"will see their app idea realized as a Mac shareware application and earn royalties on sales."
I didn't even have to RTFA to spot that.
They're getting more than a free T-Shirt, they're getting published. This is basically just making executive decisions through publicized contests instead of closed-door boardroom sessions.
You say you dislike the parent's characterization of atomic bombs, but then you go on to paint this flowery picture about how much better it is than another practice we fought to abolish. These days we act like there is nothing imaginable that is worse than targeting and killing several thousand civilians just to get to the government, but yet we're supposed to brush off targeting hundreds of thousands for that same purpose? I am in support of both stem-cell research and the use of nuclear warfare to end supermassive wars quickly. Sometimes if it's a choice between one life that's already gone and an limitless number that can still be saved, I just think you have to consider that the majority has feelings too.
Yeah, we could have done a lot worse if we just set up our own Nazi-style concentration camps and just reduced their population down to zero. There were also very few other ways to get the desired terms out of the Japanese governt, but that doesn't mean that destroying cities to force an unconditional surrender can ever be anything like a humanitarian mission, no matter what it is compared to.
Freely released program != product
It's proven possible to make open source and commercial software coexist, but you can't have unlimited free labor AND exploit the finished program for full profit. There is kind of a balance between open and proprietary software; proprietary programs are intelectual property that exist to be exploited by their owners, while something completely open has no true owner.
Things like Red Hat Enterprise Linux take advantage of the open nature of Linux, but that same thing prevents them from having total control. If you want software as a commercially exploitable product that belongs to you, closed-source is the way to go.
Let the prices change. If someone wants to price their music competitively, let them price their music cheaper.
If someone thinks that the latest Britney Spears/Eminem/Metallica album is worth more for a digital file than a CD, then let them get ripped off to their heart's content.
Apple often seems to be on the side of the RIAA over our side, but that's because our side is OUR side and that makes any compromise be less than what we want. I really would welcome price changes in both directions; independant artists being more competitive, and big fat companies ripping off diehard fans more than usual. Go Apple.
In other media such as television and radio, it takes a great deal of resouces to be able to broadcast your information outward.
Anyone can connect to the internet, and unless ISPs suddenly find the motivation and the money to start taking fine tuned control over what every user does, anyone can host their own information and data.
From TFA (and other materials on the subject)
on
HAARP Amping It Up
·
· Score: 5, Informative
HAARP is a United States defense project, one of the many defense measures against nuclear warfare.
For more information, see this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAARP (Wikipedia.org)
Would be amusing to see what one good hacker or software glitch could do with a room like that. As if being able to scan people's important info out of a key card wasn't enough.
Do not underestimate the power of old people in large numbers legislating against the internet. Their grandparents did it for TV, and their great grandparents did it for Radio.
When you buy clothes from a department store, the tag is removed and you are free to wear alter, and lend out the clothing however you see fit.
When you buy media with DRM, you take the tag home with you so it can tell you how to use the product you bought and try to get you in jail for shutting it up.
I know that this is said in just about every topic in Slashdot, but this is really a non-issue. There is no major difference between Peach Fuzz and most of the American newspaper comics other than age.
Adobe is not the same as what Business Objects is going for. If that were the case, it wouldn't take so long to open a PDF.
This is just another instance of the business world slowly catching up with the trends and executives finally realizing that allowing people to read source code isn't going to bankrupt their companies.
Re:Has this already been obsoleted by cellphones?
on
Preview Of The $100 Laptop
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Cellular phones require a lot of expensive infrastructure and service. A fully self-contained computer would be a lot more suitable for bringing technology into the developing world; think of it like the difference between giving someone one free month of subscription-based software and giving them a working copy on CD that they can use as long as they want.
$60,000 over the course of one year.
As annoying as spam is, it really does not pay well unless done in large amounts. The big catch here was that very little was invested into making that money because other people's computers were doing all of the grunt work.
You think this is bad, just wait until someone patents "hero fights villian." That's pretty much on par with some of the things other kinds of pattents are issued for.
Quick, someone write a story of a man who makes his entire living suing people and patent it.
Slashdot Mirror
...he'd be beating the crap out of anyone responsible for this proposal.
"will see their app idea realized as a Mac shareware application and earn royalties on sales."
I didn't even have to RTFA to spot that.
They're getting more than a free T-Shirt, they're getting published. This is basically just making executive decisions through publicized contests instead of closed-door boardroom sessions.
Yes, if only Google had some sort of project devoted to open-source development.
And I'd just like to say, thank you. Sorry, wasted all of my mod points on tiered internet. Can someone else five this guy?
You say you dislike the parent's characterization of atomic bombs, but then you go on to paint this flowery picture about how much better it is than another practice we fought to abolish. These days we act like there is nothing imaginable that is worse than targeting and killing several thousand civilians just to get to the government, but yet we're supposed to brush off targeting hundreds of thousands for that same purpose? I am in support of both stem-cell research and the use of nuclear warfare to end supermassive wars quickly. Sometimes if it's a choice between one life that's already gone and an limitless number that can still be saved, I just think you have to consider that the majority has feelings too.
Yeah, we could have done a lot worse if we just set up our own Nazi-style concentration camps and just reduced their population down to zero. There were also very few other ways to get the desired terms out of the Japanese governt, but that doesn't mean that destroying cities to force an unconditional surrender can ever be anything like a humanitarian mission, no matter what it is compared to.
Demonstrate bittorrent without infringing on copyrights, and show people FOSS at the same time. Not really much more needs to be said.
Makes me wonder if he had any role in this. Go geeks!
But it's still funny to me. Goes to show what these multi-million-dollar investments in anti-piracy and all of the legislation accomplishes. Go tape!
Freely released program != product It's proven possible to make open source and commercial software coexist, but you can't have unlimited free labor AND exploit the finished program for full profit. There is kind of a balance between open and proprietary software; proprietary programs are intelectual property that exist to be exploited by their owners, while something completely open has no true owner. Things like Red Hat Enterprise Linux take advantage of the open nature of Linux, but that same thing prevents them from having total control. If you want software as a commercially exploitable product that belongs to you, closed-source is the way to go.
I thought Lisa would have been the tech buff.
This is great to hear. They don't even go around suing preteens and single parents. I wish everyone was this nice.
Let the prices change. If someone wants to price their music competitively, let them price their music cheaper. If someone thinks that the latest Britney Spears/Eminem/Metallica album is worth more for a digital file than a CD, then let them get ripped off to their heart's content.
Apple often seems to be on the side of the RIAA over our side, but that's because our side is OUR side and that makes any compromise be less than what we want. I really would welcome price changes in both directions; independant artists being more competitive, and big fat companies ripping off diehard fans more than usual. Go Apple.
In other media such as television and radio, it takes a great deal of resouces to be able to broadcast your information outward. Anyone can connect to the internet, and unless ISPs suddenly find the motivation and the money to start taking fine tuned control over what every user does, anyone can host their own information and data.
HAARP is a United States defense project, one of the many defense measures against nuclear warfare. For more information, see this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAARP (Wikipedia.org)
Would be amusing to see what one good hacker or software glitch could do with a room like that. As if being able to scan people's important info out of a key card wasn't enough.
Or, speak loud verbose nonsense and wave a bigger stick around. Who ever said that everyone would be perfect?
Do not underestimate the power of old people in large numbers legislating against the internet. Their grandparents did it for TV, and their great grandparents did it for Radio.
When you buy clothes from a department store, the tag is removed and you are free to wear alter, and lend out the clothing however you see fit.
When you buy media with DRM, you take the tag home with you so it can tell you how to use the product you bought and try to get you in jail for shutting it up.
Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that it's done by MIT and not Lucas?
I know that this is said in just about every topic in Slashdot, but this is really a non-issue. There is no major difference between Peach Fuzz and most of the American newspaper comics other than age.
Adobe is not the same as what Business Objects is going for. If that were the case, it wouldn't take so long to open a PDF.
This is just another instance of the business world slowly catching up with the trends and executives finally realizing that allowing people to read source code isn't going to bankrupt their companies.
Cellular phones require a lot of expensive infrastructure and service. A fully self-contained computer would be a lot more suitable for bringing technology into the developing world; think of it like the difference between giving someone one free month of subscription-based software and giving them a working copy on CD that they can use as long as they want.
$60,000 over the course of one year. As annoying as spam is, it really does not pay well unless done in large amounts. The big catch here was that very little was invested into making that money because other people's computers were doing all of the grunt work.
Someone give those guys a free iPod.
You think this is bad, just wait until someone patents "hero fights villian." That's pretty much on par with some of the things other kinds of pattents are issued for.
Quick, someone write a story of a man who makes his entire living suing people and patent it.