ohh don't worry, Australian Telcos (Especially Telstra) are greedy bastards as well. Its just that they're being strongarmed by the government to provide reasonable service to remote areas. Its a shame they're not being forced to do it at prices that are inline with the rest of the world.
The x86 version of OSX handles a surprising amount of hardware that was never intended to be used in a mac. I'm not sure they've added this into this version but you could get it going on a fairly wide range of hardware.
somehow it doesn't seem fair for HP to ask this of IBM and SUN when they won't even let other people manufature replacement ink cartridges for their printers!
So why didn't they just make a cross platform system (ie Java, browser based etc) in the first place?
Or even better, just make it open source and let someone else do the work. Its our money paying for it initially, why shouldn't I see the source code for it? The only people scared of releasing source code for applications such as this are those who know that their software itsn't secure.
I think its easy to lose sight of the point of this. Sure you can say that 90%+ of the people wanting to do their taxes online will be using Windows, but that makes no difference.
The point is that the Tax Office (ATO) used taxpayers money to develop (or buy) this software. If I'm paying them money I expect to be able to use this software on practically any system. It is NOT hard to create a system like this that is multi platform (ie Java or browser based).
Secondly if taxpayers foot the bill for ANY software the government produces/buys then it should be open source. It is a public resource and hence I want to see what my money is paying for, not just use some windows binary.
I'm not interested in them spending (say) $1 million to code up a working linux version and do support for it. I want my cash to go to more important things.
So you're not happy with them spending $1 million for an OSS (or similar) application to do the same thing, yet you think the fact that they've spent the same amount on an application you can't use isn't newsworthy? If they're spending taxpayers money to develop an e-tax solution, it should be useable by everyone. I mean it would be pretty easy to make this in Java or even just browser based.
If I purchase some emulation software for platform xxx then I'm guessing this would be tax deductable?
Good to see the tax office is doing a good job of creating deductions for us.
finally a reasonable argument for closed source. Your second paragraph makes me rememeber why I still think there is a place for closed software. Its the McVoys and M$'s off the world that confuse people by spreading FUD but closed software will always have a place in places such as niche areas where FOSS simply doesn't make sense. Sure it would be great if it was FOSS, but lets be realistic.
and before anyone bags me for being a corporate wh0re, this is coming from someone with a poster of the GPL on his wall.
i think your dream machine is still a little way off yet then... But with the nokia you could always just have your music collection on a flash drive or RS-MMC. The later would mean there wouldn't even be any extra size.
I concede, under the weight of many comments, that yes, maybe this would have been a good idea. Honestly at the time it wasn't even something that crossed my mind. The ACCC is more obscure (Especially without Felsy, if you don't know what I'm talking about don't ask, another Aussie thing) so I gave its full title, but GST is just a natural part of the language here.
Something to keep in mind for the future i guess, this was my first submission to/. and I didn't expect it to get through.
THANKYOU!
Sometimes I would do anything for mod points
This was exactly my thinking when I submitted the story! The change this article talks about is something that affected myself and I thought that other/. readers might be in the same posistion. I kind of figured that Joe Average in Greenbay would simply flick past it. If it doesn't apply to you ignore it, don't whinge about it.
ok so say a person shares a file to 1000 people, a total loss of $5000 to RIAA. Anyone else who then shares files to those users within the same month would not be liable to pay anything.
The maximum amount that can be lost in any 1 month is $5*The total number of downloaders, and no one person could be shared for this amount.
Coming from someone who was at that talk, he specifically said NOT to give money to testers. His words were actually 'give them credit, fame and loose women'.
out of interest how exactly is this going to bite them in the ass?
When a company sets their IT infrastructure they buy x amount of servers. And then the income for IBM stops.
If a company requires 24x7 service then they sign a contract and keep paying IBM continually for years...
Slashdot Mirror
pffft. pr0n IS serious work.
in this case, at least for the moment, the government are the shareholders
ohh don't worry, Australian Telcos (Especially Telstra) are greedy bastards as well. Its just that they're being strongarmed by the government to provide reasonable service to remote areas. Its a shame they're not being forced to do it at prices that are inline with the rest of the world.
The x86 version of OSX handles a surprising amount of hardware that was never intended to be used in a mac. I'm not sure they've added this into this version but you could get it going on a fairly wide range of hardware.
somehow it doesn't seem fair for HP to ask this of IBM and SUN when they won't even let other people manufature replacement ink cartridges for their printers!
...and apple switches to intel and releases a two button mouse.
Last I heard open source applications could handle 10,000 pages.... There is no legitimate reason this could not be open source.
So why didn't they just make a cross platform system (ie Java, browser based etc) in the first place?
Or even better, just make it open source and let someone else do the work. Its our money paying for it initially, why shouldn't I see the source code for it? The only people scared of releasing source code for applications such as this are those who know that their software itsn't secure.
I think its easy to lose sight of the point of this. Sure you can say that 90%+ of the people wanting to do their taxes online will be using Windows, but that makes no difference.
The point is that the Tax Office (ATO) used taxpayers money to develop (or buy) this software. If I'm paying them money I expect to be able to use this software on practically any system. It is NOT hard to create a system like this that is multi platform (ie Java or browser based).
Secondly if taxpayers foot the bill for ANY software the government produces/buys then it should be open source. It is a public resource and hence I want to see what my money is paying for, not just use some windows binary.
I'm not interested in them spending (say) $1 million to code up a working linux version and do support for it. I want my cash to go to more important things.
So you're not happy with them spending $1 million for an OSS (or similar) application to do the same thing, yet you think the fact that they've spent the same amount on an application you can't use isn't newsworthy? If they're spending taxpayers money to develop an e-tax solution, it should be useable by everyone. I mean it would be pretty easy to make this in Java or even just browser based.
If I purchase some emulation software for platform xxx then I'm guessing this would be tax deductable?
Good to see the tax office is doing a good job of creating deductions for us.
agreed, I remember reading words very simlar to this before.... I can't find another posting with them tho.
to be finally rid of that three year woody
and they named the botnet...Slashdot!
...but it got better
finally a reasonable argument for closed source. Your second paragraph makes me rememeber why I still think there is a place for closed software. Its the McVoys and M$'s off the world that confuse people by spreading FUD but closed software will always have a place in places such as niche areas where FOSS simply doesn't make sense. Sure it would be great if it was FOSS, but lets be realistic.
and before anyone bags me for being a corporate wh0re, this is coming from someone with a poster of the GPL on his wall.
If he had of released it as FOSS it wouldn't have cost him a cent!
i think your dream machine is still a little way off yet then... But with the nokia you could always just have your music collection on a flash drive or RS-MMC. The later would mean there wouldn't even be any extra size.
ummmm it has bluetooth.....
I know it kind of goes against the whole portability idea, but no ethernet?
I concede, under the weight of many comments, that yes, maybe this would have been a good idea. Honestly at the time it wasn't even something that crossed my mind. The ACCC is more obscure (Especially without Felsy, if you don't know what I'm talking about don't ask, another Aussie thing) so I gave its full title, but GST is just a natural part of the language here.
/. and I didn't expect it to get through.
Something to keep in mind for the future i guess, this was my first submission to
THANKYOU!
/. readers might be in the same posistion. I kind of figured that Joe Average in Greenbay would simply flick past it. If it doesn't apply to you ignore it, don't whinge about it.
Sometimes I would do anything for mod points
This was exactly my thinking when I submitted the story! The change this article talks about is something that affected myself and I thought that other
ok so say a person shares a file to 1000 people, a total loss of $5000 to RIAA. Anyone else who then shares files to those users within the same month would not be liable to pay anything.
The maximum amount that can be lost in any 1 month is $5*The total number of downloaders, and no one person could be shared for this amount.
But this still doesn't take into account damages
Coming from someone who was at that talk, he specifically said NOT to give money to testers. His words were actually 'give them credit, fame and loose women'.
This drew laughs from the audience.
out of interest how exactly is this going to bite them in the ass?
When a company sets their IT infrastructure they buy x amount of servers. And then the income for IBM stops.
If a company requires 24x7 service then they sign a contract and keep paying IBM continually for years...