company. Will they be the next evil Microsoft?
As a publically traded company, they pretty much will by definition. By law US corporations are required to maximize shareholder value and profit; in practice this means exploiting every potential avenue to do so. AFAIC, that is pretty much at odds with any "don't be evil" ideal, which *must* take a bakeseat to profitability.
Yeah? Weird -- are you using kmozilla to render? Because Konq does weird stuff to my user pages (or/. does weird stuff to Konq:)) -- the columns on the top of the page are misalgined and spread all over most of the page, and while the contents of those columns do display correctly, they are seperated from the top of the page by a couple of screens of emptiness and misplaced stuff.
Ah well -- I never had any problems with/. when I was using Firefox on Windows. Different strokes, perhaps.
(On the plus side, when I first started using Konq I was somewhat wary because I had read that it was less tolerant of malformed code than Firefox, but I haven't had any problems other than the above, and the browser has really grown on me.)
Slashdot Mirror
(BTW, I'm pretty sure the labels rarely end up actually paying for the promotional costs -- it gets subtracted from the band's cut.)
What's that saying about World War IV being fought with sticks and stones...
Exactly. All this will really accomplish is to royally piss off every other country and spark a new arms race.
How about: f) Lobby for a levy on all computers sold in order to compensate for piracy of MS products (like the levy on recordable media).
It seems to me like it does -- this is another attempt by MS to legally enforce their de facto monopoly, in this case by making it more difficult to buy computers with Linux preinstalled or with no OS. This FUD is aimed at making it harder to buy a computer without buying Windows, something many Linux users have some interest in.
What the fuck do trademarks have to do with anything?
People should read Benjamin's "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. It's even more important, IMHO, in the age of electronic reproduction.
Perhaps it would have been made without SW, but no way it would have gotten the monstrous budget (for the time) that it got.
Think about a physical device; let's say a car. You can design a car and patent your specific implementations of the engine, steering column, etc (assuming it meets the other criteria of patentability -- originality, non-obviousness, etc), but you can't patent the *idea* of a vehicle that moves on four wheels. Do you see how the *specific implementation* of a software idea is already protected by copyright? Patenting software is like patenting "a vehicle that moves on four wheels" -- it doesn't encourage people to innovate new vehicles, it simply prevents them from attempting a new and innovative implementation.
Of course, IANAL, and I'm really just talking out of my ass, but that is my understanding.
I don't think it's that they don't care about public perception; it's that they trust the propaga^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmainstream media to keep people in line.
The thing is, there doesn't seem to be a really good reason why the Chinese government is persecuting them so strongly. They claim that it is a subversive and violent cult, but no other country (they have followers around the world) seems to have any problem with them. It really just looks like the Chinese government cracking down on a spiritual movement that preaches anti-materialism -- and, in particular, an organization that was extremely popular, grew very quickly, and existed outside of state control. Quasi-fascist governments such as China's don't have a great deal of tolerance for organizations that do not conform to state ideology. Also, this wouldn't be the first religious group the Chinese government has persecuted for no concrete reason (other than to focus people's loyalty entirely to the State). Here are some quick links:
ob Wikipedia article
Religious Tolerance
Falun Gong's homepage.
That's not entirely true, at least in India's case -- the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) are amongst the most well-respected technical universities in the world.
Your mother-in-law's report sounds like it came straight out of the Chinese government's press package. The group is actively being suppressed by the Chinese government; it was legally outlawed in 1999 and its leadership and members are being persecuted. In Vancouver there has been a non-stop protest against this outside of the Chinese embassy for several years now.
Absolutely -- what bugs me is the blind devotion Google receives from its followers, and the constant apologetics which they issue. These same people generally are (rightfully) distrustful of large corporations (ie Microsoft), but discard that distrust when it comes to Google.
So the world should have kept on trading with Iraq under Saddam Hussein, then? Sanctions as a method of deploying international pressure should be completely scrapped, right? After all, if the Market tells us to do it...!
If you don't play by their rules, you're removed from a one billion person market quite quickly.
Ahhh, the reason comes out: greed. China should be engaged because there's profit to be made, but America can *afford* to not do business with, say, Cuba. Nothing but doublethink.
As regarding Google, it is understandable, from the perspective of greed, why they would do this; but it puts the lie to their "Do no Evil" slogan.
...or does this guy come across as a total ass? "Pirate2Pirate"? Blaming the users? I mean, isn't *he* paid to enable *them* to do their jobs, not the other way around? (Of course, the actual article is /.ed, so maybe it's just the summary that gives me that impression.)
I am intrigued by your offer, but tell me, what are the modalities involved? Is it 100% risky free?
You're right; Google is a company, and I don't really blame them here. What does rankle me, though, is that they have some perpetual halo over their head as seen by the nerd community (-ies, actually). Lots of people take their "Do no evil" thing seriously, instead of realizing that it's only Yet Another Marketing Slogan.
This is absolutely one of the most blatant examples of doublethink I have ever heard. Can you imagine what you you or your "someone involved" would say if China used that excuse? Or the old Soviet Union? Or Iraq before the invasion? You'd call it exactly what it is: bullshit.
The crazy thing is is that it doesn't even looked like a glorified PC -- more like a stripped and locked down PC that probably won't even be able to play current A-list games effectively (check out HardOCP's recent hardware analysis), let alone A-list games a couple of years into its life cycle. The *only* possible way I can see something like this succeeding is if they can get it in hotel rooms or something like that.
You, sir, are correct. If I remember correctly too, that was only the first citation of Catch-22 in the book; it kept on popping up in other places. "There was only one catch...Catch-22." Ahh, good stuff.
As a publically traded company, they pretty much will by definition. By law US corporations are required to maximize shareholder value and profit; in practice this means exploiting every potential avenue to do so. AFAIC, that is pretty much at odds with any "don't be evil" ideal, which *must* take a bakeseat to profitability.
This little startup I heard about called "IBM" also seems to think there's money to be made in open source software.
Digging ditches and then filling them in over and over again would also create jobs, but that doesn't mean it's actually good for the economy.
Yeah? Weird -- are you using kmozilla to render? Because Konq does weird stuff to my user pages (or /. does weird stuff to Konq :)) -- the columns on the top of the page are misalgined and spread all over most of the page, and while the contents of those columns do display correctly, they are seperated from the top of the page by a couple of screens of emptiness and misplaced stuff.
Ah well -- I never had any problems with /. when I was using Firefox on Windows. Different strokes, perhaps.
(On the plus side, when I first started using Konq I was somewhat wary because I had read that it was less tolerant of malformed code than Firefox, but I haven't had any problems other than the above, and the browser has really grown on me.)