Er, no.

The 'why' has little to do with IP law and a lot to do with group dynamics, especially herd behaviour. Take this statement, for example:

One of my personal pet causes is developing a better alternative to HTML/CSS. This is a case where the metaphorical snowdrift is R&D on new platforms (which could at least initially compile to HTML/CSS).

The problem with the 'snowdrift' here, to abuse the metaphor, has nothing to do with IP law, and nothing to do with lack of innovation. It has everything to do with the size of the drift. You don't have any choice but to wait for someone else to come along to help shovel. But the author is trying to say, If everyone doesn't shovel, nobody gets out. And that's not always true.

A quick reminder: When HTML first came out, the very first thing virtually every proprietary software vendor of note did was publish their own website design tool. And each of those tools used proprietary extensions and/or unique behaviour in an attempt to corner the market on web development, and therefore on the web itself.

But the 'snowdrift' in this case was all the other companies. Because no single one of them was capable of establishing and holding overwhelming dominance, the 'drift' was doomed to remain more manageable by groups than by any single entity. (Microsoft came closest to achieving dominance, but ultimately their failure was such that they have in fact been weakened by the effort.)

Say what you like about the W3C, and draw what conclusions you will from the recent schism-and-reunification with WHATWG. The plain fact is that stodgy, not-too-volatile standards actually work in everybody's favour. To be clear: they provide the greatest benefit to the group, not to the enfant terrible programmer who thinks he knows better than multiple generations of his predecessors.

Yes, FOSS projects face institutional weaknesses, including a lack of funding. Especially on funding for R&D. But funded projects face significant weaknesses as well. Just look at the Node.JS / io.js fork, all because Joyent went overboard in its egalitarian zeal. Consider also that recent widely publicised bugs, despite the alarm they've caused, haven't really done much to affect the relative level of quality in funded vs proprietary vs unfunded code bases. They all have gaping holes, but the extent of their suckage seems to be dependent on factors other than funding. If not, Microsoft would be the ne plus ultra of software.

Weighed in the balance, therefore, FOSS's existential problems are real, and significant, but they're not as significant as those faced by all the other methods we've tried. So to those who have a better idea about how to balance community benefits and obligations, I can only reply as the Empress famously did when revolutionaries carried her bodily from the palace: 'I wish them well.'

I'm not sure that's really the canonical use of the term. I would think that selling said arms to one's own government at extortionate prices would be closer to the standard definition.

But niggling aside, the real problem with this article is that it equates the control of technology with control of behaviour, and assumes that it's even possible to usefully control the proliferation of technology.

Instead of advocating a software proscription list, why not seek to promote international legal standards concerning the right to privacy, and a respect for the rule of law among all nations?

Actually, don't answer that. I know why. Because building democracy is hard and even the purportedly enlightened, 'free' nations are busy backing away from individual human rights.

I don't think there is anything stopping a Texas auto dealer from going to Tesla's web site today and buying as many cars as he wants to buy.

The real issue is that the dealer would then want to service and support these cars, which would require a more in-depth working relationship with Tesla; and Tesla (quite reasonably IMO) does not trust dealers to do as good a job with that as Tesla itself can. Without quality service and support, OTOH, there is no reason why a customer should want to buy through a dealership and pay extra for inferior support.

It's perfect cover: as an anti-government politician, if your policies don't work, that's only more proof that government is incompetent and you were right all along to oppose. If they do work, OTOH, you're a hero! You can't lose :^)

Well, you need to define 'best' under these circumstances. The Linux kernel became 'best' when it was found that it supported and sustained the involvement of the widest developer/manufacturer constituency at a reasonable level of quality. That's hardly a glowing endorsement of the quality of the code or the operation of the kernel in real-world scenarios.

Remember that the abiding challenge for technologists is not so much 'best' as 'good enough'.

So yes, GP is wrong to see the free market as one in which the best ideas win. They don't. But the most workable available solutions do tend to get the most support. In Commodore's case, their sin was failing to market it in a way that made it readily accessible (i.e. price, distribution and support) and usable (developer support and software market). So you can praise the quality of the device, but from the buyer's perspective, it wasn't the 'best' solution after all, was it?

And, Godwin'd. That's a wrap everyone, have a great evening, see you in the next thread.

In a large number of scenarios, the limiting factor is the skill of the (often easily-intimidated newbie) programmer, not the speed of the resulting program's execution.

In those cases, a "slow" language that is easy to learn and use (e.g. Python) typically produces a better result than a really fast/powerful language that isn't as newbie-friendly. Computers are fast enough these days that for a lot of things, a slow/inefficient program is nevertheless more than adequate to the task at hand.

In particular, I think the ability to run the Python interpreter and enter python code into it interactively is an easy and convenient way for people to experiment and learn how Python works. Compiled languages make that harder to do, as you have to enter all your changes at once, then recompile, rather than being able to type in a single line and get an instant result.

It's not retarded at all; it's a simple fact that each language comes with its own set of design decisions that make some tasks easier and some tasks more difficult. Thinking that all languages are equivalent would be a newbie mistake.

For example, Python, while it is a great high-level language and easy to learn and use, will almost never produce software that runs at the speed of an equivalent compiled C or C++ program. Furthermore, its continuing reliance on a Global Interpreter Lock means that multithreaded Python programs will not utilize multiple cores efficiently for the forseeable future.

Java, OTOH, avoids those problems but using Java means you'll need to include a Java runtime environment and JIT on any platform you deploy on; that makes it inappropriate for many embedded devices or otherwise constrained environments. Also the non-deterministic timing of the built-in garbage collector makes Java a poor fit for real-time programming.

C/C++, finally, can run mostly anywhere, but their low-level nature makes them a bit harder to learn, and a great deal more conducive to shooting yourself in the foot with (if you don't use them correctly).

I'm reminded of this quote:

"The determined Real Programmer can write FORTRAN programs in any language." -- Ed Post

Not very cost-efficient upstream of those output wires, though. You could save a good bit of money by skipping the PV panels and harvesting the heat directly instead.

A possible twist on this outcome: before this happens, the price and performance of energy storage (e.g. electric-car style battery packs) improves to the point where it becomes economical for most solar panel owners (or perhaps even the power company) to store any excess electricity that would otherwise be wasted. Dunno if or when it will happen, but it certainly would simplify things.

I'm not so sure about that -- anything with moving parts is liable to wear out and need expensive repairs. I certainly wouldn't expect it to last anywhere near the 20-25 years that the rest of the system will. Given enough space, it's probably cheaper and easier just to buy more fixed panels than to add motorized sun-tracking equipment.

eggcorn |egg korn| noun In linguistics, an eggcorn is an idiosyncratic substitution of a word or phrase for a word or words that sound similar or identical in the speaker's dialect (sometimes called oronyms). The new phrase introduces a meaning that is different from the original, but plausible in the same context, such as "old-timers' disease" for "Alzheimer's disease".

humor
(h)yoomr
noun
noun: humour
1. the quality of being amusing or comic, especially as expressed in literature or speech. "his tales are full of humor"

No, actually. Unless by 'sucks' you mean, works imperfectly, but still better than those parts of the world that did not benefit from my tax dollars.

I say this with the benefit of experience. I've traveled to dozens of countries, rich and poor, and those with solid tax bases have dependably better public infrastructure than those without.

The cause of your crumbling infrastructure in the US is largely people not paying taxes.

Girls aren't the target audience of a toy like Buzz Lightyear.