That's true. But your new product would be functionally very similar to the original and a close competititor.
And if your new software were available for free, yours would likely wipe the other out.
Sorry, I tricked you. Yes, I'm playing dense but here's the punchline:
The vegetables I grew were puny and inedible. All I got out of that hard work was a bit of knowledge, viz: I suck at gardening.
Am I right that this piece of knowledge is "intellectual property" now, and that I somehow deserve to be compensated?
Obviously not. What I'm trying to point out is that the labor that goes into a thing is not the source of its market value.
"Why do media companies think that any use of media should be paid for?"
Because the metaphor of property was allowed to run rampant, unquestioned.
Not to flamebait or OT, but as in many things, rms was prophetic about this. He begged anyone who would listen not to use the term "intellectual property" as was widely ridiculed, as in many things.
"Copyright is constitutional only if it promotes the progress of science and useful arts."
Though I agree with you on this matter, SCOTUS does not -- and (*sigh) SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is constitutional.
In the holdings of Eldred versus Ashcroft, it was made clear that copyright is presumed consitutional if it is for a non-infinite amount of time and preserves the distinction between idea and expression.
The idiotic copyright laws that now exist and will soon exist are subject to challenges, just not *constitutional ones.
Just thought I'd save you some grief and trouble: BlakeyRat is almost always just trolling. His, um, "contributions" to most discussions are to tromp in and declare that the free software versions of everything will never catch up to the commercial equivalents, e.g. Paint.NET (the very name of which is kinda funny to me)
If it is open source, then yes, you can put it on your turkey and ribs and stuff.
If it is locked-down software pretending to be "open source" then you will have to ask the provider of the source what, if anything, you can do with it.
I think the logic is like this: there are *free (in all senses) alternatives aplenty out there, and their main drawback is that they sometimes need a bit of tweaking before they take Windows to school, frequently because the hardware manufacturers "don't support" Linux.
If you're going to charge multiple hundreds of dollars per PC, we kinda expect you to go into the back room with the HP people and get things humming for us.
I have heard that chess ability is only a so-so indicator of intelligence, and that the best indicators are mathematical intuition and the ability to learn foreign languages. Don't recall the source, though...
"The worldwide motion picture industry, including foreign and domestic producers, distributors, theaters, video stores and pay-per-view operators lose more than $18 billion annually as a result of movie theft. More than $7 billion in losses are attributed to illegal Internet distributions, while $11 billion is the result of illegal copying and bootlegging."
The two of you, like almost every presidential candidate I can recall, vow to curb government spending. Please list some of the cuts you would make, and what percentage of the budget would be saved by their elimination or reduction.
I didn't even read the *title, so I'll just cover all my bases: Steve Ballmer, the RIAA, Sarah Palin, and software patents are evil and must be *stopped!
"Developers need to understand that they may be putting themselves out of a job in the future by contributing to open source."
I'm terrified, really. You're almost certainly right: in a matter of days, all the software that anyone will ever need will be on sourceforge for free and no company will ever need developers again.
Can anyone tell me what an Executive MBA is? Is it just a rebranded MBA after everyone realized (circa 2001) that MBAs are as a general rule ignorant blowhards?
I was wondering whether there was any hope of getting websites to start saying "requires a PDF reader" instead of "requires Adobe's PDF reader". The non-Adobe readers I've used have pretty much all rendered docs fine and twice as quickly to boot.
Slashdot Mirror
That's true. But your new product would be functionally very similar to the original and a close competititor. And if your new software were available for free, yours would likely wipe the other out.
Sorry, I tricked you. Yes, I'm playing dense but here's the punchline: The vegetables I grew were puny and inedible. All I got out of that hard work was a bit of knowledge, viz: I suck at gardening. Am I right that this piece of knowledge is "intellectual property" now, and that I somehow deserve to be compensated? Obviously not. What I'm trying to point out is that the labor that goes into a thing is not the source of its market value.
Weird. I coulda sworn I grew some vegetables this year. But no one paid me, therefore by your logic I had no incentive to do so.
So I guess I remember it wrong; maybe it was all a dream.
Wrong as usual cliffski.
Effort does not, by virtue of being effort, "need to be rewarded".
It's *very *difficult for me to make life-size statues of John Grisham out of sour cream.
In free societies, we don't decide what I *deserve based on the quantity of labor and pass laws to make sure I get that.
"Why do media companies think that any use of media should be paid for?"
Because the metaphor of property was allowed to run rampant, unquestioned.
Not to flamebait or OT, but as in many things, rms was prophetic about this. He begged anyone who would listen not to use the term "intellectual property" as was widely ridiculed, as in many things.
"Copyright is constitutional only if it promotes the progress of science and useful arts."
Though I agree with you on this matter, SCOTUS does not -- and (*sigh) SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is constitutional.
In the holdings of Eldred versus Ashcroft, it was made clear that copyright is presumed consitutional if it is for a non-infinite amount of time and preserves the distinction between idea and expression.
The idiotic copyright laws that now exist and will soon exist are subject to challenges, just not *constitutional ones.
it is locked down because, as i understand it, neither you nor anyone else is *permitted (slash *licensed) to make it run on anything but Windows.
There are *tons of actual, open source applications that only run on windows because the developers just use windows and there you go.
But for *any of those -- b/c they are *actually open -- you're free to write up a port to any OS you want.
"If you're not trolling"
Just thought I'd save you some grief and trouble: BlakeyRat is almost always just trolling. His, um, "contributions" to most discussions are to tromp in and declare that the free software versions of everything will never catch up to the commercial equivalents, e.g. Paint.NET (the very name of which is kinda funny to me)
If it is open source, then yes, you can put it on your turkey and ribs and stuff.
If it is locked-down software pretending to be "open source" then you will have to ask the provider of the source what, if anything, you can do with it.
"What is your logic for blaming it on Vista?"
I think the logic is like this: there are *free (in all senses) alternatives aplenty out there, and their main drawback is that they sometimes need a bit of tweaking before they take Windows to school, frequently because the hardware manufacturers "don't support" Linux.
If you're going to charge multiple hundreds of dollars per PC, we kinda expect you to go into the back room with the HP people and get things humming for us.
"I still do not see why they are cutting off XP."
Have you heard of planned obsolescence?
I have heard that chess ability is only a so-so indicator of intelligence, and that the best indicators are mathematical intuition and the ability to learn foreign languages. Don't recall the source, though...
I bet you didn't know that, ahem ..
"The worldwide motion picture industry, including foreign and domestic producers,
distributors, theaters, video stores and pay-per-view operators lose more than $18 billion
annually as a result of movie theft. More than $7 billion in losses are attributed to illegal
Internet distributions, while $11 billion is the result of illegal copying and bootlegging."
http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/realdvd%20press%20release%209%2030%2008%20final.pdf
The two of you, like almost every presidential candidate I can recall, vow to curb government spending. Please list some of the cuts you would make, and what percentage of the budget would be saved by their elimination or reduction.
"My life is pants"
Most of us, always
I didn't even read the *title, so I'll just cover all my bases:
Steve Ballmer, the RIAA, Sarah Palin, and software patents are evil and must be *stopped!
"3. No Exchange support"
I'm sold. Send one over.
pace CrazedSanity, I think the less exchange support there is in the world, the better.
"Developers need to understand that they may be putting themselves out of a job in the future by contributing to open source."
I'm terrified, really. You're almost certainly right: in a matter of days, all the software that anyone will ever need will be on sourceforge for free and no company will ever need developers again.
Shudder.
IIRC, someone told me the GPL was a cancer
Can anyone tell me what an Executive MBA is? Is it just a rebranded MBA after everyone realized (circa 2001) that MBAs are as a general rule ignorant blowhards?
So when MS promises hat the next version of Windows will have X, I can take that to mean that in thirteen years it will have most of X?
Good to know.
I was wondering whether there was any hope of getting websites to start saying "requires a PDF reader" instead of "requires Adobe's PDF reader". The non-Adobe readers I've used have pretty much all rendered docs fine and twice as quickly to boot.
"What if I don't come close to the monthly limits, but I'm streaming/DLing something that will take longer than 15min? "
Then you are do doubt a filthy *pirate trying to steal intellectual property from great intellectuals like Lars Ulrich and Michael Bay
Meh. I suspect that the non-competitiveness of Congressional races has a deeper, more intractable source than demographics, viz.:
The acceptance by the general public that bringing federal cash into the district for decidedly non-federal projects is not only acceptable but *good.
Actually, I assumed nothing. I tried it and found it to be TEH BLAZORINGS FAAASSSTTTT!!!111