Coupled with this story makes for intriguing imaginations of backroom deals.
It'd be a lot easier to get a variety of providers that just benefitted from this ruling to build these back doors. "We gave you one, now you give us one."
Wrapped in the flag, it's a pretty present for the patriotic consumer. "Verizon is doing its part to protect America from terrorism. By installing a back door for feds..."
Also, in the last few years, the gov'ment has been reformulating statistics (un-employment, etc) invariably using some figure that was unavailable in previous calculations making comparisons difficult. This logic could, conceivebly, be applied to the definition of "information carrying mediums"--or any other communication the FCC may wish to regulate.
Say, Voip, for instance. Is it data, and can be blocked by telco networks, or is it "telecomunications?"
Perhaps this quote from Wi-Fi planet may shed some light to what's really going on:
"I look forward to creating clear rules for all IP-enabled services." --Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Energy and commerce Committee.
Okay this might seem like a trick question, but really is well thought out (and long):
MS has discontinued support for "Windows" operating systems prior to WinMe and, last I heard, also Win2k (I don't know if this is true). Also, MS feels the hot breath of Linux on it's back, and tosses about all manner of FUD regarding TCO, ease of use, etc.
Additionally, MS wants to break into the third-world markets, so it's shipping a stripped down version of XP around the globe--except in America. MS, and indeed Mr. Gates, keep telling us they want to make a better future for our children, yet the consistently SELL computer science to those it claims to help. Sure, you'll give 'puters away, but you make people pay for software and development tools, usually exorbitantly, and don't provide any kind of sample code to teach quality design. (Mind you, I don't think paying for software is bad, but $300/WinXP is a huge chunk of change for someone who wants to learn computers on his own given the time required to lock it down and *really* learn it, especially for underprivileged kids.)
Finally, with the ever-climbing security threat to personal data, and now major institutional data, promulgated by "open source" malware writers (virii, spyware, etc get shared in the underground), it seems to me MS could mitigate huge amounts of bad press simply by Open Sourcing code that pre-dates the "NT" code on which you base your current operating systems.
So why haven't you?
Don't you think MS could hugely benefit from the good PR that would follow such a move? Consider these benefits too:
1)People that learn computer science from an open-sourced windows 98 would "move up" to the more capable/secure WinXP when they outgrow the '98 limitations.
2)Those that move on would be able to better code "the microsoft way," increasing developer base and MicroSoft supporters;
3)MS could wholly abandon the earlier OS's, without outcry, with the simple explanation "Other people support it; now we can better spend our resource improving "longhorn." (this also creates a better reason to upgrade vis a vis the oft repeated MS saw against Linux: "you don't know WHO had their fingers in there!)
4)An exposed windows will be easier to patch for the windows "DIY," coder and help create safer/more secure network;
5)Regional tweaks--Time zones and map colorizations--provided by open sources can be incorporated into modern MS OSes. What better way to serve your customers than incorporating what they, themselves, deem important?
6)lower over all computer costs for third-world markets (after all, your limited XP OS presumes these markets don't require/can't afford the hardware it needs).
7)Unexpected Interface improvements.
Really, the list of good things that can come from this is limitless. The downside, for MS (as I see it) is vindication for the MS critics (code quality, integrations) and the realization among the learned that XP really isn't that different from prior MS offerings, raising the issue "Is XP really an improvement, or is it prettied up vendor lock-in.
So, In case you missed it, the question is: Why don't you open source earlier MS OSes to counter Linux?
Hmmm...I'm thinking back to the time when I went from windows to OS/2. The main impetus then was better multi-tasking and more control over my equipment. Pretty much the same reasons I like Linux.
The difference is when I went to OS/2 I wanted to take some apps with me. I only later discovered some superb apps developed specifically for that platform then ported to windows to try and make money (anyone remember DeScribe?)Now I'm going to Linux for quality apps.
The common thread here is QUALITY and ACCOUNTABILITY. I got used to quality products and a smaller, more personal touch that let me know the programmers really did stand behind their product.
In context of the question at hand, then, I'd say it certainly has its pros and cons, but overall it's a good thing as long as there are clear and concise outlets of information to assure a potential user of quality issues and interoperability, as well as what else is available for the environment on different platforms. The key is program size, ease of use and functionality at specific tasks.
So it's not really KDE's availability on a given platform, it's the applications stupid! As a hungry, informed user I want quality apps that do what I want with little hassle, no bloat and an interface intuitive to me. (Do I even have to mention Stability???)
I like KDE because it makes more sense than windows interface, and I like Linux because I can control it's size and 'shape,' more ways than I can with windows. Part of the reason for this is windows integrates EVERYTHING to the point of making removal impossible (explorer, etc) and locks you into high-priced softwares (dvd viewers, etc) that do what I've learned to do with Linux.
With that in mind, why not include tutorials and other learning aids into the KDE-win project that teach real digital literacy (including legal gobbledygook) and how to switch to Linux? Applets that leverage windows information tools could easily provide importantant datasheets for joe blow so when he needs to know specific chipset information for a linux set-up he can find it easily (if he remembered to print the results.)
Folks, as FireFox is proving, people aren't Glued to windows, they're just afraid of change, losing data and/or time. The OS/2 versions of DeScribe (and PM-View) are infinitely better than their windows counterparts, as the Linux versions of programs (so far) are infinitely better than the windows backports [grin]. So long as things stay this way I think OSS, and linux, will be fine.
I actually do ceramic tile installation full time (for now). Having earned a palpable distrust and dislike for institutional learning, I'm working my way up towards more I.T. than I do now, which is mostly support for small businesses that desperately wants (and needs) some sort of support and training (hint, hint.)
One of the things I've missed from reading replies, and the topic itself, are the varied contexts of "side job." Permit me to illuminate the whole "side job" thing," in my limited experience.
First, many people take 'em for different reasons. I reject many offers because 1)My boss treats me pretty well (I won't compete) and 2)A lot of people who want side work want x-tra $aving$, so get mad when you tell 'em you can't save 'em as much as they thought because of some unforseen problem that a pro will need to resolve at pro pricing. What it comes down to is do you really want to work for someone that's willing to pay your boss full freight for the big stuff but want's to cut corners on a repair and THEN has the gall to bitch because it wasn't such a small, inexpensive job after all?
So, most people take the occasional side job for extra bucks, and want little hassle. They usually pick their jobs pretty well, which means if you were a jerk on the job (the howeowner) then chances are good that you'll get rejected. I've done it with tile and computer services. (I'm branching out to other endeavors--"Making $$ with my hobby!" [grin].)
Now the other side jobber is the one that's building a business. The honorable ones tend not to 'steal' their boss's customers. They might do some side work, even some large jobs, but the purpose (besides extra ching) is reputation building. Or, for you corporate entities, brand building. These people tend to contract outside of their boss's circle, also, to avoid ill will.
"one day" the side jobber will go out on his own. If the old boss was an asshole, or if the jobber is 'dishonorable' toward a decent guy, he might take a sizeable chunk of his former employer's clientele with him.
Or, if your old boss can't keep up (as what happened to me) one of your old boss's clients will run into you at the convienience store, tell you how terrible that guy has been and "will you please pick up some slack, i'll pay well."
In the end, those wanting to start their own business will more than likely come cheaper on 'side jobs', than a "regular" company because in the contracting business it's all about reputation. Unlike Software coding, brick and mortar builders are liable for their product, whether or not that liability is backed by legal threat. If my product fails my name goes on that asshole list. Enough failures will ruin my business.(Are you listening, Bill?)
Know what that means? A side job is still work! That's right, whenever you are committing time and effort for financial gain, you are working and sometimes that can interfere with your "other life." So, the saavy side jobber takes into account the cyclical nature of "crunch times." We'll turn down jobs we suspect will clash with our "reglular job.
[tip] For example, did you know the best time to seek someone like me for "side work" might be the time between New year's and Taxes? People hold off on major projects until after their taxes and holidays are reconciled, so a lot of guys are laid off until spring
The whole point of this post is two fold:
to head of some misconceptions, mainly the implied one that "side work" is "easy Money." It's not, nor should it be. Above all else it should be rewarding, else why do it? If you can't make ends meet then maybe something else needs adjustment?
...And I really want to encourage people who work in I.T. -and especially those that evangelize open source and other I.P. issues- to get out there and and do something to bring it out to public life. There's a pile of cash to be made on situated programming
besides, you know what they say, right? "Fix a computer, it's fixed for a day. Teach the guy how to use it and it's fixed for life...well, almost.
IMHO, I'd take a two pronged attack toward the problem: First answer forcefully that rooting out all copyright infringement, etc would be impossible, as a lot of people participate. Still, we could "work on it."
The downside of this is it might cause other companies, porn or otherwise, to consider the litigation business model.
Then I'd make sure my engines wouldn't return ANY links to their material--including their websites. If they bitch simply state "Hey, we're looking out for your best interests.
Okay, I just tried the link to the IPTV and it almost seems like a funny joke.
Maybe my head is swimming in too much IP--er, intellectual property--matters, but that's what I thought at first. "Intellectual Property Television."
Then it occurs to me, why not? With the Broadcast Flag in play the slogan could be "Welcome to the new ownership class. We 0wn you."
Would there be a EVLA (End Viewer License Agreement)? Would people that devise new, analog and/or digital delivery schemes be barred by algorithmic patents?.
If you take a look at the small business crowd you'll see people more willing to try, and stick with, Linux. We're tinkers, and risk takers, individualists that have a unique vision. That unique vision, however large and small, is the exact same type of vision that caused Linus to develop the Linux kernel in the first place.
A few of the things Linux programmers can do to capture this market are pretty simple:
1)Templates! I'm not talkin' just the minimal crap I get with OO.o, I mean a decent sample of polished templates like what I can get with Word Perfect, or other proprietary wares (or warez,for the l33ts).
2)Decent, simple tutorial maintenance programs: One of the best programs I ever used was one by Clear and Simple software for OS/2 (I forget the name). Besides getting you through many onerous tasks that everyone should do, it went a long way in teaching where configuration files lie, what most of the lines meant, and (Best of all) how to tweak it.
Many small business owners aren't gonna shell out for new hardware for everything they need to do, so knowing how to maintain and tweak is pretty important.
What it boils down to is this: if you want to see more linux desktops, it has to be able to run a business out of the box, complete w/ web design, word proc, accounting with the ability to output industry standard files. (a lot of DIY business ppl design their own literature [or would like to] only to be thwarted by finished product in proprietary formats that have to be translated @ extra fee.)
Finally, what all software developers are seeming to miss, is we want accountability. As a contractor, there are certain vulnerabilities in my work that absolutely would not be tolarated, legally or professionally. Conversely, it seems software comes with terms that amount to "Use it, but if you get screwed it's not our fault." Damn, I wish I could say that!
Rather than develop for the "Enterprise market," which would only help corporations gain power through control of the software --creative-- market, why not usurp their power by building social networks *around* them? The Net routes around damage, right?
I guess what I'm trying to say is: "Are there any home software contractors out there?" For this, Linux is ideally suited. This metaphor should also, imho, help validate the value of open source software. Imagine how much I would have to charge YOU for a new bathroom if I had to license the technologies for "fastening wood segments with cylindrical ferrous alloyed metals." Oh, and it might mitigate some of that outsourcing damage too.
My dad has been in the automotive business for years. Often, especially older customers, get the benefit of his taking notes on what similar customers bought as they changed cars, changed their service contracts, or commented about a rental. I mean literally take notes:"Customer loved the Toyota camry rental." Because they were a long time customer he'd have 'filed' their age, race, etc. in his head.
then, when another, or new, customer asked about something he could relay the experience ("Other users have recommended") based on the relevant demographics.
Since he already had a system, can he sue to increase his bottom line?
Yeah, it sounds silly, but it seems we're headed that way.
Not that I had anything done to me because of its application. It's the principle that's got me razzed.
I find the modern computer to be an amazing palette for my imagination. Not only surfing, but *doing* things, and connecting with shared interests.
As such it can be a very personal sketch pad. Now think of, say, kids that get expelled from school because they wrote a macabre piece. I, personally, wrote terrible things about a teacher that didn't regard science fiction as 'valid literature' (although historical romance was kosher). Luckily, in that day and age, we hashed out our differences amicably.
Now think about all that sketching, which, by the language, is at the beck and call of the Feds...and they get to *order* other interests-your bank-to do the same w/out warrants, etc. Ripe for corruption.
On the lighter side, we have a government run by people that act like they haven't done any wrong crusade against the very things they crusaded for mere years earlier.
What we have is a sure-fire recipe for government abuse.
Most aggravating of all is how little people know about this law, and other laws slashdotters know well. So much so, I've been working on a campaign [watch out, it's a plug] to bypass the media with information dissemination.
Okay, I don't *really* want to get a nasty flame war on, so please understand where I'm coming from.
First-I like words. Love them, really, because they mean something. A word well used says a lot about a person, so when I see "decenter" the best I can think of is some sort of political joke; but I think you mean "Dissenter" which IS a word. (If the pun escapes you, no matter, I get pretty esoteric in my allusions.)
Second: I always try to buy for quality, no matter what the product. If it's something I use often, I'll try to learn more about it, how it works (maybe) and what tricks [hacks] I have to master to get it to work the way *I* want.
This goes for hand tools, work vehicles and, yes, computers. I'm not a programmer, I don't even work in the industry, I just watch it [the industry] and learn the tech. But you have to realize the old saw about the computer experience being like an automobile is pretty damn accurate. Just as people are backyard mechanics that know the makes, models, and accessory parts available for a variety of machines there are backyard hackers that do the same thing--but with hardware and software.
Speaking as a backyard hacker, I just have to say your defense that everone piles on Windows because of marketshare is mostly crap. Sure there are people that do that, but for me--who has worked as a mechanic, btw--the reason I don't like windows is I know how it works.
No, I don't know all the system calls, API's or have secret access to it's source code. But I do know that they integrate IE pretty tightly with the core code, and have known it for a long time. That's part of the reason I don't like it. This fact alone is why I'm sure many slashdotters don't like it. If you hack IE you've hacked about a dozen programs and assorted data on that machine.
Still, I grant you, it is highly functional, and I do use it for certain things I haven't been able to accomplish with Linux. This is because I AM a backyard hack, and there are some things that, knowing the costs [my code probably is not as clean] I will do because I get there easier.
Still, as a tech-minded person, in the end I find it easy to hate M$ because they have crummy product and get away with it.
Worse, they had viable competitors that eventually let themselves be bought out. Forget sun, what about Corel who had a great head start on the end-user friendly Linux market then let themselves get bribed by M$. (Yeah, I got burned on that one.) Or IBM who couldn't market their way out of a paper bag in the OS/2 fiasco.
The real reason many dislike--even loathe--windows is that marginal investigation reveals it to be crap spaghetti code. Common sense tells you that in a complex system of any sort you break down the final product into discrete pieces--modules--that are easily replaceable, should they fail. This, in turn, reduces down times, makes diagnostics easier, improves serviceability, and enable task specific tweaks (how much GUI does a fileserver need???)
In closing, I just want to emphasize the point here: people hate microsoft because it is a proveably shitty OS. The abstract concepts are built of duct tape, the implementations are jury rigged, and whole shebang is marketed like a whore in the window: pounds of paint hide the wrinkles.
I could go on about Windows. For a backyard mechanic I know quite a bit, more than the average joe. But it would get tiresome, and I don't want this to be all flame.
I just wanted to point out that people that look under the hood, understand the basics and stretch their dollars are inclined to have higher standards...which is why (imnsho) it appears to you that slashdotters pile on M$.
Oh, and if Windows is so great, why isn't there a version for other processors? Why doesn't it port easily? I mean, imagine the market domination if MS rolled out a PPC version that obviated the Mac?
Let's face it, you don't need bin-laden to tell you we've been screwed by both parties.
If you *REALLY* want to get technical, both campaings could, theororetically, be prosecuted under anti-trust laws for their debate agreement or even racketeering (RICO statutes) for all the legal manoeuvres before, during, and likely after the elections. (Intimidation, voter fraud, extortion [vote for me or else everyone gets it], rigging an election [Nader's woes]...)
Yeah, I know I'm in a "swing state," yada, yada, yada, but I look at it this way: What if? I'll be voting for someone that really does represent my views best, and, if elected, would cause repurcussions in D.C. that would be felt around the world.
One thing I got from the bin-laden transcript the media seems to miss is he is telling us we --the voter-- have the power to steer our country but our apathy has led us down this road of conflict.
I've voted every year since I was 18. I don't think I've wasted any votes except in the last election.
Not too long ago I had the "perfect" digital home media set up. (2)PIII pc's, networked and broadbanded, one solely dishing out MP3's and playing DVD's. They were windows, with all that entails, and they worked pretty well.
What bugged me was the code overhead. Still, I got to play Need for Speed just fine on it, which was quite a delight to me. And this is essentially what this pair that M$ is offering really is.
Having used Linux for a little over a year, and being a one-time (okay, STILL)OS/2 junkie it's been on my mind for a while: Why hasn't anyone developed a distro streamlined for the types of things M$ is doing. I would LOVE if I could choose to boot my SuSE in either 'work' or 'game' mode.
I mention OS/2 because that's one of the things IBM forgot, and it seems a lot of FOSS programmers are ignorant of too: computers are operated by PEOPLE. Sometimes people just want to plug in and go, others, like me, once we got it going we want to tinker and learn how it works. That is to say, I want to play right off the bat, but I also want to learn about how it all works when I get tired of playing.
While I appreciate many of the games I can get for Linux, imagine the power a unified 'game spec' OS could provide. No wasted daemon running and an API that ANY game programmer can aquire without costly license overhead! This would lower the bar for new game developers, and create a market wherein nobody would have to sign an exclusive development deal (SNES, X-Box, and PS-2 have platform specific titles).
I'm no programmer, but I'm sure this is possible. Pre-linking libraries, and/or a simplified gentoo-type build process coupled with a 'portage' or 'apt-get' type of utility could extend the life of the hardware.
And the icing on the cake? A solid REASON why America's (or any other country's) youth would want to buy a "build your own game console and save a bundle" book/kit to learn about computers and IP laws!
Kinda like the late seventies and early eighties all over again.:)
I've been thinking about all that gadgetry and it occurs to me the guy with a need for speed, danger and a place to spend unwanted money would buy software that altered or outright bypassed adaptive cruise, etc.
I'm sure you're all familiar with the Crazy Cabbie that insists on weaving through tight traffic as, no doubt, are people like Volvo. Adaptive Cruise can lead to other adaptive tech that might prevent speed racer from winning the race. Unless, of course, his car got 'chipped...'
Like many people this time of year, ESPECIALLY this year, my thoughts turn to political and philosphical debate. To that end I watched the Cobb-Badnarik debate on c-span, knowing that, if I wanted, I could have it running in a Real window on my KDE desktop-definitely easier than trying to get MS's stuff to work in or out of Linux.
Although C-span still has that file on it's site, it occurred to me that the ability to save a stream of something like this would be nice, especially for lower bandwidth students needing to do research; Kind of hard to parse a debate on 56k!
(and, before any of you make claims of broadband penetration, remember that given population size and deployment there's STILL a lot of kids out there tied to dial-up!).
So, the short question, will you be enabling this type of activity or will you lean toward the Hatch "induce" scheme?
The wider question is what will your company be doing to help people create their own outlets of A/V information? Will your company move to enable new artistic and intellectual synthesis (affordable authoring tools) or circle 'round behind and demand outrageous royalty when you feel market saturation sufficient?
Oh, and are you working on a "Play the format of your choice" hardware player? I mean, if your software can really play any format, why constrain it to a GP computer? I'd love to replace my "MP3 capable" car CD-player for something I could *update* to a better codec.
Slashdot Mirror
It'd be a lot easier to get a variety of providers that just benefitted from this ruling to build these back doors. "We gave you one, now you give us one."
Wrapped in the flag, it's a pretty present for the patriotic consumer. "Verizon is doing its part to protect America from terrorism. By installing a back door for feds..."
Also, in the last few years, the gov'ment has been reformulating statistics (un-employment, etc) invariably using some figure that was unavailable in previous calculations making comparisons difficult. This logic could, conceivebly, be applied to the definition of "information carrying mediums"--or any other communication the FCC may wish to regulate.
Say, Voip, for instance. Is it data, and can be blocked by telco networks, or is it "telecomunications?"
Perhaps this quote from Wi-Fi planet may shed some light to what's really going on: "I look forward to creating clear rules for all IP-enabled services." --Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Energy and commerce Committee.
Why not an insolated, temp controlled space for harware? Heck, why not a rack-mount closet?
MS has discontinued support for "Windows" operating systems prior to WinMe and, last I heard, also Win2k (I don't know if this is true). Also, MS feels the hot breath of Linux on it's back, and tosses about all manner of FUD regarding TCO, ease of use, etc.
Additionally, MS wants to break into the third-world markets, so it's shipping a stripped down version of XP around the globe--except in America. MS, and indeed Mr. Gates, keep telling us they want to make a better future for our children, yet the consistently SELL computer science to those it claims to help. Sure, you'll give 'puters away, but you make people pay for software and development tools, usually exorbitantly, and don't provide any kind of sample code to teach quality design. (Mind you, I don't think paying for software is bad, but $300/WinXP is a huge chunk of change for someone who wants to learn computers on his own given the time required to lock it down and *really* learn it, especially for underprivileged kids.)
Finally, with the ever-climbing security threat to personal data, and now major institutional data, promulgated by "open source" malware writers (virii, spyware, etc get shared in the underground), it seems to me MS could mitigate huge amounts of bad press simply by Open Sourcing code that pre-dates the "NT" code on which you base your current operating systems.
So why haven't you?
Don't you think MS could hugely benefit from the good PR that would follow such a move? Consider these benefits too:
1)People that learn computer science from an open-sourced windows 98 would "move up" to the more capable/secure WinXP when they outgrow the '98 limitations.
2)Those that move on would be able to better code "the microsoft way," increasing developer base and MicroSoft supporters;
3)MS could wholly abandon the earlier OS's, without outcry, with the simple explanation "Other people support it; now we can better spend our resource improving "longhorn." (this also creates a better reason to upgrade vis a vis the oft repeated MS saw against Linux: "you don't know WHO had their fingers in there!)
4)An exposed windows will be easier to patch for the windows "DIY," coder and help create safer/more secure network;
5)Regional tweaks--Time zones and map colorizations--provided by open sources can be incorporated into modern MS OSes. What better way to serve your customers than incorporating what they, themselves, deem important?
6)lower over all computer costs for third-world markets (after all, your limited XP OS presumes these markets don't require/can't afford the hardware it needs).
7)Unexpected Interface improvements.
Really, the list of good things that can come from this is limitless. The downside, for MS (as I see it) is vindication for the MS critics (code quality, integrations) and the realization among the learned that XP really isn't that different from prior MS offerings, raising the issue "Is XP really an improvement, or is it prettied up vendor lock-in.
So, In case you missed it, the question is: Why don't you open source earlier MS OSes to counter Linux?
Pete
The difference is when I went to OS/2 I wanted to take some apps with me. I only later discovered some superb apps developed specifically for that platform then ported to windows to try and make money (anyone remember DeScribe?)Now I'm going to Linux for quality apps.
The common thread here is QUALITY and ACCOUNTABILITY. I got used to quality products and a smaller, more personal touch that let me know the programmers really did stand behind their product.
In context of the question at hand, then, I'd say it certainly has its pros and cons, but overall it's a good thing as long as there are clear and concise outlets of information to assure a potential user of quality issues and interoperability, as well as what else is available for the environment on different platforms. The key is program size, ease of use and functionality at specific tasks.
So it's not really KDE's availability on a given platform, it's the applications stupid! As a hungry, informed user I want quality apps that do what I want with little hassle, no bloat and an interface intuitive to me. (Do I even have to mention Stability???)
I like KDE because it makes more sense than windows interface, and I like Linux because I can control it's size and 'shape,' more ways than I can with windows. Part of the reason for this is windows integrates EVERYTHING to the point of making removal impossible (explorer, etc) and locks you into high-priced softwares (dvd viewers, etc) that do what I've learned to do with Linux.
With that in mind, why not include tutorials and other learning aids into the KDE-win project that teach real digital literacy (including legal gobbledygook) and how to switch to Linux? Applets that leverage windows information tools could easily provide importantant datasheets for joe blow so when he needs to know specific chipset information for a linux set-up he can find it easily (if he remembered to print the results.)
Folks, as FireFox is proving, people aren't Glued to windows, they're just afraid of change, losing data and/or time. The OS/2 versions of DeScribe (and PM-View) are infinitely better than their windows counterparts, as the Linux versions of programs (so far) are infinitely better than the windows backports [grin]. So long as things stay this way I think OSS, and linux, will be fine.
...Oh, and don't forget those loser production houses that make a DVD that FORCES you to watch trailers and ads before even seeing the menu!
One of the things I've missed from reading replies, and the topic itself, are the varied contexts of "side job." Permit me to illuminate the whole "side job" thing," in my limited experience.
First, many people take 'em for different reasons. I reject many offers because 1)My boss treats me pretty well (I won't compete) and 2)A lot of people who want side work want x-tra $aving$, so get mad when you tell 'em you can't save 'em as much as they thought because of some unforseen problem that a pro will need to resolve at pro pricing. What it comes down to is do you really want to work for someone that's willing to pay your boss full freight for the big stuff but want's to cut corners on a repair and THEN has the gall to bitch because it wasn't such a small, inexpensive job after all?
So, most people take the occasional side job for extra bucks, and want little hassle. They usually pick their jobs pretty well, which means if you were a jerk on the job (the howeowner) then chances are good that you'll get rejected. I've done it with tile and computer services. (I'm branching out to other endeavors--"Making $$ with my hobby!" [grin].)
Now the other side jobber is the one that's building a business. The honorable ones tend not to 'steal' their boss's customers. They might do some side work, even some large jobs, but the purpose (besides extra ching) is reputation building. Or, for you corporate entities, brand building. These people tend to contract outside of their boss's circle, also, to avoid ill will.
"one day" the side jobber will go out on his own. If the old boss was an asshole, or if the jobber is 'dishonorable' toward a decent guy, he might take a sizeable chunk of his former employer's clientele with him.
Or, if your old boss can't keep up (as what happened to me) one of your old boss's clients will run into you at the convienience store, tell you how terrible that guy has been and "will you please pick up some slack, i'll pay well."
In the end, those wanting to start their own business will more than likely come cheaper on 'side jobs', than a "regular" company because in the contracting business it's all about reputation. Unlike Software coding, brick and mortar builders are liable for their product, whether or not that liability is backed by legal threat. If my product fails my name goes on that asshole list. Enough failures will ruin my business.(Are you listening, Bill?)
Know what that means? A side job is still work! That's right, whenever you are committing time and effort for financial gain, you are working and sometimes that can interfere with your "other life." So, the saavy side jobber takes into account the cyclical nature of "crunch times." We'll turn down jobs we suspect will clash with our "reglular job.
[tip] For example, did you know the best time to seek someone like me for "side work" might be the time between New year's and Taxes? People hold off on major projects until after their taxes and holidays are reconciled, so a lot of guys are laid off until spring
The whole point of this post is two fold: to head of some misconceptions, mainly the implied one that "side work" is "easy Money." It's not, nor should it be. Above all else it should be rewarding, else why do it? If you can't make ends meet then maybe something else needs adjustment?
...And I really want to encourage people who work in I.T. -and especially those that evangelize open source and other I.P. issues- to get out there and and do something to bring it out to public life. There's a pile of cash to be made on situated programming
besides, you know what they say, right? "Fix a computer, it's fixed for a day. Teach the guy how to use it and it's fixed for life...well, almost.
IMHO, I'd take a two pronged attack toward the problem: First answer forcefully that rooting out all copyright infringement, etc would be impossible, as a lot of people participate. Still, we could "work on it."
The downside of this is it might cause other companies, porn or otherwise, to consider the litigation business model.
Then I'd make sure my engines wouldn't return ANY links to their material--including their websites. If they bitch simply state "Hey, we're looking out for your best interests.
Maybe my head is swimming in too much IP--er, intellectual property--matters, but that's what I thought at first. "Intellectual Property Television."
Then it occurs to me, why not? With the Broadcast Flag in play the slogan could be "Welcome to the new ownership class. We 0wn you."
Would there be a EVLA (End Viewer License Agreement)? Would people that devise new, analog and/or digital delivery schemes be barred by algorithmic patents?.
If you take a look at the small business crowd you'll see people more willing to try, and stick with, Linux. We're tinkers, and risk takers, individualists that have a unique vision. That unique vision, however large and small, is the exact same type of vision that caused Linus to develop the Linux kernel in the first place.
A few of the things Linux programmers can do to capture this market are pretty simple:
1)Templates! I'm not talkin' just the minimal crap I get with OO.o, I mean a decent sample of polished templates like what I can get with Word Perfect, or other proprietary wares (or warez,for the l33ts).2)Decent, simple tutorial maintenance programs: One of the best programs I ever used was one by Clear and Simple software for OS/2 (I forget the name). Besides getting you through many onerous tasks that everyone should do, it went a long way in teaching where configuration files lie, what most of the lines meant, and (Best of all) how to tweak it.
Many small business owners aren't gonna shell out for new hardware for everything they need to do, so knowing how to maintain and tweak is pretty important.
What it boils down to is this: if you want to see more linux desktops, it has to be able to run a business out of the box, complete w/ web design, word proc, accounting with the ability to output industry standard files. (a lot of DIY business ppl design their own literature [or would like to] only to be thwarted by finished product in proprietary formats that have to be translated @ extra fee.)
Finally, what all software developers are seeming to miss, is we want accountability. As a contractor, there are certain vulnerabilities in my work that absolutely would not be tolarated, legally or professionally. Conversely, it seems software comes with terms that amount to "Use it, but if you get screwed it's not our fault." Damn, I wish I could say that!
Rather than develop for the "Enterprise market," which would only help corporations gain power through control of the software --creative-- market, why not usurp their power by building social networks *around* them? The Net routes around damage, right?
I guess what I'm trying to say is: "Are there any home software contractors out there?" For this, Linux is ideally suited. This metaphor should also, imho, help validate the value of open source software. Imagine how much I would have to charge YOU for a new bathroom if I had to license the technologies for "fastening wood segments with cylindrical ferrous alloyed metals." Oh, and it might mitigate some of that outsourcing damage too.
My dad has been in the automotive business for years. Often, especially older customers, get the benefit of his taking notes on what similar customers bought as they changed cars, changed their service contracts, or commented about a rental. I mean literally take notes:"Customer loved the Toyota camry rental." Because they were a long time customer he'd have 'filed' their age, race, etc. in his head.
then, when another, or new, customer asked about something he could relay the experience ("Other users have recommended") based on the relevant demographics.
Since he already had a system, can he sue to increase his bottom line?
Yeah, it sounds silly, but it seems we're headed that way.
Not that I had anything done to me because of its application. It's the principle that's got me razzed.
I find the modern computer to be an amazing palette for my imagination. Not only surfing, but *doing* things, and connecting with shared interests.
As such it can be a very personal sketch pad. Now think of, say, kids that get expelled from school because they wrote a macabre piece. I, personally, wrote terrible things about a teacher that didn't regard science fiction as 'valid literature' (although historical romance was kosher). Luckily, in that day and age, we hashed out our differences amicably.
Now think about all that sketching, which, by the language, is at the beck and call of the Feds...and they get to *order* other interests-your bank-to do the same w/out warrants, etc. Ripe for corruption.
On the lighter side, we have a government run by people that act like they haven't done any wrong crusade against the very things they crusaded for mere years earlier.
What we have is a sure-fire recipe for government abuse.
Most aggravating of all is how little people know about this law, and other laws slashdotters know well. So much so, I've been working on a campaign [watch out, it's a plug ] to bypass the media with information dissemination.
Okay, I don't *really* want to get a nasty flame war on, so please understand where I'm coming from.
First-I like words. Love them, really, because they mean something. A word well used says a lot about a person, so when I see "decenter" the best I can think of is some sort of political joke; but I think you mean "Dissenter" which IS a word. (If the pun escapes you, no matter, I get pretty esoteric in my allusions.)
Second: I always try to buy for quality, no matter what the product. If it's something I use often, I'll try to learn more about it, how it works (maybe) and what tricks [hacks] I have to master to get it to work the way *I* want.
This goes for hand tools, work vehicles and, yes, computers. I'm not a programmer, I don't even work in the industry, I just watch it [the industry] and learn the tech. But you have to realize the old saw about the computer experience being like an automobile is pretty damn accurate. Just as people are backyard mechanics that know the makes, models, and accessory parts available for a variety of machines there are backyard hackers that do the same thing--but with hardware and software.
Speaking as a backyard hacker, I just have to say your defense that everone piles on Windows because of marketshare is mostly crap. Sure there are people that do that, but for me--who has worked as a mechanic, btw--the reason I don't like windows is I know how it works.
No, I don't know all the system calls, API's or have secret access to it's source code. But I do know that they integrate IE pretty tightly with the core code, and have known it for a long time. That's part of the reason I don't like it. This fact alone is why I'm sure many slashdotters don't like it. If you hack IE you've hacked about a dozen programs and assorted data on that machine.
Still, I grant you, it is highly functional, and I do use it for certain things I haven't been able to accomplish with Linux. This is because I AM a backyard hack, and there are some things that, knowing the costs [my code probably is not as clean] I will do because I get there easier.
Still, as a tech-minded person, in the end I find it easy to hate M$ because they have crummy product and get away with it.
Worse, they had viable competitors that eventually let themselves be bought out. Forget sun, what about Corel who had a great head start on the end-user friendly Linux market then let themselves get bribed by M$. (Yeah, I got burned on that one.) Or IBM who couldn't market their way out of a paper bag in the OS/2 fiasco.
The real reason many dislike--even loathe--windows is that marginal investigation reveals it to be crap spaghetti code. Common sense tells you that in a complex system of any sort you break down the final product into discrete pieces--modules--that are easily replaceable, should they fail. This, in turn, reduces down times, makes diagnostics easier, improves serviceability, and enable task specific tweaks (how much GUI does a fileserver need???)
In closing, I just want to emphasize the point here: people hate microsoft because it is a proveably shitty OS. The abstract concepts are built of duct tape, the implementations are jury rigged, and whole shebang is marketed like a whore in the window: pounds of paint hide the wrinkles.
I could go on about Windows. For a backyard mechanic I know quite a bit, more than the average joe. But it would get tiresome, and I don't want this to be all flame.
I just wanted to point out that people that look under the hood, understand the basics and stretch their dollars are inclined to have higher standards...which is why (imnsho) it appears to you that slashdotters pile on M$.
Oh, and if Windows is so great, why isn't there a version for other processors? Why doesn't it port easily? I mean, imagine the market domination if MS rolled out a PPC version that obviated the Mac?I *didn't*...It's a long story, but suffice it to say I won't let it happen again.
Let's face it, you don't need bin-laden to tell you we've been screwed by both parties.
If you *REALLY* want to get technical, both campaings could, theororetically, be prosecuted under anti-trust laws for their debate agreement or even racketeering (RICO statutes) for all the legal manoeuvres before, during, and likely after the elections. (Intimidation, voter fraud, extortion [vote for me or else everyone gets it], rigging an election [Nader's woes]...)
Yeah, I know I'm in a "swing state," yada, yada, yada, but I look at it this way: What if? I'll be voting for someone that really does represent my views best, and, if elected, would cause repurcussions in D.C. that would be felt around the world.
Unlike Ralph Nader he is on the ballot in 49 states.
One thing I got from the bin-laden transcript the media seems to miss is he is telling us we --the voter-- have the power to steer our country but our apathy has led us down this road of conflict.
I've voted every year since I was 18. I don't think I've wasted any votes except in the last election.
I won't do it again.
(oh, god, i'm gonna get flamed aren't I?)
What bugged me was the code overhead. Still, I got to play Need for Speed just fine on it, which was quite a delight to me. And this is essentially what this pair that M$ is offering really is.
Having used Linux for a little over a year, and being a one-time (okay, STILL)OS/2 junkie it's been on my mind for a while: Why hasn't anyone developed a distro streamlined for the types of things M$ is doing. I would LOVE if I could choose to boot my SuSE in either 'work' or 'game' mode.
I mention OS/2 because that's one of the things IBM forgot, and it seems a lot of FOSS programmers are ignorant of too: computers are operated by PEOPLE. Sometimes people just want to plug in and go, others, like me, once we got it going we want to tinker and learn how it works. That is to say, I want to play right off the bat, but I also want to learn about how it all works when I get tired of playing.
While I appreciate many of the games I can get for Linux, imagine the power a unified 'game spec' OS could provide. No wasted daemon running and an API that ANY game programmer can aquire without costly license overhead! This would lower the bar for new game developers, and create a market wherein nobody would have to sign an exclusive development deal (SNES, X-Box, and PS-2 have platform specific titles).
I'm no programmer, but I'm sure this is possible. Pre-linking libraries, and/or a simplified gentoo-type build process coupled with a 'portage' or 'apt-get' type of utility could extend the life of the hardware.
And the icing on the cake? A solid REASON why America's (or any other country's) youth would want to buy a "build your own game console and save a bundle" book/kit to learn about computers and IP laws!
Kinda like the late seventies and early eighties all over again. :)
I'm sure you're all familiar with the Crazy Cabbie that insists on weaving through tight traffic as, no doubt, are people like Volvo. Adaptive Cruise can lead to other adaptive tech that might prevent speed racer from winning the race. Unless, of course, his car got 'chipped...'
Actually, I just looked. C-Span does have video of both conventions.
Although C-span still has that file on it's site, it occurred to me that the ability to save a stream of something like this would be nice, especially for lower bandwidth students needing to do research; Kind of hard to parse a debate on 56k!
(and, before any of you make claims of broadband penetration, remember that given population size and deployment there's STILL a lot of kids out there tied to dial-up!).
So, the short question, will you be enabling this type of activity or will you lean toward the Hatch "induce" scheme?
The wider question is what will your company be doing to help people create their own outlets of A/V information? Will your company move to enable new artistic and intellectual synthesis (affordable authoring tools) or circle 'round behind and demand outrageous royalty when you feel market saturation sufficient?
Oh, and are you working on a "Play the format of your choice" hardware player? I mean, if your software can really play any format, why constrain it to a GP computer? I'd love to replace my "MP3 capable" car CD-player for something I could *update* to a better codec.