I don't know what you are making, you didn't provide info. How popular do you expect the software to get (be realistic)? If you think it will displace Apache in 2 months, then you should make it open source and freely downloadable. But otherwise if you need to buy groceries and stuff, I think you should sell it with the source included (you can sell service contracts on top of that). Choose a license that gives you, for a limited time, a fair amount of control over their ability to sell copies of your work. You can even choose the GPL, but I dont think that's a good idea.
Whenever you release a new version of your software GPL the previous version and make it freely available.. while keeping the current version for sale at a fixed price (with source).
Again all of this depends on what you're making, and if you need to eat etc.
Assuming no wars or major natural disasters, the cost of a decent laptop or tablet will be under $75 (in inflation adjusted currency) in about 7 years.
Impossible?? Well think about it.. you can get a tablet today for $50 that performs better than any available smartphone of 2005 and with higher resolution too. So add $25 to that $50 improve the build quality. Guess what you have $75 tablet performing at least at the level of today's new iPad.. which, at the risk of saying 640k oughta be enough for everyone, is good enough for many scenarios -- when CPUs first hit that "good enough" point (2 to 3GHz) people no longer cared about upgrading their desktops and wanted laptops. Speaking of which, the price of ultrabooks are headed for collapse too. Although the price of laptops have not changed.. once Windows 8 comes out there will be ARM based laptops and we'll see a price collapse.. as people adapt future versions of Android to better take advantage of keyboards (actually it already supports it). Current Walmart netbooks are in the $300 price range.. because they perform at the level of $400 tablets. So there is no competitive pressure to drop in price. Once high performance tablets are available at $75 we'll see the hardware prices drop. Furthermore, Android will be built into everything. Your car will have an Android touchscreen. Your personal robot will have it too.
Consumers might benefit in the short term, but in the long term as investors refuse to risk their capital in high tech.. nobody will benefit. Also without an accumulation of capital (since nobody will be able to make a large profit margin due to competition), there won't be anyone with the capital to fund new research.
Chill out bro. Keep tryin' to b a millionaire. Now you didn't say what you did or what your angle on the market was.. but it's been always well known that hard work alone isn't enough -- you need good ideas, a marketing strategy that works, and smart practices. If wealth was based solely on how much hard work you do, people working at a fast food place or on a farm would be earning double what a CEO makes.
Anyway,..according to wikipedia.. this guy owned a record store.. he understood music.. and people had told him there was a need for a decent amp.. so he formed a company.. hired some engineers.. and produced one.
Btw, most of the time.. by the time the Chinese copy your invention.. you'd have presumably made a chunk of money already (or how else would they know your invention even exists.. let alone that its worth manufacturing).
As for "little guys who made it work".. there are plenty of millionaires that made smartphone apps -- individuals who had good ideas, implemented them the correct way, and worked hard -- with almost no money or capital investment. Also your cloning theory is false. How come twitter clones didnt make it? Twitter is a fairly simple website that wouldn't have been difficult for any of the big boys to duplicate.. same thing with youtube. Anyway.. just cause you failed 3 times doesn't mean you should give up.. many people failed a lot more times than that before they made it.
When i said update the star tables every 10,000 years.. i meant the spacecraft itself can update its own tables too.That is, the spacecraft itself could update the star tables for many cycles by keeping track of changes to individual stars. It would need AI though to know how stable certain changes are, and drop or suspend tracking of stars, galaxies, or other objects that are unreliable to use either due to their intrinsic nature or because they are being obscured or dimmed because of a dust cloud or something else. It would need to build or update its own table anyway as it leaves the region that Hipparcos data would allow accurate fixation in.
How do we know a pulsar's period cannot change over millenia? I mean all sorts of things can change a pulsars period.. collision with a red dwarf for one.
Isn't it easier, and far more accurate to use the regular stars? There are billions of them.. many of which have known rotational periods, brightness variability, and proper motions that can be detected via doppler shifts and other means. The Hipparchos satellite produced a fairly accurate 3D map of the neighborhood.. that can be a good starting point. Every star has it's own spectrographic and brightness variation signature.. Sure black swan events may change a stars spectrum, variability cycle, and other things.. but there are a billions stars.. a spacecraft can navigate by tracking just a few million of them (a wide field gigapixel camera and few spectrographic telescopes, should be all it needs).. its extremely unlikely that more than a few percent of them will change enough to cause navigational errors.. just update the star tables every 10,000 years.. normal GPS has to it that way more often with satellites.
Now, go to http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/26/how-would-you-change-sony-ericssons-xperia-x1/2#comments and do a find in page for the word "bottom" or "pop out"... ok read that description.. now if you scroll up to the top of the article you can see a photo of the Xperia X1 which is being talked about.. notice that a combination of the Xperia X1 and the comment exactly fit the patent of microsoft? If you read the actual patent it becomes even clearer they stole the idea from that engadget comment.
SSL needs to be mandatory.. there is way too much threat from various governments and even non governmental bodies that want to see what people are doing on the web.
Also, they can easily price the cure at the amortized cost of the treatment (for example price the cure at the 5 years of treatment price) -- insurance companies will gladly pay it -- since their costs will be reduced since they can spread it across quarters. (and btw the treatment industry isn't necessarily all that profitable there is a fair amount of competition).
There will always be people predicting disasters. What about the engineers who made predictions that the other power plants would get hit by a meteor and cause a thermonuclear explosion? If you chase every dire prediction nothing would ever get built. Yes sometimes something slips through the cracks.. but overall there is a benefit to ignoring some of the crank stuff unless there is specific evidence that a tsunami was going to strike.
Just because it has been done before doesn't mean it can't be done again with a new twist. Look at many of the popular games in the app store such as Angry Birds or Doodle Jump (PapiJump and Sonic Jump).. they are remakes of existing games that nobody ever heard of (Angry Birds concept is from Crush the Castle, Doodle Jump concept is from the prior iPhone game PapiJump which in turn improved on Sonic Jump).. the biggest difference being the graphics.
People were a lot smarter back then. Unfortunately the Sun started emitting extra doses of gamma radiation from the late 80s onwards, permanently ruining humanity. Thanks a lot Sun.
Why can't the inventor of a cure charge the amortized amount that the "treatments" cost? As an added (though unnecessary) benefit a cure wouldn't even have any competition. Steve Jobs.. a multi billionaire.. one of the top 50 richest people in the world.. why couldnt one of the cancer scientists approach him and ssay "give me 5 billion, i will cure your cancer"? All they have to do is charge the treatment's price for the cure. Most people die within 5 years of a cancer diagnosis, so it's not like a cancer treatment can make you unlimited continuous profit. By the way, there is a lot of different cancer treatments out there.. and so just because you have a treatment doesn't mean you can charge an unlimited amount.. however there is no cure.. a cur would be a diffrent story.. people will pay anything for a cure .
Why shouldn't Americans have the right to purchase goods made in foreign countries? What about software? What about ideas? Without foreign ideas and foreigners the iPhone wouldn't even exist.
They could spend 50 billion of it on curing cancer. You know, I wondered why Steve Jobs didn't do that.. I kept putting off writing to him to tell him to do that -- I now regret that. All he had to do was get all the world's top cancer scientists together to work on the problem in a focused way. He did that with computer animation and it worked. He did that with smartphones and it worked. Why can't it work for cancer or for regenerative medicine (growing new body parts)?
And yes, it would be massively profitable.. they can charge the equivalent of 1 or 2 years of chemotherapy for the cure. The insurance companies would gladly pay for it (it'll be cheaper than paying for 3-5 years of various expensive chemotherapy drugs and tests that the average cancer patient needs).
They would get their invested money back within months.
for example: NASA went to space, so Europe made the ESA.. a weak form of NASA The US starting building the supercollider (which Reagan cancelled) so they built the LHC -- a weaker supercollider... they only win cause supercollider funding got cut The US has Boeing so Europee made Airbus -- most of their planes are uninspired boeing clones The US built the National Ignition Facility to study nuclear fusion, so Europe is building Laser Megajoule.. Now as it turns out NIF is having trouble achieving ignition, due to the type of lasers used.. however Europe already started building Laser Megajoule.. and is still building it similar to the NIF.. at least they should have tried to innovate and use a different type of laser such as DPSSL or Krypton Flouride.. that way there is no duplication of effort and they could have made a genuine contribution.
The only project Europe can be commended on is ITER.. which will take another 8 years to build and whose funding is constantly on the brink of cutoff.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what you are making, you didn't provide info. How popular do you expect the software to get (be realistic)? If you think it will displace Apache in 2 months, then you should make it open source and freely downloadable. But otherwise if you need to buy groceries and stuff, I think you should sell it with the source included (you can sell service contracts on top of that). Choose a license that gives you, for a limited time, a fair amount of control over their ability to sell copies of your work. You can even choose the GPL, but I dont think that's a good idea.
Whenever you release a new version of your software GPL the previous version and make it freely available .. while keeping the current version for sale at a fixed price (with source).
Again all of this depends on what you're making, and if you need to eat etc.
Assuming no wars or major natural disasters, the cost of a decent laptop or tablet will be under $75 (in inflation adjusted currency) in about 7 years.
Impossible?? Well think about it .. you can get a tablet today for $50 that performs better than any available smartphone of 2005 and with higher resolution too. So add $25 to that $50 improve the build quality. Guess what you have $75 tablet performing at least at the level of today's new iPad .. which, at the risk of saying 640k oughta be enough for everyone, is good enough for many scenarios -- when CPUs first hit that "good enough" point (2 to 3GHz) people no longer cared about upgrading their desktops and wanted laptops. Speaking of which, the price of ultrabooks are headed for collapse too. Although the price of laptops have not changed .. once Windows 8 comes out there will be ARM based laptops and we'll see a price collapse .. as people adapt future versions of Android to better take advantage of keyboards (actually it already supports it). Current Walmart netbooks are in the $300 price range .. because they perform at the level of $400 tablets. So there is no competitive pressure to drop in price. Once high performance tablets are available at $75 we'll see the hardware prices drop.
Furthermore, Android will be built into everything. Your car will have an Android touchscreen. Your personal robot will have it too.
Consumers might benefit in the short term, but in the long term as investors refuse to risk their capital in high tech .. nobody will benefit. Also without an accumulation of capital (since nobody will be able to make a large profit margin due to competition), there won't be anyone with the capital to fund new research.
Chill out bro. Keep tryin' to b a millionaire. Now you didn't say what you did or what your angle on the market was .. but it's been always well known that hard work alone isn't enough -- you need good ideas, a marketing strategy that works, and smart practices. If wealth was based solely on how much hard work you do, people working at a fast food place or on a farm would be earning double what a CEO makes.
Anyway, ..according to wikipedia .. this guy owned a record store .. he understood music .. and people had told him there was a need for a decent amp .. so he formed a company .. hired some engineers .. and produced one.
Btw, most of the time.. by the time the Chinese copy your invention .. you'd have presumably made a chunk of money already (or how else would they know your invention even exists .. let alone that its worth manufacturing).
As for "little guys who made it work" .. there are plenty of millionaires that made smartphone apps -- individuals who had good ideas, implemented them the correct way, and worked hard -- with almost no money or capital investment. Also your cloning theory is false. How come twitter clones didnt make it? Twitter is a fairly simple website that wouldn't have been difficult for any of the big boys to duplicate .. same thing with youtube. Anyway .. just cause you failed 3 times doesn't mean you should give up.. many people failed a lot more times than that before they made it.
It is self sustaining as long as it's being sustained by sunlight.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Pulsar_Causes_Mysterious_Collision_With_Stellar_Winds.html
http://scienceray.com/astronomy/22-pulsars-found-in-the-star-cluster-in-our-galaxy/ (read where it says some of them may have collided with a red giant)
http://www.swinburne.edu.au/magazine/1/46/giant-energy-burst-reveals-new-cosmic-horizons/
Satisfied or want more?
When i said update the star tables every 10,000 years .. i meant the spacecraft itself can update its own tables too.That is, the spacecraft itself could update the star tables for many cycles by keeping track of changes to individual stars. It would need AI though to know how stable certain changes are, and drop or suspend tracking of stars, galaxies, or other objects that are unreliable to use either due to their intrinsic nature or because they are being obscured or dimmed because of a dust cloud or something else. It would need to build or update its own table anyway as it leaves the region that Hipparcos data would allow accurate fixation in.
How do we know a pulsar's period cannot change over millenia? I mean all sorts of things can change a pulsars period .. collision with a red dwarf for one.
Isn't it easier, and far more accurate to use the regular stars? There are billions of them .. many of which have known rotational periods, brightness variability, and proper motions that can be detected via doppler shifts and other means. The Hipparchos satellite produced a fairly accurate 3D map of the neighborhood .. that can be a good starting point. Every star has it's own spectrographic and brightness variation signature .. Sure black swan events may change a stars spectrum, variability cycle, and other things .. but there are a billions stars .. a spacecraft can navigate by tracking just a few million of them (a wide field gigapixel camera and few spectrographic telescopes, should be all it needs) .. its extremely unlikely that more than a few percent of them will change enough to cause navigational errors .. just update the star tables every 10,000 years .. normal GPS has to it that way more often with satellites.
Microsoft recently got this patent:
http://www.reghardware.com/2011/09/23/microsoft_contemplates_mobiles_with_interchangeable_accessories/
Now, go to http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/26/how-would-you-change-sony-ericssons-xperia-x1/2#comments and do a find in page for the word "bottom" or "pop out" ... ok read that description .. now if you scroll up to the top of the article you can see a photo of the Xperia X1 which is being talked about .. notice that a combination of the Xperia X1 and the comment exactly fit the patent of microsoft? If you read the actual patent it becomes even clearer they stole the idea from that engadget comment.
Well that part needs to be changed. I guess I should have said encryption rather than SSL.
SSL needs to be mandatory .. there is way too much threat from various governments and even non governmental bodies that want to see what people are doing on the web.
If wish somebody would ship an SSL-only browser.
Also, they can easily price the cure at the amortized cost of the treatment (for example price the cure at the 5 years of treatment price) -- insurance companies will gladly pay it -- since their costs will be reduced since they can spread it across quarters. (and btw the treatment industry isn't necessarily all that profitable there is a fair amount of competition).
Is it really a bad idea? This is just the opinion of some researchers, so why don't we vote on it online and see?
There will always be people predicting disasters. What about the engineers who made predictions that the other power plants would get hit by a meteor and cause a thermonuclear explosion? If you chase every dire prediction nothing would ever get built. Yes sometimes something slips through the cracks .. but overall there is a benefit to ignoring some of the crank stuff unless there is specific evidence that a tsunami was going to strike.
Just because it has been done before doesn't mean it can't be done again with a new twist. Look at many of the popular games in the app store such as Angry Birds or Doodle Jump (PapiJump and Sonic Jump) .. they are remakes of existing games that nobody ever heard of (Angry Birds concept is from Crush the Castle, Doodle Jump concept is from the prior iPhone game PapiJump which in turn improved on Sonic Jump) .. the biggest difference being the graphics.
People were a lot smarter back then. Unfortunately the Sun started emitting extra doses of gamma radiation from the late 80s onwards, permanently ruining humanity. Thanks a lot Sun.
Why can't the inventor of a cure charge the amortized amount that the "treatments" cost? As an added (though unnecessary) benefit a cure wouldn't even have any competition. Steve Jobs .. a multi billionaire .. one of the top 50 richest people in the world .. why couldnt one of the cancer scientists approach him and ssay "give me 5 billion, i will cure your cancer"? All they have to do is charge the treatment's price for the cure. Most people die within 5 years of a cancer diagnosis, so it's not like a cancer treatment can make you unlimited continuous profit. By the way, there is a lot of different cancer treatments out there .. and so just because you have a treatment doesn't mean you can charge an unlimited amount .. however there is no cure .. a cur would be a diffrent story .. people will pay anything for a cure
.
Why shouldn't Americans have the right to purchase goods made in foreign countries? What about software? What about ideas? Without foreign ideas and foreigners the iPhone wouldn't even exist.
Ahh, no wonder the rattling sound from my wheel well suddenly disappeared.
They could spend 50 billion of it on curing cancer. You know, I wondered why Steve Jobs didn't do that .. I kept putting off writing to him to tell him to do that -- I now regret that. All he had to do was get all the world's top cancer scientists together to work on the problem in a focused way. He did that with computer animation and it worked. He did that with smartphones and it worked. Why can't it work for cancer or for regenerative medicine (growing new body parts)?
And yes, it would be massively profitable .. they can charge the equivalent of 1 or 2 years of chemotherapy for the cure. The insurance companies would gladly pay for it (it'll be cheaper than paying for 3-5 years of various expensive chemotherapy drugs and tests that the average cancer patient needs).
They would get their invested money back within months.
Seriously, cause my own memory really sucks, it would be nice if i could make myself remember things. How do i waterboard myself?
You obviously didn't bother to click on the video, and assumed it was some other video you'd seen. Dingbat.
for example: .. a weak form of NASA ... they only win cause supercollider funding got cut .. Now as it turns out NIF is having trouble achieving ignition, due to the type of lasers used .. however Europe already started building Laser Megajoule .. and is still building it similar to the NIF .. at least they should have tried to innovate and use a different type of laser such as DPSSL or Krypton Flouride .. that way there is no duplication of effort and they could have made a genuine contribution.
NASA went to space, so Europe made the ESA
The US starting building the supercollider (which Reagan cancelled) so they built the LHC -- a weaker supercollider
The US has Boeing so Europee made Airbus -- most of their planes are uninspired boeing clones
The US built the National Ignition Facility to study nuclear fusion, so Europe is building Laser Megajoule
The only project Europe can be commended on is ITER .. which will take another 8 years to build and whose funding is constantly on the brink of cutoff.
The idea of an all powerful, all knowledgeable, and all good God only emerged well after the caveman era.
Ahh yes that fits a lot better.