Oh really? I hear this claim a lot, but its been my observation that if the Democrats do something stupid, Jon will certainly take the opportunity to nail them to the wall. I recall that when the Democrats got control of the Senate, that he played video of them discussing an effing sports game rather than fixing the country, like they claimed they were going to. Or showing clips of similarities between Bush and Obama speeches. Or comparing Obama's exit strategy with Bush's. Or calling out Democrats on hyperbole.
Jon does clearly lean left, but I don't see him as playing softball with the Democrats. They just tend to give him less ammunition. Yes, the Democrats do have their fuck-ups, but the Republicans have taken the whole dishonest-fuck-up game to a whole new level.
Slippery slope is only a fallacy if you fail to outline that its possible and likely to go from one point to another. Hardware, software, and service lock-ins are hardly an unknown phenomenon in the computer industry. I think its completely valid to be concerned that a company like Apple is trying to use their walled-garden approach to lock their customers in to their own services, and I'm glad that the FSF are trying to bring attention to it.
And I'm someone who actually prefers some of his devices to be "walled-garden" devices. I just want to have the option to get a device that's not tied to one company, if I so desire.
$120 + $30/month is a kick in the balls. Well, actually, you're correct that its hyperbole on my part. I was comparing it to my iPhone (yes, an Apple product!) which I got for $200 ($30 a month for the data), but as some other posters pointed out, there's no contract and its unlocked. Taking that into consideration makes it seem a *lot* fairer.
Still, no Flash is going to be a deal-killer for me personally, I think. At first, I was thinking about getting one of these for my wife, but no Flash support means she can't watch Japanese TV over the internet while loafing on the couch.
That's still ridiculous price increase for merely getting 3G.
I wonder what the hardware cost for the 3G stuff is? Regardless, prices are set based on what people are willing to pay. I'd wager that being able to browse the internet while loafing around in the park is worth $120 to some people. It seems a bit steep to me too, though, and I have to admit I did a bit of a double-take at the price. The main kick in the balls is that you have to pay $30 a month on top of that for the data plan...
What I also would like to know if it supports fallback to gprs in case 3G isn't available, as is usually outside cities.
Good question. It doesn't mention anything about that, so I'm assuming that its going to be useless outside of cities. Not a big deal for some people, I would guess, and that's probably why they're offering the WiFi-only versions too. That way, if your 3G coverage stinks, you don't have to pay extra for a useless feature.
To be fair, the pope also decrees that sex outside of marriage is also a sin, so obviously they're not really following the teachings of the pope, are they? Seems to me that if you have no issue having sex, then you shouldn't have issues wearing a condom. I'm inclined to doubt the prevailing wisdom that Catholics, and the pope, are responsible for the AIDs epidemic in Africa.
Disclaimer: I'm an agnostic, so don't take this as promotion of organized religion. I just don't like scape-goating.
I'm actually a bit surprised at the almost-uniformly negative response to "mega corps." I've worked at two companies that could be described as "mega corps." The first, while not exactly soul-crushing, bore such a striking resemblance to Office Space that I was happy to leave. The other one has been an almost-uniformly pleasant experience, with a solid focus on tech and very little bureaucracy. What I've taken away from this is that you can't judge the quality of a job by the size of the company.
As far as the 60-hours-per-week thing goes, both jobs had me firmly in the 40-45 hours range. The lone, very rare exceptions (50-55 hour weeks) were solely due to my own fuckups, and my desire to not have my fuckups impact the rest of my team (as in, they're actual people who didn't deserve to look bad because of something I did). I've never been forced to work long hours.
On the topic of overtime, I've found that mentioning "quality of life" and "no mandatory overtime" in interviews will get you dropped like a hot-potato if the company in question actually does expect 60 hour weeks. I've made it a habit to ignore people telling me not to ask these things, and make sure to ask it in every interview. Tends to weed out the places I don't want to work.
I realize that my experiences may not be the norm, though.
However, finally getting to the actual advice, if you want a better chance of getting your code to work using "mainstream cutting edge features" (say, lots of render-to-texture, deep render target pixel formats, etc.), and you don't want to fight a battle with your publisher, you're probably better off using Direct3D. If you only need to use a safe subset of features that lags the cutting edge by a year or so, and you want the nicer programming experience, or if you want to use the most bleeding edge stuff that's only available in vendor extensions, then you should use OpenGL.
Personally, I write all of my prototypes, tools, and indie games in OpenGL, because it's just more agile and toolkit-y. And fun. Don't underestimate the motivational power of having fun while you program. The games I work on for big companies are almost all written in Direct3D.
Sure, he's still recommending OpenGL for prototypes or experimental stuff, but its kinda damning praise, don't you think?
Back when I was still into the religion thing, I had a Bible with footnotes that discussed translation issues and meanings of certain passages, citing original sources where appropriate. It outlined areas where there was disagreement about interpretation as well.
I can't remember what it was called, unfortunately, but I had considered it a step above some of the other bibles I had seen.
I don't think a lot of people feel that war is never an answer. However a lot of us feel that we spend far, far more on war than we actually need to, and that it'd be prudent to maybe focus on consolidating and reducing our forces to a defensive role.
Its frustrating when people act as if we want to get rid of it completely. Its also frustrating when people respond to nuanced criticism of our military spending with, "Well, funding the military is the federal government's job!" Of course it is, but that doesn't mean we need to spend quite so much.
That's begging the question. Those with a "hate-on" for Stallman likely see no moral or ethical dilemma with proprietary software. You're assuming that its imminently clear and universally agreed upon that proprietary software is unethical and immoral, when this is actually not the case.
So, why should I buy a product designed with the publishers' interests in mind over a product with the customers' interests in mind? I don't particularly care about the publishers' interests, but I do care about mine.
In what way? Closed source says nothing about whether you actually use some of the very-bad laws on the books to prevent people from inspecting the workings of your program. Its perfectly possibly for me to write a closed-source program and not drag people to court for reverse engineering, and even write a license to that effect.
If I do not explicitly permit someone to distribute modifications of my software, that *would* fall under copyright law, but that's not covered by the analogy. In fact, its pretty difficult to come up with a car analogy that actually makes sense. Whether you view copyright as moral or not falls to your personal belief. My belief is that, despite Stallman's protestations, it is possible to distribute software under copyright morally, even though a lot of proprietary software vendors do not do so.
Assuming that the guy I'm selling it to has a real choice whether to buy the car, understands that the hood is welded shut before buying, and I don't try to use legal means to keep him from unwelding the hood or getting to the engine, why should I feel bad about selling it to him?
I actually enjoyed "Mandatory Fun Day" because of the comment-posted spoofs of the actual comic. The real comic was terrible, but some of those spoofs were actually funny.
How convenient for them. Run their illegal shit under a "different branch," and when they're caught simply disband it and claim that the problem is dealt with. Of course, they did something similar with the entire concept of "Fair Game," except that there was no indication that they actually were trying to stop the practice, but rather were concerned about PR.
The GO's management of the Church's external affairs was notably deficient and many parishioners and staff began to suspect that matters for which the GO was responsible were not being dealt with in accordance with the teachings of Mr. Hubbard. In fact, by this time, the Guardian's Office had abandoned any pretense of following the principles described in Mr. Hubbard's writings.
As early as 1960, L. Ron Hubbard had proposed that Scientologists should infiltrate government departments by taking secretarial, bodyguard or other jobs.[8]
That little [8] there is a citation, by the way. Looks like Hubbard was OK in principle with the actions of the GO. Scientology did a 180 on it when it became bad for PR. Forgive me if I don't take the words of a Scientology shill as anything more than the ramblings of a habitual liar.
I'm guessing that these kinds of comments are made by vegetarians who are more concerned about growing the ranks of their "organization" than preventing animals from being killed. To them, its about being a part of the "in group" as opposed to any actual productive results. You'll find those kinds of people in any sort of organization, and they tend to be the most annoying. I'm guessing that most vegetarians will either welcome this or have no opinion.
Actually, when lay-people say "IT", "computer guy", or any similar generic term, they typically assume that said person carries a broad range of computer-related skills and can fix any of their problems that involves a computer. I've dumbfounded more than one person when explaining that just because I write software, doesn't mean that I know how to fix their printer, configure their network, or do something in Microsoft Word. They assume that because I write software, I'm a computer guy, and because I'm a computer guy, I know how to solve all those computer problems. The reality is that if I'm not programming, half the time I'm just doing this. The thought that Network Administration, IT Help Desk, and Software Developer are all distinct positions with different knowledge and skill-sets is a revelation to them.
I work at a company where we have on-call rotations, with pager and everything. It was made explicitly clear during the interview and hiring process that this would be expected of me, and that I should consider my salary as reflecting this responsibility. Given that the salary was a good deal higher than typical jobs in the area, and expectations were stated up-front, I felt that this was fair.
If you're an independent contractor, then you definitely should be paid for those on-calls. Its unfathomable to me that someone can expect you to work without proper compensation.
I'd disagree with your point about movies. Yes, Hollywood does put out a lot of crap, but they also put out a decent number of good moves. Of those good movies, they are usually higher-quality than indie movies. And speaking of indie movies, how many of those were released under a permissive license (without copyright)?
And video games? That's a huge gaping hole that people tend to forget (or outright ignore). After all, the quality of FOSS/non-copyrighted video games is laughable when compared to games developed under copyright. I certainly haven't seen a single free game that has managed to convince me that non-copyrighted games will be able to fill the shoes of the current industry.
And of course, we haven't even touched the real problem with your argument: that you're equating copying today with copying hundreds of years ago. The ability to easily copy books and other materials wasn't even around until the printing press, and today's computers and digital media far exceed previous copying methods in terms of cost-savings and quality. As another poster pointed out, the invention of the printing press was followed shortly by the invention of copyright. Maybe the issue isn't as simple as you'd like to make it out?
That you'd trot out the tired, "Well, people were making stuff before copyright," argument without any sort of critical thinking, gloss over the works that current industries produce, and then even leave out an entire industry worth billions of dollars... well it doesn't say much for your argument.
I'm wearing a pager right now. When our engineers are on-call, we get pagers to wear to notify us of any problems. The pagers tend to be more reliable than cell phones. I can get a signal in places where my phone has no bars.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh really? I hear this claim a lot, but its been my observation that if the Democrats do something stupid, Jon will certainly take the opportunity to nail them to the wall. I recall that when the Democrats got control of the Senate, that he played video of them discussing an effing sports game rather than fixing the country, like they claimed they were going to. Or showing clips of similarities between Bush and Obama speeches. Or comparing Obama's exit strategy with Bush's. Or calling out Democrats on hyperbole.
Jon does clearly lean left, but I don't see him as playing softball with the Democrats. They just tend to give him less ammunition. Yes, the Democrats do have their fuck-ups, but the Republicans have taken the whole dishonest-fuck-up game to a whole new level.
Slippery slope is only a fallacy if you fail to outline that its possible and likely to go from one point to another. Hardware, software, and service lock-ins are hardly an unknown phenomenon in the computer industry. I think its completely valid to be concerned that a company like Apple is trying to use their walled-garden approach to lock their customers in to their own services, and I'm glad that the FSF are trying to bring attention to it.
And I'm someone who actually prefers some of his devices to be "walled-garden" devices. I just want to have the option to get a device that's not tied to one company, if I so desire.
$120 + $30/month is a kick in the balls. Well, actually, you're correct that its hyperbole on my part. I was comparing it to my iPhone (yes, an Apple product!) which I got for $200 ($30 a month for the data), but as some other posters pointed out, there's no contract and its unlocked. Taking that into consideration makes it seem a *lot* fairer.
Still, no Flash is going to be a deal-killer for me personally, I think. At first, I was thinking about getting one of these for my wife, but no Flash support means she can't watch Japanese TV over the internet while loafing on the couch.
That's still ridiculous price increase for merely getting 3G.
I wonder what the hardware cost for the 3G stuff is? Regardless, prices are set based on what people are willing to pay. I'd wager that being able to browse the internet while loafing around in the park is worth $120 to some people. It seems a bit steep to me too, though, and I have to admit I did a bit of a double-take at the price. The main kick in the balls is that you have to pay $30 a month on top of that for the data plan...
What I also would like to know if it supports fallback to gprs in case 3G isn't available, as is usually outside cities.
Good question. It doesn't mention anything about that, so I'm assuming that its going to be useless outside of cities. Not a big deal for some people, I would guess, and that's probably why they're offering the WiFi-only versions too. That way, if your 3G coverage stinks, you don't have to pay extra for a useless feature.
The 3G version has both.
To be fair, the pope also decrees that sex outside of marriage is also a sin, so obviously they're not really following the teachings of the pope, are they? Seems to me that if you have no issue having sex, then you shouldn't have issues wearing a condom. I'm inclined to doubt the prevailing wisdom that Catholics, and the pope, are responsible for the AIDs epidemic in Africa.
Disclaimer: I'm an agnostic, so don't take this as promotion of organized religion. I just don't like scape-goating.
I'm actually a bit surprised at the almost-uniformly negative response to "mega corps." I've worked at two companies that could be described as "mega corps." The first, while not exactly soul-crushing, bore such a striking resemblance to Office Space that I was happy to leave. The other one has been an almost-uniformly pleasant experience, with a solid focus on tech and very little bureaucracy. What I've taken away from this is that you can't judge the quality of a job by the size of the company.
As far as the 60-hours-per-week thing goes, both jobs had me firmly in the 40-45 hours range. The lone, very rare exceptions (50-55 hour weeks) were solely due to my own fuckups, and my desire to not have my fuckups impact the rest of my team (as in, they're actual people who didn't deserve to look bad because of something I did). I've never been forced to work long hours.
On the topic of overtime, I've found that mentioning "quality of life" and "no mandatory overtime" in interviews will get you dropped like a hot-potato if the company in question actually does expect 60 hour weeks. I've made it a habit to ignore people telling me not to ask these things, and make sure to ask it in every interview. Tends to weed out the places I don't want to work.
I realize that my experiences may not be the norm, though.
The same Chris Hecker that currently recommends you use Direct3D for production code on his web page?
However, finally getting to the actual advice, if you want a better chance of getting your code to work using "mainstream cutting edge features" (say, lots of render-to-texture, deep render target pixel formats, etc.), and you don't want to fight a battle with your publisher, you're probably better off using Direct3D. If you only need to use a safe subset of features that lags the cutting edge by a year or so, and you want the nicer programming experience, or if you want to use the most bleeding edge stuff that's only available in vendor extensions, then you should use OpenGL.
Personally, I write all of my prototypes, tools, and indie games in OpenGL, because it's just more agile and toolkit-y. And fun. Don't underestimate the motivational power of having fun while you program. The games I work on for big companies are almost all written in Direct3D.
Sure, he's still recommending OpenGL for prototypes or experimental stuff, but its kinda damning praise, don't you think?
Yes, I agree. Its amazing that fictional entertainment makes things up to entertain people. I know that when I think "accuracy," I think "Hollywood."
Current LCD/plasma screens cannot polarize the light, which is how those 3d movies work. Wikipedia.
Someone tried something similar to that.
Back when I was still into the religion thing, I had a Bible with footnotes that discussed translation issues and meanings of certain passages, citing original sources where appropriate. It outlined areas where there was disagreement about interpretation as well.
I can't remember what it was called, unfortunately, but I had considered it a step above some of the other bibles I had seen.
I don't think a lot of people feel that war is never an answer. However a lot of us feel that we spend far, far more on war than we actually need to, and that it'd be prudent to maybe focus on consolidating and reducing our forces to a defensive role.
Its frustrating when people act as if we want to get rid of it completely. Its also frustrating when people respond to nuanced criticism of our military spending with, "Well, funding the military is the federal government's job!" Of course it is, but that doesn't mean we need to spend quite so much.
That's begging the question. Those with a "hate-on" for Stallman likely see no moral or ethical dilemma with proprietary software. You're assuming that its imminently clear and universally agreed upon that proprietary software is unethical and immoral, when this is actually not the case.
We need to extend Poe's Law to managerial speak.
So, why should I buy a product designed with the publishers' interests in mind over a product with the customers' interests in mind? I don't particularly care about the publishers' interests, but I do care about mine.
In what way? Closed source says nothing about whether you actually use some of the very-bad laws on the books to prevent people from inspecting the workings of your program. Its perfectly possibly for me to write a closed-source program and not drag people to court for reverse engineering, and even write a license to that effect.
If I do not explicitly permit someone to distribute modifications of my software, that *would* fall under copyright law, but that's not covered by the analogy. In fact, its pretty difficult to come up with a car analogy that actually makes sense. Whether you view copyright as moral or not falls to your personal belief. My belief is that, despite Stallman's protestations, it is possible to distribute software under copyright morally, even though a lot of proprietary software vendors do not do so.
Assuming that the guy I'm selling it to has a real choice whether to buy the car, understands that the hood is welded shut before buying, and I don't try to use legal means to keep him from unwelding the hood or getting to the engine, why should I feel bad about selling it to him?
I actually enjoyed "Mandatory Fun Day" because of the comment-posted spoofs of the actual comic. The real comic was terrible, but some of those spoofs were actually funny.
The GO's management of the Church's external affairs was notably deficient and many parishioners and staff began to suspect that matters for which the GO was responsible were not being dealt with in accordance with the teachings of Mr. Hubbard. In fact, by this time, the Guardian's Office had abandoned any pretense of following the principles described in Mr. Hubbard's writings.
Given that the doctrine of "Fair Game" came from Hubbard himself, this is bullshit. Hubbard's principles included harassment, character asssassination, and murder. I'd also like to point out this little tidbit
As early as 1960, L. Ron Hubbard had proposed that Scientologists should infiltrate government departments by taking secretarial, bodyguard or other jobs.[8]
That little [8] there is a citation, by the way. Looks like Hubbard was OK in principle with the actions of the GO. Scientology did a 180 on it when it became bad for PR. Forgive me if I don't take the words of a Scientology shill as anything more than the ramblings of a habitual liar.
I'm guessing that these kinds of comments are made by vegetarians who are more concerned about growing the ranks of their "organization" than preventing animals from being killed. To them, its about being a part of the "in group" as opposed to any actual productive results. You'll find those kinds of people in any sort of organization, and they tend to be the most annoying. I'm guessing that most vegetarians will either welcome this or have no opinion.
Actually, when lay-people say "IT", "computer guy", or any similar generic term, they typically assume that said person carries a broad range of computer-related skills and can fix any of their problems that involves a computer. I've dumbfounded more than one person when explaining that just because I write software, doesn't mean that I know how to fix their printer, configure their network, or do something in Microsoft Word. They assume that because I write software, I'm a computer guy, and because I'm a computer guy, I know how to solve all those computer problems. The reality is that if I'm not programming, half the time I'm just doing this. The thought that Network Administration, IT Help Desk, and Software Developer are all distinct positions with different knowledge and skill-sets is a revelation to them.
I work at a company where we have on-call rotations, with pager and everything. It was made explicitly clear during the interview and hiring process that this would be expected of me, and that I should consider my salary as reflecting this responsibility. Given that the salary was a good deal higher than typical jobs in the area, and expectations were stated up-front, I felt that this was fair.
If you're an independent contractor, then you definitely should be paid for those on-calls. Its unfathomable to me that someone can expect you to work without proper compensation.
I'd disagree with your point about movies. Yes, Hollywood does put out a lot of crap, but they also put out a decent number of good moves. Of those good movies, they are usually higher-quality than indie movies. And speaking of indie movies, how many of those were released under a permissive license (without copyright)?
And video games? That's a huge gaping hole that people tend to forget (or outright ignore). After all, the quality of FOSS/non-copyrighted video games is laughable when compared to games developed under copyright. I certainly haven't seen a single free game that has managed to convince me that non-copyrighted games will be able to fill the shoes of the current industry.
And of course, we haven't even touched the real problem with your argument: that you're equating copying today with copying hundreds of years ago. The ability to easily copy books and other materials wasn't even around until the printing press, and today's computers and digital media far exceed previous copying methods in terms of cost-savings and quality. As another poster pointed out, the invention of the printing press was followed shortly by the invention of copyright. Maybe the issue isn't as simple as you'd like to make it out?
That you'd trot out the tired, "Well, people were making stuff before copyright," argument without any sort of critical thinking, gloss over the works that current industries produce, and then even leave out an entire industry worth billions of dollars... well it doesn't say much for your argument.
I'm wearing a pager right now. When our engineers are on-call, we get pagers to wear to notify us of any problems. The pagers tend to be more reliable than cell phones. I can get a signal in places where my phone has no bars.