Re:Abolition of IP laws would be disasterous
on
Swedish Pirate Demo
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Your Anonymous statements require proof. "your invention is unprotected and copied and you make no money, the consequence is simple: no one invents any more."
I doubt that, needs would still exist and there would still be money to be made by filling those needs.
What would change is that 'invention' would become a different proposition going from get rich quick, and retire, to invent more often to produce an income.
Current IP law is becoming too cumbersome with innovation being killed by trivial patents that are interfering with development.
Many inventions are stillborn because of the threat of licensing of the obvious and that products are forced to produce enough income to cover the huge IP tax that licensing creates.
Abolishing IP laws might not be a good idea, but it might be a better idea than suffocation by IP extreme.
I believe this article is intended to help the community recognize these problems and come up with ways to deal with them. It isn't as negative as you make it out to be.
It's every bit as negative as I make it out to be.
IF the author intended to improve the breed then the logical way would be to compare the lame products directly to products that work, not lame products to nebulous poorly defined ideals.
Best of breed products were named, and summarily excluded so the author could make a point about products left un-named so they could not be examined.
The article only allowed for one thought, that being that the Open Source movement is doomed on technical merit.
Unfortunately the article itself lacks technical merit for any purpose other than propaganda and self promotion.
Doesn't open source software compare well to closed-source on merit? Or do we need to excuse its technical shortcomings on the grounds of its philosophy?
Apples and Oranges
Open Source is all one thing.
Michelle's article make a bad assumption, that is that mainstream Microsoft applications don't suffer the same failings.
Bad software is bad software but at least GPL software doesn't string you up with;
o typically a non refundable price
o no access to source code
o license's that keep you from fixing problems
o death when you finally adapt to failures of the product and the company finally fails and nobody is dumb enough to purchase the product and continue it.
Like I said the assumption is that these issues are unique to her Mislabeled Open Source software (all OS software is not GPL and all of it is not potential commercial).
The last point I'll make is that software is also free speech and who is she, or anyone else to restrict free speech?
Did you read me ask for a 'Year of Desktop Linux'?
Nope and it wouldn't or shouldn't be Desktop Linux, It would be the year of Gnome, or KDE or something else Linux is the Kernel, not the Desktop, and the OS is GNU, not Linux.
As for not wanting my code criticized, I could really give a flying F---!
You can be grateful or not for using my garbage app, use it, or don't I don't care, it's written by and for a community of developers for our own purposes, if it fails to meet our needs we'll quit working on it.
Anyone (yes if you don't like it code it yourself, or look elsewhere) can continue on with it when we quit, or even fork it and move in the 'right' direction if we won't.
You the user retains all the rights, and more that you get with closed source on making choice, heck you can even choose closed source the worlds big enough for both.
There is a claim that Michelle makes that just yanks my chain. The claim is in the title of the article 'Fundamental issues with open source software development', it just isn't so.
The 5 items are not 'Fundamental issues', they are issues for concern and they will all be solved when critical mass is reached and a 'Open Source Best Practices Seal of Approval' is developed. But be ready for the bitching, and the lawyers when it is. Until then the seal of approval is usage as it is for Apache, Perl, PHP, MYSQL, and Mozilla, the very hih quality applications that Michelle chose to exclude in the note for the supposed reason of '...some of my statements do not apply to them. I made these generalizations for the point of simplification, and not for any political motivations.'
Actually they were left out because if they were considered there wouldn't have been cause to produce the FUD title, and it would have taken much much more woork to write an article with the appearence of validity.
My prefered OS of choice is Forth, I don't shove it down anyones throat, I don't sneak it into thier systems or deliver it in fancy coloured envelopes via postal mail.
IF you want what I write with it, you'll accept my o simple UI
o my extensive and mostly un-needed documentation
o the list of features that were deemed useful,
o Programming for myself (and others with the same needs)
o my Religious blindness (join the faith or go to Redmond)
o My price to get it your way, because it's GPL not 'free' as in beer, but free as in freedom
As an Open Source author there is only one Fundamental issue that I can see as un addressed and that is ownership of code routines, right now they are tied up with the app they are found in, even if the app is unrelated to the new use.
I'd like to see a variation on GPL that can be used for code routines and alogorithms and allow open source to rip the face off old methods of development by reinvention and obfuscation.
Michelle's points are by and large valid, just misrepresented.
I have to admit right up front, I didn't RTFA.
I did skim it, it's too long for the lame points it makes.
o Bad UI
o Insufficient Documentation
o Focus Features (Kitchen Sink Syndrome)
o Programmers programming what they want for themselves
o Religious blindness (oh Please)
Open Source folks freely give license for you or anyone else who cares to modify, use, change -thier work- for your use. With only the restriction that they can keep the right to what they created.
Yup, shame on them for not considering the needs of the entire rest of the world.
Michelle Levesque isn't even open enough to share the name of the Open Source project being modified, I seriously doubt that Michelle Levesque will bother to share the fruits of the added value added by Michelle's team with the same Open Source world that the project originated from.
Golly gosh, Santa Clause brought me a shiny new electric train, but the one I asked for had a B&O Engine, a yellow caboose and 4 cars. The one I got has a CGW Engine, a red caboose and 16 cars.
This train set sucks, and Santa is a Fink.
I suggest caboose take a look at the huge number of Open Source projects that meet an exceed his lame list and quit looking at the free (as in freedom) glass of water as half empty.
AC> So everyone here is telling me that becasue Linux code is vetted before non-payrolled developers this makes it less vulnerable, seems pretty weird all these foreigners doing America a big favour?
Where did you get your FUD today?
Linux 'code' is vetted by payrolled developers at IBM, Redhat, Mandrake, even Torvolds himself.
Linux used in commercial application is not the hobby OS that we fondly remember from the early days .
Yes there are hobby distro's and projects, but don't confuse the OS with the variety of Distributions. This is plus the Open Source camp has that closed source can't match. A vulnerability can be fixed by anyone with the resources in literaly minutes, and be verified by the community in rapid order. Closed source can't do that.
AC> drink, smoke and be happy, software is just software and it really dosen't matter.
Not true, software is pacemakers, powergrids, oil refineries, nuclear materials processing, pharmaceuticals, and dairy pasteurization.
Alas software hasn't been just software since machines became connected and essential.
" "The breakup?" Still bitter about that, twenty years later huh?
Go back to the Ma Bell retirement home and play another round of shuffleboard. I'm sure you'll find a sympathetic ear there. "
Retirement home my ass, I started in 1997 and was let go in 2003.
Here's a FACT for you (anonymous) and anyone else who thinks the breakup saved you money, increased quality and improved services.
The only positive side of the breakup has been an increased variety of telecom related services for which all added together cost 500% more than they did before the breakup.
Telecom (in it's myriad current forms) is a 21st century vital service, not the luxury it was a mere 2 decades ago.
The old horse is being hobbled everyone wants to own the ears, but nobody wants to pay yo feed the legs.
A T1 is a T1 no matter what you put on it for an overlay feature or service, and the same is true for all the multiplexed bigger brothers.
In the 21st century the country that wins is going to be the one with the most coordinated, reliable system that reaches from and to each and every point desired. High Speed everywhere, and fully interoperable.
That isn't going to happen with the turf wars that are taking place.
We are witnessing at this time an implosion that appears all shiny on the outside, but it's burnt out and collapsing behind the pretty shimmer.
Everybody wants the sweet markets and top dollar consumer but if they are allowed to focus on that alone, shake off regulation and abandon the longmile short suscribers, then there will be gaps so big that it won't matter.
It will be worse than a digital, class, or economic divide, it will be a geographic divide that no nation the size of the United States can survive in an era where 'imaginary' bits are the real currency and the value of a mountain of gold can be changed with just one shifted bit.
Having worked in private line provisioning and maintenance at Ma Bell I can say without equivocation that this is a direct result of the breakup and not really 'human error'.
I've seen the exact same thing being done at all the locals and the long distance companies.
Manpower is being drawn down, redundancies eliminated, and a talent and brain drain that causes errors like this.
The reason is always given that automation is allowing the company to maximize the remaining workforce and competition makes is neccesary. BS.
Best Practices are -gone- everything is driven by sales and bean counters. Engineers, Technicians and Managers who complain are moved, removed or eliminated from the loop because facts are not going to be allowed to get in the way.
It used to take weeks to get a misdirected line corrected in some instances. The fault was blamed on too many layers, and union incompetence.
Now with all the improvements brought about by divestiture and competition it is a near imposibility unless it affects a major source of income or government.
This type of error was prevented by human redundancy and a workforce able to put the breaks on before the damage was done because they could stand on the strength of regulations and the union and tell the idiot boss in charge that things were wrong.
Get used to it, rapid reorder will be the order of the day.
As in were you born yesterday, or do you think we all were?
You actually said " The cost of living is high because we are a very rich country."
Post WW1 Germany was dirt poor paying war reparations, it took a wheelbarrel full of high denomination notes just to buy a loaf of bread, if you could get it. This situation provided the fuel to push your namesake into power.
And then you said " If what you say is true and suddenly we all lose our jobs, the cost of living will go down as well and things will balance out."
Ok, it was you who was born yesterday, not us.
Cost of living and jobs ok ok. Look, the cost of things don't mean a damned thing if you have no income, but you have obviously mis-schooled in supply and demand economics. If an item has a very low sales rate (because few people can afford it) the price does not go down, the price goes up to match (a) your cost of production and (b) to provide enough revenue to make it worth producing at all.
Minimum quality levels do not apply universally and you will never be able to sell anything for less than the cost of production to people who cannot carry the real price for long.
A coffee maker does not equate to a Jaguar anywhere at any time.
Your perception of 'wealth' and 'means' indicates an immaturatiy of knowledge and experiance.
Tarrifs have been used historically to prevent irresponsible behaviour that results in a race to the bottom, and tarrifs are the only way to control the current race. Corperations and consumers are caught in a trap that they cannot be freed from without intervention. Lowered consumer spending power drives them to the lowest cost option, the lowest cost option becomes the driving factor for business and business does what it has to to meet that demand, driving jobs to the lowest cost provider and further decreasing the purchasing power of the consumer by the elimination of jobs.
The business has no choice because if they leave production and jobs in the higher cost domain of the primary consumer, they will see the competition beat them in cost and take the primary consumer.
1. "The Internet is powered by open source."
2. "The Internet is the carrier for open source."
3. "The Internet is also the platform through which open source is developed."
4. "It's simply going to be more secure than proprietary software."
5. "Open source benefits from anti-American sentiments."
6. "Incentives around open source include the respect of one's peers."
7. "Open source means standing on the shoulders of giants."
8. "Servers have always been expensive and proprietary, but Linux runs on Intel."
9. "Embedded devices are making greater use of open source."
10. "There are an increasing number of companies developing software that aren't software companies."
11. "Companies are increasingly supporting Linux."
12. "It's free."
What Marc left out is ---
13. "I'm using it to offshore firstworld jobs to the third world, and I'm damned proud of it" Mar. 22, 2004 Toronto Star Article
Andreessen is not a friend to techies, He's our Benedict Arnold
Anita Coney -" Your ignorant opinions simply do not matter."
And your 'informed' opinion matters?
BS. Mz. Coney, I have some important news for you, Everyone's opinion matters, and the ability of the police to investigate is limited by law to ensure and protect the innocent as well as the guilty to prevent abuse.
The road to promotion for an officer is paved with convictions, arrests, and closed cases.
Unfortunately there is no promotion track that puts the primary focus on protecting rights of the accused. Hence we need laws to prevent abuse.
Mr. Hiibel was arrested for failure to produce ID, watch the video.
They have a right to investigate a complaint yes, but the question about "How'd you get home last night?" makes it quite clear the officer knew who he was.
I am not required by law to have, or produce identification on demand, except in very clear circumstances, standing beside the road talking to your daughter isn't one of them.
A complaint of a passer by is unsubstantiated without investigation yes, but rights don't stop because someone complains.
Appaerently the CEO of NVidia isn't in the loop.
About a year ago Microsoft sucked up Virtual PC [ http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/02/19/mac bu/ ] .
Patrons are murdered.
Patrons are repeatedly murdered.
The government short-circuits the free evolution of the system.
How many deaths before the Government (The People) are allowed/required to take an interest?
Most of the failures of a Capitalist driven society when dealing with gangs is when they fail to intervene and quickly.
Gangs understand two things, what they can do an what they can't.
The ID's must be paid for by the person holding the card. - regardless it's mandated for safety and incurs a cost by Govt mandate.
The Approved container must be purchased, hence cost - again Govt mandate the fact that you witness lawbreakers doing otherwise changes nothing.
Photocopying the ID and maintaining it on file requiring filing, storage and space, far more than.01 dollars I assure you, still a cost, it's not the amount it's a cost.
'This is called capitalism, survival of the fittest', no that's called the law of the jungle, unbridled capitalism is the worst monster mankind could create.
Video records are almost never (really check) admitted as evidence in a trial, it is usually used pretrial the accused party, if guilty often fesses up and accepts responsibility for thier actions. The video is also used to corroborate the statements of witnesses and reconstruct events, it isn't evidence but investigative, useful in investigation.
I know you don't defend gang members, but the cybercafe owners in Garden Grove are the real criminals here, they failed to maintian a reasonably safe environment, after all in the north eastern U.S. businesses are REQUIRED at thier own expense to keep the sidewalk in front of the establishment clear of ice, AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE by Govt mandate.
Mandating Video is extreme yes, but not unreasonable based on the history of injury to the public and is no presumption of guilt, but instead a record of events.
Required recording of faces, license plates, and ID's at a bar?
What is the history of the bar?
Look, nobody has a RIGHT to operate a business harmful to the public. You can argue that this isn't the fault of the business, but the fault of the patrons, the sum is the same... harm to the public.
If businesses refuse to operate in a proper manner, the the people of the community (AKA the government) must take action, if the situation persists the there must be preventative action.
The river floods the town takes easement on the farm bordering the river and builds a burm.
The farm loses income from lost growing area.
Why can't we see the larger issue? The overall failure of society. The problem you postulate is that the tapes are prosecuter, jurer, and judge.
That situation is not here (yet), and we must guard against it.
The danger is not the camera, or the tape, but what can be done with it by those with no regard to the rights of the recorded.
The owner keeps and maintains the tapes and records, the 72hr period indicates that these records will be drawn apon in the likely event that history repeats itself and can be used to remove an asocial person or persons from contact with civilized society, survival of the fit, not the fittest.
Capitalism is an economic system, not a social system. America had better learn the difference before it is too late.
If an employer has RIGHT to video tape and employee, and a business has a RIGHT to tape customers, the RIGHT of the Govt. to tape everything else is hard to refuse.
This law will do nothing to stop crimes in the establishments, and it will do nothing to curtail gang activity. It attempts to shift the financial burdon of "public safety" from the government to the business owner.
Oh, if you were only correct, the whole world could go to be and sleep sound in the knowledge that business owners would do the right thing without mandate by government.
Establishments who sell alcoholic beverages are REQUIRED to check ID for age. It is unlawful to dispense gasoline into unapproved containers.
It is unlawful to enter into a contract with a minor without the permission of a guardian.
All issues of public safety that do place a financial cost on someone other than government to address a known hazard.
The cybercafe owners had a chance to handle the situation, they failed, the public welfare was repeatedly harmed, and government took action in a manner (to thier credit) that allowed the business venue to stay in business, and allowed access to a private/public resource (aka business) that does have a recognisable asset of public value.
This was not a private club, or private residence, it is a venue, the same as a gas station, liquor store, news stand or day care center. The government has an obligation to force the proprietor to operate in a manner consistent with public interest.
There are towns where the 'girlie clubs' are required to cover nipples with pasties, or the girls have to wear panyhose.
This is an issue of local public safety, I don't like it, but it isn't like the environment has been safe.
As an operator I'd either comply, put an age/time limit on, or move outside the city limits and let my customers kill each other, myself, or folks just walking by.
I'm not familiar with VXWorks, but it's supposed to be POSIX compliant.
Hitatchi SuperH is one of the many supported processors. (Dreamcast?)
I suspect hardware, the environment is 'dry sticky powder', it's gotta get into everything and gum it up. If spirit was immobile for a time waiting for communications during the storms in Australia then that gunk could have had a chance to settle into some pretty tender places.
PC-DOS, then MS-DOS and Microsoft Windows first moved into the corperate environment and from that position into the homes.
Adoption at home came from work to allow the user a chance to do work at home and maybe get an edge on the co-worker who was running a 'home computer' rather than a PC.
Red Hat is only marginally wrong in saying Linux isn't ready for the home, but the problem really isn't in Linux, it's in the workplace.
Once the workplace reaches critical adoption the migration to home will be a natural move and Linux will be the primary target for Virus writers, not WinBlows.
They only have a case to use the trademark for thier project, nothing else.
The same as Software Etc. and Software Etcetera in the Philly area back in the late Eighties.
My point was the project (neither) can claim exclusive use.
The University project is requesting 'At this date, Red Hat has refused our request to withdraw its trademark applications and reverse its claims of usage restrictions on the name.'.
The request is assinine, if it were as important as they make out then they have no excuse for not having registered it themselves.
A search at the US patent and trademark office lists 4 registered trademarks with the word fedora in them.
. 73467748 Feb 28 1984 Fedora Cafe and Bar
. 78296509 Sept 5 2003 Red Hat
. 78268874 June 30 2003 cosmetics
. 78312293 Oct 10 2003 Chemical Data Software
The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.
It is not exclusively trademarked for software by fedora.info.
This could be forgiven of a small independent group, but this group is a co sponsored project, part of Cornell University and University of Virginia both of which I am sure have strict policies about things like Trademark, copyright and patents. And both have the legal staff to handle it.
Sorry but they won't get any sympathy from me, and no support from the law.
Trademark is not like copyright law, you must register to get exclusive control for a product in a market.
Slashdot Mirror
Your Anonymous statements require proof.
"your invention is unprotected and copied and you make no money, the consequence is simple: no one invents any more."
I doubt that, needs would still exist and there would still be money to be made by filling those needs.
What would change is that 'invention' would become a different proposition going from get rich quick, and retire, to invent more often to produce an income.
Current IP law is becoming too cumbersome with innovation being killed by trivial patents that are interfering with development.
Many inventions are stillborn because of the threat of licensing of the obvious and that products are forced to produce enough income to cover the huge IP tax that licensing creates.
Abolishing IP laws might not be a good idea, but it might be a better idea than suffocation by IP extreme.
I believe this article is intended to help the community recognize these problems and come up with ways to deal with them. It isn't as negative as you make it out to be.
It's every bit as negative as I make it out to be.
IF the author intended to improve the breed then the logical way would be to compare the lame products directly to products that work, not lame products to nebulous poorly defined ideals.
Best of breed products were named, and summarily excluded so the author could make a point about products left un-named so they could not be examined.
The article only allowed for one thought, that being that the Open Source movement is doomed on technical merit.
Unfortunately the article itself lacks technical merit for any purpose other than propaganda and self promotion.
Doesn't open source software compare well to closed-source on merit? Or do we need to excuse its technical shortcomings on the grounds of its philosophy?
Apples and Oranges
Open Source is all one thing.
Michelle's article make a bad assumption, that is that mainstream Microsoft applications don't suffer the same failings.
Bad software is bad software but at least GPL software doesn't string you up with;
o typically a non refundable price
o no access to source code
o license's that keep you from fixing problems
o death when you finally adapt to failures of the product and the company finally fails and nobody is dumb enough to purchase the product and continue it.
Like I said the assumption is that these issues are unique to her Mislabeled Open Source software (all OS software is not GPL and all of it is not potential commercial).
The last point I'll make is that software is also free speech and who is she, or anyone else to restrict free speech?
Did you read me ask for a 'Year of Desktop Linux'?
Nope and it wouldn't or shouldn't be Desktop Linux, It would be the year of Gnome, or KDE or something else Linux is the Kernel, not the Desktop, and the OS is GNU, not Linux.
As for not wanting my code criticized, I could really give a flying F---!
You can be grateful or not for using my garbage app, use it, or don't I don't care, it's written by and for a community of developers for our own purposes, if it fails to meet our needs we'll quit working on it.
Anyone (yes if you don't like it code it yourself, or look elsewhere) can continue on with it when we quit, or even fork it and move in the 'right' direction if we won't.
You the user retains all the rights, and more that you get with closed source on making choice, heck you can even choose closed source the worlds big enough for both.
There is a claim that Michelle makes that just yanks my chain.
The claim is in the title of the article 'Fundamental issues with open source software development', it just isn't so.
The 5 items are not 'Fundamental issues', they are issues for concern and they will all be solved when critical mass is reached and a 'Open Source Best Practices Seal of Approval' is developed.
But be ready for the bitching, and the lawyers when it is.
Until then the seal of approval is usage as it is for Apache, Perl, PHP, MYSQL, and Mozilla, the very hih quality applications that Michelle chose to exclude in the note for the supposed reason of '...some of my statements do not apply to them. I made these generalizations for the point of simplification, and not for any political motivations.'
Actually they were left out because if they were considered there wouldn't have been cause to produce the FUD title, and it would have taken much much more woork to write an article with the appearence of validity.
My prefered OS of choice is Forth, I don't shove it down anyones throat, I don't sneak it into thier systems or deliver it in fancy coloured envelopes via postal mail.
IF you want what I write with it, you'll accept my
o simple UI
o my extensive and mostly un-needed documentation
o the list of features that were deemed useful,
o Programming for myself (and others with the same needs)
o my Religious blindness (join the faith or go to Redmond)
o My price to get it your way, because it's GPL not 'free' as in beer, but free as in freedom
As an Open Source author there is only one Fundamental issue that I can see as un addressed and that is ownership of code routines, right now they are tied up with the app they are found in, even if the app is unrelated to the new use.
I'd like to see a variation on GPL that can be used for code routines and alogorithms and allow open source to rip the face off old methods of development by reinvention and obfuscation.
Michelle's points are by and large valid, just misrepresented.
I have to admit right up front, I didn't RTFA.
I did skim it, it's too long for the lame points it makes.
o Bad UI
o Insufficient Documentation
o Focus Features (Kitchen Sink Syndrome)
o Programmers programming what they want for themselves
o Religious blindness (oh Please)
Open Source folks freely give license for you or anyone else who cares to modify, use, change -thier work- for your use.
With only the restriction that they can keep the right to what they created.
Yup, shame on them for not considering the needs of the entire rest of the world.
Michelle Levesque isn't even open enough to share the name of the Open Source project being modified, I seriously doubt that Michelle Levesque will bother to share the fruits of the added value added by Michelle's team with the same Open Source world that the project originated from.
Golly gosh, Santa Clause brought me a shiny new electric train, but the one I asked for had a B&O Engine, a yellow caboose and 4 cars. The one I got has a CGW Engine, a red caboose and 16 cars.
This train set sucks, and Santa is a Fink.
I suggest caboose take a look at the huge number of Open Source projects that meet an exceed his lame list and quit looking at the free (as in freedom) glass of water as half empty.
AC> So everyone here is telling me that becasue Linux code is vetted before non-payrolled developers this makes it less vulnerable, seems pretty weird all these foreigners doing America a big favour?
Where did you get your FUD today?
Linux 'code' is vetted by payrolled developers at IBM, Redhat, Mandrake, even Torvolds himself.
Linux used in commercial application is not the hobby OS that we fondly remember from the early days .
Yes there are hobby distro's and projects, but don't confuse the OS with the variety of Distributions. This is plus the Open Source camp has that closed source can't match. A vulnerability can be fixed by anyone with the resources in literaly minutes, and be verified by the community in rapid order. Closed source can't do that.
AC> drink, smoke and be happy, software is just software and it really dosen't matter.
Not true, software is pacemakers, powergrids, oil refineries, nuclear materials processing, pharmaceuticals, and dairy pasteurization.
Alas software hasn't been just software since machines became connected and essential.
" "The breakup?" Still bitter about that, twenty years later huh?
Go back to the Ma Bell retirement home and play another round of shuffleboard. I'm sure you'll find a sympathetic ear there. "
Retirement home my ass, I started in 1997 and was let go in 2003.
Here's a FACT for you (anonymous) and anyone else who thinks the breakup saved you money, increased quality and improved services.
The only positive side of the breakup has been an increased variety of telecom related services for which all added together cost 500% more than they did before the breakup.
Telecom (in it's myriad current forms) is a 21st century vital service, not the luxury it was a mere 2 decades ago.
The old horse is being hobbled everyone wants to own the ears, but nobody wants to pay yo feed the legs.
A T1 is a T1 no matter what you put on it for an overlay feature or service, and the same is true for all the multiplexed bigger brothers. In the 21st century the country that wins is going to be the one with the most coordinated, reliable system that reaches from and to each and every point desired. High Speed everywhere, and fully interoperable.
That isn't going to happen with the turf wars that are taking place.
We are witnessing at this time an implosion that appears all shiny on the outside, but it's burnt out and collapsing behind the pretty shimmer.
Everybody wants the sweet markets and top dollar consumer but if they are allowed to focus on that alone, shake off regulation and abandon the longmile short suscribers, then there will be gaps so big that it won't matter.
It will be worse than a digital, class, or economic divide, it will be a geographic divide that no nation the size of the United States can survive in an era where 'imaginary' bits are the real currency and the value of a mountain of gold can be changed with just one shifted bit.
Having worked in private line provisioning and maintenance at Ma Bell I can say without equivocation that this is a direct result of the breakup and not really 'human error'.
I've seen the exact same thing being done at all the locals and the long distance companies.
Manpower is being drawn down, redundancies eliminated, and a talent and brain drain that causes errors like this.
The reason is always given that automation is allowing the company to maximize the remaining workforce and competition makes is neccesary. BS.
Best Practices are -gone- everything is driven by sales and bean counters. Engineers, Technicians and Managers who complain are moved, removed or eliminated from the loop because facts are not going to be allowed to get in the way.
It used to take weeks to get a misdirected line corrected in some instances.
The fault was blamed on too many layers, and union incompetence.
Now with all the improvements brought about by divestiture and competition it is a near imposibility unless it affects a major source of income or government.
This type of error was prevented by human redundancy and a workforce able to put the breaks on before the damage was done because they could stand on the strength of regulations and the union and tell the idiot boss in charge that things were wrong.
Get used to it, rapid reorder will be the order of the day.
As in were you born yesterday, or do you think we all were?
You actually said " The cost of living is high because we are a very rich country."
Post WW1 Germany was dirt poor paying war reparations, it took a wheelbarrel full of high denomination notes just to buy a loaf of bread, if you could get it. This situation provided the fuel to push your namesake into power.
And then you said " If what you say is true and suddenly we all lose our jobs, the cost of living will go down as well and things will balance out."
Ok, it was you who was born yesterday, not us. Cost of living and jobs ok ok. Look, the cost of things don't mean a damned thing if you have no income, but you have obviously mis-schooled in supply and demand economics. If an item has a very low sales rate (because few people can afford it) the price does not go down, the price goes up to match (a) your cost of production and (b) to provide enough revenue to make it worth producing at all.
Minimum quality levels do not apply universally and you will never be able to sell anything for less than the cost of production to people who cannot carry the real price for long.
A coffee maker does not equate to a Jaguar anywhere at any time.
Your perception of 'wealth' and 'means' indicates an immaturatiy of knowledge and experiance.
Tarrifs have been used historically to prevent irresponsible behaviour that results in a race to the bottom, and tarrifs are the only way to control the current race. Corperations and consumers are caught in a trap that they cannot be freed from without intervention. Lowered consumer spending power drives them to the lowest cost option, the lowest cost option becomes the driving factor for business and business does what it has to to meet that demand, driving jobs to the lowest cost provider and further decreasing the purchasing power of the consumer by the elimination of jobs.
The business has no choice because if they leave production and jobs in the higher cost domain of the primary consumer, they will see the competition beat them in cost and take the primary consumer.
1. "The Internet is powered by open source."
2. "The Internet is the carrier for open source."
3. "The Internet is also the platform through which open source is developed."
4. "It's simply going to be more secure than proprietary software."
5. "Open source benefits from anti-American sentiments."
6. "Incentives around open source include the respect of one's peers."
7. "Open source means standing on the shoulders of giants."
8. "Servers have always been expensive and proprietary, but Linux runs on Intel."
9. "Embedded devices are making greater use of open source."
10. "There are an increasing number of companies developing software that aren't software companies."
11. "Companies are increasingly supporting Linux."
12. "It's free."
What Marc left out is ---
13. "I'm using it to offshore firstworld jobs to the third world, and I'm damned proud of it" Mar. 22, 2004 Toronto Star Article
Andreessen is not a friend to techies, He's our Benedict Arnold
normal_guy (676813)" No, that's why I asked a question. I thought that perhaps the Audrey hardware runs some kind of software."
;)
That's where you made your mistake, software runs the Audrey, not the other way around.
Anita Coney -" Your ignorant opinions simply do not matter."
And your 'informed' opinion matters?
BS. Mz. Coney, I have some important news for you, Everyone's opinion matters, and the ability of the police to investigate is limited by law to ensure and protect the innocent as well as the guilty to prevent abuse.
The road to promotion for an officer is paved with convictions, arrests, and closed cases.
Unfortunately there is no promotion track that puts the primary focus on protecting rights of the accused.
Hence we need laws to prevent abuse.
Mr. Hiibel was arrested for failure to produce ID, watch the video.
They have a right to investigate a complaint yes, but the question about "How'd you get home last night?" makes it quite clear the officer knew who he was.
I am not required by law to have, or produce identification on demand, except in very clear circumstances, standing beside the road talking to your daughter isn't one of them.
A complaint of a passer by is unsubstantiated without investigation yes, but rights don't stop because someone complains.
Appaerently the CEO of NVidia isn't in the loop.
About a year ago Microsoft sucked up Virtual PC [ http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/02/19/ma
Patrons are murdered.
Patrons are repeatedly murdered.
The government short-circuits the free evolution of the system.
How many deaths before the Government (The People) are allowed/required to take an interest?
Most of the failures of a Capitalist driven society when dealing with gangs is when they fail to intervene and quickly.
Gangs understand two things, what they can do an what they can't.
The ID's must be paid for by the person holding the card. - regardless it's mandated for safety and incurs a cost by Govt mandate.
The Approved container must be purchased, hence cost - again Govt mandate the fact that you witness lawbreakers doing otherwise changes nothing.
Photocopying the ID and maintaining it on file requiring filing, storage and space, far more than
'This is called capitalism, survival of the fittest', no that's called the law of the jungle, unbridled capitalism is the worst monster mankind could create.
Video records are almost never (really check) admitted as evidence in a trial, it is usually used pretrial the accused party, if guilty often fesses up and accepts responsibility for thier actions.
The video is also used to corroborate the statements of witnesses and reconstruct events, it isn't evidence but investigative, useful in investigation.
I know you don't defend gang members, but the cybercafe owners in Garden Grove are the real criminals here, they failed to maintian a reasonably safe environment, after all in the north eastern U.S. businesses are REQUIRED at thier own expense to keep the sidewalk in front of the establishment clear of ice, AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE by Govt mandate.
Mandating Video is extreme yes, but not unreasonable based on the history of injury to the public and is no presumption of guilt, but instead a record of events.
Required recording of faces, license plates, and ID's at a bar?
What is the history of the bar?
Look, nobody has a RIGHT to operate a business harmful to the public.
You can argue that this isn't the fault of the business, but the fault of the patrons, the sum is the same... harm to the public.
If businesses refuse to operate in a proper manner, the the people of the community (AKA the government) must take action, if the situation persists the there must be preventative action.
The river floods the town takes easement on the farm bordering the river and builds a burm.
The farm loses income from lost growing area.
Why can't we see the larger issue?
The overall failure of society.
The problem you postulate is that the tapes are prosecuter, jurer, and judge.
That situation is not here (yet), and we must guard against it.
The danger is not the camera, or the tape, but what can be done with it by those with no regard to the rights of the recorded.
The owner keeps and maintains the tapes and records, the 72hr period indicates that these records will be drawn apon in the likely event that history repeats itself and can be used to remove an asocial person or persons from contact with civilized society, survival of the fit, not the fittest.
Capitalism is an economic system, not a social system.
America had better learn the difference before it is too late.
If an employer has RIGHT to video tape and employee, and a business has a RIGHT to tape customers, the RIGHT of the Govt. to tape everything else is hard to refuse.
Oh, if you were only correct, the whole world could go to be and sleep sound in the knowledge that business owners would do the right thing without mandate by government.
Establishments who sell alcoholic beverages are REQUIRED to check ID for age.
It is unlawful to dispense gasoline into unapproved containers.
It is unlawful to enter into a contract with a minor without the permission of a guardian.
All issues of public safety that do place a financial cost on someone other than government to address a known hazard.
The cybercafe owners had a chance to handle the situation, they failed, the public welfare was repeatedly harmed, and government took action in a manner (to thier credit) that allowed the business venue to stay in business, and allowed access to a private/public resource (aka business) that does have a recognisable asset of public value.
This was not a private club, or private residence, it is a venue, the same as a gas station, liquor store, news stand or day care center.
The government has an obligation to force the proprietor to operate in a manner consistent with public interest.
Within the juristiction of the local government.
There are towns where the 'girlie clubs' are required to cover nipples with pasties, or the girls have to wear panyhose.
This is an issue of local public safety, I don't like it, but it isn't like the environment has been safe.
As an operator I'd either comply, put an age/time limit on, or move outside the city limits and let my customers kill each other, myself, or folks just walking by.
I fail to see how a cybercafe deserves any more protection for privacy of partons than a convenience store.
For the protection of the patrons, and the owners almost all entertainment, and retail establishments have video recorders these days.
Look, if they're going to video monitor you going down the interstate, I see no reason that you should be exempt on the Information SuperHighway.
My pet rock just got a broad patent covering out of work IT people starting software ventures.
/.
#
Spirit is running VXWorks realtime embeded OS.
So I guess all the 'Press any key', and 'New device detected...' jokes are all wet.
http://www.windriver.com/
http://www.windriver.com/news/press/20040105.html
I'm not familiar with VXWorks, but it's supposed to be POSIX compliant.
Hitatchi SuperH is one of the many supported processors. (Dreamcast?)
I suspect hardware, the environment is 'dry sticky powder', it's gotta get into everything and gum it up. If spirit was immobile for a time waiting for communications during the storms in Australia then that gunk could have had a chance to settle into some pretty tender places.
PC-DOS, then MS-DOS and Microsoft Windows first moved into the corperate environment and from that position into the homes.
Adoption at home came from work to allow the user a chance to do work at home and maybe get an edge on the co-worker who was running a 'home computer' rather than a PC.
Red Hat is only marginally wrong in saying Linux isn't ready for the home, but the problem really isn't in Linux, it's in the workplace.
Once the workplace reaches critical adoption the migration to home will be a natural move and Linux will be the primary target for Virus writers, not WinBlows.
They only have a case to use the trademark for thier project, nothing else.
The same as Software Etc. and Software Etcetera in the Philly area back in the late Eighties.
My point was the project (neither) can claim exclusive use.
The University project is requesting
'At this date, Red Hat has refused our request to withdraw its trademark applications and reverse its claims of usage restrictions on the name.'.
The request is assinine, if it were as important as they make out then they have no excuse for not having registered it themselves.
exclusive control
I guess you didn't read the line fully.
They can continue to use it due to prior use, but they cannot claim control.
Ever hear of Snyder's of Hanover?
The reason for the 'of Hanover' is that another company trademarked Snyder's and also sold potato chips.
There is no common law trademark, there is only common use sales mark lowercase sm.
A search at the US patent and trademark office lists 4 registered trademarks with the word fedora in them.
. 73467748 Feb 28 1984 Fedora Cafe and Bar
. 78296509 Sept 5 2003 Red Hat
. 78268874 June 30 2003 cosmetics
. 78312293 Oct 10 2003 Chemical Data Software
The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.
It is not exclusively trademarked for software by fedora.info.
This could be forgiven of a small independent group, but this group is a co sponsored project, part of Cornell University and University of Virginia both of which I am sure have strict policies about things like Trademark, copyright and patents. And both have the legal staff to handle it.
Sorry but they won't get any sympathy from me, and no support from the law.
Trademark is not like copyright law, you must register to get exclusive control for a product in a market.