Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 256 256

Since we are discussing rules for the society where those links hold true, it hardly matters.

If/when society changes radically enough, we can revisit.

That will be quite a radical change though since as far back as written history goes, we find remarks about young adults being more rash and hot-headed than their elders and so in need of guidance.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 256 256

See the references here.

If your claim was true, parents would instinctively tell their 5 year olds to go to bed when they feel like it and wouldn't worry about it if their 12 year old decided not to come home until morning.

Instead, they recognize that the 5 year old is developmentally advanced enough to avoid immediate threats but is nowhere near ready to plan their future.

Your knowledge is decades out of date.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 256 256

That's just BS.

No it isn't. It is a fact of human development.

That doesn't mean helicopter parenting is in order or that they can't manage at home by themselves for a while with generally increasing autonomy, but it does mean that expecting adult thinking about longer term life choices will be hit and miss at best. It makes no more sense to hold them forever responsible for their actions than it does to teach calculus in kindergarten.

While pulling everything off the internet forever isn't really possible, we can certainly disallow use of old information from childhood when deciding on employment or credit at the very least.

Comment So where is the rending of garments? (Score 4, Insightful) 84 84

Snowden hands over evidence that the NSA has been illegally spying on U.S. citizens and Allies (not to mention perjuring itself before Congress) to an American journalist resulting in a careful release of some data to prove the allegation and the feds call for his head on a platter, even risking an international incident or two to try to disappear him.

The OPM fumbles and hands over 4.2 million very detailed dossiers on federal employees and 21 million others with security clearance to China and the feds say "no worries, we'll give you a year of credit monitoring.....eventually.".

Comment Re:So... redundant, in other words (Score 1) 24 24

While its true that SJWs pretty much ruin everything they touch in the case of Patreon there are just as many using it for good things. For example there are several reviewers of niche movies/TV/Music where you can "buy" an episode and choose the topic of that episode (as long as it falls into the niche) and dedicate it to someone, E.G. Todd In The Shadows has a show called "One Hit Wonderland" where you can choose any one hit band from the past 40 years if you wish to buy an episode. I have seen similar things done with reviews of games like World of Planes/Tanks/Warships where the buyer can choose which vehicle is under review next. Some of these reviewers also sell game time, where the person buying can be in the next review by joining up with the reviewer in game.

In these "works for hire" I see no issue as everybody gets the content for free, the one paying the money simply gets to choose the topic and be mentioned or appear in the video. Watching a few of these other than the person being mentioned in the front you'd be hard pressed to tell this from any of their other content so if it helps them continue to make entertaining videos we can all watch for free? I say go for it, especially when you can use it to help those that could really use it, like Chuck at SFDebris whose wife has a serious mental illness which requires him to be a stay at home dad.

Comment Re:Companies Selling Actually Free Software? (Score 1) 152 152

The problem with the GPL is the ONLY way to actually make enough money to keep your doors open (and feel free to try to prove me wrong with a single example, you can't) is through the "blessed trinity" which is 1.- Sell hardware, 2.- Sell support or services, and 3.-E-Begging.

So what is wrong with that? Simple the vast majority of software doesn't fall into those niches and thus there will never be a GPL equivalent. For a perfect example just look at how ID has given some of the most powerful game engines ever made yet you can't name a single player GPL game with the quality of Far Cry 1 or Bioshock, which are over a decade old, reason? Games don't fall into the blessed trinity so all you get are a billion piss poor Q3 Arena ripoffs because those are so simple any kid can whip one off in a couple months. This is why despite 20 years the best answer to Photoshop is the Gimp, which isn't anywhere near the same league, why you have no GPL small business software that comes even close to Quickbooks despite it being out there for ages, they simply do not fall under the trinity and so will never get made.

This is the problem with rigid dogma, it frequently ignores reality and becomes the classic "is ought" problem, saying their "ought" to be GPL for all forms of software while ignoring reality which "is" that someone devoting their full time to a software project needs to be able to eat and have a home. If you simply removed the "free to redistribute" clause this problem would not exist, after all we have seen that this works in the world of video games where many games let you modify the games and distribute those modifications (and some like ID let you have the code) but you cannot distribute the game itself, allowing the developers to get paid for their labor and make more games.

Of course I'm sure I will get nothing but hate for daring to say programmers should be able to make a living (and I notice RMS never says anybody else should give their work away for free, I bet he has no qualms with paying his doctor for the years of hard work he put in learning his craft while ignoring programmers often spend as many years learning theirs) but when you look at the GPL? It simply insures that many forms of software will simply never come to be, the license is too narrow to allow one to make a living unless you can do so through the trinity.

Comment Have We Lost the War to Quid Pro Quo Complacency? (Score 2) 152 152

Time and time again I see news articles that seem to herald the idea that users are willing to sacrifice something like privacy for the use of software. Take Facebook for an example. You get a robust and snappy storage and website for communication at the cost of control over your life and privacy. And as I try to explain to people the tradeoffs most of them seem to be complacent. Even I myself use GMail, there's just no better mail service. Even if there were, I'd have to run the server from my home to be sure that I'm in control in it and it's truly free (by your definition). So given that much of the populace isn't even prepared technologically to harness truly free software, don't you think they have slowly accepted the trade offs and that the pros of your arguments -- though sound -- are only possibly realized by those skilled enough to edit source code or host their own mail server from their home?

Comment Companies Selling Actually Free Software? (Score 5, Interesting) 152 152

I found your piece on selling free software to be pretty logical on paper. However, has it ever worked in the wild? Can you name companies or revenues that currently operate on this idea (and I'm not talking about services or support of the software)? I simply can't come up with a widely used monetized piece of software licensed under the GNU GPL whereby the original software was sold at a single price and shipped with the source code -- free for the original purchaser to distribute by the license's clauses. Can you list any revenue generation from that? I must admit I'm not exactly enamored with paying for free software (as in your definition of free) before it's written yet I cannot think of any other way this would fairly compensate the developer.

Comment Re:Sounds like he was arrested for shooting. (Score 1) 898 898

In general anything that creates a hazard for bystanders would be a bad idea. So even if there isn't a specific ordinance against shooting bows-and-arrows in the city limits, I'm sure the authorities would take a dim view of your clout shooting into your neighbors' yards.

What there should be is a legally mandated remote radio kill switch anyone can trigger that will cause the drone to land, or in the case of the more sophisticated models to return to base. If the switch worked within say a 50' radius it'd pretty much only work on drones buzzing your residence.

Line Printer paper is strongest at the perforations.

Working...