Cracking DRM, and having to wade through reverse engineered code (when have you seen source code leaked for a major application (Windows source code rumours excepted as I haven't actually seen any of it)) is a hassle, abolishing copyright would be a disaster for the open source community, maybe not from a continuation perspective, but certainly in terms of future expansion.
By leaked, I meant the application leaked to torrent sites already hacked (not leaked). My editing was not so good there.
Corporations would not be able to pull code out of the public domain that had already been released. However, yeah they'd be able to violate the GPL in that they could modify and release their own versions.
To you comment about reverse engineering and whatnot, I think that activity would become a lot more mainstream if disassembly were legal. I mean, you dissassemble Java, C, or C# and you get uncommented assembler, java byte codes,.net IL, etc. Its really not that unreadable; and in the absense of copyright it could be published and the community could comment on it. This would be especially easy if it was mostly GPL code that had been appropriated -- because by and large we'd have the real source for most of it, and identifying the changes, even if they obfuscate and change compiler options wouldn't be that hard.
ESPECIALLY because in a world like that the tools to do it would be far more sophisticated than they are now because the stuff people would be doing with them would be entirely legal - driving demand up. Right now all these tools are a bit of a grey area - we can't publish dissaembled application source anyway so tools to dissaemble, distribute, and collaboratively re-comment would be of limited legal use. Generally in the current world if you have permission to dissaessmble and publish you already have the source anyway.
--
As for the 20 year term; I was thinking broader than just software. 5 or 6 is unreasonably short for a Book or Movie in my opinion.
And even software is a grey area. A six year term would mean office 2000 is public domain. Granted Office XP and Office 2003 have largely taken its place today, and microsoft certainly doesn't sell Office 2000 anymore -- but would they be able to sell Office 2003 if 2000 was public domain? Not to mention Windows 2000 Pro, Windows 2000 Server. SQL Server 2000, etc...
Same goes for software from Oracle, or SAP, or Adobe -- if we had a situation where the versions that were available in 2000 were in the public domain now -- well that would be one hell of a shakeup. And I'm not convicned its justifiable.
They would fail because all the code that is currently GPL would be taken up by companies, modified, improved (or just re-branded) and redistributed, in closed source form.
And all the code that is closed source would be leaked, modified, and redistributed in 'free form', and be nearly impossible to sell because everyone wanted a copy would just make one. DRM and encryption would be toothless deterrents, because it would be hacked put up on a torrent, and there is nothing anyone could do about it.
But, I agree with you. The problem isn't that copyright exists. The problem is that:
1) the length is too long. 20 years is plenty long enough. 2) All proprietary/protected/withheld source code should be placed in trust that it is automatically released when the term expires.
3) Fair use rights need to be properly enumerated and protected instead of being the existing 'well we the rich megacorp can sue you for the smallest perceived breach, and then you have to convince a court it was actually fair use - so even if we lose we still fucked you over!'.
4) And penalties need to be updated to reflect the reality that a mandatory 750$ fine per work violated is absurd when applied to a 10 year old with an 30GB ipod with 10,000 infringing songs. At worst, he should be fined a few thousand, and probably considerably less for a first offense... not the current legal minimum of $750,000. (10,000 songs x $750 per song)
Only that a private plane/yatch is far more expensive
That's a misconception really. You can get a flight worthy aircraft for under 10k. You can get a fairly decent one like a Cessna 120/140 for 15-25k. There are lots of 'bargain planes' out there.
Pretty much anyone that wants one can afford to buy one; the real issue is storage costs, inspections, fuel costs, getting a license to fly it, etc; and above all, its not generally that useful, so its a hobby/sport/recreation activity for most people.
And if your a terrorist looking to move a nuke into the country. seriously, just put it in a cargo container. Less than 5% are currently scanned, and only a fraction are actually opened; so you've got a 95% chance of success.
And hey, even if customs did find it the terrorist could always just detonate it in port.
They had one shot as surging back to prominence, and they nailed it.
Oh I don't know about that. The gamecube was pretty much neck and neck with the xbox one, and because its still being sold while the xbox has been discontinued means that in the final analysis it will have sold more.
It was also profitable, which made the endeavour worthwhile, while xbox lost money hand over fist. I'm sure they were disappointed to be in 3rd, and the lack of 3rd party developers didn't help. But of all the console makers -- they are the only ones that really didn't NEED to be in first.
They were selling at a profit, and have enough first party franchises to successfully carry their own system.
To top it off, the DS was a license to print money, so they had a 2nd highly profitable and highly successful product. The Wii was gamble to be sure, but frankly it was a gamble they could have afforded to lose (and by 'lose' I mean end up with a profitable, but not dominant position in the console market and repeat the gamecube's story.)
As for the rest of your post, yes, 'they nailed it'. And 3rd party developers will inevitably sit up and take note, and they have.
No government has the resources to avoid the flow of people and merchandise once instead of patrolling a two-dimentional line it has to patrol a 3d surface.
Are you referring to national borders? That's hardly a real issue; at least no moreso than patroling the existing land and sea borders. Granted there would be a LOT more 'air traffic' if everyone had a flying car, but if the law required you to cross the border at a land based checkpoint, pretty much everyone but a criminal would obey it. So the few cars that tried to sneak over would be no worse than handlign the private yachts and planes that do it now.
Not old enough to vote, but certainly old enough to take advantage of many of the services and infrastructure that taxes pay/paid for.
So what?
That's the moral equivalent of Walmart selling you shoes at gunpoint, and saying "hey, whats your problem, you get to use the shoes!"
The money is taken from them with the force of law (which can end up at gunpoint if you are persistent in your resistance), and this is justified by the fact they they get to the use services and infrastructure it pays for.
Sure they need roads, and education, and to have their conversations wiretapped. There's no question we all need that!
But they're also paying for the DMCA, the DHS, and a whole whack of other BS 'services' and 'infrastructure'.
Not an extra vote per child or anything so perverse. But they get to frame all nearly political discussion, control the media to 'sell' their message, and between the two effectively convince the poor to vote for things that are actually harmful to themselves.
They also run the legislature. Sure the poor may have elected them, but once in there they don't necessarily represent them.
If the minimum age to be on a payroll is 15, or 16 (and start paying income tax) then that is the age at which you should be allowed to vote too. All kids, not just employed ones.
Well, the alternative would be that everyone paying taxes was allowed to vote, which would probably even worse, as this would make people with lots of money get extra votes quite easily...
1) No it wouldn't change that at all. 2) For all practical purposes the wealthy already get extra votes.
We just wanted a widget to check links. A wee little WIDGET!!
Then it turned out it needed an enterprise level database engine behind it for efficiency and security. (Just the sort of feature creep IT departments love most.)
I suppose the next step is that once this massive database is checking links... well it only makes sense to harvest the data for advertising trends, pagerank, and so forth and try to make some money off it...
EA probably has no interest in making headlines
on
Sexuality And The Sims
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Right now the Sims is perceived by the public as a great family friendly game. The last thing they want to do is put the Sims in the headlines next to "adult content" or "bizarre sex acts" or anything that is going to cause an outswell of ill-founded but inevitable comparisons to the 'hot coffee' mod and general backlash against their game.
"(Yes I know the Acer isn't 1.6 inches thick everywhere.)"
I noticed that the front was thinner than the front, and even the specs online say 1.1" to 1.6" (so I'm not sure where you measured 0.9). But despite the fact that its 1.1" thick at the front, the over all effect isn't nearly as sleek a 1" everywhere.
The same is true of many cell phones which have optional high-capacity batteries that add a bulge to the thickness for part of the device. The aesthetic difference is huge.
But for the average slashdot user, I think the F3Sv is the better deal in this case.
On strict hardware power I'd agree; given the acer price edge.
If size weight are important, the MBP delivers roughly equivalent hardware in a smaller, lighter, sleeker package, at a moderate premium. To each their own.
Lastly, re:OSX if you want it, you pretty much just elminated the Acer. Sure we can hack it on there, but its not a supported platform and it is an EULA violation. That makes it ok for personal use/fair use/fun, but not really suitable for a professional/commercial environment. On the flipside, if you don't want OSX the Apple really shouldn't be under consideration at all; the MBP only makes sense if you want OSX.
I'd recommend a dual/triple boot if you have the absolute need to run Windows.
I agree entirely.
Parallels is a god-send if you need to run a windows only accounting program. Or if you you need to use an activeX enabled version of internet explorer 7 internet or intranet site, (or as a web developer to check IE rendering) Having to reboot all the time is a royal pita.
but yeah if you are doing a lot of heavy lifting in a virtual machine, especially on something that's graphically intensive and performance is sluggish or worse, dual booting is the way to go.
I don't put any value in the finger print scanner myself, but its there. The card reader is a nice touch, and I can see some people liking the modem. I've never used lightscribe, but it might be cool. Overall, I think that offsets the firewire 800, backlit keyboard, and mag-lock power cord, and remote.
Call it pretty even on the hardware then?
Two comparison questions you didn't answer though:
Weight: F3Sv - 6.4 pounds MBP 5.6 pounds
MPB weighs 12.5% less
Size: F3Sv - 14.2 x 10.5 x 1.6 MBP - 14.1 x 9.6 x 1.0
MBP is ever so slightly narrower, almost a full inch less deep, and a whopping 40% less thick. (Yes I know the Acer isn't 1.6 inches thick everywhere.)
Nearly a full pound lighter, and 40% less thick is a pretty big deal. That alone would easily be worth a 400+ premium to some people. And from a technical standpoint, that took some pretty heavy lifting from the engineers to make it happen. There is real value there.
It's not worth paying an extra $400-500 for the MBP, if you ask me. Which is why you bought the Acer.:)
But the size of the MPB, the brand name recognition of Apple, the fact that its the only unit that is officially supported and bundled with OSX, etc, etc. I can see a lot of people deciding its worth the extra - all things considered.
I'm pretty sure he's got an Asus F3Sv, which I also own.
Alright, so I googled the thing; its a pretty deluxe laptop and pretty good deal. No question. Its also got a few features the MBP doesn't have:
modem
finger print scanner
8-in-1 card reader
lightscribe
I don't put any value in the finger print scanner myself, but its there. The card reader is a nice touch, and I can see some people liking the modem. I've never used lightscribe, but it might be cool. Overall, I think that offsets the firewire 800, backlit keyboard, and mag-lock power cord, and remote.
Call it pretty even on the hardware then?
Two comparison questions you didn't answer though:
Weight:
F3Sv - 6.4 pounds
MBP 5.6 pounds
MPB weighs 12.5% less
Size:
F3Sv - 14.2 x 10.5 x 1.6
MBP - 14.1 x 9.6 x 1.0
MBP is ever so slightly narrower, almost a full inch less deep, and a whopping 40% less thick. (Yes I know the Acer isn't 1.6 inches thick everywhere.)
Nearly a full pound lighter, and 40% less thick is a pretty big deal.
That alone would easily be worth a 400+ premium to some people. And from a technical standpoint, that took some pretty heavy lifting from the engineers to make it happen. There is real value there.
It's not worth paying an extra $400-500 for the MBP, if you ask me.
Which is why you bought the Acer.:)
But the size of the MPB, the brand name recognition of Apple, the fact that its the only unit that is officially supported and bundled with OSX, etc, etc. I can see a lot of people deciding its worth the extra - all things considered.
The worst of the worst terrorists are put up in an air-conditioned facility on a tropical island, with three square meals a day, and the bloody prayer time five days a week.
Hah! Those aren't the worst of the worst terrorists. Those are primarily innocent people who we can't even be bothered to charge of a crime. We deny them all access to the legal system, lawyers. All for what? The worst crime they are guilty of is being sympathetic to anti-american sentiment! Go figure. We invade their country, destroy their cities, kill their family members, and then lock them in a prison without any access to the outside world. I'd be more concerned about anyone who was 'pro-american' after an ordeal like that.
As for the truly 'worst of the worst', we keep them neatly outside our jurisdiction, in prisons in other 2nd/3rd world countries where they can be held, interrogated, tortured and killed without having to get our hands dirty.
Even a massively high profile criminal like the captured Saddam Hussein? What did we do with him? Why we released him into Iraqi custody, knowing full bloody well they would convict and then execute him. Had he been tried in a more civilized court -- hell even an American court an execution would have been unlikely. We might as well have pulled the trigger ourselves.
and it's damn hard to jail people in United States, given our independant Judiciary, jury system, and open courts.
Indeed, that must be why nearly 12% of black males aged 20-34 are currently in prison.
In the US we have 702 inmates per 100,000 people. In other 1st world countries the number is a fraction that amount... Canada 116, Italy 100, Germany 91, France 85. Here's a rough graph to drive the point home. Each star represents ~33 people per 100,000.
********************* USA *** Canada *** Italy *** Germany ** France
Call me crazy, but I wouldn't pick the USA as a country that's hard to jail people in.
Look up how well China does in Tibet, or whatever.
Really? You're going to go there now? Your going to bring up a country China invaded and has a relatively terrible record with? I mean hey, last time the US invaded a country, we were greeted as liberators, right? I mean, the studies that show 30,000 - 50,000 civilian deaths resulting from direct violence in the last 6 years, and the absolutely staggering estimates of 500,000 to 600,000 indirect deaths due to disease, exposure, infrastructure destruction, and so forth that would not have died if not for the war.
(Essentially... over the course of the last six years, the mortality rate -- the rate at which people die has gone up by 500 per day. Its reasonable to believe that if we hadn't invaded, the mortality rate would not have shot up like this.)
What if I want to play a game here and there? Im screwed.
Screwed? Hardly. Haven't you heard, mac's run on intel now. For a measly $100 bucks you can add an OEM Windows in a separate boot partition and run all your windows directx games. For another few bucks you can get Parallels or VMware Fusion and run most applications from inside windows on top of OSX, including some directx stuff.
You are hardly screwed.
I would have bought one myself if they didnt cost twice as much as they should.
Now, apple upgrade pricing is a scam, but you don't have to buy your 2nd stick of ram or hard drive upgrade from Apple.
Most of the price difference between Apple and PC is actually represented in the 2ndary specs, and build quality. If you were to spec a dell or asus that matches on all the 2ndary features, the price premium for apple is a pittance. (Now whether you want or care about those features is a separate issue.)
Instead I bought a ASUS laptop with 2GB of RAM, a 7200RPM HD, a Core 2 Duo 2 Ghz and a Nvidia Geforce 8600M GPU.
Good on you, for finding what you need. Is it a better deal than an apple? Hard to say.
You paid 1500 for it, and the 15-inch apple MBPro is 1999, or 30% more (hardly the twice you were moaning about). That gets you an 8600M GPU, 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, and 5400 rpm drive. Sounds about even for 499 more, right? Slight bump up on the cpu, but a hit on HD speed.
So... does the asus have firewire? (firewire 800 no less?) gigabit or just 10/100? a camera? bluetooth? a remote control? microphone? is it heavier or lighter? is it thinner or thicker? Does it have a remote? DVI out or only VGA? 802.11n or just a/b/g? is the keyboard backlit? Does it have a magnetic release on the power-cord? express-card slot?
Im sure the asus has at least some of those. But I doubt it has most of them. And if you add it all up, there is a good chunk of value in there, easily enough to justify the extra 400-500 for a lot of people.
And that's before we get into the ease of use, virus situation, unix under the hood, and other soft advantages of the Mac OS platform.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a mac fanboy, and I'm not saying a Mac is right for everyone. My last purchase was a 4GB RAM 3.1GHz (2.5GHz overclocked) Core2 Quad PC with Vista U x64 / Ubuntu Feisty x64 on separate 500GB drives, and an 8600GTS; I have no regrets; the iMac was worlds away from what I needed (hello PCI slots for testing medical video capture equipment). And a Mac Pro simply wasn't a good value for this unit. (That said, my next purchase is likely to be a Mac Book Pro 15".)
But I am defending Apples product and pricing as good value, because for what you get, it is. (upgrade pricing aside!) It might not be what YOU or I need, from a given system, but that's a separate issue.
When I said the "FSF is happy..." I only meant that the FSF isn't out to forcibly stop people from using proprietary code. Their only effort in that regard is educating about the superiority of free software. While they might prefer the rest of the world adopt their stance, they co-exist peacefully with the rest of the world.
The only time the FSF gets 'forcible' is when someone (like Tivo) tries to co-opt THEIR software and put it into a system that denies the end users the freedoms that the software was specifically gauranteed to come with.
So if the FSF is 'angry' with you, its because you've taken GPL code and tried locking it up. To get them off your back you can either a) comply with the terms (and better still the spirit) of the GPL, or b) stop redistributing gpl code.
A lot of people think the FSF is trying to force Tivo to open up. The reality is they don't give a crap what Tivo does as long as they don't distribute gpl code without passing on the full set of freedoms. That can solved by Tivo opening up -- or it can be solved by Tivo ceasing to redistribute GPL code. Either solution is acceptable.
If Tivo goes the route of ceasing to distribute Linux, some people think that is a pyhrric victory - that actually harms the FOSS community. But the FSF believes, rightly I think, that more harm is actually done to the community if let people get away with leeching away our rights to use and modify free GPL code.
Really, what is the value to the community of a company using GPL code if they lock up their modifications in DRM and/or patents.
Take the TiVo, what GPLv3 wanted to do was force TiVo to release their DRM so the community has access to their product.
No, that is the fundamental error that so many people make.
That is NEVER what they wanted to do at all.
What they wanted to do was to stop TiVo from redistributing GPL code that couldn't be modified and run on the purchased hardware it came with.
This was never to 'force' TiVo to do anything except make a choice: Use the free (as in liberty) code covered by the GPL and extend those freedoms to those you redistribute it to. Or don't redistribute it.
TiVo has always had, and still has the choice of switching to Windows, or BSD, or something else entirely if they want to lock the code up and bind it to specific hardware so only their version will run on their hardware.
So if you make FreeSoftware to strict on its use people won't use it.
The FSF is happy with people who want proprietary code to use their own propreitary code. They just don't want THEIR GPL code turned into someone elses proprietary code.
Academically Free as in speech software sounds like a good plan
It is a good plan.
but real life realizes there is information that you want to keep private.
Good point, but completely irrelevant. If you don't want to share your code, you don't have to. Just don't incorporate GPL code into your product and you won't have to.
The people that contributed that code intended for it to *remain free*. If you can't abide by that don't use THEIR code.
I probably wouldn't have tipped him off by posting that you were looking for a tactful way to obliterate him from the face of the earth by posting on a rapidly anti-MPAA forum like slashdot.;)
Oh, you weren't looking to obliterate him? Um... why did you come to us again?
The 'leaving your back door open' analogy is not a good one. A better analogy is buying a book, scanning it, and posting it on a web page. In fact, it's EXACTLY the same thing, only with a different protocol.
So what if you just buy books, and then put stacks of those books next to a photocopier. You know, like a library? Are they liable if someone uses the facilities they made available for copyright infringement?
What if I leave a book or CD I bought in a public on common area that happens to contain a computer or photocopier? Am I liable if anyone makes a copy.
What if I let someone use my computer, to read my pdfs, listen to my music, and surf the internet? What if that person abuses that trust, and makes a 10000 copies. Am *I* liable?
Per your words "If you provide the facilities for someone to copy copywritten material, you should be liable. There is no other way for copyright to work."
And there is nothing inherently wrong with short relationships. They don't have to end in a crushing heartbreak. You can be in a series of short relationships without emotionally scarring everyone you come into contact with; if you are honest with your partner.
We're untrustworthy creatures at heart.
Maybe you are. I have enough respect for myself and for others that I don't go around needlessly hurting the people who care for me. As a result I've parted with exes as freinds, or became friends after getting over the breakup. (Which was possible because although we were no longer 'in love', we still had common interests, and respect for each other as human beings.-- something you are not going to have if you lied, cheated, and used your ex.)
'Love' is a just a biochemical reaction to physical contact with a member of the opposite sex, designed to keep a breeding pair together to keep offspring alive.
Which is why getting together just for 'love' rarely lasts. But combine love, respect, and friendship and you have something a lot more solid, something that *can* last.
If you take the moral high ground and not cheat, then your partner will pick up on that as a biological weakness, and go astray, guaranteed.
Hardly. Taking the moral high ground and respecting your partner creates a positive feedback loop. They might still lose interest in you as a 'lover' but if there is respect and friendship between you there is a better chance they will end the relationship 'honorably' rather than lie to you or use you.
Also ideally, a CTO wouldn't be asking those in the trenches how to measure productivity, but rather how to improve it.
Measuring it would be a crucial component of improving it. It tells you where you started, where you finished, and how much it improved.
you probably know where the snags are in efficiency or what software you would need to purchase to help smooth things along or even where people are over worked or over looked.
Organizations actually run a lot like complex programs. And just like organizations, we instinctively believe we know where the inefficiencies are. But the reality is that running a profiler against some code to generate some objective hard performance numbers often results in some big surprises. The same is true of organizations and productivity.
I agree 'measuring' a complex job like sysadmin for productivity is hard. But that doesn't mean it isn't worth trying.
I read elsewhere that a good sysadmin is one that does the least work. And THAT, is utter bullshit. That is a sysadmin who, though effective at ensuring the system is reliable and stable is being relatively unproductive compared to what he COULD be doing with that time.
He SHOULD be evaluating new products, or performing disaster recovery exercises, or meeting with departments and staff to review their needs or even their wish lists...
A good sys-admin is one who doesn't spend all day putting out fires. But once the fires are out, a good sys-admin doesn't sit on his ass playing solitaire waiting for one to start.
Slashdot Mirror
Cracking DRM, and having to wade through reverse engineered code (when have you seen source code leaked for a major application (Windows source code rumours excepted as I haven't actually seen any of it)) is a hassle, abolishing copyright would be a disaster for the open source community, maybe not from a continuation perspective, but certainly in terms of future expansion.
By leaked, I meant the application leaked to torrent sites already hacked (not leaked). My editing was not so good there.
Corporations would not be able to pull code out of the public domain that had already been released. However, yeah they'd be able to violate the GPL in that they could modify and release their own versions.
To you comment about reverse engineering and whatnot, I think that activity would become a lot more mainstream if disassembly were legal. I mean, you dissassemble Java, C, or C# and you get uncommented assembler, java byte codes,
ESPECIALLY because in a world like that the tools to do it would be far more sophisticated than they are now because the stuff people would be doing with them would be entirely legal - driving demand up. Right now all these tools are a bit of a grey area - we can't publish dissaembled application source anyway so tools to dissaemble, distribute, and collaboratively re-comment would be of limited legal use. Generally in the current world if you have permission to dissaessmble and publish you already have the source anyway.
--
As for the 20 year term; I was thinking broader than just software. 5 or 6 is unreasonably short for a Book or Movie in my opinion.
And even software is a grey area. A six year term would mean office 2000 is public domain. Granted Office XP and Office 2003 have largely taken its place today, and microsoft certainly doesn't sell Office 2000 anymore -- but would they be able to sell Office 2003 if 2000 was public domain? Not to mention Windows 2000 Pro, Windows 2000 Server. SQL Server 2000, etc...
Same goes for software from Oracle, or SAP, or Adobe -- if we had a situation where the versions that were available in 2000 were in the public domain now -- well that would be one hell of a shakeup. And I'm not convicned its justifiable.
They would fail because all the code that is currently GPL would be taken up by companies, modified, improved (or just re-branded) and redistributed, in closed source form.
And all the code that is closed source would be leaked, modified, and redistributed in 'free form', and be nearly impossible to sell because everyone wanted a copy would just make one. DRM and encryption would be toothless deterrents, because it would be hacked put up on a torrent, and there is nothing anyone could do about it.
But, I agree with you. The problem isn't that copyright exists. The problem is that:
1) the length is too long. 20 years is plenty long enough.
2) All proprietary/protected/withheld source code should be placed in trust that it is automatically released when the term expires.
3) Fair use rights need to be properly enumerated and protected instead of being the existing 'well we the rich megacorp can sue you for the smallest perceived breach, and then you have to convince a court it was actually fair use - so even if we lose we still fucked you over!'.
4) And penalties need to be updated to reflect the reality that a mandatory 750$ fine per work violated is absurd when applied to a 10 year old with an 30GB ipod with 10,000 infringing songs. At worst, he should be fined a few thousand, and probably considerably less for a first offense... not the current legal minimum of $750,000. (10,000 songs x $750 per song)
Only that a private plane/yatch is far more expensive
That's a misconception really. You can get a flight worthy aircraft for under 10k. You can get a fairly decent one like a Cessna 120/140 for 15-25k. There are lots of 'bargain planes' out there.
Pretty much anyone that wants one can afford to buy one; the real issue is storage costs, inspections, fuel costs, getting a license to fly it, etc; and above all, its not generally that useful, so its a hobby/sport/recreation activity for most people.
And if your a terrorist looking to move a nuke into the country. seriously, just put it in a cargo container. Less than 5% are currently scanned, and only a fraction are actually opened; so you've got a 95% chance of success.
And hey, even if customs did find it the terrorist could always just detonate it in port.
They had one shot as surging back to prominence, and they nailed it.
Oh I don't know about that. The gamecube was pretty much neck and neck with the xbox one, and because its still being sold while the xbox has been discontinued means that in the final analysis it will have sold more.
It was also profitable, which made the endeavour worthwhile, while xbox lost money hand over fist. I'm sure they were disappointed to be in 3rd, and the lack of 3rd party developers didn't help. But of all the console makers -- they are the only ones that really didn't NEED to be in first.
They were selling at a profit, and have enough first party franchises to successfully carry their own system.
To top it off, the DS was a license to print money, so they had a 2nd highly profitable and highly successful product. The Wii was gamble to be sure, but frankly it was a gamble they could have afforded to lose (and by 'lose' I mean end up with a profitable, but not dominant position in the console market and repeat the gamecube's story.)
As for the rest of your post, yes, 'they nailed it'. And 3rd party developers will inevitably sit up and take note, and they have.
...and it's gaining market share at a much faster rate than the 360 or PS3.
Its selling faster than any console ever has ever sold. Including the DS and PS2.
No government has the resources to avoid the flow of people and merchandise once instead of patrolling a two-dimentional line it has to patrol a 3d surface.
Are you referring to national borders? That's hardly a real issue; at least no moreso than patroling the existing land and sea borders. Granted there would be a LOT more 'air traffic' if everyone had a flying car, but if the law required you to cross the border at a land based checkpoint, pretty much everyone but a criminal would obey it. So the few cars that tried to sneak over would be no worse than handlign the private yachts and planes that do it now.
Not old enough to vote, but certainly old enough to take advantage of many of the services and infrastructure that taxes pay/paid for.
So what?
That's the moral equivalent of Walmart selling you shoes at gunpoint, and saying "hey, whats your problem, you get to use the shoes!"
The money is taken from them with the force of law (which can end up at gunpoint if you are persistent in your resistance), and this is justified by the fact they they get to the use services and infrastructure it pays for.
Sure they need roads, and education, and to have their conversations wiretapped. There's no question we all need that!
But they're also paying for the DMCA, the DHS, and a whole whack of other BS 'services' and 'infrastructure'.
Not an extra vote per child or anything so perverse. But they get to frame all nearly political discussion, control the media to 'sell' their message, and between the two effectively convince the poor to vote for things that are actually harmful to themselves.
They also run the legislature. Sure the poor may have elected them, but once in there they don't necessarily represent them.
If the minimum age to be on a payroll is 15, or 16 (and start paying income tax) then that is the age at which you should be allowed to vote too. All kids, not just employed ones.
Well, the alternative would be that everyone paying taxes was allowed to vote, which would probably even worse, as this would make people with lots of money get extra votes quite easily...
1) No it wouldn't change that at all.
2) For all practical purposes the wealthy already get extra votes.
You have a database of links/phrases.
Heh. That's how it starts.
We just wanted a widget to check links. A wee little WIDGET!!
Then it turned out it needed an enterprise level database engine behind it for efficiency and security. (Just the sort of feature creep IT departments love most.)
I suppose the next step is that once this massive database is checking links... well it only makes sense to harvest the data for advertising trends, pagerank, and so forth and try to make some money off it...
Right now the Sims is perceived by the public as a great family friendly game. The last thing they want to do is put the Sims in the headlines next to "adult content" or "bizarre sex acts" or anything that is going to cause an outswell of ill-founded but inevitable comparisons to the 'hot coffee' mod and general backlash against their game.
Do people under 18 pat taxes?
Yes.
Old enough to pay taxes.
Not old enough to vote what they are use for.
One of the many injustices in the system.
You must have missed the part where I said:
"(Yes I know the Acer isn't 1.6 inches thick everywhere.)"
I noticed that the front was thinner than the front, and even the specs online say 1.1" to 1.6" (so I'm not sure where you measured 0.9). But despite the fact that its 1.1" thick at the front, the over all effect isn't nearly as sleek a 1" everywhere.
The same is true of many cell phones which have optional high-capacity batteries that add a bulge to the thickness for part of the device. The aesthetic difference is huge.
But for the average slashdot user, I think the F3Sv is the better deal in this case.
On strict hardware power I'd agree; given the acer price edge.
If size weight are important, the MBP delivers roughly equivalent hardware in a smaller, lighter, sleeker package, at a moderate premium. To each their own.
Lastly, re:OSX if you want it, you pretty much just elminated the Acer. Sure we can hack it on there, but its not a supported platform and it is an EULA violation. That makes it ok for personal use/fair use/fun, but not really suitable for a professional/commercial environment. On the flipside, if you don't want OSX the Apple really shouldn't be under consideration at all; the MBP only makes sense if you want OSX.
I'd recommend a dual/triple boot if you have the absolute need to run Windows.
I agree entirely.
Parallels is a god-send if you need to run a windows only accounting program. Or if you you need to use an activeX enabled version of internet explorer 7 internet or intranet site, (or as a web developer to check IE rendering) Having to reboot all the time is a royal
pita.
but yeah if you are doing a lot of heavy lifting in a virtual machine, especially on something that's graphically intensive and performance is sluggish or worse, dual booting is the way to go.
Sorry for the double post. Slashdot submitted as html and toasted my paragraphs. :(
:)
I'm pretty sure he's got an Asus F3Sv, which I also own.
Alright, so I googled the thing; its a pretty deluxe laptop and pretty good deal. No question. Its also got a few features the MBP doesn't have:
modem
finger print scanner
8-in-1 card reader
lightscribe
I don't put any value in the finger print scanner myself, but its there. The card reader is a nice touch, and I can see some people liking the modem. I've never used lightscribe, but it might be cool. Overall, I think that offsets the firewire 800, backlit keyboard, and mag-lock power cord, and remote.
Call it pretty even on the hardware then?
Two comparison questions you didn't answer though:
Weight:
F3Sv - 6.4 pounds
MBP 5.6 pounds
MPB weighs 12.5% less
Size:
F3Sv - 14.2 x 10.5 x 1.6
MBP - 14.1 x 9.6 x 1.0
MBP is ever so slightly narrower, almost a full inch less deep, and a whopping 40% less thick. (Yes I know the Acer isn't 1.6 inches thick everywhere.)
Nearly a full pound lighter, and 40% less thick is a pretty big deal.
That alone would easily be worth a 400+ premium to some people. And from a technical standpoint, that took some pretty heavy lifting from the engineers to make it happen. There is real value there.
It's not worth paying an extra $400-500 for the MBP, if you ask me.
Which is why you bought the Acer.
But the size of the MPB, the brand name recognition of Apple, the fact that its the only unit that is officially supported and bundled with OSX, etc, etc. I can see a lot of people deciding its worth the extra - all things considered.
I'm pretty sure he's got an Asus F3Sv, which I also own. Alright, so I googled the thing; its a pretty deluxe laptop and pretty good deal. No question. Its also got a few features the MBP doesn't have: modem finger print scanner 8-in-1 card reader lightscribe I don't put any value in the finger print scanner myself, but its there. The card reader is a nice touch, and I can see some people liking the modem. I've never used lightscribe, but it might be cool. Overall, I think that offsets the firewire 800, backlit keyboard, and mag-lock power cord, and remote. Call it pretty even on the hardware then? Two comparison questions you didn't answer though: Weight: F3Sv - 6.4 pounds MBP 5.6 pounds MPB weighs 12.5% less Size: F3Sv - 14.2 x 10.5 x 1.6 MBP - 14.1 x 9.6 x 1.0 MBP is ever so slightly narrower, almost a full inch less deep, and a whopping 40% less thick. (Yes I know the Acer isn't 1.6 inches thick everywhere.) Nearly a full pound lighter, and 40% less thick is a pretty big deal. That alone would easily be worth a 400+ premium to some people. And from a technical standpoint, that took some pretty heavy lifting from the engineers to make it happen. There is real value there. It's not worth paying an extra $400-500 for the MBP, if you ask me. Which is why you bought the Acer. :)
But the size of the MPB, the brand name recognition of Apple, the fact that its the only unit that is officially supported and bundled with OSX, etc, etc. I can see a lot of people deciding its worth the extra - all things considered.
The worst of the worst terrorists are put up in an air-conditioned facility on a tropical island, with three square meals a day, and the bloody prayer time five days a week.
Hah! Those aren't the worst of the worst terrorists. Those are primarily innocent people who we can't even be bothered to charge of a crime. We deny them all access to the legal system, lawyers. All for what? The worst crime they are guilty of is being sympathetic to anti-american sentiment! Go figure. We invade their country, destroy their cities, kill their family members, and then lock them in a prison without any access to the outside world. I'd be more concerned about anyone who was 'pro-american' after an ordeal like that.
As for the truly 'worst of the worst', we keep them neatly outside our jurisdiction, in prisons in other 2nd/3rd world countries where they can be held, interrogated, tortured and killed without having to get our hands dirty.
Even a massively high profile criminal like the captured Saddam Hussein? What did we do with him? Why we released him into Iraqi custody, knowing full bloody well they would convict and then execute him. Had he been tried in a more civilized court -- hell even an American court an execution would have been unlikely. We might as well have pulled the trigger ourselves.
and it's damn hard to jail people in United States, given our independant Judiciary, jury system, and open courts.
Indeed, that must be why nearly 12% of black males aged 20-34 are currently in prison.
In the US we have 702 inmates per 100,000 people. In other 1st world countries the number is a fraction that amount... Canada 116, Italy 100, Germany 91, France 85. Here's a rough graph to drive the point home. Each star represents ~33 people per 100,000.
********************* USA
*** Canada
*** Italy
*** Germany
** France
Call me crazy, but I wouldn't pick the USA as a country that's hard to jail people in.
Look up how well China does in Tibet, or whatever.
Really? You're going to go there now? Your going to bring up a country China invaded and has a relatively terrible record with? I mean hey, last time the US invaded a country, we were greeted as liberators, right? I mean, the studies that show 30,000 - 50,000 civilian deaths resulting from direct violence in the last 6 years, and the absolutely staggering estimates of 500,000 to 600,000 indirect deaths due to disease, exposure, infrastructure destruction, and so forth that would not have died if not for the war.
(Essentially... over the course of the last six years, the mortality rate -- the rate at which people die has gone up by 500 per day. Its reasonable to believe that if we hadn't invaded, the mortality rate would not have shot up like this.)
God no. That image as a still is bad enough. I do NOT want to see it move.
What if I want to play a game here and there? Im screwed.
Screwed? Hardly. Haven't you heard, mac's run on intel now. For a measly $100 bucks you can add an OEM Windows in a separate boot partition and run all your windows directx games. For another few bucks you can get Parallels or VMware Fusion and run most applications from inside windows on top of OSX, including some directx stuff.
You are hardly screwed.
I would have bought one myself if they didnt cost twice as much as they should.
Now, apple upgrade pricing is a scam, but you don't have to buy your 2nd stick of ram or hard drive upgrade from Apple.
Most of the price difference between Apple and PC is actually represented in the 2ndary specs, and build quality. If you were to spec a dell or asus that matches on all the 2ndary features, the price premium for apple is a pittance. (Now whether you want or care about those features is a separate issue.)
Instead I bought a ASUS laptop with 2GB of RAM, a 7200RPM HD, a Core 2 Duo 2 Ghz and a Nvidia Geforce 8600M GPU.
Good on you, for finding what you need. Is it a better deal than an apple? Hard to say.
You paid 1500 for it, and the 15-inch apple MBPro is 1999, or 30% more (hardly the twice you were moaning about). That gets you an 8600M GPU, 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, and 5400 rpm drive. Sounds about even for 499 more, right? Slight bump up on the cpu, but a hit on HD speed.
So... does the asus have firewire? (firewire 800 no less?) gigabit or just 10/100? a camera? bluetooth? a remote control? microphone? is it heavier or lighter? is it thinner or thicker? Does it have a remote? DVI out or only VGA? 802.11n or just a/b/g? is the keyboard backlit? Does it have a magnetic release on the power-cord? express-card slot?
Im sure the asus has at least some of those. But I doubt it has most of them. And if you add it all up, there is a good chunk of value in there, easily enough to justify the extra 400-500 for a lot of people.
And that's before we get into the ease of use, virus situation, unix under the hood, and other soft advantages of the Mac OS platform.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a mac fanboy, and I'm not saying a Mac is right for everyone. My last purchase was a 4GB RAM 3.1GHz (2.5GHz overclocked) Core2 Quad PC with Vista U x64 / Ubuntu Feisty x64 on separate 500GB drives, and an 8600GTS; I have no regrets; the iMac was worlds away from what I needed (hello PCI slots for testing medical video capture equipment). And a Mac Pro simply wasn't a good value for this unit. (That said, my next purchase is likely to be a Mac Book Pro 15".)
But I am defending Apples product and pricing as good value, because for what you get, it is. (upgrade pricing aside!) It might not be what YOU or I need, from a given system, but that's a separate issue.
When I said the "FSF is happy..." I only meant that the FSF isn't out to forcibly stop people from using proprietary code. Their only effort in that regard is educating about the superiority of free software. While they might prefer the rest of the world adopt their stance, they co-exist peacefully with the rest of the world.
The only time the FSF gets 'forcible' is when someone (like Tivo) tries to co-opt THEIR software and put it into a system that denies the end users the freedoms that the software was specifically gauranteed to come with.
So if the FSF is 'angry' with you, its because you've taken GPL code and tried locking it up. To get them off your back you can either a) comply with the terms (and better still the spirit) of the GPL, or b) stop redistributing gpl code.
A lot of people think the FSF is trying to force Tivo to open up. The reality is they don't give a crap what Tivo does as long as they don't distribute gpl code without passing on the full set of freedoms. That can solved by Tivo opening up -- or it can be solved by Tivo ceasing to redistribute GPL code. Either solution is acceptable.
If Tivo goes the route of ceasing to distribute Linux, some people think that is a pyhrric victory - that actually harms the FOSS community. But the FSF believes, rightly I think, that more harm is actually done to the community if let people get away with leeching away our rights to use and modify free GPL code.
Really, what is the value to the community of a company using GPL code if they lock up their modifications in DRM and/or patents.
Take the TiVo, what GPLv3 wanted to do was force TiVo to release their DRM so the community has access to their product.
No, that is the fundamental error that so many people make.
That is NEVER what they wanted to do at all.
What they wanted to do was to stop TiVo from redistributing GPL code that couldn't be modified and run on the purchased hardware it came with.
This was never to 'force' TiVo to do anything except make a choice:
Use the free (as in liberty) code covered by the GPL and extend those freedoms to those you redistribute it to. Or don't redistribute it.
TiVo has always had, and still has the choice of switching to Windows, or BSD, or something else entirely if they want to lock the code up and bind it to specific hardware so only their version will run on their hardware.
So if you make FreeSoftware to strict on its use people won't use it.
The FSF is happy with people who want proprietary code to use their own propreitary code. They just don't want THEIR GPL code turned into someone elses proprietary code.
Academically Free as in speech software sounds like a good plan
It is a good plan.
but real life realizes there is information that you want to keep private.
Good point, but completely irrelevant. If you don't want to share your code, you don't have to. Just don't incorporate GPL code into your product and you won't have to.
The people that contributed that code intended for it to *remain free*. If you can't abide by that don't use THEIR code.
I probably wouldn't have tipped him off by posting that you were looking for a tactful way to obliterate him from the face of the earth by posting on a rapidly anti-MPAA forum like slashdot. ;)
Oh, you weren't looking to obliterate him? Um... why did you come to us again?
The 'leaving your back door open' analogy is not a good one. A better analogy is buying a book, scanning it, and posting it on a web page. In fact, it's EXACTLY the same thing, only with a different protocol.
So what if you just buy books, and then put stacks of those books next to a photocopier. You know, like a library? Are they liable if someone uses the facilities they made available for copyright infringement?
What if I leave a book or CD I bought in a public on common area that happens to contain a computer or photocopier? Am I liable if anyone makes a copy.
What if I let someone use my computer, to read my pdfs, listen to my music, and surf the internet? What if that person abuses that trust, and makes a 10000 copies. Am *I* liable?
Per your words "If you provide the facilities for someone to copy copywritten material, you should be liable. There is no other way for copyright to work."
I think you are mistaken. Greviously so.
Yes you do - it's human nature.
No we don't. Many relationships last a lifetime.
And there is nothing inherently wrong with short relationships. They don't have to end in a crushing heartbreak. You can be in a series of short relationships without emotionally scarring everyone you come into contact with; if you are honest with your partner.
We're untrustworthy creatures at heart.
Maybe you are. I have enough respect for myself and for others that I don't go around needlessly hurting the people who care for me. As a result I've parted with exes as freinds, or became friends after getting over the breakup. (Which was possible because although we were no longer 'in love', we still had common interests, and respect for each other as human beings.-- something you are not going to have if you lied, cheated, and used your ex.)
'Love' is a just a biochemical reaction to physical contact with a member of the opposite sex, designed to keep a breeding pair together to keep offspring alive.
Which is why getting together just for 'love' rarely lasts. But combine love, respect, and friendship and you have something a lot more solid, something that *can* last.
If you take the moral high ground and not cheat, then your partner will pick up on that as a biological weakness, and go astray, guaranteed.
Hardly. Taking the moral high ground and respecting your partner creates a positive feedback loop. They might still lose interest in you as a 'lover' but if there is respect and friendship between you there is a better chance they will end the relationship 'honorably' rather than lie to you or use you.
Also ideally, a CTO wouldn't be asking those in the trenches how to measure productivity, but rather how to improve it.
Measuring it would be a crucial component of improving it. It tells you where you started, where you finished, and how much it improved.
you probably know where the snags are in efficiency or what software you would need to purchase to help smooth things along or even where people are over worked or over looked.
Organizations actually run a lot like complex programs. And just like organizations, we instinctively believe we know where the inefficiencies are. But the reality is that running a profiler against some code to generate some objective hard performance numbers often results in some big surprises. The same is true of organizations and productivity.
I agree 'measuring' a complex job like sysadmin for productivity is hard. But that doesn't mean it isn't worth trying.
I read elsewhere that a good sysadmin is one that does the least work. And THAT, is utter bullshit. That is a sysadmin who, though effective at ensuring the system is reliable and stable is being relatively unproductive compared to what he COULD be doing with that time.
He SHOULD be evaluating new products, or performing disaster recovery exercises, or meeting with departments and staff to review their needs or even their wish lists...
A good sys-admin is one who doesn't spend all day putting out fires. But once the fires are out, a good sys-admin doesn't sit on his ass playing solitaire waiting for one to start.