Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:convenience over quality (Score 1) 360

Nah...Cory represents some of the worst I find about the FOSS community. He is a prettier version of RMS. Sorry.

I *LOVE* opensource, but I've been burned several times by people like him. No matter what you do, its not good enough.

Again, I am not a fan of GPL with my own works...I straight out PD it when I get around to it (I keep about a 2 to 3 year cycle that anything I sell myself is open)...and yeah, I know I technically need a copyright for it. I put out a few statistical routines for a number of languages last year...ones that actually work (i.e., I was surprised how many actually didn't). These were for running my own experiments and I needed them to work correctly. Honestly, I find it odd that someone would try to copyright something that is another representation of a mathematical formula. I got shit on because I didn't explain how some of this works...I mean FUCKING TAKE A GRADUATE LEVEL STATS COURSE IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO REGRESSIONS OR FACTOR ANALYSIS...I'M NOT GOING TO DO YOUR HOMEWORK FOR YOU.

These were public domain...as they should be. And I have no idea how these people tracked me down because they aren't intended to be used by people that don't know stats. If you know stats? You know how to implement them. Wasn't supposed to be a text book, nor was it supposed to be for the nerd that their boss said HEY I NEED THIS FEATURE, FIND IT...

Most of the opensource people I know are pragmatic. Its the 1% that seem to actually represent the movement that make it look bad. I could care less about telling someone what to do with the product after I'm finished. GPL does that. Telling someone how to live their life and mandating their morality is not free. BSD gets a little closer...it says HEY, AT LEAST GIVE ME CREDIT...I don't even want the credit.

But yes, Cory represents the part of the FOSS movement I can't stand. He is a cheerleader that puts out shitty works and people pay him for cheerleading. You should find out the inside story of how he convinced a nonprofit to move him overseas, spent most of his time promoting his own works, and then quit once they paid for his expenses. Not even a great evangelist if you dig deep enough...more like an opportunist. So yes...he represents the opensores part of opensource.

Not a troll...just someone that has interacted with the man for a long time and realized that he is a bigger douche than I am. And that is telling...

Comment Re:convenience over quality (Score 2) 360

"I don't tip the waitress until I get the check. "

No, but you do pay for the food. The content creator isn't asking for a tip...they are asking for a specific amount of money to watch their movie. In the case of a loaned DVD...the person paying for the DVD originally paid for the right to loan this. When I wrote software and it had to run from disc (this was YEARS ago), my only rule for loans was that you had to loan the original media -- not copies. I gave a shit load of my software away for free -- both opensourcing the older stuff (actually public domaining it and disavowing the code...I stripped all references to my name because most of what people were paying for was my personal service and support and for some reason people thought free software with the code gave them the right to call me an asshole publicly when I told them they could pay if they wanted any support or communication what so ever...and I specifically wrote in the code DO NOT CONTACT ME FOR SUPPORT).

Hell...then again, sometimes poor musicians would write me and ask for my software and I'd give them a copy if they weren't dicks about it. 90% of the time I did.

I'm not a bit fan of the current copyright code, but at the same time, I'm almost 40 and there is only about 5 years of my songwriting or code that wouldn't be covered by the 20 years. I would be happy with it being exactly as it was. And places like TPB would STILL be dealing with software that was 3 months old.

As for Doctorow...I've had conversations with him for 15 years and he has always been wrong about so many things. He use to be a hypercard 'hacker' back in the day...until Apple wouldn't suck his cock and he got righteous about it. His works suck. I use to buy them because I thought he was a decent guy...but my god the man cannot write. I know a lot of others that feel the same way and buy his works...almost like a pat on the head because he is the most outspoken opensores evangelist that doesn't publicly eat his toe cheese in public...he is grating, but acceptable company if he isn't lecturing you. As such, he is a big deal to a lot of nerds who reward him for this, not his writings. As for his other success stories...he points out artists that have made a shit ton of money through the use of their copyrights, live comfortably and then realize they can give a little back and STILL make a shit ton because they have the name to do it. He doesn't talk about the 99% of the people that try this and fail. For me? I sold a shit ton of music over my life and I love the obscurity. Every so often someone will find my name in the credits of an album, but even then...I'd rather my name be on the books in some labels safe and let those that are more talented in performing or comfortable doing PR and interviews take the credit. And they paid well to take the credit.

A true artist doesn't give a fuck who's name is on the works. All I ever cared about was making enough money to be able to continue to do what I needed to do. Fuck obscurity...it never hurt me a bit...it paid for my house and 4 years of college and I've been pimping some of my works to friends again after almost a decade out of the industry so that I can go to med school without having to take on loans. Van Gogh...did a lot of work in obscurity that paid the bills. His paintings were an afterthough and personal. His life as an art collector made a lot of things easier. He used his collection -- and the fact that these works were like currency -- to live a good life that allowed him to paint obscurely. And it didn't hurt him...what would have hurt him? If someone could have come along and made exact works of the paintings in his collection from others that allowed him to live well.

Point is, Cory is wrong about those going broke from piracy but starving from obscurity. They aren't connected...and yet, I've known a lot of talented well known people quit industries because their work was too widely available and they weren't getting compensation for their work (or the investment that it took to create it).

Comment Re:convenience over quality (Score 1) 360

"That's what the Pirate Bay is for. I'm not going to pay to watch something I wouldn't pay to watch..."

I've never understood this idea...if it isn't worth paying for, it isn't worth stealing / copyright infringing / taking something that cost someone else to make that you find crap and thus shouldn't even view unless willing to pony up for it. At least if you REALLY wanted to see someting and couldn't afford it, it would at least make sense...

It just doesn't seem right even if you don't believe in intellectual properties...someday when people don't make bad movies or television for money and are compensated in other ways...I'll agree, but for now, the expectation is that people are compensated for their work if you use.

I figure if I don't want to compensate someone for entertaining me, I don't let them entertain me. It isn't that hard to avoid the garbage...especially if you have to resort to TPB for it.

As for priorities? I agree...I don't drink coffee...and one cup of tea at Starbucks that I can refill all day long and get out of my office for 20 minutes at a time...costs me less that $2. At the same time, I know plenty of people that don't bat an eye at paying for this, and yet they complain about Netflix.

Comment Re:convenience over quality (Score 2) 360

Quality isn't about the bells and whistles...its about the content.

I have tapes recorded in lowfi mono that are far more artful than anything in 7.1 recorded at 192khz. This is not quality...its a numbers game. Does 7.1 sound nice? Yes...but if the content is good, it shouldn't matter.

I look at Netflix as something that I can test out movies I wouldn't have otherwise watched. For $7 a month, I'm not sure if I'm going to care if I don't get 7.1 out of something that costs as much as 2 coffees. And yet, this is exactly why Hastings was kicked in the gonads pretty hard...people were upset about having to pay the equivalent of one days coffee for something that lasts a lot longer and enriches their lives far more. (it is just television...but c'mon...in the scheme of things, it is still better than coffee!). People getting upset that they are getting something that if it would have come down coax instead of Cat5 and they didn't have a choice of what was being played or when that they would be paying 3x that just for the basics (let alone premium channels) and yet people still found reason to complain.

But some people want to complain about $7 and talk about flashy audio formats that really don't add much to 99% of the films out there...

Comment Re:It's not just drugs. Sometimes it's culture, to (Score 1) 333

We do not all believe speeding is wrong.

A large percentage of people believe speeding to be perfectly legitimate because speed laws are artificially low to increase revenues from fines and otherwise. Or may believe that they are good enough to speed, but most others shouldn't. Or that disregarding the law is perfectly legitimate if there is an excuse.

Not one of these tells us they feel speeding it wrong...they feel it is justified under many many circumstances.

I don't speed...and yet I don't find speeding wrong. I find breaking laws that were made that don't affect my life to be wrong. There is nothing that the speeding laws stop me from doing that wasn't my fault to begin with (i.e., get up 5 minutes earlier to get to work). As such, I find it moronic to break the law. I also feel the same about drug laws...I don't like drug laws, but I don't make up excuses as to why the law is bad when all I'd want to do is to get high. I don't see this as a human right that needs to be protected by breaking the laws. At the same time, I don't judge someone that wants to get high...its their life. I do find people that go to jail for this to be morons that took a risk for no apparent reason knowing its against the law.

Taking these ideas out, lot of people could believe that cheating might be wrong EXCEPT IF IT IS JUSTIFYABLE....i.e., they know the material, but just didn't study. Or feel more worthy than someone else. Or otherwise...cheating isn't wrong...others cheating is wrong.

This is the problem with a decade of psychology behind me...these things are not simple questions nor answers...

Comment Re:It's not just drugs. Sometimes it's culture, to (Score 1) 333

All anecdotal?

I keep track of the types of tests and the students that were suspected of cheating. I've been doing this for 10 years. A few years back, I was asked to see which tests were being cheated on the most. A large international exam testing English speaking skills (not going to say the name) was the one that by and far was the largest group of suspected cheating. Note: suspected cheating is most likely actual cheating, but in a lot of cases, I couldn't take the risk of accusation. For instance, I can dismiss someone for talking to someone else, but I can't really say its 'cheating' unless I knew what was being said.

When I went in to names and otherwise, sometimes I have their country of origin...and sometimes just the names...but I can make a pretty good determination that over 10 years that students from certain countries by and far elicit more cheating than others. And not just a little...a LOT. Even when I look at the other tests other than this English Language test...its the same thing.

Who knows, you may be right...unless I went to another large university and repeated these results, I don't know if it is just the locals that have congregated here and not an indictment of the countries...but an indictment of the locals that just happen to cluster from those countries and have heard it was easy to cheat. However, though friends on the national collegiate testing association...this is generally true anecdotally -- even if they haven't kept the same records I have.

You seem to have a lot invested in your belief that it is systematic and not just localized to cultures. I've spent a LOT of time with two diverse cultures -- I am white, but I really don't have many white friends -- living with one family for 15 years, and growing up with another where I spent more time with them than my own family I can definitely tell you they have very different values and norms compared to the average 'white' family (what ever that may be). There are things that make you say What The Fuck...and then when you leave and go back to your 'own' culture...you realize in some ways theirs is so much fucking better and you sit around going WHAT THE FUCK about your own...90% of it all is going to be the same. But where it deviates...it really deviates. And understanding the cultures...it makes sense why.

But going around believing everyone is the same? No...cultures differ and values differ and this is why its great to get out of a monoculture and live with others to see the world for what it is...you might end up agreeing with your own more...or you might go back sickened by your own...I did the latter...

Comment Re:It's not just drugs. Sometimes it's culture, to (Score 1) 333

I do a lot of student testing a part of my job (I design testing methodology as well as designing psychological instruments) and I can tell you this...on exams that are not even for grades but ones just for placement purposes, I have NEVER caught an American cheating. I catch foreigners cheating all the time. Again, these are not even for grade...it's to pick the most appropriate course.

The funny thing is, getting caught cheating will actually keep them from taking courses because of the academic dishonesty...where failing and getting a big fat zero won't...

The problem is, in other parts of the world, if you fall on your face you are done...this as far as you get. It's not racism, it's culture specific. The more authoritarian a country, the more likely they are to cheat. And it's understandable...I would probably cheat if I were given the odds they were as well. If it meant more freedom for me and my family, there is no question...sure I'll want to do well on my own as well, but id do what I can to minimize the odds.

There are two countries in particular that I ALWAYS have to watch for...one guy actually offered to buy me a car to have me look the other way...I told him I was stopping his test because I hadn't actually caught him cheating (I was 99% certain, but I couldn't get to the phone in time and not allowed to search students) but I was planning on dismissing him (he could take it again later). I told him I was going to have to report this, and told him that this country wasn't like his and to go to his advisor IMMEDIATELY and beg for forgiveness about the 'joke' that he tried to bribe me...

Over the years, I actually got to know that kid and I know he actually has the resources to have bought me a car, but his ethics are far better these days. And we've discussed this once or twice about the differences in our cultures and school...

But there is nothing racist or jingoistic in pointing out that other countries have different values...quite a few things I hate about American culture that should be thrown back in our face as well...all cultures have weak points...

Comment Re:The Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science (Score 4, Insightful) 254

"shows that parts of the foundations of some psychology is a sham, not a science"

So, looking at Freud and then applying these tests of pseudoscience to him is an indictment of psychology because some of the roots of the field have not panned out?

So what does that say about the alchemists in conjunction to modern chemistry or physics? Quite a bit of scientific understanding of the world and what it is made up of and how it all fits together were put together by men whose methodology was on par with sorcery.

You go far enough back in any field and you realize that someone important probably got something so wrong that it would invalidate their whole work if applied to todays standards.

That said, I find most of what Freud professed to be utter bullshit...and it pissed me off through most of my undergrad and into my postgraduate work...people would bring up theories of his and I would just shudder. And then I realized that without the application and expansion of his beliefs, psychology may be 50 to 100 years behind what it is today. And we realize that even with his flawed beliefs, we can make a pretty accurate assessment of the world, or more to the point...the people that live within it. We know that with his talking therapies, even with his overemphasis on genitalia and the mommy problems, people are around 60% more likely to have measurable healing compared to those that receive nothing. We know that some interpretations of dreams or beliefs while inaccurate using the Freudian perspective, can lead to a better understanding of the person. In some ways, until imaging scanners and technology to analyze this comes into place, we realize we will most certainly be wrong...but in some ways correct.

In 50 years from now, discoveries made through things like the Hadron Collider may show that the gods of physics may have been wrong...will that mean they are not scientists because they are only postulating that which they have not yet been able to observe? Until the first atomic bomb was detonated, we could not observe, let alone replicate what we had believed. And yet, it worked.

That said, I pretty much moved from psychology to another science and I really don't have a dog in the fight any more. However, the more I deal with other sciences, the more I realize that they are grasping at straws in much the same fashion psychology has done...simply waiting for technology to catch up so that things can be proven or disproven...luckily, most other fields don't have to deal with quite as much human subjects protection / IRB that stop us from finding the truth. Not to go Godwin on things, but if you want to see true science in psychology, one only need to look back at Nazi Germany where one didn't need approval to do bad things to people to be able to reproducibly get results under a number of scenarios and stimuli. I think most would agree that the pseudoscience nature of psychology today is far more civilized and humane even while limiting the research and validity of what could be.

Comment Re:Thank god (Score 1) 1452

I can wait for Netflix to eventually offer it, maybe in 6 months...maybe never...and it is rare that I want anything that is so new that I NEED to pay for it.

As such, just because I can get other content for a much cheaper rate -- this doesn't lower the cost for other things I might want. If it costs too much, I find something else...I'll go through the Netflix archives and find something 6 years old and watch it...

Comment Re:Stallman and FOSS (Score 1, Flamebait) 1452

Some of us tried the freedom and realized it got us no where.

I was a unix enthusiast for 20 years. I set up a BSD box on a 486 and then later a linux one. I still run a business off of 4 linux boxes I had colocated somewhere, now they are emulated in the cloud...probably everywhere. At the time, it gave me all the tools I wanted...20 years later...those same tools are pretty much exactly where they were when I started.

I was a FOSS enthusiast for years. I got sick of dealing with the personalities when I'd make a package simpler to use, I'd get shit on for doing so...my background is in psychology, and its not hard to pare these things down to something that the average person can use -- while still giving the same power to the nerds. I got kicked out of one project for making a wrapper app that allowed non-nerds to use it. I regularly released software as public domain -- because I felt the freedom of the person with the software should be more important that telling them what they needed to do with it after it was out of my hands. I got crapped on by several people in the community when I did this...one of my projects ended up forking with people acting like I was an asshole -- and I fully agreed with them forking it. It wasn't my project any more, so they could do what they wanted...however, I was still treated like crap by these people that could only see past their own zealotry.

All in all, the Stallman view of freedom is slavery IMHO. I can't stand his perspective. It is too absolute and demanding.

As for Apple, I don't really like the walled garden idea...but when I see whats on the other side of the walled garden, I don't complain too much. I have jailbroken my apps, only to find that the jailbroken apps that were supposed to be currated by others are completely shitty, they 'leak' info to servers oversea, they waste battery, and screw with the stability of the system...there are two jailbroken apps I use and have paid for...one I know does shitty things, but I use it because it is useful for me. The other? Makes life simpler and gets around some of the things the phone company thinks I should pay for. Maybe I should...

Either way, the Apple way seems to be far better than the alternatives -- even if I disagree with a lot of this in principle.

Comment Re:Thank god (Score 1) 1452

So how would you be a consumer of the ATV anyways then?

You want to buy a product that is specifically for streaming...nothing on the box says anything BUT streaming...and then complain that it costs too much to steam?

Ok...some of us research our products before we buy them...

Comment Re:Thank god (Score 1) 1452

I bought an ATV and only use Netflix on it. I had XBMC on it for a while, but an upgrade wiped it out...it was getting to be a pain to keep hulu running on it anyways...

No AppleTax for me...and even if there were? It isn't like paying $3 to rent a movie is all that much (especially when it costs me $8 to rent a RedBox because I can never seem to get back to the box in any reasonable amount of time).

Comment Re:That probably makes sense.... (Score 1) 244

"Why should 80% of the people pay no income taxes on their income?"

Because they end up paying taxes regardless. income is only one tax...we have multiple taxible sources to equilize the process.

The poor tend to spend their money on essentials. These get taxed...the things that aren't essential get taxed much higher -- booze, cigs...

However, you can't make it ONLY sales tax, because quite a few of us go out of our way to buy things that aren't taxed for one reason or another. The more money you make, the easier it is to do this...I buy a LOT of shit overseas...and the few times I am required to declare its value...well...lets just say there isn't an appraiser there to say if it is right or not.

Beyond that, a lot of services are not taxed / taxible. The more money you have, the less likely you need STUFF and the more likely you want specific services. Sure, you will have the stuff, but you won't be like the poor white trash that buy a big screen and it breaks, and repeats the cycle ever year not realizing if they had the money in the first place, they could have just bought something decent and kept it for much longer and actually saved money on the deal...more 'poor' people have more stuff than I do...but mine lasts a hell of a lot longer and the TCO is far less. But you need the initial money sitting around to do this.

And then you get into the idea of the rich screaming about wanting only income tax...when 90% of what they bring home isn't income but something else. They may actually have $1M in stock, but they don't want to be judged on this until they cash it in because it might not be worth that much when they do.

I do think the tax laws need to be simplified...but the idea that some people are not paying taxes is ridiculous. Are they paying their fair share? Who knows...I've always felt that those that could afford to burden the load more should...but thats just my Christian nature...

Comment Re:Dear Apple (Score 1) 345

He also 'shamelessly' paid for these ideas and 'ripped off' Xerox by allowing them to loan some of their best engineers for the project by allowing the company to invest in Apple and making them millions of dollars.

But don't let facts get in the way of your criticism...

Comment Good... (Score 2) 142

I use to write medical applications and instruments years ago, and one of the most expensive things was testing the work, and running it past lawyers -- who tested the work one more time with a different team.

And my products were generally known as being good, accurate, and scientifically tested. ...

And then I would see competitors put out similar works that was not tested, and often times inaccurate. And much cheaper. Hell, one of my competitors put a disclaimer and lawyerly notice with the same guys I had been working with and I asked them if it was a conflict of interest...my guys said that if they were involved, they couldn't talk about it because of client lawyer priv...but then came back and said they could talk about it because they never heard from the guy. And yet, people thought his work was as scientifically tested and rigorous mine.

In my case, I was doing mostly psychological work...I was careful about my clients. I only licensed my software to legitimate psychologists or MDs with the appropriate background. My competitors didn't care...schools would try to buy my work to test kids to see if they were psychos or needed kicked out...and wants software that could take the place of a trained professional (where as I actually took out a few automations that would have been easier to diagnose, BUT it made it easier for people that had no right to diagnose, nor actually understood the ramification of doing this...I wanted the diagnosis to come from a licensed psychologist).

The whole point is, there is too much unregulated work in this world. Too many people that think they are experts, just because they have a book with equations and knowledge of programming. Too many people that are willing to put their name on a product for a percentage of the sales without ever looking at it. I spend the money on making certain things were right -- and it cut into my profit A LOT -- but it was the right thing to do. Everything I hear from this law is that it will actually make the law a little more uniform and a lot of stuff that we had to guess at is now concrete and no guessing needed. It will be actually cheaper to do this than what I paid before...the only people complaining are those that took shortcuts and didn't really care about your health.

(and sadly, these days I have the credentials to do the work...and yet I do no programming any more).

Slashdot Top Deals

The cost of feathers has risen, even down is up!

Working...