Question: Considering your motivation to innovate and design futuristic air/spacecraft, are you attracted to the Centennial Prizes offered by NASA to develop new craft designs?
Answer: Oh no, I don't believe NASA can properly put out a (developmental) prize like the Orteg Prize or the Kramer Prize, or either the X Prize. NASA has a real habit of trying to help sub-contractors and contractors by monitoring risks that NASA wouldn't take themselves. What NASA needs to do is to put out a very difficult goal to achieve and then not monitor it at all and let those that go after it take their own risks. I don't see NASA doing that. Possibly they will. Maybe they will put someone in charge that knows the benefits of running a prize properly. I haven't seen that yet.
Too much "help" from NASA has hurt development in some respects.
Are you trying to tell me competion doesn't lead to innovation? There has to be a division somewhere between companies and ideas, otherwise only one sollution would be proposed, and only one solution built.
However many solutions, with the one working solution being used for the next stage of innovation, is a much better system.
NASA may not be dumb. But they are a huge goverment operation that may not be doing things the best way, and other than internal competition, there is not way to promote differing ideas.
What about ISP's? There routers and switchs and lines are used for distribution of copyright material and child porn.
Yet they are not held liable.
Why would someone running this program that mereley routes traffic through it, be held liable?
But there exists the possibility that the other person may still be living, and if they choose, they can divulge this information, however they should have the option not to divulge it as well.
The privacy issue doesn't just affect one person, but both, especially when sent email is saved.
Do I really want my parents seeing emails I've sent my girlfriend [or if you find that hard to believe... some 60 year old man posing as a girl]
Knowing what I've written, I'm pretty sure I'm happy that they don't get to access such files when I die. Do you want to read erotic messages your parents send to each other?
I think something cool would be a HUD for every window. Like the HUD you see in flight sim games where other 'ships' are shown as dots or squares or some sort. Then you could set it to show you the 'name' of every vehicle (which you set as you get in) and the speed and relative distance of each vehicle. This would be especially useful in snowy, foggy or rainy weather where visibility is limited.
You could have the option to toggle what you see as well.
Last time I checked, US law doesn't apply everywhere.
So they are not CLEARLY offering illegal content, as...
Wait a minute. Let me actually look this up. I'm applying patent law thinking to this...
*looks it up*
Oh fuck. Okay, so copyright protection usually DOES apply in foreign countries, assuming they signed the Berne Convention, are members of the WTO or signed the WIPO Copyright Treaty.
I thought we all knew that closed source != more secure. So why should it be any different in the gaming market? Just because a computer game is open source, doesn't mean it's easier to create cheats.
But you bring up a good point. The engine was already developed. I could see an intresting buisness model where some companies (iD, Valve, etc) make game engines, and sell them.
Then you no longer go out and buy Doom3, or Halflife 2. You buy a game engine, freeing up the engine maker from creating content.
Then the open source group comes along and builds games on an engine.
As I said, I wrote something smiliar, and I agreed with what you said.
Then something came to me... what about Mods? Counterstrike anyone? While not truly an open source product, (especially now) it started with a couple guys working on a project, and now is the most widley played game on the internet.
Mods are far more like open source than the original game.
The turnover rate for computers games may be high, but that's due to the fact that the game ends, and the replayability is often low. If a product where open source and continually updating, changing and adding new content, the game industry could be further improved. No more paying $50 for an expansion pack.
You can't tell me the will isn't there, like I said, look at mods.
I can't see why closed source games are better than open source.
If a parent wants to block mature content, they can install a filter of some sort like many work places.
Would you be happy if a V chip was MANDATORY in all TV's? No, your example is the initative of the parents, and so should the blocking of mature content on the internet.
Or any Online purchase for that matter. Steam?
What about free downloads?
It'll be about as useful as denying teenagers porn. I mean that's why they built the internet right?
OSS is not just a battle of Linux vs MS, it's a battle of the open source development model vs the closed source model.
Open Source is not a Linux exclusive term, and developers that are limiting themselves to Linux only development are probably hurting there marketability in the long run. [Because we all know OSS is free as in speech, not beer]
Because the presence of those actors almost always has a direct correlation to the amount of money the film brings in. I know, I know - you're one of those people who thinks that they should cast an unknown shlub in every movie that comes out, thereby slashing the budget and enabling you to go see movies for $.50. But eventually one of those shlubs is going to be interesting/talented/attractive enough that more people go see *his* movies than anyone else's and *then* some crackpot capitalist will realize that casting that guy = more box office and offer him more money than the unknown shlub that nobody cares about - but not you, no-sir-ree! You go see movies based solely on how low-paid the actor is, because that's the kind of appreciator of fine cinema you are.
Stupid hippie...
But perhaps because of piracy that the makers of movies will realise that maybe spending $20 million on an actor is not the way to make people pay to see the movie in the box office, when people are just downloading it for free. I'm sure I'd see more movies if the price weren't $10 a movie, if instead it was half that or less.
While I'll admit that some movies cost hundres of millions of dollars, those that are good make their money back easily (LOTR?), however it would STILL pay for itself at a lower ticket price.
This is one of those supply and demand equations where I think someone is moving the price the wrong way.
Problem: Not making enough money... no one is coming to watch.
Current Solution: Raise the price.
Obviously, with piracy the way it is.. the increased price is not having the affect of making them more money.
Better Solution: Lower the price, entice people to see the movie in the theatre instead. [For reasons of better sound, picture, etc. than say a cam copy]
Slashdot Mirror
7.5% during day trading. 10% during after hours trading. So that's 17.5% in one day.
Settle? Does anyone see IBM settling? Why would they when they will win.
Too much "help" from NASA has hurt development in some respects.
Are you trying to tell me competion doesn't lead to innovation? There has to be a division somewhere between companies and ideas, otherwise only one sollution would be proposed, and only one solution built.
However many solutions, with the one working solution being used for the next stage of innovation, is a much better system.
NASA may not be dumb. But they are a huge goverment operation that may not be doing things the best way, and other than internal competition, there is not way to promote differing ideas.
However unlike open source, I don't think the release early and release often is a good idea for manned space travel.
People's lives and billion dollar equiptment is not something I'd want to see being tested in such a manner.
What about ISP's? There routers and switchs and lines are used for distribution of copyright material and child porn. Yet they are not held liable. Why would someone running this program that mereley routes traffic through it, be held liable?
Then where do we draw the line between "Omg, technology for terrorists" and real useful software? What about instant messanger systems?
Does AIM and MSN user = Terroist?
No.
But they can very easily use such software can they not?
What about Planes? Maybe we should stop using planes.. I mean terrorists can use them to fly into our buildings.
Why are you drawing the line at this piece of software? Where should this line be? The further it goes into our freedoms...
What, so my girlfriend has to unencrypt my erotic email to read it?
Talk about a turn on. *cough*
But there exists the possibility that the other person may still be living, and if they choose, they can divulge this information, however they should have the option not to divulge it as well.
The privacy issue doesn't just affect one person, but both, especially when sent email is saved.
Exactly.
Do I really want my parents seeing emails I've sent my girlfriend [or if you find that hard to believe... some 60 year old man posing as a girl]
Knowing what I've written, I'm pretty sure I'm happy that they don't get to access such files when I die. Do you want to read erotic messages your parents send to each other?
I think something cool would be a HUD for every window. Like the HUD you see in flight sim games where other 'ships' are shown as dots or squares or some sort. Then you could set it to show you the 'name' of every vehicle (which you set as you get in) and the speed and relative distance of each vehicle. This would be especially useful in snowy, foggy or rainy weather where visibility is limited.
You could have the option to toggle what you see as well.
Well I would assume whoever made the .torrent file of course.
But what about this analogy. You write a book about how to stalk young children on the internet. Is such a thing illegal? I don't know the answer.
Last time I checked, US law doesn't apply everywhere.
So they are not CLEARLY offering illegal content, as...
Wait a minute. Let me actually look this up. I'm applying patent law thinking to this...
*looks it up*
Oh fuck. Okay, so copyright protection usually DOES apply in foreign countries, assuming they signed the Berne Convention, are members of the WTO or signed the WIPO Copyright Treaty.
I thought we all knew that closed source != more secure. So why should it be any different in the gaming market? Just because a computer game is open source, doesn't mean it's easier to create cheats.
But you bring up a good point. The engine was already developed. I could see an intresting buisness model where some companies (iD, Valve, etc) make game engines, and sell them.
Then you no longer go out and buy Doom3, or Halflife 2. You buy a game engine, freeing up the engine maker from creating content.
Then the open source group comes along and builds games on an engine.
When will someone create a 'joystick' with 30 different kinds of porn, instead of having to use that old 'internet' thing.
As I said, I wrote something smiliar, and I agreed with what you said. Then something came to me... what about Mods? Counterstrike anyone? While not truly an open source product, (especially now) it started with a couple guys working on a project, and now is the most widley played game on the internet. Mods are far more like open source than the original game. The turnover rate for computers games may be high, but that's due to the fact that the game ends, and the replayability is often low. If a product where open source and continually updating, changing and adding new content, the game industry could be further improved. No more paying $50 for an expansion pack. You can't tell me the will isn't there, like I said, look at mods. I can't see why closed source games are better than open source.
I had a good long post about how open source is not for games.
But as I went along I convinced myself that I was wrong, and that open source can be better than the closed source model, even for games.
So I can only hope that one day the OSS gaming market does seize the day.
If a parent wants to block mature content, they can install a filter of some sort like many work places.
Would you be happy if a V chip was MANDATORY in all TV's? No, your example is the initative of the parents, and so should the blocking of mature content on the internet.
What...
Did you read the article?
Or any Online purchase for that matter. Steam? What about free downloads? It'll be about as useful as denying teenagers porn. I mean that's why they built the internet right?
Why should OSS be considered Linux software?
OSS is not just a battle of Linux vs MS, it's a battle of the open source development model vs the closed source model.
Open Source is not a Linux exclusive term, and developers that are limiting themselves to Linux only development are probably hurting there marketability in the long run. [Because we all know OSS is free as in speech, not beer]
Stupid hippie...
But perhaps because of piracy that the makers of movies will realise that maybe spending $20 million on an actor is not the way to make people pay to see the movie in the box office, when people are just downloading it for free. I'm sure I'd see more movies if the price weren't $10 a movie, if instead it was half that or less.
While I'll admit that some movies cost hundres of millions of dollars, those that are good make their money back easily (LOTR?), however it would STILL pay for itself at a lower ticket price.
This is one of those supply and demand equations where I think someone is moving the price the wrong way.
Problem: Not making enough money... no one is coming to watch.
Current Solution: Raise the price.
Obviously, with piracy the way it is.. the increased price is not having the affect of making them more money.
Better Solution: Lower the price, entice people to see the movie in the theatre instead. [For reasons of better sound, picture, etc. than say a cam copy]