Dylan Evans article is indeed ridiculous. He compares not knowing to program to not knowing to read. Not every kind of ignorance is illiteracy, most are not. For example most people do not know how a car works, yet most are car users either as drivers of passengers. Sure, it's nice to know how combustion engine works, and this knowledge might even help you drive better, but this is not what we mean by illiteracy.
I was a VP of IT for a startup, developing a large content web site. Initially the site was hosted on 2 Pentium based IBM servers, running Linux. The server were no where near full capacity, but we wanted to check how much load these machines could take before requiring additional servers.
Solution such as LoadRunner were too expensive, but even renting LoadRunner users for a few days was too much. We figured that for the money we saved by not checking the load we could buy and host two additional servers for two years.
Think how much serving capacity you could for a QUARTER OF A MILLION dollars.
Even a better idea: put the $250K in the bank, and buy a new server every month on the interest alone!
There is one serious logical flaw with the H.G Wells Time Machine concept.
Supposedly, the story describes someone who gets into the machine and travels in time, actually, while the machine is working - it is the whole universe that travels in time! The time traveler is the only one who does not change.
If I travel in time 5 years backwards - I'm supposed to be 5 years younger. If I traveled to before I was born - I would not exist at all and therefor would no be able to go back. What people refer to by time travel is therefor much harder to achieve than just moving a specific person through time - they would like a machine that moves "life, the universe and everything" through time.
You can laugh all you want, but soon M$ products are going have fewer security problems. When these guys set their mind on something they usually get it.
BTW: Are plain old bugs considered "security problems"?
1) I'm a Napster user.
2) Ever since I started using Napster I increased my spending on CDs from one every 2 month to 2-3 a month. (and many of these titles I ready own on vinyl!)
3) I therefor think that RIAA is stupid to sue Napster instead of coming to terms with it.
4) I do not use pirated software.
5) If I did want to get pirated software I would have to go to the Warez sites, the underground, clearly knowing that I'm doing something illegal.
6) Even though I differentiate between pirated software and pirated music, I do it on the subconscious level, not on the logical one.
7) Can someone explain to me, in simple language and with strong logical arguments why pirating software is different from pirating music?
Why is using software without paying for it is generally considered wrong and and using music considered right?
Slashdot Mirror
Whats next, the Magna Carta?
Dylan Evans article is indeed ridiculous. He compares not knowing to program to not knowing to read.
Not every kind of ignorance is illiteracy, most are not. For example most people do not know how a car works, yet most are car users either as drivers of passengers. Sure, it's nice to know how combustion engine works, and this knowledge might even help you drive better, but this is not what we mean by illiteracy.
I was a VP of IT for a startup, developing a large content web site. Initially the site was hosted on 2 Pentium based IBM servers, running Linux. The server were no where near full capacity, but we wanted to check how much load these machines could take before requiring additional servers.
Solution such as LoadRunner were too expensive, but even renting LoadRunner users for a few days was too much. We figured that for the money we saved by not checking the load we could buy and host two additional servers for two years.
Think how much serving capacity you could for a QUARTER OF A MILLION dollars.
Even a better idea: put the $250K in the bank, and buy a new server every month on the interest alone!
Ideas are not patentable, they never were, until the USPTO decided to accept ideas and business methods as patents.
USPTO should return to accepting patent according to the law - no need for voting or public hearing.
There is one serious logical flaw with the H.G Wells Time Machine concept.
Supposedly, the story describes someone who gets into the machine and travels in time, actually, while the machine is working - it is the whole universe that travels in time!
The time traveler is the only one who does not change.
If I travel in time 5 years backwards - I'm supposed to be 5 years younger. If I traveled to before I was born - I would not exist at all and therefor would no be able to go back. What people refer to by time travel is therefor much harder to achieve than just moving a specific person through time - they would like a machine that moves "life, the universe and everything" through time.
I agree %100 !
Imagine if someone had copyrighted the Bible or Talmod!
You can laugh all you want, but soon M$ products are going have fewer security problems. When these guys set their mind on something they usually get it.
BTW: Are plain old bugs considered "security problems"?
I Occasionally shop at Amazon, and usually I don't bother to compare prices elsewhere.
Now I will. They will surly lose some of my business.
How fast till someone comes with a script to automatically compression shop in Amazon against it self?
1) I'm a Napster user.
2) Ever since I started using Napster I increased my spending on CDs from one every 2 month to 2-3 a month. (and many of these titles I ready own on vinyl!)
3) I therefor think that RIAA is stupid to sue Napster instead of coming to terms with it.
4) I do not use pirated software.
5) If I did want to get pirated software I would have to go to the Warez sites, the underground, clearly knowing that I'm doing something illegal.
6) Even though I differentiate between pirated software and pirated music, I do it on the subconscious level, not on the logical one.
7) Can someone explain to me, in simple language and with strong logical arguments why pirating software is different from pirating music?
Why is using software without paying for it is generally considered wrong and and using music considered right?