"Right now the reality is there are only a few thousand professional developers in China. The lack, especially senior level developers, has become another important bottleneck."
1. Those that are to become developers tend to think. Those that think sometimes find it hard to keep to themselves. In China those that think and express their feelings tend to end up in jail.
3. Game developers need access to technology and (less importantly) gaming sites... not only to get knowledge, but primarily to "develop themselves in the right direction". People involved in gaming or coding tend to be beeg fans of the ideas of Freedom/Anarchy. Sites with such content tend to be banned in China.
I don't feel very confident about my English, so in case you didn't get my point: "to me time needed to find an vulnerability is just a tiny % of the total time needed to patch most people's OS (most people don't update, M$ doesn't issue patches very quickly, etc.)"
Pre-Monkey Era:
-- someone exploits a vulnerability
-- 2 weeks later someone discovers it
-- half a year later M$ patches it
-- three years later new version of Windows is released and finally the last 80% of users have patched systems.
it took 3 years, 6 months and 2 weeks to patch most computers. Post-Monkey Era:
-- someone exploits a vulnerability
-- 2 days later monkeys report it
-- half a year later M$ patches it
-- three years later new version of Windows is released and finally the last 80% of users have patched systems.
it took 3 years 6 months and 2 days to patch most computers.
Looking at it from a strictly business-wise point of view it's surprising for me to see how Fuat Kirccali acts.
It's quite clear (although it's only a hypothesis) for me that being a linux user must be somehow co-related with moral sensitivity. Ideas surrounding Open Source are filled with ethical meanings and most of linux users swim in open source world on a daily basis.
Why would a businessman who relies heavily on morally sensitive customers (yes, visitors, not advertisers, are his customers ("bring visitors and advertisers will come") supports immoral acts? Especially that this immoral act was indirectly pointed at Open Source world... that's simply stupid for me. He can't simply do what Gates does (he can repeat "IE is better" over and over and most people will believe), cuz he talks to smarter people.
Ain't it what actually happened? Thousands of people are pissed at Sys-Con...
On the other hand, I'm affraid that show-biznes' rule "there's no such thing as bad press" might work here as well - after all they got a lot of attention.
Do radio stations pay to play music? I'm thinking not.
Actually yes, they do. At least in Poland. We have one big organization (ZAiKS) representing authors and music companies (I'm sorry, I forgot a proper English term... those companies that finance recordings and then market and sell CDs) plus several smaller ones that represent authors that don't like ZAiKS' monopoly.
Radio stations pay. TV stations pay. Restaurants, pubs, etc. pay for having a tv, radio, cd player or anything else that's capable of playing music. Separately for each piece (which is kinda stupid - you can't play regular radio and music from CD at the same time, right?).
My father owns several jukeboxes that are placed in pubs here. He has to pay them, too.
But the funniest part is here: I have few friend who organize a lot of concerts. Very niche bands - not many people, inexpensive tickets and usually very cool music. Every time they do something, ZAiKS agent shows up demanding money. Artists get money for tickets and they have to pay ZAiKS to get some of it back (such monsters eat a lot).
As you can see, at least here you have to pay for playing any kind of music, whatever media you use.
In such case, I don't see a reason why it should be different for i-stations.
I also don't want to spend $50 or $100 or whatever to buy the seasons on DVD (long after they already aired and too late to keep up with the new episodes anyway). Especially when I already pay for HBO to start with!
You weren't HBO subsriber when those first 4 seasons were on the air, right? You're not entitled to view everything that was shown on HBO in the past 20 years just because you paid for this month.
Not that I'm against stealing intellectual property, I do that all the time:).
I wonder when they'll become greedy enough to chase people in poor countries (over here, in Poland, almost 100% of private computers have pirated soft installed... exclclusively - only legal software is freeware/OS). Just like those #$%@&$! drug companies sued African governments for purchasing generic anti-AIDS drugs (I might not be bringing this up 100% accurately, sorry if it's not precisely what happened).
Slashdot Mirror
1. Those...
...
3. Game...
who said I can count to 3?
1. Those that are to become developers tend to think. Those that think sometimes find it hard to keep to themselves. In China those that think and express their feelings tend to end up in jail.
3. Game developers need access to technology and (less importantly) gaming sites... not only to get knowledge, but primarily to "develop themselves in the right direction". People involved in gaming or coding tend to be beeg fans of the ideas of Freedom/Anarchy. Sites with such content tend to be banned in China.
sorry in advance for writing this...
I don't feel very confident about my English, so in case you didn't get my point: "to me time needed to find an vulnerability is just a tiny % of the total time needed to patch most people's OS (most people don't update, M$ doesn't issue patches very quickly, etc.)"
Pre-Monkey Era:
-- someone exploits a vulnerability
-- 2 weeks later someone discovers it
-- half a year later M$ patches it
-- three years later new version of Windows is released and finally the last 80% of users have patched systems.
it took 3 years, 6 months and 2 weeks to patch most computers.
Post-Monkey Era:
-- someone exploits a vulnerability
-- 2 days later monkeys report it
-- half a year later M$ patches it
-- three years later new version of Windows is released and finally the last 80% of users have patched systems.
it took 3 years 6 months and 2 days to patch most computers.
nice PR move though.
from toolbar.google.com. There's no point to waste a ff visit to direct them to a page that has no use for them.
Looking at it from a strictly business-wise point of view it's surprising for me to see how Fuat Kirccali acts.
It's quite clear (although it's only a hypothesis) for me that being a linux user must be somehow co-related with moral sensitivity. Ideas surrounding Open Source are filled with ethical meanings and most of linux users swim in open source world on a daily basis.
Why would a businessman who relies heavily on morally sensitive customers (yes, visitors, not advertisers, are his customers ("bring visitors and advertisers will come") supports immoral acts? Especially that this immoral act was indirectly pointed at Open Source world... that's simply stupid for me. He can't simply do what Gates does (he can repeat "IE is better" over and over and most people will believe), cuz he talks to smarter people.
Ain't it what actually happened? Thousands of people are pissed at Sys-Con...
On the other hand, I'm affraid that show-biznes' rule "there's no such thing as bad press" might work here as well - after all they got a lot of attention.