"So, if the kids want to get rich from the farm, WORK THE LAND! And if you want to get rich from music, WORK THOSE INSTRUMENTS!"
This analogy is flawed. You're comparing a farmer with an instrument player, not a farmer with a songwriter.
This would be just like saying that any ordinary clerk, or indeed anyone who knows how to use pen and paper, can be a James Joyce or TS Elliot. Sure not, and likewise, not everyone who has a musical instrument, or even knows how to play it, can write a popular and valuable song.
I'm a physician and I frequently sense that physicians consider themselves smarter than the common individual, programmers included. I am also aware that lawyers too, by virtue of their understanding of meticulous contracts and weighing of evidence, consider themselves *far* smarter than others. Then also come the management professionals, many of whom are happy to consider themselves transcendentally smarter than others they would like to see as personnel, resources and assets they can manipulate.
I think it's a middle-class disease. If you're upper class with inherited property and investments, then the urge to prove yourself isn't all that pressing. But If you're a middle-class and falling into the ranks of lower-class isn't unthinkable, then kicking the lower-class man is a good way to relieve your tension.
"without that IP-based protection, nobody would pay to do the research that creates new drugs."
Not true!
I'm a physician and I know this not to be true. In fact, IPs, in their current widespread misuse, totally screwed up the consumer side of the pharmaceutical equation. But I won't elaborate into this as it's too much to talk about.
One thing I'll mention though; this whole capitalist propaganda myth that IPs are there to promote investment in R&D and that without IPs no "nobody would pay to do the research" or development is pure BS(!). That's not the original intention of IPs, historically or sociophilosophically.
Your analogy is BS and here's why; i have never walked up to you and asked you where you keep your car keys, and what your alarm's PIN is, what times are you around and what times you leave your house, and had I done so you would've probably declined to tell me, even if I had no record of breaking into it and stealing your radio. Oh and while we're at it, why don't you allow me to install a camera over your bed to record your sexlife, (i know someone who may want to sell you viagra or lingerie for your wife), you can't really say that i "might" tell someone else about your sexlife because i really have no record of doing that. And hey, actually, I want to know everything about you, why don't you tell me EVERYTHING about you!
Google has a BAD RECORD because it sees itself entitled to personal and private information that it should not seek! Give me a reason why Orkut wants all this "data" and information about me. Have you signed up for an account and seen the forms? I am not being paranoid; the amount of personal details they ask for, in page after page, to sign up for orkut is **absolutely** unacceptable. Even moneylenders don't ask for so much information. Regardless of what "they might" do with it, an invasion of privacy is wholly unacceptable from the outset and unconditionally so. Their mere requrest for information IS a disrespectful invasion of my privacy.
As for Google News, i mentioned it as an example of perpetual beta, so that idea that gmail or orkut is invitation-only because it's in beta status is BS. Almost anyone can get a gmail account and those that do do it too readily. Same for Orkut, those that rush in the eager wanting to get that exclusive, invitation-only, orkut thing will be situationally compromised enough to be more likely to divulge their information. As for Google Desktop, I have read about it and seen what it does and I know there are OSS and freewares that do far ***more and better*** - wilbur is one example - without giving ****anyone**** any information about me.
I am truly sick and tired of all those comments that get moderated as high whenever there's a google story and all seemingly are defensive of google regardless of what.
Let's face it. Google's practices towards privacy have been far from holy and way too intrusive. In fact, they've had an AWFUL record by any objective account. This invitation-only model of builcing up demand for their services as in orkut and gmail is ludicrous; it's such a cheap trick, the scarcity principle, and I can't believe how stuipdly the masses are falling for it, that once they get an orkut or gmail account they'll willingly do anything. Have you filled up an orkut form? pages and pages of information collected, NEVER seen anyone online who wants so much information about someone. The privacy conerns about gmail are also legitimate. It doesn't require you to tell them your life story by filling forms before you can use the service but who needs that when they got your email and can and do scan them. This whole beta excuse is pure BS; Google News has been beta for 3 years now! I have downloaded Google desktop search, but decided not to install it seeing how I already had software solutions that did more and better and without the privacy compromises I would have to make.
Dare anyone mod me down as troll or flamebait on this post and it'd be so much evidence of how sucked up into it many of you are.
It will encourage complacency. I bet it'll cause more accident because people will just drop the need to remain fully alert and will just think they can rely on the camera to alarm them of any problems.
Dude... that's nonsense... that "richest person in the country" WAS and IS a corrupt thief, him and his oligarchs gang. There's no way they could've got Russia's mineral resources and heavy industries without the fact that they had access to Yeltsin during his worst Vodka days. They got billion dollar state industries at outrageously low prices in very corrupt privatization deals. I'm no fan of Putin; I hate him for what he did to Chechneya, but it has to be said, that when it comes to the Oligarchs, Putin is just repairing the mess of the Yeltsin era. Hodorkovskiy himself admitted wrongdoing in the past, when he said that he didn't break the law in those days, but the law itself just wasn't good.
You're right. Gates himself attributes his early success to one thing, contracts! He understood contracts, what they meant, how to do them, and so on. The Microsoft vs Apple case regarding the "look and feel" of the Macintosh interface imitated in windows is an example of that; Apple signed an agreement with Microsoft that effectively banned it from imitating the Mac, and Gates was apparently careful to specify a certain version of windows in the text of the document, so that when Microsoft followed it up with a later version of windows, and Apple sued, their lawsuit collapsed in court as a result of that previous agreement they had.
Re:Wow, good job for american propoganda machine
on
Linus Interviewed
·
· Score: 1
Well, you may read but apparently you don't seem to read well enough. Read my post again and see what i said; I put "communism" in quotes and then elaborated on it by saying as he - parent post - described it, because he actually described socialism. Note that I ended my post with the word socialism, prosperous socialism, not communism.
What is very amusing and comical is that you're attacking my viewpoint and yet then saying almost exactly what I'm saying in my post.
Learn to read well, mistuh!
Re:Wow, good job for american propoganda machine
on
Linus Interviewed
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"Communism", the way you define it, where everyone has equal right of access to essential resources that meet their basic needs, such as food, shelter, healthcare, and so on, is working extremely well in Scandanavia. Look at the Scandanavians, for the most part they're healthy, happy, very prosperous and peaceful nations. The quality of living there is probably the highest in the world. Linus comes from Finland, the first nation whose economy was declared relatively more internationally competitive than the USA after very many years of the US topping the list. If you're an american you probably only know of communism as stalinism, where you assasinate all your opposition and a few notable economists too. Your view of communism was probably formulated by the public speeches of Nixon, Kessinger and Reagan. Linus knows better; he lived under propserous socialims.
I'm sure their friends at IBM and Motorola would be happy to provide chips to anyone that wanted to make computers to run this new OS.
You're making it sound like IBM is really eager for someone to ask for their PPC processors. Well, guess what? Apple has been practically begging IBM for enough PPC processors for their computers, and the processors were in such short supply that they had to repeatedly delay critical product launches for many months. It happened with the new G5 Imac, and it happened with the bigger G5s.
This chimp is reportedly so huge that it can "kill a lion", yet if the dimensions reported in the story are correct, at "up to two meters tall (6.5 feet) and weigh between 85 and 102 kilos (187 and 224 pounds)", I can think of many humans, especially those in sports like bodybuilding, weightlifting, and basketball who are taller, heavier, and possibly more agile (even, Jordan can fly!). Heck, I've personally been friends with humans bigger than those numbers.
I don't know how it would kill a lion. I pircutred a pack kill but I know that a lion wouldn't attack a pack.
Would an unarmed human be able to kill a lion? what about those people (er, the christians!) who were thrown to the lions in Roman entertainment? were there ever any reports of an unarmed man bare-handedly killing a lion?
Blame it on capitalism... you can't have an environmentally sound system without a strong regulation that would deny the natural resources to the people who are competitively abusing them to the last drop. (p.s. I said capitalism, NOT democracy!)
The quote in the submission contains a statement that directly blame it on high-speed internet and gadgets... where is the evidence here? where's the primary data of the research that would prove that those with high-speed internet access and gadgets would buy less music than those without, in a way that would explain this drop?
... but I think it's time to start seeing distros NOT contain every software package, desktop environment, etc, under the sun.
Why not? the software is free, bittorrent is fast and unlimited, blank CDs or DVDs cost pennies, and the smallest hard drive on sale these days in an average box will be at least 10 times the size of the largest install possible. I personally have 320gb in this box I built myself and I didn't even splash out on it. I'd much prefer to have a linux distribution contain everything i might need (on a DVD) than to go out on the web searching for each application individually.
Mac OS X for commodity box x86 would almost certainly get pirated. Those who will buy an OEM box will almost certainly receive windows installed by default. The few people who would care to change the OS (the enthausiast crowd) or those who would build their own OS-less box and then buy an OS will probably know how to get a pirated copy. On the other hand, you can't pirate an imac or a powerbook. Apple would be giving up one incentive to buy a mac and in most cases be getting no money in return.
1. I'm increasingly alarmed by any tool that requests a username and a password.
2. would google terminate the account? don't they have a rule against third party notifiers?
Firstly, your organization is larger and therefore harder to manage. Secondly, your customers tend to hold you more accountable to servicing them, the underdog gets more leeway, because he's the underdog.
Makes me wonder, why not relaunch another small, fast, and agile underdog (or even a swarm of them) to fight with the disrupting ones, one that would have the advantage of a big backer (YOU!), and eventually unfurl the big coporation when it's clear you little puppy is the way to go.
It sure is easier, sometimes, to scrap and rewrite something than to revise it.
Sun settled because it believes the majority of its key customers have mission-critical needs and can't tolerate uncertainty at all (the people who buy the sun hardware, software and services).
This is why Kodak could get away with this blatant extortionism.
Slashdot Mirror
"So, if the kids want to get rich from the farm, WORK THE LAND! And if you want to get rich from music, WORK THOSE INSTRUMENTS!"
This analogy is flawed. You're comparing a farmer with an instrument player, not a farmer with a songwriter.
This would be just like saying that any ordinary clerk, or indeed anyone who knows how to use pen and paper, can be a James Joyce or TS Elliot. Sure not, and likewise, not everyone who has a musical instrument, or even knows how to play it, can write a popular and valuable song.
"I'm envisioning someone figuring out how to boot off an iPod and using spare hard drive space to trade pirated software."
Why? what's the point?
Why would anyone want to do that?
I'm a physician and I frequently sense that physicians consider themselves smarter than the common individual, programmers included. I am also aware that lawyers too, by virtue of their understanding of meticulous contracts and weighing of evidence, consider themselves *far* smarter than others. Then also come the management professionals, many of whom are happy to consider themselves transcendentally smarter than others they would like to see as personnel, resources and assets they can manipulate.
I think it's a middle-class disease. If you're upper class with inherited property and investments, then the urge to prove yourself isn't all that pressing. But If you're a middle-class and falling into the ranks of lower-class isn't unthinkable, then kicking the lower-class man is a good way to relieve your tension.
"without that IP-based protection, nobody would pay to do the research that creates new drugs."
Not true!
I'm a physician and I know this not to be true. In fact, IPs, in their current widespread misuse, totally screwed up the consumer side of the pharmaceutical equation. But I won't elaborate into this as it's too much to talk about.
One thing I'll mention though; this whole capitalist propaganda myth that IPs are there to promote investment in R&D and that without IPs no "nobody would pay to do the research" or development is pure BS(!). That's not the original intention of IPs, historically or sociophilosophically.
Your analogy is BS and here's why; i have never walked up to you and asked you where you keep your car keys, and what your alarm's PIN is, what times are you around and what times you leave your house, and had I done so you would've probably declined to tell me, even if I had no record of breaking into it and stealing your radio. Oh and while we're at it, why don't you allow me to install a camera over your bed to record your sexlife, (i know someone who may want to sell you viagra or lingerie for your wife), you can't really say that i "might" tell someone else about your sexlife because i really have no record of doing that. And hey, actually, I want to know everything about you, why don't you tell me EVERYTHING about you!
Google has a BAD RECORD because it sees itself entitled to personal and private information that it should not seek! Give me a reason why Orkut wants all this "data" and information about me. Have you signed up for an account and seen the forms? I am not being paranoid; the amount of personal details they ask for, in page after page, to sign up for orkut is **absolutely** unacceptable. Even moneylenders don't ask for so much information. Regardless of what "they might" do with it, an invasion of privacy is wholly unacceptable from the outset and unconditionally so. Their mere requrest for information IS a disrespectful invasion of my privacy.
As for Google News, i mentioned it as an example of perpetual beta, so that idea that gmail or orkut is invitation-only because it's in beta status is BS. Almost anyone can get a gmail account and those that do do it too readily. Same for Orkut, those that rush in the eager wanting to get that exclusive, invitation-only, orkut thing will be situationally compromised enough to be more likely to divulge their information. As for Google Desktop, I have read about it and seen what it does and I know there are OSS and freewares that do far ***more and better*** - wilbur is one example - without giving ****anyone**** any information about me.
I am truly sick and tired of all those comments that get moderated as high whenever there's a google story and all seemingly are defensive of google regardless of what.
Let's face it. Google's practices towards privacy have been far from holy and way too intrusive. In fact, they've had an AWFUL record by any objective account. This invitation-only model of builcing up demand for their services as in orkut and gmail is ludicrous; it's such a cheap trick, the scarcity principle, and I can't believe how stuipdly the masses are falling for it, that once they get an orkut or gmail account they'll willingly do anything. Have you filled up an orkut form? pages and pages of information collected, NEVER seen anyone online who wants so much information about someone. The privacy conerns about gmail are also legitimate. It doesn't require you to tell them your life story by filling forms before you can use the service but who needs that when they got your email and can and do scan them. This whole beta excuse is pure BS; Google News has been beta for 3 years now! I have downloaded Google desktop search, but decided not to install it seeing how I already had software solutions that did more and better and without the privacy compromises I would have to make.
Dare anyone mod me down as troll or flamebait on this post and it'd be so much evidence of how sucked up into it many of you are.
It will encourage complacency. I bet it'll cause more accident because people will just drop the need to remain fully alert and will just think they can rely on the camera to alarm them of any problems.
Dude... that's nonsense... that "richest person in the country" WAS and IS a corrupt thief, him and his oligarchs gang. There's no way they could've got Russia's mineral resources and heavy industries without the fact that they had access to Yeltsin during his worst Vodka days. They got billion dollar state industries at outrageously low prices in very corrupt privatization deals. I'm no fan of Putin; I hate him for what he did to Chechneya, but it has to be said, that when it comes to the Oligarchs, Putin is just repairing the mess of the Yeltsin era. Hodorkovskiy himself admitted wrongdoing in the past, when he said that he didn't break the law in those days, but the law itself just wasn't good.
You're absolutely right. It's bullet-proof in terms of reliability, it's idiot-proof in terms of simplicity, and the results are out the same day.
It's voting by the people (voters), for the people (to elect their government), by the people (volunteers).
Seriously, what is there more to be gained by electronic voting... other than... erm,... to obscurely, and irreversibly(!), steal an election??!
You're right. Gates himself attributes his early success to one thing, contracts! He understood contracts, what they meant, how to do them, and so on. The Microsoft vs Apple case regarding the "look and feel" of the Macintosh interface imitated in windows is an example of that; Apple signed an agreement with Microsoft that effectively banned it from imitating the Mac, and Gates was apparently careful to specify a certain version of windows in the text of the document, so that when Microsoft followed it up with a later version of windows, and Apple sued, their lawsuit collapsed in court as a result of that previous agreement they had.
Well, you may read but apparently you don't seem to read well enough. Read my post again and see what i said; I put "communism" in quotes and then elaborated on it by saying as he - parent post - described it, because he actually described socialism. Note that I ended my post with the word socialism, prosperous socialism, not communism.
What is very amusing and comical is that you're attacking my viewpoint and yet then saying almost exactly what I'm saying in my post.
Learn to read well, mistuh!
"Communism", the way you define it, where everyone has equal right of access to essential resources that meet their basic needs, such as food, shelter, healthcare, and so on, is working extremely well in Scandanavia. Look at the Scandanavians, for the most part they're healthy, happy, very prosperous and peaceful nations. The quality of living there is probably the highest in the world. Linus comes from Finland, the first nation whose economy was declared relatively more internationally competitive than the USA after very many years of the US topping the list. If you're an american you probably only know of communism as stalinism, where you assasinate all your opposition and a few notable economists too. Your view of communism was probably formulated by the public speeches of Nixon, Kessinger and Reagan. Linus knows better; he lived under propserous socialims.
I'm shocked and horrified.
I'm sure their friends at IBM and Motorola would be happy to provide chips to anyone that wanted to make computers to run this new OS.
You're making it sound like IBM is really eager for someone to ask for their PPC processors. Well, guess what? Apple has been practically begging IBM for enough PPC processors for their computers, and the processors were in such short supply that they had to repeatedly delay critical product launches for many months. It happened with the new G5 Imac, and it happened with the bigger G5s.
LOL... mod parent up! UP!
IBM will then pick it up... it's so clear.
This chimp is reportedly so huge that it can "kill a lion", yet if the dimensions reported in the story are correct, at "up to two meters tall (6.5 feet) and weigh between 85 and 102 kilos (187 and 224 pounds)", I can think of many humans, especially those in sports like bodybuilding, weightlifting, and basketball who are taller, heavier, and possibly more agile (even, Jordan can fly!). Heck, I've personally been friends with humans bigger than those numbers.
I don't know how it would kill a lion. I pircutred a pack kill but I know that a lion wouldn't attack a pack.
Would an unarmed human be able to kill a lion? what about those people (er, the christians!) who were thrown to the lions in Roman entertainment? were there ever any reports of an unarmed man bare-handedly killing a lion?
Blame it on capitalism... you can't have an environmentally sound system without a strong regulation that would deny the natural resources to the people who are competitively abusing them to the last drop. (p.s. I said capitalism, NOT democracy!)
The quote in the submission contains a statement that directly blame it on high-speed internet and gadgets... where is the evidence here? where's the primary data of the research that would prove that those with high-speed internet access and gadgets would buy less music than those without, in a way that would explain this drop?
one word; lowepro!
Why not? the software is free, bittorrent is fast and unlimited, blank CDs or DVDs cost pennies, and the smallest hard drive on sale these days in an average box will be at least 10 times the size of the largest install possible. I personally have 320gb in this box I built myself and I didn't even splash out on it. I'd much prefer to have a linux distribution contain everything i might need (on a DVD) than to go out on the web searching for each application individually.
Mac OS X for commodity box x86 would almost certainly get pirated. Those who will buy an OEM box will almost certainly receive windows installed by default. The few people who would care to change the OS (the enthausiast crowd) or those who would build their own OS-less box and then buy an OS will probably know how to get a pirated copy. On the other hand, you can't pirate an imac or a powerbook. Apple would be giving up one incentive to buy a mac and in most cases be getting no money in return.
1. I'm increasingly alarmed by any tool that requests a username and a password. 2. would google terminate the account? don't they have a rule against third party notifiers?
Firstly, your organization is larger and therefore harder to manage. Secondly, your customers tend to hold you more accountable to servicing them, the underdog gets more leeway, because he's the underdog.
Makes me wonder, why not relaunch another small, fast, and agile underdog (or even a swarm of them) to fight with the disrupting ones, one that would have the advantage of a big backer (YOU!), and eventually unfurl the big coporation when it's clear you little puppy is the way to go.
It sure is easier, sometimes, to scrap and rewrite something than to revise it.
Sun settled because it believes the majority of its key customers have mission-critical needs and can't tolerate uncertainty at all (the people who buy the sun hardware, software and services).
This is why Kodak could get away with this blatant extortionism.