I can still remember the proud moment in 1996 when I sent my first e-mail from the college computer lab. It felt like sending a postcard from the future. I was getting a glimpse of how the Internet would change everything--nothing could be faster and easier than e-mail.
I can still remember the days when slashdot was news for nerds, stuff that mattered...
"news" about how a guy felt 11 years ago are the reason why I'm close to deleting/. from my rss abonnements...
Microsoft said it believes individuals [...] should be free to choose the software
saies the company that is multiply convicted for illegally taking user's choice away...
either the person in charge has no clue about the IT world (in which case he shouldn't be in charge for this decision) or he was bribed - there is no other credible explanation for this step (all of a sudden paying extra for redundant software)
say they buy open source company X
now all coworkers of X leave, found "their own" company and fork the last open version of their software...
in effect MS would have nothing for their money - except the right to sell the software under a different license, but in competition to a free version of the same software.... in time the versions might start to differ, but since the coworkers of company X are more familiar with the sourcecodes, the development of the free version should be faster (unless MS puts far more coders on the source - which I wouldn't consider a very bright idea either...)
If n downloads were paied for and gave them an average of 5pounds (so they get 5*n pounds) and there were 2*n downloads together, that means 2.5punds per download overall - thats about 10*n $ for 2*n downloads, but if they sold 2*n CDs via a major label, they'd have 2*n $ (because major labels give their artists an average of 1$ per sold CD) DID YOU GET THIS? this means, that they have FIVE TIMES MORE MONEY than they'd have if all these downloads (including the unpaied downloads) were all legal CD sales!!!
if the unpaied downloads were illegal downloads or at least not-bought CDs (which i think is more reallistic) this means they'd only have n $, if they sold the CD via a major label... so in this (imo more reallistic) scenario they have TEN TIMES MORE MONEY than what they'd have, if they sold the album on CD via a major label
C'mon, math isn't THAT hard...
but as many people pointed out, they could even do better - they could use bittorrent for distribution (to keep server-costs down - which would mean, they'd get more profit out of the 10*n $) and give people a preview of the songs, as incentive to buy (I, for one, might buy it, if I could get a preview...)
in other words: "now that the OIN (open invention network) shut our big mouth
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/05/1456209 , we have no other possibility to spread FUD anymore, than saying that OTHERS might sue Linux vendors and users..."
maybe that exact thing is why people think they had AV...
the survey should have included a search for malware that is spreaded that way... maybe they are on the other 49%s PCs...
this statistic is based on browser ID counting on websites that use the hitslink technology
no wonder, vista is kicking butt, the only site that does this is support.microsoft.com
no, this information was totally made up, but it demonstrates perfectly, why this statistic is completely worthless...
I, for one, just want to say: thank you for that link
I don't think I'd have found it without that article, but I'm very interested. I'm downloading it right now (via torrent)
this is one of the rare occasions, when reading a/. article was really useful for me... now mod me offtopic:-)
i think TVBoxSet.com might have some records about how many discs they have sold - therefore you can point out EXACTLY how big the loss is, that they have caused
going after children, cripples, deads, single mothers etc. is just more profitable, because you can just MAKE UP a loss that they've caused... 6500$ per song? yeah right, they surely uploaded every f***ing song to 6500 people on average...
this gives me an idea... you might get away cheaper, if your broadband connection wouldn't be fast enough to upload a song so often... IANAL though... the MAFIAA would surely make something up like second-level loss - because the people, that downloaded the file from me, upload it to others...
I'm just saying that stallman is right with his distinction between "open" and "free" -.nets source may be "opened" but it's far from "free" like GPL Software...
open = we show you the code - help us make money with it! (no, you don't get any of that - infact - if you want to use that product, you have to buy it for the normal price) free = we donate this to everyone - who wants to participate? (you don't get money either, but you - and everyone else - gets the product)
Slashdot Mirror
makes sense...
most of the products in the list are unfunny game-consoles... just like vista...
http://www.garageband.com/
http://www.jamendo.com/
http://www.stage.fm/
http://magnatune.com/
http://www.soundclick.com/
http://www.myownmusic.de/
hand-picked from around 1000 at del.icio.us
for example in mafia you played the biggest "jobs" of tommy's career - and there were years between them
wouldn't it be kinda stupid to play all the uneventful years between those "jobs" in realtime?
"news" about how a guy felt 11 years ago are the reason why I'm close to deleting
do they run linux?
either the person in charge has no clue about the IT world (in which case he shouldn't be in charge for this decision) or he was bribed - there is no other credible explanation for this step (all of a sudden paying extra for redundant software)
when i read the title i first thought, the MPAA wanted robots to swim to sweden and "visit" TPB....
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/22/1243202
We knew it was a lie...
every patented technology is excluded
i.e. they do pretty much nothing...
say they buy open source company X
now all coworkers of X leave, found "their own" company and fork the last open version of their software...
in effect MS would have nothing for their money - except the right to sell the software under a different license, but in competition to a free version of the same software.... in time the versions might start to differ, but since the coworkers of company X are more familiar with the sourcecodes, the development of the free version should be faster (unless MS puts far more coders on the source - which I wouldn't consider a very bright idea either...)
> Predict the Unpredictable
/dev/urandom
cat
do I get $2.2Million now?
If n downloads were paied for and gave them an average of 5pounds (so they get 5*n pounds) and there were 2*n downloads together, that means 2.5punds per download overall - thats about 10*n $ for 2*n downloads, but if they sold 2*n CDs via a major label, they'd have 2*n $ (because major labels give their artists an average of 1$ per sold CD)
DID YOU GET THIS? this means, that they have FIVE TIMES MORE MONEY than they'd have if all these downloads (including the unpaied downloads) were all legal CD sales!!!
if the unpaied downloads were illegal downloads or at least not-bought CDs (which i think is more reallistic) this means they'd only have n $, if they sold the CD via a major label... so in this (imo more reallistic) scenario they have TEN TIMES MORE MONEY than what they'd have, if they sold the album on CD via a major label
C'mon, math isn't THAT hard...
but as many people pointed out, they could even do better - they could use bittorrent for distribution (to keep server-costs down - which would mean, they'd get more profit out of the 10*n $) and give people a preview of the songs, as incentive to buy (I, for one, might buy it, if I could get a preview...)
when is this going to happen?... I mean WHERE is this going to happen?... I mean... uhm... damnit!
in other words: "now that the OIN (open invention network) shut our big mouth http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/05/1456209 , we have no other possibility to spread FUD anymore, than saying that OTHERS might sue Linux vendors and users..."
Who's Googles main Admin? I want to nominate him - just to destroy some chairs in redmond...
This must mean, that Hotmail just lost marketshare to Gmail...
why else would monkeyboy care?
do you think you have anti virus protection?
[X] Yes [ ] No
do you actually have anti virus protection?
[ ] Yes [X] No
Thank you for your help.
maybe that exact thing is why people think they had AV...
the survey should have included a search for malware that is spreaded that way... maybe they are on the other 49%s PCs...
this statistic is based on browser ID counting on websites that use the hitslink technology
no wonder, vista is kicking butt, the only site that does this is support.microsoft.com
no, this information was totally made up, but it demonstrates perfectly, why this statistic is completely worthless...
I, for one, just want to say: thank you for that link
/. article was really useful for me... now mod me offtopic :-)
I don't think I'd have found it without that article, but I'm very interested. I'm downloading it right now (via torrent)
this is one of the rare occasions, when reading a
i think TVBoxSet.com might have some records about how many discs they have sold - therefore you can point out EXACTLY how big the loss is, that they have caused
going after children, cripples, deads, single mothers etc. is just more profitable, because you can just MAKE UP a loss that they've caused... 6500$ per song? yeah right, they surely uploaded every f***ing song to 6500 people on average...
this gives me an idea... you might get away cheaper, if your broadband connection wouldn't be fast enough to upload a song so often... IANAL though... the MAFIAA would surely make something up like second-level loss - because the people, that downloaded the file from me, upload it to others...
finally! soon we'll have code-monkeys!
never heared about this species?
I'm just saying that stallman is right with his distinction between "open" and "free" - .nets source may be "opened" but it's far from "free" like GPL Software...
open = we show you the code - help us make money with it! (no, you don't get any of that - infact - if you want to use that product, you have to buy it for the normal price)
free = we donate this to everyone - who wants to participate? (you don't get money either, but you - and everyone else - gets the product)
stallman may be weird, but he's right...