What has TV survived on for over 50 years? Is it not advertising? What has happened to TV lately that very few new shows are being produced? Could it be that a big chunk of their ad revenues is going to Google? Could more people be surfing Google than are watching TV?
Also after MS gets over all it's anti trust-hassles, it won't be pissing around with anyone for a while. Now a "kinder gentler" twelve step MS, on recovery from a chair throwing addiction.
What was the point of Columbus sailing to the new world? To walk on land similar to the land that he left behind? New discoveries are not just new inventions, new discoveries are also new places.
Greed, It is all about Greed. The EU is a potentially larger market than the US, and the fines are less than 25% of the MS revenues there. In other words the daily take for MS there, is about four times the fine.
And MS typically has more than 100% profit on their products. Greed will not let them walk away from that gravy train. But they will probably end up playing by the rules, because in other parts of the world elected Governments govern, not Big Business. How the democracy concept is supposed to work, by affirimitive action, and not rhetoric and WMD lies.
I think that way back when, spaghetti, gunpowder, and several other such technologies were "reverse engineered" (stolen) from China. It's the old what goes around comes around thing.
I think I read a while back that there was a university student in the same sort of situation. He had bought a student discount version of Office, and when he could not get a refund at the university library where he bought it, he put it up for sale in E-Bay or something.
When the MS spies saw this, they tracked him down and sued him, and he counter sued under some fraudulent business / anti-trust practices laws. Because of all the anti-trust stuff going on with MS, I understand that they backed away and settled. This was in the US though not in the UK, so the laws may be somewhat different.
Isn't that the whole sick thing about software patents, or any patent for that matter. It presupposes that someone on the far side of the world, working independently can't have the same idea as you. But if they rush down to the patent office and file, then you have lost your rights to your idea. This is in direct violation of human freedoms and rights, everyone should be allowed to be free thinkers, and use our progressive ideas however we see fit.
No idea is ever unique, for someone else will independently have that idea sooner or later, without any need to copy. For example the Europeans invented bows and arrows, but when they came to the Americas, they discovered that the native peoples had also invented these too. How come there are pyramids all over the world, if there is no independent invention? Patents only restrict free thinking and the synergy that gives rise to accelerated progress of actually sharing and building on ideas. Pretty soon they will be doing something totally absurd like suing the Universities for teaching a concept that has been patented.
Like it or not bio-metrics is the wave of the future. Not yet a full-proof way of determining "who you are". There will likely eventually be two or more pieces of information required to make it more full-proof. Facial recognition at locations, and fingerprint combination tracking system. The "who you are" along with the "where you are", or some such combination. This technology can be used both for buying / selling and terrorism. George Orwell and 1984 was just a little early.
If you think blue is hard to focus on, you should try blue on red, or red on blue, where the wavelengths are at the opposite ends of the light spectrum. Black on yellow is supposed to be the easiest on the eyes, since yellow is mid spectrum.
Exactly, Yankee and Laura receive funding from you know who, for their "unbiased" reporting. And the folks over at Groklaw are not her biggest fans either, apparently she got some info blatantly wrong about them too.
With M$ it is never about the technology, it is always about, embrace, extend, extinguish. Adobe might have a chance against "extinguish" if they don't let them "embrace".
Corporations are run by people, and greed, selfishness and callousness, surprise you? How do you think that people get into positions of power? Because they are kind, caring, and considerate?
People are not stationary objects people are mobile. People use phones. Cell phones are mobile. Land line phones are stationary. If you actually had the technology choice, which the original phone companies did not, which one would you install, when really only one system is needed?
Firefox runs on more than one OS. You could say that it is multicultural? Not mono-cultural. Were the security issues related to all OS versions, or any particular OS?
If someone representing consumer interests voices an opinion they are neo-political fanatics. But when big business represent their own, and only their own interests, that is OK?
This is balanced reporting, no prejudices or "stir it up" interests here.
Ah gee, a know-it-all student!!! Hasn't even got an education yet, but really wants to show the world what he knows. We get a few of those who take their thesis where I work, eventually they learn that they don't know-it-all, and they certainly don't know people's intentions.
But after more than twenty years of negotiating, it is ALWAYS and ONLY about intention, motive and purpose, of the party on the other side of the table. The what makes them tick. All the other issues are only of secondary relevance.
I also asked you some questions about your motive and purpose. About your compulsion to show how clever you are, the sure sign of immaturity. But I have not seen your excuses or evasive answers to any of these questions. Because you still avoid the issue about your presumptions to know other peoples intentions, when you don't. Your arrogant presumption that you know that other people intend to write. Your arrogant presumption that you know what other people think and know.
How can I spell voilà incorrectly when that is not the word that I intended to use? (This is a question it requires a direct answer) And you had your little problem with the word that I did intend to use, because you didn't even know it was a real word. Do the two words even look anything alike, so they could be confused by a spelling mistake? (This is also a question that requires a direct answer) So then, how can it have been a spelling mistake, which you so eagerly tried to correct, if the two words are totally different? (Another question requiring an answer)
Ah, but it was a word that you did not know and obviously still do not know. Because it is an English word originally from Sanskrit (not from answers.com) My Oxford Dictionary that I still have from high school, gives the definition as "a person in charge or responsible" and that is the only definition given, and I see that Encarta gives the exact same definition, and also only that definition. And that is what I have always understood it to mean, "someone who takes responsibility, or someone who takes charge". So maybe you should get yourself a real dictionary.
And if you want to make it as an engineer, I suggest you learn the meaning of this word, because if you ever have to put your stamp to a drawing, you will understand about responsibility, in relation to jail time. Know-it-alls usually don't make it in the business. I am familiar with engineers and what it takes to be one. You know the people who create the IFC documents, that are included in contracts. The know-it-alls tell you they are final IFC documents when they are not even IFB, then there are schedule delays and job cost overruns because of this poor engineering, and then they get fired.
So a couple of tips here, I suggest you learn all the different words for responsible, and also for accountable, because when you actually get out into the real world, if you don't know these, it could get you fired. And if you do not understand the content of a business document, "get clarification before presuming to know what it means", or that will also get you fired. The real world does not take kindly to arrogant smart-asses.
Time for a little introspection here mister, and have a little look into your motivations, why do you have the obsessive compulsive need to try and correct what people write, and infer that you are great and they are morons? Is is because you are a know-it-all? Or is it because you have nothing useful to contribute? Or is it driven by self doubt, so you always have to reaffirm to yourself how great you are?
Your use of the word gibberish, and your use of French, that would tell me a snob Limey background with a pseudo education, you know the "arts" kind with no real useful application, and not much scientific or business interest. Maybe that that is why you have the compulsion to correct what "you" think is wrong with others writing. Because you don't have a life outside your academic cloisters. Maybe if you were in business you might have some meaningful purpose, apart from trying to show the world how great you are.
You live in oblivion, and don't know that you are witnessing the decline of the western world, because Asia is turning out the scientists and engineers, and the west is turning out the arts degree know-it-alls like you. And by the way I took four years of French, I don't use it because it is the language of snobs. I have known what walla means from high school, I could have used many words including "presto", another Latin word, but I didn't. I used the word I meant to use.
It was you who had the problem with that, and inferred that I was a moron because I didn't use your preferred artsy French word, and that says more about you than it does about the use of the word walla. You didn't know that it was a real English word, and didn't like it when I "called you" on that.
I think some self examination about why you do what you do, and what useful purpose it serves, besides self gratification, might be in order here.
No mister it is not gibberish, you are just one of those "haughty" assholes who tries to correct everyone, and you got it wrong this time. I see your type on the internet all the time.
I write contracts for I living, to the tune of about $500M per year, and if you know anything about contracts, you will know that you have to know what you are saying, and say what you mean. And you are implying that I didn't know what I was saying, because you didn't know what I was saying, and that is because you are not as bright as you think you are.
So here is a Latin contract term for you, "quid pro quo", it essentially means "tit for tat" and with your attitude, did you expect anything different.
"Somebody was responsible for getting it right" that was what the whole gist of what the post was about.
"haughty" -- arrogant, disdainful, overbearing, conceited, condescending, stuck-up (informal), proud, self-important, full of yourself
Are you a French teacher now, and telling me what word I intended to use? I was not using French, I was using English. The issue was about someone being responsible for something actually working.
walla [wóll] (plural wallahs) or walla [wóll] (plural wallas) noun
somebody responsible for something: somebody in charge of something or associated with a particular service or occupation (dated informal) a legal wallah
[Late 18th century. Via Hindi -vl "(somebody) responsible for something or some duty" Sanskrit plaka "keeper"]
I am familiar with the propriety / Open Source concept. Just because there is no charge for the software does not necessarily mean that it is "free".
Say for the two big video hardware manufacturers, they are constantly going head to head on the FPS thing. And it is a constant cycle of hardware design, and then squeeze the last bit of performance out of the old hardware until they have new designed hardware in production, by incremental improvements to the drivers. Intel and AMD have a similar model, except without the installable drivers.
With this competitive type business model, I don't ever see ATI or Nividia opening up their drivers.
I will be buying Linux supported hardware in future, but my current hardware is not that old. The situation keeps steadily improving, as a couple of years back a lot less of my hardware worked with the then Linux OSes, including the internet hardware, and the monitor card only marginally. The only thing that does not work now with the latest Linux OSes is the printer. The rest seems to be full plug and play.
I understand the propriety / Open Source concept, just because there is no charge does not mean it is free.
I'm not a programmer so I don't know that much about this stuff, and the finer points of how to tackle the problem. But some sort of coordinated united type effort is needed in the Linux community to solve this issue.
The propriety crowd will probably not cooperate that much with any kind of reverse engineering effort. I have heard of Windows drivers being used in some sort of Linux wrapper. I don't know if that direction is a viable solution. Is a Linux API or port specifically designed to allow raw Windows drivers to be used, a viable option? I have read that the KDE 4 community is putting in some sort of layer to make the driver development and installation thing easier.
Whatever the Linux community effort is to solve this, it should not be all over the board like it seems to be now, but pick some single better or best solution, and all effort be coordinated in this direction.
The other associated issue of course is interoperability of applications and drivers on the different Linux OSes. There needs to be some standards set for this, so the same applications or drivers can be installed on any Linus OS and work. These are just my pet beefs with Linux, because I keep hoping that the next version will be my main "all systems work" Desktop. I thought SUSE 10.1 might have been it.
Slashdot Mirror
So the moon is not en route to the stars? You don't have to crawl before you walk?
What has TV survived on for over 50 years? Is it not advertising? What has happened to TV lately that very few new shows are being produced? Could it be that a big chunk of their ad revenues is going to Google? Could more people be surfing Google than are watching TV?
Also after MS gets over all it's anti trust-hassles, it won't be pissing around with anyone for a while. Now a "kinder gentler" twelve step MS, on recovery from a chair throwing addiction.
What was the point of Columbus sailing to the new world? To walk on land similar to the land that he left behind? New discoveries are not just new inventions, new discoveries are also new places.
Greed, It is all about Greed. The EU is a potentially larger market than the US, and the fines are less than 25% of the MS revenues there. In other words the daily take for MS there, is about four times the fine.
And MS typically has more than 100% profit on their products. Greed will not let them walk away from that gravy train. But they will probably end up playing by the rules, because in other parts of the world elected Governments govern, not Big Business. How the democracy concept is supposed to work, by affirimitive action, and not rhetoric and WMD lies.
I think that way back when, spaghetti, gunpowder, and several other such technologies were "reverse engineered" (stolen) from China. It's the old what goes around comes around thing.
I think I read a while back that there was a university student in the same sort of situation. He had bought a student discount version of Office, and when he could not get a refund at the university library where he bought it, he put it up for sale in E-Bay or something.
When the MS spies saw this, they tracked him down and sued him, and he counter sued under some fraudulent business / anti-trust practices laws. Because of all the anti-trust stuff going on with MS, I understand that they backed away and settled. This was in the US though not in the UK, so the laws may be somewhat different.
Isn't that the whole sick thing about software patents, or any patent for that matter. It presupposes that someone on the far side of the world, working independently can't have the same idea as you. But if they rush down to the patent office and file, then you have lost your rights to your idea. This is in direct violation of human freedoms and rights, everyone should be allowed to be free thinkers, and use our progressive ideas however we see fit.
No idea is ever unique, for someone else will independently have that idea sooner or later, without any need to copy. For example the Europeans invented bows and arrows, but when they came to the Americas, they discovered that the native peoples had also invented these too. How come there are pyramids all over the world, if there is no independent invention? Patents only restrict free thinking and the synergy that gives rise to accelerated progress of actually sharing and building on ideas. Pretty soon they will be doing something totally absurd like suing the Universities for teaching a concept that has been patented.
Like it or not bio-metrics is the wave of the future. Not yet a full-proof way of determining "who you are". There will likely eventually be two or more pieces of information required to make it more full-proof. Facial recognition at locations, and fingerprint combination tracking system. The "who you are" along with the "where you are", or some such combination. This technology can be used both for buying / selling and terrorism. George Orwell and 1984 was just a little early.
If you think blue is hard to focus on, you should try blue on red, or red on blue, where the wavelengths are at the opposite ends of the light spectrum. Black on yellow is supposed to be the easiest on the eyes, since yellow is mid spectrum.
And why not? Like MS never puts out any negative spin about other companies? And occasionally throws a chair or two.
Like the glass house and the stones, you reap what you sow, you lie in the bed you make, the chickens come home to roost etc. etc.
Exactly, Yankee and Laura receive funding from you know who, for their "unbiased" reporting. And the folks over at Groklaw are not her biggest fans either, apparently she got some info blatantly wrong about them too.
With M$ it is never about the technology, it is always about, embrace, extend, extinguish. Adobe might have a chance against "extinguish" if they don't let them "embrace".
Corporations are run by people, and greed, selfishness and callousness, surprise you? How do you think that people get into positions of power? Because they are kind, caring, and considerate?
There should not be any surprises here.
I think the key word here is "tools". People usually "use" tools, they are not replaced by them.
If the only tool that you have is a hammer, then every problem becomes a nail.
People are not stationary objects people are mobile. People use phones. Cell phones are mobile. Land line phones are stationary. If you actually had the technology choice, which the original phone companies did not, which one would you install, when really only one system is needed?
Firefox runs on more than one OS. You could say that it is multicultural? Not mono-cultural. Were the security issues related to all OS versions, or any particular OS?
If someone representing consumer interests voices an opinion they are neo-political fanatics. But when big business represent their own, and only their own interests, that is OK?
This is balanced reporting, no prejudices or "stir it up" interests here.
The software may have bugs, but it never operates under the influence of alcohol.
Ah gee, a know-it-all student!!! Hasn't even got an education yet, but really wants to show the world what he knows. We get a few of those who take their thesis where I work, eventually they learn that they don't know-it-all, and they certainly don't know people's intentions.
But after more than twenty years of negotiating, it is ALWAYS and ONLY about intention, motive and purpose, of the party on the other side of the table. The what makes them tick. All the other issues are only of secondary relevance.
I also asked you some questions about your motive and purpose. About your compulsion to show how clever you are, the sure sign of immaturity. But I have not seen your excuses or evasive answers to any of these questions. Because you still avoid the issue about your presumptions to know other peoples intentions, when you don't. Your arrogant presumption that you know that other people intend to write. Your arrogant presumption that you know what other people think and know.
How can I spell voilà incorrectly when that is not the word that I intended to use? (This is a question it requires a direct answer) And you had your little problem with the word that I did intend to use, because you didn't even know it was a real word. Do the two words even look anything alike, so they could be confused by a spelling mistake? (This is also a question that requires a direct answer) So then, how can it have been a spelling mistake, which you so eagerly tried to correct, if the two words are totally different? (Another question requiring an answer)
Ah, but it was a word that you did not know and obviously still do not know. Because it is an English word originally from Sanskrit (not from answers.com) My Oxford Dictionary that I still have from high school, gives the definition as "a person in charge or responsible" and that is the only definition given, and I see that Encarta gives the exact same definition, and also only that definition. And that is what I have always understood it to mean, "someone who takes responsibility, or someone who takes charge". So maybe you should get yourself a real dictionary.
And if you want to make it as an engineer, I suggest you learn the meaning of this word, because if you ever have to put your stamp to a drawing, you will understand about responsibility, in relation to jail time. Know-it-alls usually don't make it in the business. I am familiar with engineers and what it takes to be one. You know the people who create the IFC documents, that are included in contracts. The know-it-alls tell you they are final IFC documents when they are not even IFB, then there are schedule delays and job cost overruns because of this poor engineering, and then they get fired.
So a couple of tips here, I suggest you learn all the different words for responsible, and also for accountable, because when you actually get out into the real world, if you don't know these, it could get you fired. And if you do not understand the content of a business document, "get clarification before presuming to know what it means", or that will also get you fired. The real world does not take kindly to arrogant smart-asses.
Time for a little introspection here mister, and have a little look into your motivations, why do you have the obsessive compulsive need to try and correct what people write, and infer that you are great and they are morons? Is is because you are a know-it-all? Or is it because you have nothing useful to contribute? Or is it driven by self doubt, so you always have to reaffirm to yourself how great you are?
Your use of the word gibberish, and your use of French, that would tell me a snob Limey background with a pseudo education, you know the "arts" kind with no real useful application, and not much scientific or business interest. Maybe that that is why you have the compulsion to correct what "you" think is wrong with others writing. Because you don't have a life outside your academic cloisters. Maybe if you were in business you might have some meaningful purpose, apart from trying to show the world how great you are.
You live in oblivion, and don't know that you are witnessing the decline of the western world, because Asia is turning out the scientists and engineers, and the west is turning out the arts degree know-it-alls like you. And by the way I took four years of French, I don't use it because it is the language of snobs. I have known what walla means from high school, I could have used many words including "presto", another Latin word, but I didn't. I used the word I meant to use.
It was you who had the problem with that, and inferred that I was a moron because I didn't use your preferred artsy French word, and that says more about you than it does about the use of the word walla. You didn't know that it was a real English word, and didn't like it when I "called you" on that.
I think some self examination about why you do what you do, and what useful purpose it serves, besides self gratification, might be in order here.
No mister it is not gibberish, you are just one of those "haughty" assholes who tries to correct everyone, and you got it wrong this time. I see your type on the internet all the time.
I write contracts for I living, to the tune of about $500M per year, and if you know anything about contracts, you will know that you have to know what you are saying, and say what you mean. And you are implying that I didn't know what I was saying, because you didn't know what I was saying, and that is because you are not as bright as you think you are.
So here is a Latin contract term for you, "quid pro quo", it essentially means "tit for tat" and with your attitude, did you expect anything different.
"Somebody was responsible for getting it right" that was what the whole gist of what the post was about.
"haughty" -- arrogant, disdainful, overbearing, conceited, condescending, stuck-up (informal), proud, self-important, full of yourself
Are you a French teacher now, and telling me what word I intended to use? I was not using French, I was using English. The issue was about someone being responsible for something actually working.
walla [wóll]
(plural wallahs) or walla [wóll] (plural wallas)
noun
somebody responsible for something: somebody in charge of something or associated with a particular service or occupation (dated informal)
a legal wallah
[Late 18th century. Via Hindi -vl "(somebody) responsible for something or some duty" Sanskrit plaka "keeper"]
I am familiar with the propriety / Open Source concept. Just because there is no charge for the software does not necessarily mean that it is "free".
Say for the two big video hardware manufacturers, they are constantly going head to head on the FPS thing. And it is a constant cycle of hardware design, and then squeeze the last bit of performance out of the old hardware until they have new designed hardware in production, by incremental improvements to the drivers. Intel and AMD have a similar model, except without the installable drivers.
With this competitive type business model, I don't ever see ATI or Nividia opening up their drivers.
I will be buying Linux supported hardware in future, but my current hardware is not that old. The situation keeps steadily improving, as a couple of years back a lot less of my hardware worked with the then Linux OSes, including the internet hardware, and the monitor card only marginally. The only thing that does not work now with the latest Linux OSes is the printer. The rest seems to be full plug and play.
I understand the propriety / Open Source concept, just because there is no charge does not mean it is free.
I'm not a programmer so I don't know that much about this stuff, and the finer points of how to tackle the problem. But some sort of coordinated united type effort is needed in the Linux community to solve this issue.
The propriety crowd will probably not cooperate that much with any kind of reverse engineering effort. I have heard of Windows drivers being used in some sort of Linux wrapper. I don't know if that direction is a viable solution. Is a Linux API or port specifically designed to allow raw Windows drivers to be used, a viable option? I have read that the KDE 4 community is putting in some sort of layer to make the driver development and installation thing easier.
Whatever the Linux community effort is to solve this, it should not be all over the board like it seems to be now, but pick some single better or best solution, and all effort be coordinated in this direction.
The other associated issue of course is interoperability of applications and drivers on the different Linux OSes. There needs to be some standards set for this, so the same applications or drivers can be installed on any Linus OS and work. These are just my pet beefs with Linux, because I keep hoping that the next version will be my main "all systems work" Desktop. I thought SUSE 10.1 might have been it.