I just got hired and I only had the chance to work with marketing ThinLinc for 16 days before Oracle threw in the towel, obviously because they are scared of me...
Now the Oracle customers themselves are taking my job and are flooding the Oracle mailing lists discussing alternatives to Sun Ray, for example ThinLinc, and we're already getting tons of request from Oracle customers who want to migrate to ThinLinc.
Don't have data that needs contant backup and protection on the laptop, but edit the files on your home/office computer via ssh or even better a remote Linux desktop server which is quite handy and it works fine if you're just writing text remotely and have 2Mbit Internet speed. ThinLinc and No Machine for example; they aren't open source, but free for small users.
Yes, really. Google and other advertising agencies only consider profit for themselves and for the site. Nowhere is the input of what the viewers think of the ad (except if they click on the ad, which means "I like to see this ad" even though it likely doesn't). I'm know that it's hard to get it to work, but if it works, buttons like "This ad is irrelevant" and "I clicked this ad and I totally regret it" are needed. Then people will get ads that they actually are interested in.
But of course: Too many ads will still make people avoid them.
I would actually think that they caved in for psychological reasons. The mafia sent some very angry frightening people to them, and they felt that the only way to stop this terror is to pay up. The university staff was probably just trying to do the very right thing, and then the terror convinced them that strangling free flow of information and start sponsoring more terrorism was the only thing that is surely legal.
The smallest coin in Sweden is a krona, which is about 15 cents. That works just fine. We actually only have 3 types of coins: 1, 5 and 10. Very nice. You can actually pay with coins without really looking at them, even if you have no training for it.
Sorry, but that doesn't mean a shit. The Obama Administration was also "against" infinite detention of people without any kind of trial, of course Obama didn't veto it.
The Obama Administration is just a bunch of bribed lying son-of-a-bitches like everyone else (except the mad ones) in DC, but people just eat their shit and keep quiet. I mean, what could anyone on the left do? Vote for Ron Paul, haha... ha... ha...
>"Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds."
Bullshit! Some robot will notice that your notice that your stuff looks "copied" and you'll be gone. And if they can shove SOPA down your throat, you can be sure that you'll soon have to have a permit to have a website. And your thoughts are build on other thoughts, by the way, so they are just blatant copy-monopoly infringement.
This is NOT fear-mongering. It's already happening! Youtube is deleting stuff that "seems" bad (like critique of SOPA) because of misuse by the entertainment mafia. Google's AdSense is removing from sites that MIGHT have copied stuff on them. With SOPA the mafia can also shut people up or at least make Internet at lot less useful.
The entire idea behind the law is to protect media, corporations and the corrupt government from their subjects. Media companies simply mostly ignore each others infringements, and focus their censorship on the ones trying to take their monopolies down. No media organization can sue another one because then they will be sued back. But taking the basic rights from new voices that aren't in the ruling class is very easy, which is the entire point.
And while this is happening, media will be blowing up a big "fight" between Mitt and Obama, as if either of them would stop the rape on your (and the rest of the world's) basic human rights.
I don't think that an industry that have bought your politicians and are trying to shut down Internet as we know it should be considered a joke. It's a terrorist organization, and a far deadlier one than any Al Qaeda. With the copyright and patent monopolies the very few are stealing the opportunities from the poor, and the suffering this is causing is immense. Due to these monopolies, you have to be something like Google to create this very simple service that actually most programmers easily could have mad if they were allowed.
It's definitely time for an Occupy IP-monopolies movement!
So Google becomes a content seller and part of the RIAA and MPAA kind of mafia industry too? We already know that a big part the money we buy music/movies for is used to buy politicians to impose ever more draconian laws that restricts common people's rights and steal our money and freedom.
It's quite possible to have fun without buying content! Kill the information monopoly companies (entertainment industry), or you are to blame for the end of freedom!
"If I am correct, what is stopping me from drafting a "take-down" notice stating that I own the trademark for MPAA.org? RIAA.org? whitehouse.gov?"
The fact that MPAA and RIAA own the courts, of course. If you aren't a member of the content-industry's organizations, you'll have no rights. If you are a member, you'll get your own personal APIs that you can abuse with automatic programs and so on.
Also note that all the trading laws or the private stock-markets' rules aimed at "stop speculation", "market distortion" and "inside trading" always end up hitting the little smart traders that are using the big firms' flawed algorithms against them, and almost never hit the stock markets' big customers (big thieves) who are screwing the other investors daily.
So if tobin-taxes are imposed, you can be sure that it will not hit the thieves (because they will go around the tax) and it will give very little income.
So instead of simply paying a fee on everything, and then hand out the money to companies and people who have published very good designs and/or research, you honestly think it's a good idea to go medieval and hand out state enforced monopolies and force people to have armies of lawyers fighting each other in courts for years while the invention is forced off the market?
Not to mention that
patents kill innovation directly. An innovation is a combination of two or more ideas (always). If you combine two patents into something new, the both patent owners will say that their patent counts for 65% of the value of the product, and thus the product is effectively banned from market. Because people want to have laws that forbid new inventions to be used.
No, that isn't a correct analysis. I've studied this for years, as I develop and run (more narrow) social network sites for a living.
What is happening in both Brazil and Russia is that people in the big towns and people who have international connections tend to use Facebook. You can't keep contact with your friends in Europe with Orkut or Vkontakte, and after a while, Facebook wins because it's a better system and because people don't want to use two systems (people do use two systems for a while, but then Facebook wins). There are many many more examples, you can take a look at the pretty old, but still valid State of Facebook Competition that I wrote last year.
In USA there was a social difference between MySpace and Facebook, where the students used Facebook and annoying kids used MySpace. Eventually Facebook won because it was less annoying to browse around. Now it's the nerds that are using Google+, but they kind of fail to attract more people. If you want to read something from a nerd, just read his (or maybe "her") blog, Twitter, FB and so on... No need to register for Google+ for that.
Here in Sweden Facebook has had a little of backlash among kids, because they don't want to be on the same site as their parents and teachers. But I think it's something they have learnt to handle now.
"Actually the "compelling function" is that the crowd is there."
Yes? You don't expect the ones with thousands of photos and stuff on Facebook to suddenly just start using Google+ instead, do you? And Google+ doesn't offer anything that I can't get on FB. If someone has something important to say, they do it on FB (or a site related to the subject).
I think that Google+ has messed up the marketing here. I got tired of Google+ after a few days, and I feel really uncomfortable with giving even more power to Google.
An artist's job is to do propaganda. That the best of the artists have little problem to convince people to give them benefits that they don't deserve, don't need and are harmful to society is just as sad as it's predictable.
I see little hope to change this sad fact until the ones who stand up to the entertainment industry can get an equal amount of money to spend on propaganda and people who are good at it.
If Springsteen wants money, I suggest that he goes out and play some concerts. I don't see why anyone should get money for stuff they recorded a long time ago. It's OK if someone sells old copies of records or tunes, but there is NO REASON to give them a monopoly.
It would be so much better if the money spent on buying old music, went to something useful, like investments for the future. Ex-musicians and RIAA will just spend the money on bribes and jet set lifestyles. Not something the state should pay for by giving them monopolies.
Slashdot Mirror
My work is to post stuff on Facebook!
I just got hired and I only had the chance to work with marketing ThinLinc for 16 days before Oracle threw in the towel, obviously because they are scared of me... Now the Oracle customers themselves are taking my job and are flooding the Oracle mailing lists discussing alternatives to Sun Ray, for example ThinLinc, and we're already getting tons of request from Oracle customers who want to migrate to ThinLinc.
Don't have data that needs contant backup and protection on the laptop, but edit the files on your home/office computer via ssh or even better a remote Linux desktop server which is quite handy and it works fine if you're just writing text remotely and have 2Mbit Internet speed. ThinLinc and No Machine for example; they aren't open source, but free for small users.
But of course: Too many ads will still make people avoid them.
I would actually think that they caved in for psychological reasons. The mafia sent some very angry frightening people to them, and they felt that the only way to stop this terror is to pay up. The university staff was probably just trying to do the very right thing, and then the terror convinced them that strangling free flow of information and start sponsoring more terrorism was the only thing that is surely legal.
The smallest coin in Sweden is a krona, which is about 15 cents. That works just fine. We actually only have 3 types of coins: 1, 5 and 10. Very nice. You can actually pay with coins without really looking at them, even if you have no training for it.
The entire close-down stinks with corruption and the US corporate dictatorship misusing it's powers much like drone-attacks in foreign countries.
The Obama Administration is just a bunch of bribed lying son-of-a-bitches like everyone else (except the mad ones) in DC, but people just eat their shit and keep quiet. I mean, what could anyone on the left do? Vote for Ron Paul, haha... ha... ha...
Bullshit! Some robot will notice that your notice that your stuff looks "copied" and you'll be gone. And if they can shove SOPA down your throat, you can be sure that you'll soon have to have a permit to have a website. And your thoughts are build on other thoughts, by the way, so they are just blatant copy-monopoly infringement.
This is NOT fear-mongering. It's already happening! Youtube is deleting stuff that "seems" bad (like critique of SOPA) because of misuse by the entertainment mafia. Google's AdSense is removing from sites that MIGHT have copied stuff on them. With SOPA the mafia can also shut people up or at least make Internet at lot less useful.
Isn't finding your vehicle destroyed by an 18th century weapon getting old?
And while this is happening, media will be blowing up a big "fight" between Mitt and Obama, as if either of them would stop the rape on your (and the rest of the world's) basic human rights.
You can also sign a petition.
It's definitely time for an Occupy IP-monopolies movement!
It's quite possible to have fun without buying content! Kill the information monopoly companies (entertainment industry), or you are to blame for the end of freedom!
The fact that MPAA and RIAA own the courts, of course. If you aren't a member of the content-industry's organizations, you'll have no rights. If you are a member, you'll get your own personal APIs that you can abuse with automatic programs and so on.
#insert "bunch of insults"
Also note that all the trading laws or the private stock-markets' rules aimed at "stop speculation", "market distortion" and "inside trading" always end up hitting the little smart traders that are using the big firms' flawed algorithms against them, and almost never hit the stock markets' big customers (big thieves) who are screwing the other investors daily.
So if tobin-taxes are imposed, you can be sure that it will not hit the thieves (because they will go around the tax) and it will give very little income.
Not to mention that
patents kill innovation directly. An innovation is a combination of two or more ideas (always). If you combine two patents into something new, the both patent owners will say that their patent counts for 65% of the value of the product, and thus the product is effectively banned from market. Because people want to have laws that forbid new inventions to be used.
What is happening in both Brazil and Russia is that people in the big towns and people who have international connections tend to use Facebook. You can't keep contact with your friends in Europe with Orkut or Vkontakte, and after a while, Facebook wins because it's a better system and because people don't want to use two systems (people do use two systems for a while, but then Facebook wins). There are many many more examples, you can take a look at the pretty old, but still valid State of Facebook Competition that I wrote last year.
In USA there was a social difference between MySpace and Facebook, where the students used Facebook and annoying kids used MySpace. Eventually Facebook won because it was less annoying to browse around. Now it's the nerds that are using Google+, but they kind of fail to attract more people. If you want to read something from a nerd, just read his (or maybe "her") blog, Twitter, FB and so on... No need to register for Google+ for that.
Here in Sweden Facebook has had a little of backlash among kids, because they don't want to be on the same site as their parents and teachers. But I think it's something they have learnt to handle now.
Yes, that's why no one is using Facebook and everyone is using MySpace.
I have discovered that people think that one of the best features of Elftown is that there are no games...
Yes? You don't expect the ones with thousands of photos and stuff on Facebook to suddenly just start using Google+ instead, do you? And Google+ doesn't offer anything that I can't get on FB. If someone has something important to say, they do it on FB (or a site related to the subject).
I think that Google+ has messed up the marketing here. I got tired of Google+ after a few days, and I feel really uncomfortable with giving even more power to Google.
I see little hope to change this sad fact until the ones who stand up to the entertainment industry can get an equal amount of money to spend on propaganda and people who are good at it.
It would be so much better if the money spent on buying old music, went to something useful, like investments for the future. Ex-musicians and RIAA will just spend the money on bribes and jet set lifestyles. Not something the state should pay for by giving them monopolies.
So how can we make it work again now when all neanderthals are mostly homo (;))?