Why does software not being a physical object make it less suitable to be patented? Patents are there so that if you invent something, someone else can't copy it and mass produce it cheaper than you can, without having paid anything for the development. If I invent a new software algorithm, and it is not patented, then someone can copy it (not a copy of the code, but of the process) into their own software, which they have far greater resources to distribute and undercut on price. Why should I spend time inventing new algorithms, then?
Re:public opinion is more important
on
Brave New Ballot
·
· Score: 1
I know there is no negative IQ. I was trying to give an example of something making the average != the median.
But if you're talking about a large test group, like the whole world, then a smaller section of it, like the U.S., could have different averages than the entire thing.
Oh yeah? I have a WQUXGA screen. I can run 20x1080P videos at native resolution.
Re:public opinion is more important
on
Brave New Ballot
·
· Score: 1
Back that up. By definition, half has an IQ below median, but if we had one guy with a very low negative IQ (e.g. -100000000000000000000), 90% of us could be above average.
You seem to be combining WYSIWYG and word processors. I think the concept of word processors is broken. If you just want to get words down, use a plain text editor or a specialized novel writing application. If you want to make something presentable, use a page layout application.
But what is wrong with WYSIWYG for page layout? It allows immediate results and easy editing. Even with the best editor set up, you still have to glance up from your HTML/TeX code to see what the document looks like. With WYSIWYG, you are directly editing it. Using something like HTML requires that you read through the code to figure things out instead of just looking at it. I find it hard to connect formatting code with an actual document.
Why should gas guzzlers be taxed? They aren't taking a public resource. They pay for each drop of gas they use, much of it tax. If you want to tax them for polluting the air, you have to tax everyone. And it would have nothing to do with fuel economy. Fairly, it would be based upon total gas usage, and emissions.
I like how you try to blame the rich. Unfortunately for your argument, most of the gas guzzling SUVs are owned by the middle class.
$60,000 luxury cars probably get above average fuel economy, overall.
Car companies don't produce all that many emissions. Car drivers, on the other hand, do. And so do people who use fossil-fuel provided electricity. Or who buy anything made with such electricity or shipped in a vehicle powered by fossil fuels. And I'm sure the California state government causes emissions. They need to sue everyone, including themselves.
Comparing a $600 Dell laptop to a MacBook isn't fair to either of them, even though they are both their manufacturer's cheapest laptop. The Dell will certainly be less powerful, and the MacBook more expensive. A comparison between a similar MacBook and Dell has them around the same price. The Apple has a larger screen and a few more features, and the Dell has a Core 2 Duo rather than a Core Duo.
What I am saying is that Dell sells lower end computers than Apple. The cheapest Dell can't be fairly compared to the cheapest Apple because they are not at the same level of performance.
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. - Robert Heinlein
I don't think it's all Microsoft's fault, but PCs do need to much legacy nonsense. I mainly use Macs. I am building my own computer to run a MythTV server, and I find having half of my ports completely useless quite irritating. There is also the need for floppies to do some things. Parallel, serial, and COM ports need to go. Floppies need to go. PATA HDs need to go. Why can't hardware manufacturers be brave, and get rid of that junk?
But that's just the thing. You can review the code for the project, but not the code running on a machine. And it is hard to hold anyone responsible if those aren't the same, which isn't true of a company like Diebold. Perhaps hardware DRM could help restrict it to a specific build that is overseen to prevent corruption, but that isn't fool proof, and GPL v3 wouldn't like it.
Open source does present some problems in this area. Diebold can be held responsible (although it apparently isn't) for the software it sells. A build of proprietary software can be checked out. It is hard to hold 1000 tech guys responsible for not changing any code before they./configure, make, make install-ed . I fully support open source for this, but it presents some issues.
Even with batteries, the overall speed for this ship isn't better than a far cheaper sailboat. The ocean is generally windy, but it is only sunny during the day, and batteries are extremely inefficient and heavy.
If you drive in a 20 mpg car, 10,000 miles per year, with $3 gas prices, you pay $1500 dollars per year for gas. Thats a rather inefficient car with less efficient, expensive fuel, greater speed, and no sail.
This boat is useless, but imagine covering a giant non-nuclear gas powered ship with solar panels.
Are you honestly implying that solar panels are worse for the environment than nuclear power plants? Are you willing to keep nuclear waste in you garage for thousands of years?
Not really./. politically caters to an audience of demagogues, mostly leftist, but others extreme libertarians. They can't disagree with the president and still have him be a decent person and a fairly elected president. It's very similar to talk radio where "liberals hate America".
You'll also notice that many/.ers who support OSS have decided that proprietary software is evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does software not being a physical object make it less suitable to be patented? Patents are there so that if you invent something, someone else can't copy it and mass produce it cheaper than you can, without having paid anything for the development. If I invent a new software algorithm, and it is not patented, then someone can copy it (not a copy of the code, but of the process) into their own software, which they have far greater resources to distribute and undercut on price. Why should I spend time inventing new algorithms, then?
I know there is no negative IQ. I was trying to give an example of something making the average != the median.
But if you're talking about a large test group, like the whole world, then a smaller section of it, like the U.S., could have different averages than the entire thing.
Oh yeah? I have a WQUXGA screen. I can run 20x1080P videos at native resolution.
Back that up. By definition, half has an IQ below median, but if we had one guy with a very low negative IQ (e.g. -100000000000000000000), 90% of us could be above average.
You seem to be combining WYSIWYG and word processors. I think the concept of word processors is broken. If you just want to get words down, use a plain text editor or a specialized novel writing application. If you want to make something presentable, use a page layout application.
But what is wrong with WYSIWYG for page layout? It allows immediate results and easy editing. Even with the best editor set up, you still have to glance up from your HTML/TeX code to see what the document looks like. With WYSIWYG, you are directly editing it. Using something like HTML requires that you read through the code to figure things out instead of just looking at it. I find it hard to connect formatting code with an actual document.
Why should gas guzzlers be taxed? They aren't taking a public resource. They pay for each drop of gas they use, much of it tax. If you want to tax them for polluting the air, you have to tax everyone. And it would have nothing to do with fuel economy. Fairly, it would be based upon total gas usage, and emissions.
I like how you try to blame the rich. Unfortunately for your argument, most of the gas guzzling SUVs are owned by the middle class.
$60,000 luxury cars probably get above average fuel economy, overall.
Car companies don't produce all that many emissions. Car drivers, on the other hand, do. And so do people who use fossil-fuel provided electricity. Or who buy anything made with such electricity or shipped in a vehicle powered by fossil fuels. And I'm sure the California state government causes emissions. They need to sue everyone, including themselves.
Comparing a $600 Dell laptop to a MacBook isn't fair to either of them, even though they are both their manufacturer's cheapest laptop. The Dell will certainly be less powerful, and the MacBook more expensive. A comparison between a similar MacBook and Dell has them around the same price. The Apple has a larger screen and a few more features, and the Dell has a Core 2 Duo rather than a Core Duo.
What I am saying is that Dell sells lower end computers than Apple. The cheapest Dell can't be fairly compared to the cheapest Apple because they are not at the same level of performance.
Dell's computers aren't cheaper than Apples for the same thing, but Dell sells cheaper computers. They just aren't comparable to any of Apple's.
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. - Robert Heinlein
I don't think it's all Microsoft's fault, but PCs do need to much legacy nonsense. I mainly use Macs. I am building my own computer to run a MythTV server, and I find having half of my ports completely useless quite irritating. There is also the need for floppies to do some things. Parallel, serial, and COM ports need to go. Floppies need to go. PATA HDs need to go. Why can't hardware manufacturers be brave, and get rid of that junk?
There are many more wavelengths of laser light than those colors you mentioned.
But that's just the thing. You can review the code for the project, but not the code running on a machine. And it is hard to hold anyone responsible if those aren't the same, which isn't true of a company like Diebold. Perhaps hardware DRM could help restrict it to a specific build that is overseen to prevent corruption, but that isn't fool proof, and GPL v3 wouldn't like it.
Open source does present some problems in this area. Diebold can be held responsible (although it apparently isn't) for the software it sells. A build of proprietary software can be checked out. It is hard to hold 1000 tech guys responsible for not changing any code before they ./configure, make, make install-ed . I fully support open source for this, but it presents some issues.
The question is always #2. The "incorrect" answer is #1.
It has no hard drive. Read the article.
Even with batteries, the overall speed for this ship isn't better than a far cheaper sailboat. The ocean is generally windy, but it is only sunny during the day, and batteries are extremely inefficient and heavy.
If you drive in a 20 mpg car, 10,000 miles per year, with $3 gas prices, you pay $1500 dollars per year for gas. Thats a rather inefficient car with less efficient, expensive fuel, greater speed, and no sail. This boat is useless, but imagine covering a giant non-nuclear gas powered ship with solar panels.
Are you honestly implying that solar panels are worse for the environment than nuclear power plants? Are you willing to keep nuclear waste in you garage for thousands of years?
Why does that matter? Sailboats can go in any direction other than straight into the wind. They aren't pushed forward by it.
Not really. /. politically caters to an audience of demagogues, mostly leftist, but others extreme libertarians. They can't disagree with the president and still have him be a decent person and a fairly elected president. It's very similar to talk radio where "liberals hate America".
/.ers who support OSS have decided that proprietary software is evil.
You'll also notice that many
There was a
That first post was redundant. It has been posted hundreds of times on /. . Of course, it is usually not true, just like the "ironic captcha" post.
n00b. Every web technology which allows interactive web pages is AJAX. And Web 2.0 .