When games went mainstream shit went downhill, the fact that gamers put up with such onerous bullshit because they are so addicted and stupid is why we can't have nice things.
That statement implies, that at one time the shit was uphill. I don't think that was the case. Video Gamers have always been putting up with bullshit.
As far as having nice things... Don't we already have nice things?
Which country are you talking about? I couldn't narrow it down from your description.
Many countries have lots of problems. Many of them take a long time to fix. You can just ignore some, because you haven't yet solved other multiyear problems. Especially when some of the problems are intertwined.
You should care less what your university thinks their policy is on a copyright of a students work. Unless you signed them away when you registered, you own your own copyright. just because the university thinks they own it, doesn't mean anything.
So they should be able to get some rights and turn that into money, just because you are a dead relative? What have THEY done?
They were born, and you set out to provide for them. So are you saying it is bad for parents to save up money for their children? To work hard, so that their children can have it easier? Or Get an education? So instead of working hard at a factory job and getting a decent wage, and storing some of it away, perhaps you spent years and years working hard on the Great American Novel. You did it for your children, but you died shortly before/after it was published. So your children should get nothing? Because you feel only people who actually perform the work should make money?
Unfortunately you can not have the cookie and eat it too.
Perhaps, but that is what most consumers want, why can the creators have it as well?
define "very expensive" To be its in the the thousands of dollars, to Apple its in the billions.
Yes, the telephone may have come about eventually. But would people have slaved away on it, to bring it to fruition sooner?
Non Obviousness doesn't mean only one person in the world can come up with the idea. In the US at least, it is not obvious to "Person having ordinary skill in the art" Which means several people can come up with the idea at the same time, and it still not be obvious. Cause you know, there are more than one people that have extraordinary skill in their art.
If someone else independently can implement code that does the same thing, then it is obvious it should not be eligible for a patent.
That isn't how "obviousness" works. First of all, it isn't that it can't be obvious to anyone else in the world. And secondly, at some point in the future it will become obvious. If you want to enjoy a limited monopoly, that limit will still extend beyond the time it becomes obvious.
Still doesn't mean you can get a software patents for ideas, let alone ideas that are obvious.
I agree.. I have no problems with him "driving around the parking lot" trying to kill the battery. But he should have said so, and he should have said it didn't drain it. And he should NOT have said he was charging then battery when in fact he was driving around the parking lot. This would be like saying "I was pumping gas into the car" when he was actually siphoning gas from the car.
I'm not sure what world you grew up in where Wordperfect was consider excellent.
But what really happened was Windows came out. Microsoft wrote Word for Windows. Wordperfect did not. Word was better than ALL other word processors written for windows, so it won. By the time wordperfect figured it out, it was too late.
It had nothing to do with suites, and everything to do with Windows.
It's an equivalent argument for smoking marry-j. So many people advocate for its legalization, but yet, you can't honestly tell me that legalizing it would really lead to a better world... It's bogus.
Why is it bogus? Legalizing it would probably lead to a better world, as long as people don't abuse it. Or would you claim that making alcohol consumption illegal would lead to a better world? I believe that proved false. And as long as the alcohol isn't abused, we have a better world now than during prohibition.
Can you elaborate on why you think smoking "marry-j" would lead to a worse world? You know its legal in some places, and those place appear to me to be BETTER places. Not that I smoke it either.
Out of curiosity, you consider porn trash. Do you also consider Michelangelo's David trash? What about all of the other masterpieces? Is it trash when a girl wears a bikini? Goes topless? At what point is ok before it turns into trash?
Let's also assume, for the sake of argument, it is trash. Are you saying that everything that YOU consider trash should be outlawed? Heavy Metal perhaps? Maybe rock n roll (you know, with all that devilish hip swinging) Maybe salsa music with its dirty dancing? Where is the line drawn?
One company does something wrong, so all companies must do something wrong?
Tesla didn't say they "rig" their vehicles. He did say they add additional logging. They'd be dumb not to.
You are correct, Elon's data could be faked. So instead lets look at the article, in the author's own words. He claims he left one place and had an estimated 32 miles of fuel to go. 51 miles later it ran out and was placed on a flatbed... This is like a 30MPG car saying there is a gallon of left, and then you driving 50 miles, then complaining when it ran out of gas.
I think that tracking that deeply is an invasion of privacy.... although it's a double-edged sword at this rate.
Invasion of whose privacy? The reporter was reviewing/testing a car that belongs to Tesla. It wasn't the reporters car. Most companies that lend out product to be reviewed and tested log a TON of data.
This wasn't some private individual out in about in his own vehicle.
Slashdot Mirror
So it has come to this: they are equivocating planting seeds with reverse engineering a light bulb.
No, they are equivocating planting seeds with building a light bulb from a blue print.
When games went mainstream shit went downhill, the fact that gamers put up with such onerous bullshit because they are so addicted and stupid is why we can't have nice things.
That statement implies, that at one time the shit was uphill. I don't think that was the case. Video Gamers have always been putting up with bullshit.
As far as having nice things... Don't we already have nice things?
Which country are you talking about? I couldn't narrow it down from your description.
Many countries have lots of problems. Many of them take a long time to fix. You can just ignore some, because you haven't yet solved other multiyear problems. Especially when some of the problems are intertwined.
Ok. So someone invented this thing called a virtual shopping cart. Another company "tweaked" the code slightly and had a shopping cart themselves.
The FIRST problem is you are talking about "another company" and not your business partner.
You should care less what your university thinks their policy is on a copyright of a students work. Unless you signed them away when you registered, you own your own copyright. just because the university thinks they own it, doesn't mean anything.
So you think the write should get his due. But the editor, the proof reader, the formater, and the marketer shouldn't?
So they should be able to get some rights and turn that into money, just because you are a dead relative? What have THEY done?
They were born, and you set out to provide for them. So are you saying it is bad for parents to save up money for their children? To work hard, so that their children can have it easier? Or Get an education? So instead of working hard at a factory job and getting a decent wage, and storing some of it away, perhaps you spent years and years working hard on the Great American Novel. You did it for your children, but you died shortly before/after it was published. So your children should get nothing? Because you feel only people who actually perform the work should make money?
Unfortunately you can not have the cookie and eat it too.
Perhaps, but that is what most consumers want, why can the creators have it as well?
How would a copyright/trademark free world have solved this problem? This wasn't a trademark issue (nor a copyright issue)
CGI? Its called makeup
I wonder if the news broadcast will be as detailed as the news about the Triumph cruise ship.
Uhm, Betterridge applies to headlines to articles, not to Slashdot questions.
define "very expensive" To be its in the the thousands of dollars, to Apple its in the billions.
Yes, the telephone may have come about eventually. But would people have slaved away on it, to bring it to fruition sooner?
Non Obviousness doesn't mean only one person in the world can come up with the idea. In the US at least, it is not obvious to "Person having ordinary skill in the art" Which means several people can come up with the idea at the same time, and it still not be obvious. Cause you know, there are more than one people that have extraordinary skill in their art.
If someone else independently can implement code that does the same thing, then it is obvious it should not be eligible for a patent.
That isn't how "obviousness" works. First of all, it isn't that it can't be obvious to anyone else in the world. And secondly, at some point in the future it will become obvious. If you want to enjoy a limited monopoly, that limit will still extend beyond the time it becomes obvious.
Still doesn't mean you can get a software patents for ideas, let alone ideas that are obvious.
I agree.. I have no problems with him "driving around the parking lot" trying to kill the battery. But he should have said so, and he should have said it didn't drain it. And he should NOT have said he was charging then battery when in fact he was driving around the parking lot. This would be like saying "I was pumping gas into the car" when he was actually siphoning gas from the car.
I'm not sure what world you grew up in where Wordperfect was consider excellent.
But what really happened was Windows came out. Microsoft wrote Word for Windows. Wordperfect did not. Word was better than ALL other word processors written for windows, so it won. By the time wordperfect figured it out, it was too late.
It had nothing to do with suites, and everything to do with Windows.
When porn is common, everyone gets desensitized to porn and lets it shape their worldview.
So this is a reason to ban it? Rock Music is popular, everyone is desensitized to it, so lets ban it. Baseball is popular, lets ban it...
And you are obviously "Not thinking of the children"
It's an equivalent argument for smoking marry-j. So many people advocate for its legalization, but yet, you can't honestly tell me that legalizing it would really lead to a better world... It's bogus.
Why is it bogus? Legalizing it would probably lead to a better world, as long as people don't abuse it. Or would you claim that making alcohol consumption illegal would lead to a better world? I believe that proved false. And as long as the alcohol isn't abused, we have a better world now than during prohibition.
Can you elaborate on why you think smoking "marry-j" would lead to a worse world? You know its legal in some places, and those place appear to me to be BETTER places. Not that I smoke it either.
Out of curiosity, you consider porn trash. Do you also consider Michelangelo's David trash? What about all of the other masterpieces? Is it trash when a girl wears a bikini? Goes topless? At what point is ok before it turns into trash?
Let's also assume, for the sake of argument, it is trash. Are you saying that everything that YOU consider trash should be outlawed? Heavy Metal perhaps? Maybe rock n roll (you know, with all that devilish hip swinging) Maybe salsa music with its dirty dancing? Where is the line drawn?
There are instances of women doing these things because they cannot find anything else legal, that can give them the money they need to survive.
So you take away the one thing they can do to survive? Now what? Now they have to do something illegal?
One company does something wrong, so all companies must do something wrong?
Tesla didn't say they "rig" their vehicles. He did say they add additional logging. They'd be dumb not to.
Let's not forget that in the libel-lawsuit capital of the world, Tesla's libel suit was switftly dismissed.
It was "swiftly" dismissed, because the judge said no one would confuse Top Gear with reality. Problem is, a lot of people do.
You are correct, Elon's data could be faked. So instead lets look at the article, in the author's own words. He claims he left one place and had an estimated 32 miles of fuel to go. 51 miles later it ran out and was placed on a flatbed... This is like a 30MPG car saying there is a gallon of left, and then you driving 50 miles, then complaining when it ran out of gas.
Obviously, because business doesn't bring out new technology. Magical elves do.
I think that tracking that deeply is an invasion of privacy.... although it's a double-edged sword at this rate.
Invasion of whose privacy? The reporter was reviewing/testing a car that belongs to Tesla. It wasn't the reporters car. Most companies that lend out product to be reviewed and tested log a TON of data.
This wasn't some private individual out in about in his own vehicle.