Perhaps, more interestingly, Linux users would be more willing to open malicious documents convinced that viruses and worms are the sole domain of Windows.
I would guess that generally speaking though, Linux users are a tad more tech-savvy than the Windows users, at least at this point. Not because of any bias, but simply because the majority of Linux users currently are the tech-oriented, as they are always amongst the first adopters of new technology.
In any case, I think rather than proving the incapabilities of OpenOffice.org developers, it shows how far along their reverse engineering skills have come.
If the **AA wins in the Supreme Court, it will deter progress in the P2P field, regardless of its purpose, as developers would fear making something that could be used for illegal purposes.
For now, he's on our side. No doubt, he's fighting because of greed. But if he loses, expect larger losses in the future, at the expense of technology.
Their excuse for providing this Starter Edition is that it is a low-cost alternative to XP. If the Starter Edition provided modern features, they'd have a hell of a time trying to sell XP.
As others have mentioned, it's a gateway to XP and future Windows OSes, while simultaneously providing competition to Linux, and broadcasting Microsoft's view of how far Linux has progressed. Microsoft is not serious about this. It's a ploy so that it can say, "Hey, at least we tried. But people still want to be pirates. Now book 'em, Dano."
It doesn't have to work. Microsoft is doing this for one reason and one reason only: to continue competing with Linux.
If they didn't release these crippled products in these countries, people would get the idea that they couldn't compete. That is far more dangerous to Redmond's position than a failure of a crippled OS in developing markets.
As an added benefit, it gives people the impression that Microsoft thinks a lame version of XP is sufficient to compete against Linux.
The Starter Edition would be good for shop displays though. It'd stop those pesky kids from using multiple net send commands and filling the screens with porn popups.
True, the company, like Maui X-tream, cannot prevent others from using software. Hence, they're not committing theft. But they are exploiting the work of others in order to make a quick profit. That is morally wrong.
I don't expect everyone to have the same principles and morals as me. You are free to allow companies to use your software the way you like, and I believe the BSD license provides for this.
My vague wording has nothing to do with politics. It's my personal belief. If you wish to label me as a liberal, a communist or a neo-con is entirely up to you. But there is nothing political about stopping companies from exploiting others. It's plain common sense.
There is a big moral difference between receiving a financial benefit by saving money, and receiving the same financial benefit by exploiting the work of others.
Perhaps it is a fine line, but it is a line nonetheless.
It's open, but that doesn't mean that anyone can do what they want with it. That amounts to licentiousness, and not freedom.
Licensing open-source software ensures that the developers work is not abused or ripped off by companies seeking a quick profit. Any code written under an open-source license is to remain free forever, at least theoretically.
And before Slashdotters start asking why it's ok for developers to license code and not for the RIAA to license music, remember that the former means profit for the violator, while the latter doesn't.
How the heck are you modded as Flamebait? If anything you should be +3, Informative, at the very least.
The crux of the matter is that the problems people see in outsourcing lies in their belief that they cannot extend the laws and regulations here to other countries, and thereby punish them. Many posts here point to how it's easier to keep tabs on employees if they're close-by.
However, the world is not lawless. India has its laws too. And the criminals, as the parent mentioned, were prosecuted. The US does not have to police the world and every offshore company to ensure that people aren't screwing them over.
There's a deep sense of paranoia in the US. I can only blame Bernays and his uncle Freud for such irrational behavior.
Linus said
Larry has a very clear moral standpoint: "You can compete with me, but you can't do so by riding on my coat-tails. Solve the problems on your own, and compete _honestly_. Don't compete by looking at my solution."
And that is what the BK license boils down to. It says: "Get off my coat-tails, you free-loader". And I can't really argue against that.
That's bollocks. Reverse-engineering is not riding on the coat-tails of anyone. It ensures that the product is 100% compatible.
If Linus truly believed that, he'd have worked to drop Tridge and keep BitKeeper. However, I'm quite disappointed in Linus implicating Tridge as the evil in this situation.
Oh come now, from what I remember from economics class, which isn't much, each country has its own relative advantage in something or the other.
If any country were to have a relative advantage in too many things, its resources, which are limited, would be split between these advantages, and other countries could pick up the slack, offering more for less.
In any case, with the dwindling size of the labor force in Western countries, some countries have to pick up where the Western world has left off. At some point, India and China, too, will face the same thing. And thus, the cycle continues.
That's theft, and not a direct result of outsourcing. If it were, we'd be seeing a lot more of those cases.
Theft happens everywhere.
Those workers, IIRC, were working multiple jobs, shipping them off to India, spending their time reading Fark, Slashdot or C++ template metaprogramming (I forget which), and thus improving the quality of their lives.
India does have some of the best IT universities in the world, especially the IIT group of universities. However, remember that many, if not most, of the tech force working in India are not graduates of these courses. Those who have graduated from IIT and other technical universities are actively courted to the US, Germany and the UK to work for large NGOs.
A higher level of education allows for greater upward mobility in the current field of occupation. However, it also grants you a better chance to re-train and pursue a different occupation. While the US, for example, is over 97% literate, India lags behind at 59.5%.
Yes, it is true that both India and China have their relative spheres of influence in SE Asia. However, the potential benefit from fighting over these countries is far less than a 2-billion-strong free economic zone.
As India improves ties with Pakistan, and loses patience with America's support for a leader it sees as undemocratic, it realizes that it requires a strategic partner. With Russia on the decline, China is the obvious choice. Even though relations between Pakistan and China are rosy, this would change if Pakistan supports the US and Taiwan against China.
Pakistan is the wildcard here. However, it also stands the most to gain. If it stays out of any global bickering, it could improve relations with the US and India, while maintaining relations with China, opening up three huge markets.
Those in America and the UK, and other developed countries, are relatively better educated. As such, their occupational mobility is higher. Moreover, they have the chance to be creative without getting their hands dirty.
I've heard, on Slashdot no less, of Americans outsourcing their own work to India, pocketing the difference and spending their time at the desk learning. Specialization of labor has always worked, and may even be the reason we are where we are now.
Cooperation between India and China is inevitable. Their feud stems from a small war and dispute over small threads of land. The benefits of their cooperation is far greater than the benefits of a rift, and both sides have seen this. Add this to a burgeoning ASEAN, and you have a truly global economic power.
Whether or not they succeed at dominating the tech industry is redundant. If they cooperate, even economically, they'd have a lot more say in the world than the either the US or the EU, over time.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps, more interestingly, Linux users would be more willing to open malicious documents convinced that viruses and worms are the sole domain of Windows.
I would guess that generally speaking though, Linux users are a tad more tech-savvy than the Windows users, at least at this point. Not because of any bias, but simply because the majority of Linux users currently are the tech-oriented, as they are always amongst the first adopters of new technology.
Linus is going to be so mad...
In any case, I think rather than proving the incapabilities of OpenOffice.org developers, it shows how far along their reverse engineering skills have come.
If the **AA wins in the Supreme Court, it will deter progress in the P2P field, regardless of its purpose, as developers would fear making something that could be used for illegal purposes.
For now, he's on our side. No doubt, he's fighting because of greed. But if he loses, expect larger losses in the future, at the expense of technology.
Contrarily, a punchline is an endpoint, and not a process.
You probably didn't find it because you forgot to pipe it to grep :P
There's another conspiracy for them google-watch people.
Their excuse for providing this Starter Edition is that it is a low-cost alternative to XP. If the Starter Edition provided modern features, they'd have a hell of a time trying to sell XP.
As others have mentioned, it's a gateway to XP and future Windows OSes, while simultaneously providing competition to Linux, and broadcasting Microsoft's view of how far Linux has progressed. Microsoft is not serious about this. It's a ploy so that it can say, "Hey, at least we tried. But people still want to be pirates. Now book 'em, Dano."
It doesn't have to work. Microsoft is doing this for one reason and one reason only: to continue competing with Linux.
If they didn't release these crippled products in these countries, people would get the idea that they couldn't compete. That is far more dangerous to Redmond's position than a failure of a crippled OS in developing markets.
As an added benefit, it gives people the impression that Microsoft thinks a lame version of XP is sufficient to compete against Linux.
The Starter Edition would be good for shop displays though. It'd stop those pesky kids from using multiple net send commands and filling the screens with porn popups.
True, the company, like Maui X-tream, cannot prevent others from using software. Hence, they're not committing theft. But they are exploiting the work of others in order to make a quick profit. That is morally wrong.
I don't expect everyone to have the same principles and morals as me. You are free to allow companies to use your software the way you like, and I believe the BSD license provides for this.
My vague wording has nothing to do with politics. It's my personal belief. If you wish to label me as a liberal, a communist or a neo-con is entirely up to you. But there is nothing political about stopping companies from exploiting others. It's plain common sense.
There is a big moral difference between receiving a financial benefit by saving money, and receiving the same financial benefit by exploiting the work of others.
Perhaps it is a fine line, but it is a line nonetheless.
I was referring primarily to students and the like who download, but don't make a profit.
My bad.
It's open, but that doesn't mean that anyone can do what they want with it. That amounts to licentiousness, and not freedom.
Licensing open-source software ensures that the developers work is not abused or ripped off by companies seeking a quick profit. Any code written under an open-source license is to remain free forever, at least theoretically.
And before Slashdotters start asking why it's ok for developers to license code and not for the RIAA to license music, remember that the former means profit for the violator, while the latter doesn't.
How the heck are you modded as Flamebait? If anything you should be +3, Informative, at the very least.
The crux of the matter is that the problems people see in outsourcing lies in their belief that they cannot extend the laws and regulations here to other countries, and thereby punish them. Many posts here point to how it's easier to keep tabs on employees if they're close-by.
However, the world is not lawless. India has its laws too. And the criminals, as the parent mentioned, were prosecuted. The US does not have to police the world and every offshore company to ensure that people aren't screwing them over.
There's a deep sense of paranoia in the US. I can only blame Bernays and his uncle Freud for such irrational behavior.
I remember reading that headline somewhere. I just forgot it was on April 1st.
Damn you, Daniel Molkentin!!
Reverse engineering is perfectly legitimate, and excellent products have emerged because of it, such as Samba.
What is interesting is if other open-source projects will follow Linus' footsteps. KDE, I believe, still uses BK.
Linus said
Larry has a very clear moral standpoint: "You can compete with me, but you can't do so by riding on my coat-tails. Solve the problems on your own, and compete _honestly_. Don't compete by looking at my solution."
And that is what the BK license boils down to. It says: "Get off my coat-tails, you free-loader". And I can't really argue against that.
That's bollocks. Reverse-engineering is not riding on the coat-tails of anyone. It ensures that the product is 100% compatible.
If Linus truly believed that, he'd have worked to drop Tridge and keep BitKeeper. However, I'm quite disappointed in Linus implicating Tridge as the evil in this situation.
Oh come now, from what I remember from economics class, which isn't much, each country has its own relative advantage in something or the other.
If any country were to have a relative advantage in too many things, its resources, which are limited, would be split between these advantages, and other countries could pick up the slack, offering more for less.
In any case, with the dwindling size of the labor force in Western countries, some countries have to pick up where the Western world has left off. At some point, India and China, too, will face the same thing. And thus, the cycle continues.
That's theft, and not a direct result of outsourcing. If it were, we'd be seeing a lot more of those cases.
Theft happens everywhere.
Those workers, IIRC, were working multiple jobs, shipping them off to India, spending their time reading Fark, Slashdot or C++ template metaprogramming (I forget which), and thus improving the quality of their lives.
India does have some of the best IT universities in the world, especially the IIT group of universities. However, remember that many, if not most, of the tech force working in India are not graduates of these courses. Those who have graduated from IIT and other technical universities are actively courted to the US, Germany and the UK to work for large NGOs.
A higher level of education allows for greater upward mobility in the current field of occupation. However, it also grants you a better chance to re-train and pursue a different occupation. While the US, for example, is over 97% literate, India lags behind at 59.5%.
Yes, it is true that both India and China have their relative spheres of influence in SE Asia. However, the potential benefit from fighting over these countries is far less than a 2-billion-strong free economic zone.
As India improves ties with Pakistan, and loses patience with America's support for a leader it sees as undemocratic, it realizes that it requires a strategic partner. With Russia on the decline, China is the obvious choice. Even though relations between Pakistan and China are rosy, this would change if Pakistan supports the US and Taiwan against China.
Pakistan is the wildcard here. However, it also stands the most to gain. If it stays out of any global bickering, it could improve relations with the US and India, while maintaining relations with China, opening up three huge markets.
Those in America and the UK, and other developed countries, are relatively better educated. As such, their occupational mobility is higher. Moreover, they have the chance to be creative without getting their hands dirty.
I've heard, on Slashdot no less, of Americans outsourcing their own work to India, pocketing the difference and spending their time at the desk learning. Specialization of labor has always worked, and may even be the reason we are where we are now.
...in order to post substandard comments and get a substandard karma.
Cooperation between India and China is inevitable. Their feud stems from a small war and dispute over small threads of land. The benefits of their cooperation is far greater than the benefits of a rift, and both sides have seen this. Add this to a burgeoning ASEAN, and you have a truly global economic power.
Whether or not they succeed at dominating the tech industry is redundant. If they cooperate, even economically, they'd have a lot more say in the world than the either the US or the EU, over time.
Patent an unoriginal idea which seeks to eliminate the patenting of unoriginal ideas?
Jim Stallings, is that you?