I think part of the problem is also geek-speak intruding into mainstream life. "Y2K" sounds weird and foreign. If it had been called "The Year 2000 Bug" or perhaps "The Millennial Bug" I don't think there would have been as much distress and alarm.
How about "twenty-ten" or "twenty-eleven"? I don't see the problem. Having been doing a lot of budgets at work recently, that's how everybody says it. Just as everybody says "naughties" when speaking about the 2000s.
I'm not sure why you would even think of saying "oh-ten" because that nomenclature is used for sub-decade years. You'd say "oh-nine," but "oh-ten" wouldn't make any sense.
I think it's time that Congress and the President (who's a blackberry customer) is informed of what exactly verizon thinks of their freedom of choice.
Yeah, because this is a really important matter that deserves government attention. Did you ever stop to think that there are much more important issues for government to deal with than your stupid fucking mobile gadgets?
so the original Ultima and God Emperor of Dune and would be available for remixing and mashing up.
Remixing and mashing up? I like a good remix as much as anybody, but the faddish use of these terms needs to die. Mashup, really? You think you're being edgy, but you're actually being a giant cuntnozzle. Get off my lawn!
I didn't say Free Software couldn't work... I'm not sure why you're taking that line. If we're talking about building, then I guess an appropriate analogy would be architect's drawings. It is trivial to copy the design of a building, but few people argue that architects shouldn't charge for their designs or restrict copying of them.
Fair enough. I just think it's interesting that your comment...
Software generally provides value by making people more productive and people are often willing to pay for that productivity, which gives developers an opportunity to make money. If the people can get the software for free, the benefits of the increased productivity do not just disappear, the user gets to keep the benefits.
... is applicable to almost any product or industry - brick laying enables buildings to be built, which increases productivity because people don't have to work outside, exposed to the elements. But I don't see anybody arguing for "Free Bricklaying" or "Free Buildings" in the way that the "Free Software" movement does.
Sorry, I'm not too enthusiastic about supporting tattoos and aiding Free Republic trolls. That's their thing, they are free to do it. But I'm not going to actively support it.
Not really. Software generally provides value by making people more productive and people are often willing to pay for that productivity, which gives developers an opportunity to make money. If the people can get the software for free, the benefits of the increased productivity do not just disappear, the user gets to keep the benefits.
But who pays for that development/research into productivity-enhancing software, if it can just be had for free? I realize that there are lots of wonderful people in the world who contribute their time for free - but that has its limits.
-1 Factually Incorrect would just call for "I don't agree with the poster, but instead of answering and correcting I just mod him down without telling what is incorrect" mods
What would be so bad about that? It would be a lot better than people using "troll" or "overrated" for the same purpose, as they do now. And if it wasn't factually incorrect, then it could be countered with a "Factually Correct" mod.
There is a lot of very good FOSS software out there. Now is there a lot of total crap? You bet but there is a ton of total crap closed source software as well.
Wow, what a brilliant argument! No wait, you're not really saying anything meaningful at all.
Ummm... writing good, foss apps to do the things you need/want to do? Seems obvious.
Dude, what a stupid idea. What we should do is have a protest rally, where we all wear funny hats, invite Richard Stallman as a guest speaker, and burn our Android phones on a massive bonfire. That's how you effect change and gain sympathy with the masses!
But people who use the net vote, pick up the phone type a letter do something it can work just ask australians about the emissions trading scheme. you just have to do something and if the campaign doesn't change their mind then vote them out
Why does it have to be shipped between two different people? I could ship it to myself - load the drone up in Colombia, fly to the USA, wait for it to arrive, pick it up myself. After all, the drone is going to take quite a bit longer than a commercial flight.
Scarlet Knight, the 7-foot-9-inch submersible robot from the stormy Atlantic off western Spain.
Her turn ons include long strolls along the beach at night, powerful servos, and embedded Linux. Her turn offs include shark nets and unreliable power sources. She's looking for a soul mate, but not somebody who's clingy, as she previously had a bad relationship with a Giant Squid.
The only thing I have to add is that argument by analogy is generally no argument at all.
Well, I had to resort to analogy, because you couldn't get basic terminology and facts right. You aren't even able to argue the topic directly, you have to resort to lies and propaganda.
Your argument only makes sense to those who have been indoctrinated into the "copyright abolishment" movement. It's not a rational argument, it's an emotional one.
Back in the real world, things work very differently to in the fantasy world of "information wants to be free" and intellectual property is accepted on par with other forms of property. But you don't want facts to intrude on your fantasy. So you redefine words, and you abuse words until they have no meaning.
My "analogies" about physical property" are more than just analogies. I'm talking about how property works. Intellectual and physical property are both forms of property - so why shouldn't they be treated similarly? By your logic of "government granted monopolies" then every piece of property is a government-granted monopoly, as the government grants us that ownership, and protects it with Police, Fire Departments and Armies. So, why would intellectual property be treated any differently?
Likewise, your idea of business and the economy is bizarre. Businesses strive to make profit, they don't strive to sell something for as close to the marginal cost as possible. Works the same with physical products. If something costs 20 cents to make, a business will still try to sell it for 20 dollars. Why should software be any different?
Slashdot Mirror
I think part of the problem is also geek-speak intruding into mainstream life. "Y2K" sounds weird and foreign. If it had been called "The Year 2000 Bug" or perhaps "The Millennial Bug" I don't think there would have been as much distress and alarm.
How about "twenty-ten" or "twenty-eleven"? I don't see the problem. Having been doing a lot of budgets at work recently, that's how everybody says it. Just as everybody says "naughties" when speaking about the 2000s.
I'm not sure why you would even think of saying "oh-ten" because that nomenclature is used for sub-decade years. You'd say "oh-nine," but "oh-ten" wouldn't make any sense.
DRM will take care of copyright not playing a role anymore quite soon.
But DRM doesn't work, so how is it going to cause media to be lost?
Awe look, another idiot who thinks saying 'exploder' and M$ is witty and cool.
Says the person replacing the 's' with a 'z' in his slashdot handle. I believe something about tarnished cookware applies here.
I kept checking for it every time I did a reboot or battery pull.
A "battery pull"? Why would you do that? How often is it necessary? Have you considered returning the product as defective?
I think it's time that Congress and the President (who's a blackberry customer) is informed of what exactly verizon thinks of their freedom of choice.
Yeah, because this is a really important matter that deserves government attention. Did you ever stop to think that there are much more important issues for government to deal with than your stupid fucking mobile gadgets?
Which isn't evil its just company spirit. Slashdot needs to learn the difference between pride in your work/team and evil.
When did anybody say it was evil? Culture20's post did not mention that word once. Perhaps you are projecting?
so the original Ultima and God Emperor of Dune and would be available for remixing and mashing up.
Remixing and mashing up? I like a good remix as much as anybody, but the faddish use of these terms needs to die. Mashup, really? You think you're being edgy, but you're actually being a giant cuntnozzle. Get off my lawn!
I didn't say Free Software couldn't work... I'm not sure why you're taking that line. If we're talking about building, then I guess an appropriate analogy would be architect's drawings. It is trivial to copy the design of a building, but few people argue that architects shouldn't charge for their designs or restrict copying of them.
I recall a PETA manager confirming what the freezer was used for while under oath during a criminal trial a few years back.
So, why were you on trial for criminal activity?
Fair enough. I just think it's interesting that your comment...
Software generally provides value by making people more productive and people are often willing to pay for that productivity, which gives developers an opportunity to make money. If the people can get the software for free, the benefits of the increased productivity do not just disappear, the user gets to keep the benefits.
... is applicable to almost any product or industry - brick laying enables buildings to be built, which increases productivity because people don't have to work outside, exposed to the elements. But I don't see anybody arguing for "Free Bricklaying" or "Free Buildings" in the way that the "Free Software" movement does.
http://www.androlib.com/appstatsfreepaid.aspx
Androgynous library?
Apps Tats Freep Aid?
Sorry, I'm not too enthusiastic about supporting tattoos and aiding Free Republic trolls. That's their thing, they are free to do it. But I'm not going to actively support it.
Not really. Software generally provides value by making people more productive and people are often willing to pay for that productivity, which gives developers an opportunity to make money. If the people can get the software for free, the benefits of the increased productivity do not just disappear, the user gets to keep the benefits.
But who pays for that development/research into productivity-enhancing software, if it can just be had for free? I realize that there are lots of wonderful people in the world who contribute their time for free - but that has its limits.
-1 Factually Incorrect would just call for "I don't agree with the poster, but instead of answering and correcting I just mod him down without telling what is incorrect" mods
What would be so bad about that? It would be a lot better than people using "troll" or "overrated" for the same purpose, as they do now. And if it wasn't factually incorrect, then it could be countered with a "Factually Correct" mod.
What we really need is a -1 Factually Incorrect.
I second that motion.
There is a lot of very good FOSS software out there. Now is there a lot of total crap? You bet but there is a ton of total crap closed source software as well.
Wow, what a brilliant argument! No wait, you're not really saying anything meaningful at all.
Ummm... writing good, foss apps to do the things you need/want to do? Seems obvious.
Dude, what a stupid idea. What we should do is have a protest rally, where we all wear funny hats, invite Richard Stallman as a guest speaker, and burn our Android phones on a massive bonfire. That's how you effect change and gain sympathy with the masses!
If it gets Nicolas Cage off the planet, it can't be all bad.
Ahhh, you do realize that they don't shoot those Apocalyptic-Outer-Space-Action-Movies on location, don't you?
But people who use the net vote, pick up the phone type a letter do something it can work just ask australians about the emissions trading scheme. you just have to do something and if the campaign doesn't change their mind then vote them out
Was that a real sentence?
Cheers! I'm no officially born in the 70s!
You're now officially born in the 70s, or you're not officially born in the 70s? Or are you just incoherent?
Why does it have to be shipped between two different people? I could ship it to myself - load the drone up in Colombia, fly to the USA, wait for it to arrive, pick it up myself. After all, the drone is going to take quite a bit longer than a commercial flight.
Real hackers know that the body is the most impressive machine known to man.
You clearly haven't read the article about the female submersible robot.
Scarlet Knight, the 7-foot-9-inch submersible robot from the stormy Atlantic off western Spain.
Her turn ons include long strolls along the beach at night, powerful servos, and embedded Linux. Her turn offs include shark nets and unreliable power sources. She's looking for a soul mate, but not somebody who's clingy, as she previously had a bad relationship with a Giant Squid.
€h what? W€ can't und€rstand you.
The only thing I have to add is that argument by analogy is generally no argument at all.
Well, I had to resort to analogy, because you couldn't get basic terminology and facts right. You aren't even able to argue the topic directly, you have to resort to lies and propaganda.
Your argument only makes sense to those who have been indoctrinated into the "copyright abolishment" movement. It's not a rational argument, it's an emotional one.
Back in the real world, things work very differently to in the fantasy world of "information wants to be free" and intellectual property is accepted on par with other forms of property. But you don't want facts to intrude on your fantasy. So you redefine words, and you abuse words until they have no meaning.
My "analogies" about physical property" are more than just analogies. I'm talking about how property works. Intellectual and physical property are both forms of property - so why shouldn't they be treated similarly? By your logic of "government granted monopolies" then every piece of property is a government-granted monopoly, as the government grants us that ownership, and protects it with Police, Fire Departments and Armies. So, why would intellectual property be treated any differently?
Likewise, your idea of business and the economy is bizarre. Businesses strive to make profit, they don't strive to sell something for as close to the marginal cost as possible. Works the same with physical products. If something costs 20 cents to make, a business will still try to sell it for 20 dollars. Why should software be any different?