Can you fathom why FLOSS users balk at paying $100/year + $1000 one time fee for access to free software that is always $0 free as long as they STAY AWAY from Apple?
Because they're fucking cheapskates. That's what you're saying.
No, we shouldn't have to pay to get *our* software out there. We're volunteers, we are doing it out of the goodness for our hearts, why should we pay a hardware corporation to distribute open source software?
Are you trying to claim that you shouldn't have access to the dev platform to dev software? If you want to release something for Solaris, you'd still need a machine running Solaris. If you want to release something for Windows, you'll need access to a machine running Windows. This is no different.
Just because you're releasing open source software doesn't mean you shouldn't incur any costs whatsoever.
Most people don't have the $1,000 or so to buy the hardware required to make use of the "free developer account.
That's their problem. If I want to release something for Windows, I still need a Windows machine to compile and test on. And, don't even start down the road of claiming that everyone who wants to release on Windows has Windows.
You don't have any more freedom on Android in that respect; once you've bought enough apps and sunk enough money into the platform, you're effectively locked in. Sure, you can buy a few different "shells" for Android, but it's all the same stuff.
Btw, would you buy a extra large rubber bumper for your car to avoid it breaking from a slight ding or would you rather it be designed to actually withstand normal use?
If you think this is unique to Apple stuff, you're high. Or an anti-fanboy troll.
I would say a lot of your gripes about the iPad are prevalent on Android as well. The excessive use of touch, for instance, is also there on Android. The crappy searching in the Market is definitely there. And as far as the 2x hack, well Android just does that by default.
and you've got the apps they lead to which themselves are somewhat restricted as to what they're allowed to do.
Not really. Yes, there are some exceptions, but for the most part, anything you want to do on Android, you can do on iOS. Especially if you're willing to Jailbreak (which I would put as on the same level as rooting for Android phones).
What about the software ecosystem? Price may favor the Transformer, and I'm not convinced about the specs (and as any good geek can tell you, they're not the only thing you should judge on), but the software definitely favors the iPad at this point in time. Tablet optimized apps are far more available on iOS than on Android. I'm sure given time that will change, but for now it's true.
And before you ask, tablet optimized apps are better than scaled up phone apps, mainly because they can take advantage of the hardware a tablet has to offer. They're able to make much better use of the extra screen real estate.
Why not buy something that looks and feels like an iPad but isn't one and the answer is of course, brand loyalty/brand choice/lack of willingness to shop around/take your pick.
You forget the far better app ecosystem, as of now. I'm sure that'll change in a year or so, but as of now, the iPad has a far better library of tablet-optimized apps than Honeycomb.
He could - and wind up in a lot of expensive legal hot water as a result, such as perjury charges and civil damages.
Oh shit. Here for a minute I thought we were talking about the DMCA!
Even if he sent a blatantly false takedown notice, he will face nothing. In fact, I don't think there is anything the recipient of a DMCA notice can do except issue the counter-notice. There's really not many provisions to dissuade people from issuing false claims.
Isn't it illegal to own person's private time this way?
Not according to Libertarians. They think that if you can fuck someone over on their employment contract, it is your moral obligation to do so.
As far as I know slavery was abolished in the US some time ago.
In reality, it was abolished in name only. Oh, and the race thing. They realized quite quickly they could make more money if they opened slavery to all races, rather than just one.
If a company does not pay you for your out of work time, then they have not right to whatever you do then.
They get away with this through "salaries", in which they say you're always on the clock.
It is really shocking that people accept such conditions.
It is more shocking that they are allowed to offer such conditions. However, I'd wager the majority of people simply don't read it. The others really don't want to, but that nagging feeling of hunger in your belly can be quite a motivator.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say your position was the minority of positions. I'm also going to bet that you were not doing it in a down economy, when people have been out of work for 2 years or more.
You might say you don't want to work for such a corporation any way, but then again you might not have another option not evolving a steep pay-cut.
This statement right here is why there should be no additional constraints on a job other than showing up and doing the work in a satisfactory fashion. All of these "non-competes" and "we own your shit" clauses should be ended.
We're in huge trouble as a country because a completely different sector of the financial industry was irresponsible in the way they lent money. Making high-frequency trading the scapegoat is not going to solve our problems.
I am not trying to pin it entirely on HFT, as that feeling I mentioned is pervasive throughout the entire economy. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Sure there is. The point at which a normal person cannot possibly react.
If we push the markets together a millisecond faster, there isn't much social worth, but it is that competition for that tiny timeslice that gives what we do benefit.
Meaning you don't provide anything to society, just to your overlords.
HFT does produce something of value, because there's almost always liquidity in the market because of HFT.
That's questionable at best. When you increase the liquidity (and in doing so, volatility) faster than an actual person can react to it, there is no value there, except to other HFT. You are just skimming profits at that point.
And don't even try to hide behind "real investors". You are fucking them over with your shit.
Losing money is also defined as not making as much as possible. If you were making $1000/minute on Monday doing something and only $100/minute on Friday (many bots only run for the first 5 to 10 minutes of the market); then that is also defined as a loss of $900/minute.
I find that statement quite disgusting, and also indicative of why we're in the trouble we are as a country.
I highly doubt it would be patented, as that would require them to actually disclose the recipe, and then 30 years later everyone would be drinking Kookey Kola, Carmel Cola, and a dozen other knock offs.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you fathom why FLOSS users balk at paying $100/year + $1000 one time fee for access to free software that is always $0 free as long as they STAY AWAY from Apple?
Because they're fucking cheapskates. That's what you're saying.
No, we shouldn't have to pay to get *our* software out there. We're volunteers, we are doing it out of the goodness for our hearts, why should we pay a hardware corporation to distribute open source software?
Are you trying to claim that you shouldn't have access to the dev platform to dev software? If you want to release something for Solaris, you'd still need a machine running Solaris. If you want to release something for Windows, you'll need access to a machine running Windows. This is no different.
Just because you're releasing open source software doesn't mean you shouldn't incur any costs whatsoever.
No, that's a recent change. It was GCC in the beginning, and the GCC toolchain will still work.
Most people don't have the $1,000 or so to buy the hardware required to make use of the "free developer account.
That's their problem. If I want to release something for Windows, I still need a Windows machine to compile and test on. And, don't even start down the road of claiming that everyone who wants to release on Windows has Windows.
Which very much is preventing me from installing my apps on my devices.
Oh no, you're too cheap to do so. Doesn't change the fact that you still can.
Can you be sure your hard work will even reach the appstore?
Yes. The evaluation criteria is freely published. Not to mention that some 95% of apps are approved within a day or two.
Stop spreading FUD regarding the Store. It's largely not what you say.
Because you're absolutely forced to apply every update the second it's released? You can't wait for the community to break it?
As opposed to the many locked down versions of Android (Hello, AT&T) that require the same thing to get the "freedom" you were talking about?
You don't have any more freedom on Android in that respect; once you've bought enough apps and sunk enough money into the platform, you're effectively locked in. Sure, you can buy a few different "shells" for Android, but it's all the same stuff.
Btw, would you buy a extra large rubber bumper for your car to avoid it breaking from a slight ding or would you rather it be designed to actually withstand normal use?
If you think this is unique to Apple stuff, you're high. Or an anti-fanboy troll.
I would say a lot of your gripes about the iPad are prevalent on Android as well. The excessive use of touch, for instance, is also there on Android. The crappy searching in the Market is definitely there. And as far as the 2x hack, well Android just does that by default.
and you've got the apps they lead to which themselves are somewhat restricted as to what they're allowed to do.
Not really. Yes, there are some exceptions, but for the most part, anything you want to do on Android, you can do on iOS. Especially if you're willing to Jailbreak (which I would put as on the same level as rooting for Android phones).
What about the software ecosystem? Price may favor the Transformer, and I'm not convinced about the specs (and as any good geek can tell you, they're not the only thing you should judge on), but the software definitely favors the iPad at this point in time. Tablet optimized apps are far more available on iOS than on Android. I'm sure given time that will change, but for now it's true.
And before you ask, tablet optimized apps are better than scaled up phone apps, mainly because they can take advantage of the hardware a tablet has to offer. They're able to make much better use of the extra screen real estate.
Why not buy something that looks and feels like an iPad but isn't one and the answer is of course, brand loyalty/brand choice/lack of willingness to shop around/take your pick.
You forget the far better app ecosystem, as of now. I'm sure that'll change in a year or so, but as of now, the iPad has a far better library of tablet-optimized apps than Honeycomb.
He could - and wind up in a lot of expensive legal hot water as a result, such as perjury charges and civil damages.
Oh shit. Here for a minute I thought we were talking about the DMCA!
Even if he sent a blatantly false takedown notice, he will face nothing. In fact, I don't think there is anything the recipient of a DMCA notice can do except issue the counter-notice. There's really not many provisions to dissuade people from issuing false claims.
Isn't it illegal to own person's private time this way?
Not according to Libertarians. They think that if you can fuck someone over on their employment contract, it is your moral obligation to do so.
As far as I know slavery was abolished in the US some time ago.
In reality, it was abolished in name only. Oh, and the race thing. They realized quite quickly they could make more money if they opened slavery to all races, rather than just one.
If a company does not pay you for your out of work time, then they have not right to whatever you do then.
They get away with this through "salaries", in which they say you're always on the clock.
It is really shocking that people accept such conditions.
It is more shocking that they are allowed to offer such conditions. However, I'd wager the majority of people simply don't read it. The others really don't want to, but that nagging feeling of hunger in your belly can be quite a motivator.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say your position was the minority of positions. I'm also going to bet that you were not doing it in a down economy, when people have been out of work for 2 years or more.
You might say you don't want to work for such a corporation any way, but then again you might not have another option not evolving a steep pay-cut.
This statement right here is why there should be no additional constraints on a job other than showing up and doing the work in a satisfactory fashion. All of these "non-competes" and "we own your shit" clauses should be ended.
But why can women (and men!) be exploited?
Because then that completely shatters any illusion we might have of a "free market" system where both parties are exchanging of their own free will.
We're in huge trouble as a country because a completely different sector of the financial industry was irresponsible in the way they lent money. Making high-frequency trading the scapegoat is not going to solve our problems.
I am not trying to pin it entirely on HFT, as that feeling I mentioned is pervasive throughout the entire economy. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
I'm often responsible for developing my own trading algos and running them all myself.
If that's true, then why aren't you taking the bulk of the earnings?
There is just no real dividing line.
Sure there is. The point at which a normal person cannot possibly react.
If we push the markets together a millisecond faster, there isn't much social worth, but it is that competition for that tiny timeslice that gives what we do benefit.
Meaning you don't provide anything to society, just to your overlords.
I have a conscience.
HFT does produce something of value, because there's almost always liquidity in the market because of HFT.
That's questionable at best. When you increase the liquidity (and in doing so, volatility) faster than an actual person can react to it, there is no value there, except to other HFT. You are just skimming profits at that point.
And don't even try to hide behind "real investors". You are fucking them over with your shit.
Losing money is also defined as not making as much as possible. If you were making $1000/minute on Monday doing something and only $100/minute on Friday (many bots only run for the first 5 to 10 minutes of the market); then that is also defined as a loss of $900/minute.
I find that statement quite disgusting, and also indicative of why we're in the trouble we are as a country.
I highly doubt it would be patented, as that would require them to actually disclose the recipe, and then 30 years later everyone would be drinking Kookey Kola, Carmel Cola, and a dozen other knock offs.