Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Is that really a lot? (Score 1) 255

by ewibble (#49139125) Attached to: Drones Cost $28,000 Per Arrest, On Average

I totally agree, they probably work harder than me, I hate cleaning toilets and am not very good at it, and are just as essential, if not more, to the smooth running of society as doctors and lawyers. If all the garbage collectors stopped working tomorrow, may more people would die than if all the doctors did.

If a person is working, then they deserve dignity and wage that they can live off. What is more important? That you have the latest phone, bigger house, flasher car? Or that everyone that works can afford a place to live, and enough food to eat.

Comment: Re:Terrorists (Score 2) 256

by ewibble (#49133029) Attached to: It's Official: NSA Spying Is Hurting the US Tech Economy

That's the problem with the political system isn't it, two main parties, both pretty similar, both sponsored by the same corporates. None of them I agree with, and if you vote for someone else, people will say don't do that its a wasted vote. It gives the perception of choice without actually providing you with one.

I say vote the way you want. I also say you should be able to vote no confidence in any of them. I don't know what you do if no confidence was significant, probably wouldn't make a difference but at least it would be embarrassing. At the moment if you don't vote they count it as you don't care, this way they can count it as you don't think any of them can run the country, and maybe take there egos down a peg.

Comment: Re:Net metering is unstustainable (Score 1) 344

by ewibble (#49129445) Attached to: The Groups Behind Making Distributed Solar Power Harder To Adopt

I am not sure how it works in the US but my power costs are divided into 2 a daily charge and a cost per kw. I assume the daily charge covers fixed costs such as: cost of lines, maintenance, you can also have different rates at different times of the day, so if you are producing power in the middle of the day when everyone else is you simply pay less, for it, but you must also charge less for it.

Comment: Re: Umm... Lulz.... (Score 2) 253

by ewibble (#49106641) Attached to: Will Greek Finance Minister Varoufakis Support Cryptocurrency In Greece?

I don't think anything that bad will happen Greece defaults, sure the government may not loans, for a while, that will just force them live within there means, while removing any interest burden. Who in their right mind lending more money to Greece anyway, and simply not trying to recover as much money back as they can. Private companies will still get loans, the wouldn't have defaulted.

If you lend people money to take on a risk (Isn't that the justification for charging interest), and if you lend too much money to people and they can't pay, well like any investment you can loose, and I don't feel sorry for the lenders. These are large banks and countries that have lent to Greece and as such should have done due diligence.

Maybe if Greece defaults, It will teach these people, don't lend to people who can't afford to pay (even countries), and it will not allow countries like Greece to get into these situations, in the first place.

At some point going bankrupt, is the only sane choice, probably better than having your entire economy crippled by interest repayments for the foreseeable future.
 

Comment: Re:I read the summary (Score 1) 145

by ewibble (#49089811) Attached to: The Burden of Intellectual Property Rights On Clean Energy Technologies

I wasn't saying that people don't buy movies older than 2 years old, I was saying the majority of money is not made at that point.

If movies where public domain, then we would not need Disney to re-author the movie someone would probably do it for free.

Look at your example Snow White (and many other Disney Movies), it is clearly a story based of public domain, yes they changed it, improved it, made it into a movie. Like all creations/ideas it is based on others. Is it not fair and beneficial that they return there creation in a timely manner to the public domain, in order so others can base there creations of there work, like they based their work on others. Re-authoring is one such improvement.

I tried to get beauty and the beast a few years ago, I couldn't buy it Disney weren't distributing at that point. They had it in their Disney vault. Where it was easy to download it. What we have is not allowing content to be seen, but a way of stopping it.

This like most things in life is a trade off, yes you may need a way of compensating the creator, I think 2 years is an adequate amount of time, for a movie to make its money back plus a tidy profit. If you haven't though luck, lots of money making ventures fail.

I personally think neither side can think of the right amount of money that is a fair return on investment. There will always be people who want the movie for cheaper, and not aware of the costs of development. Companies will all ways want more money. I would say that the government is the right place to decide, if it wasn't the massively disproportionate sway that big business has as compared to the average voter.

Comment: Re:Where did you (not?) go to shchool? (Score 1) 145

by ewibble (#49083719) Attached to: The Burden of Intellectual Property Rights On Clean Energy Technologies

It is probably not by owning IP. If he is like most people, he works, gets paid for the hours worked, that's it. No ongoing rent for the work done by his great grandfather up to 75 year after he died.

Companies can still be paid to develop stuff for other entities, paid for running servers, they don't need to release source code, paid for support of software, you will probably get a premium if you developed it.

Plenty of ways to make money without intellectual property.

Comment: Re:I read the summary (Score 3, Insightful) 145

by ewibble (#49083665) Attached to: The Burden of Intellectual Property Rights On Clean Energy Technologies

All these cases people do can and do:

Would you make a movie if every theater could immediately show it without paying you?

Seen Youtube, people make movies all the time, release them for free. People love to create and show other people.

Would you write a book?

Of course they would, I wouldn't but I don't like writing. If you want to get your opinion across, you would most certainly do it. In fact right now I am writing for free, what about blogs.

People would also pay for it even if they can get it for free, People can go down to the library and read books for free, but somehow they still go out and buy them too.

Would you, as movie theater owner, pay the artist that made a movie, while your neighbouring theater doesn't,

of course, within reason, as long as the viewers are informed for, one movie money goes to the creator and another doesn't. People would be willing to pay a premium for that. You obviously would too since, you think it is unfair not to pay the creator, or are your morals bound only by the law, and not what you think is right. People still buy movies when downloading it is cheaper, and more convenient.

Also, without IP, licenses like the AGPL or even the GPL wouldn't be possible

Without IP they wouldn't be necessary.

I don't necessarily agree we should have no IP at all but 1 or 2 years max on a movie, music is fine. After that if you want more money make another movie. How many movies run for more than a couple of months, in the theater, or have significant DVD sales after 2 years?

Comment: Re:Sort of puts the lie (Score 1) 111

by ewibble (#49074847) Attached to: Privacy: the 21st Century's Newest Luxury Item

definition of privacy:

a state in which one is not observed or disturbed by other people.

In order to have secrecy you must have some level of privacy, you can't have just anybody watching what you do, it won't be much of a secret will it.

The statement itself implies both secrecy and privacy.

if you have nothing to hide (have a secret) you have nothing to worry about (worry about loosing your privacy, by being watched)

Comment: Re:Sort of puts the lie (Score 1) 111

by ewibble (#49074357) Attached to: Privacy: the 21st Century's Newest Luxury Item

if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about

Is just a lie, ask anybody in power (well anybody really, apart from close friends and family) if you can have access to their email, and see the response you get. I can just imagine Obama, say of course I have nothing to hide.

I find it rather ironic that spy agencies, who rely on secrecy to do there job, cannot see why other people may require privacy, for a perfectly valid reason.

 

Comment: Re: No (Score 1) 291

by ewibble (#49061241) Attached to: Should We Really Try To Teach Everyone To Code?

First I wouldn't consider simple SQL coding, you an entering fields into field on a UI coding too, or using spreadsheet formulas coding? If the the situation required doctors to access more advanced search then the program is wrong. It is much more efficient to have person code the interface than all the doctors learn to code. There are GUIs that allow you to "program" SQL queries, of course a natural language parser that could accurately work out the query from the doctors request would be better.

Yes coding can be useful, but English and Maths are much more so. It would be useful for everyone to have basic electrical, plumbing knowledge too. There is no need for everyone to code, there is a need for every to read, write, and understand basic maths. You could consider programing a specialization of maths.

This is not about job security, even if everyone could code it would just mean that they could do some basic scripting on their phone/computer. It would not detract from people who write large programs.

Specialization is good, it means people can focus on the things they are good at.

Comment: Re:Projector (Score 1) 330

by ewibble (#49040495) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Affordable Large HD/UHD/4K "Stupid" Screens?

Perhaps he doesn't want a 100" TV. A projector can project at any size, so yes if want a really large screen go for a projector, if you are actually on a budget, which judging from the question he is, then go for a much smaller screen 4K TV, I am sure you could find for well under $11,000.

But you knew that, didn't you.

Dreams are free, but you get soaked on the connect time.

Working...