Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:I'm surprised this didn't happen years ago (Score 1) 121

by gnupun (#49618751) Attached to: Internet Customers Surpass Cable Subscribers At Comcast

You need internet. Cable-TV is a grossly overpriced luxury.

Cable/Satellite/OTA are broadcast mediums where one signal is transmitted to almost unlimited viewers whereas internet TV is a unicast medium where a every internet TV viewer has to be allocated some bandwidth from the source. If everybody ditched cable/satellite/OTA and switched to the internet, the bandwidth consumed would probably bring down the internet.

Comment: Re:news flash.... (Score 2) 175

Uber is trying to enter the taxi market that is controlled by the govt. Instead of just providing internet hailing service to existing taxis and collect very low profits, it wants to provide taxis directly to consumer and make the whopping 20-30% cut of taxi fare (instead of the 2-4% cut by providing internet booking to existing taxis).

All these illegal maneuvers are about making a ton of money by working around the highly controlled and regulated taxi market.

Comment: Re:More like to his own parents (Score 1) 169

by gnupun (#49605651) Attached to: Bill Gates Owes His Career To Steven Spielberg's Dad; You May, Too

Why? - I would like to know that!

Maybe IBM executives considered PCs as toys compared to mainframes and not likely to generate much revenue. So they outsourced almost everything -- CPU, RAM, OS, programming language. It's also probably why the inventors of GUI didn't value their own creation... instead, Steve Jobs profited from that.

Comment: Re:Another bad parenting example (Score 1) 244

Is convenience more important than security? Apparently so, since if the grades had been stored in on a more secure medium such as paper locked inside a vault or safe, it would be less hackable. A networked computer can be hacked from anywhere in the world and has typically thousands of bugs which form entry points for hackers.

Comment: Re:Try again... 4? (Score 1) 224

by gnupun (#49596501) Attached to: Grooveshark Shuts Down

It is quite possible for a company to preserve its trade secrets without a patent.

In which case they don't file patents. If trade secret is incapable of protecting the IP (by threats such as reverse engineering), they file patents. It's common sense, since trade secrets can last almost infinite years.

Patents are primarily supposed to help the People, not the "owners".

Not true. Patent are an exchange of resources -- a deal/trade. The patent holder can make a ton of money off his novel invention (because of 20 years of govt enforced monopoly) and the govt and the people get improvement in lifestyle because the secrets of the invention are exposed for anyone to remanufacture the product.

Also, let's not forget that the invention still needs an implementer. The implementer of the patent (after its expiry) also makes a lot of money of other people's work and a big corp is usually such an implementer of expired patents. So the patent system benefits the inventor less and the implementer most (along with the govt.). IOW, patent laws were written to benefit big business the most, since after the patent has expired, big business can bring the product based on expired patent to the market, at the lowest cost . And they can make profit off expired patents for infinite years as long as they have the lowest cost of production and distribution.

So just like short copyright terms, inventors are screwed of long term profits so that big business benefits the most. So patents are not a great deal unlike what many /.ers say.

Comment: Re:Not everyone is a musician (Score 2) 224

by gnupun (#49595423) Attached to: Grooveshark Shuts Down

How about you pay up every time you use your toothbrush? Not everyone can create a toothbrush. Same concept.

If you pay 1/100th or 1/200th the full retail price of a toothbrush, expect to pay every time you use it. That's what's happening with streaming music. Listeners are paying a tiny fraction of the 99 cent song to listen to it once.

Comment: Re:Try again... 4? (Score 1) 224

by gnupun (#49594859) Attached to: Grooveshark Shuts Down

You know getting free but old, overplayed music for almost a CENTURY...

FTFY! Radio plays the same, banal top 100 music over and over. These songs have been played so many times on radio, nobody enjoys them anymore. If radio started to play all the good music, nobody would buy records, they would just listen to the radio.

Comment: Re:subject lines are dumb (Score 1) 263

by gnupun (#49582147) Attached to: Crashing iPad App Grounds Dozens of American Airline Flights

All these problems could've been avoided if ios and android had simple file manager apps where you could store PDF files and use a regular PDF viewer to view docs. Instead, documents are embedded within apps or downloaded from the cloud creating easy points of failures in the custom viewer apps.

Comment: Re:Wow ... (Score 1) 263

by gnupun (#49582027) Attached to: Crashing iPad App Grounds Dozens of American Airline Flights

In this case, a badly written app (or piece of data) crashed a bunch of iPads.

Sorry, there's a big difference between "apps crashed a bunch of iPads (including iOS)" and "apps crashed (but did not crash iOS)." In this case, the latter happened, so it's only the fault of inhouse app developers who typically produce shitty code anyway. The former case is extremely rare since it's difficult for some app to crash a stable OS like iOS.

Comment: Re:This is why.. (Score 1) 124

by gnupun (#49559963) Attached to: Pandora Paying Artists $0.0001 More Per Stream Than It Was Last Year

.. I'm never going to buy any music.

I'd send money directly to artists, tho.

How frickin hard is it set up a webserver to distribute their own music in this day and age? Protecting the music from pirate distributions once it leaves the server is quite hard though, as is marketing their songs.

Comment: Re:Raise Them To Infinity! (Score 1) 309

You have confused ideas with property.

And you are confused to think all intellectual property is ideas, whereas the reality is things like songs are based upon ideas, but are not ideas themselves. Songs are air vibrations created by instruments or human voices and ideas are ueed to guide these vibrations -- so songs are not ideas. Songs are tangible (to the ear) whereas ideas are abstract.

Just as a house can be based upon ideas (such as ideas about location, ideas about exterior design, ideas about interior design etc), the house is not ideas, rather it uses ideas just as songs use ideas.

The only rational argument for using state force to punish people or make them pay for making a copy of a work is that doing so promotes the creation of more works.

When you derive benefit from a commercial product, such as a song, without payment, that is theft, pure and simple. Your argument that the owner is not deprived of his copy is irrelevant. The music was created to be listened to by consumers in exchange for payment.

if I sing one of his songs it doesn't -- and so your comparison makes no sense.

I'm sure if enough people hear it, it does make a difference. You're using somebody else's hard work for your own gain (whether monetary or not) and it dilutes the value of that work even if you give it away for free. This results in lower sales of said song.

Only through hard work and perseverance can one truly suffer.