Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Lies? (Score 1) 548

The value of a developer is dictated by the value of what they produce, but their cost (as in what a developer is paid) is determined by two things (1) the cost of a replacement developer, and generally what another developer with a similar skillset, will demand, and (2) what the same developer is able to earn elsewhere.

In a reasonably working labour market, (2) is implied by (1).

Comment Re: do it without communicating or warning the sit (Score 1) 136

The need for copyright is clear from the relevant laws and statutes that it is meant to encourage the production of works of authorship.

Our culture is richer because people have created these works.

Now, I don't agree with these seemingly infinite copyrights. I would prefer a much shorter copyright term - I would go for 40 years. I don't think copyrights need to be much longer than that to encourage production of works of authorship.

However, I would definitely not want a return to wealthy people deciding what constitutes good art and therefore what is worthy of funding. We are on the cusp of truly democratizing the creation of works of art in a way that was just not possible even 2 decades ago.

I trust the market, and I trust copyright (as a concept) even though I also think current copyright periods are excessive.

Comment Re: do it without communicating or warning the sit (Score 1) 136

Copyright is working now. Not perfectly, but it is working nonetheless. The proof is in companies such as Microsoft (and others) making bank every month.

Nowhere does anyone say that copyright needs to work perfectly for it to be considered to be working successfully.

And what other ways (other than patronage) are available for people to fund content? Put some ideas on the table, rather than just hypothesize that there are other means available.

Comment Re: do it without communicating or warning the sit (Score 1) 136

Content locking is not mandatory. You, or anyone else, can create content and distribute it completely free of charge.

You are probably not going to spend $200m on any content that you want to give away for free, and therein lies the problem.

Yes, studios fear disruption, but the disruption they fear isn't about free content. They are much more worried that the likes of Amazon and Netflix are going to supplant them.

Comment This is a manageable problem (Score 1) 274

I imagine that if a typical old monitor is approximately 50cm * 50cm * 50 cm, then you can fit about 1 billion of them into a hole in the ground that is approximately 500m * 500m * 500m.

This isn't to suggest that waste that is currently unrecycleable is a good thing, but this is a problem that can be managed by having a plan to deal with the issue.

Comment Re:The end is near? (Score 2) 481

Brazil has a population density of 22 people per square mile. To put that figure in context, the US has a density of 84, China of 142 and India of 386.

It is easy for Brazil to lead the way on renewables because, per capita, they have way more resources than others.

That isn't to say they shouldn't, but they cannot be a realistic example for all countries to follow.

Comment Re:I think it's safe to say that wouldn't hold up (Score 3, Insightful) 216

He was executed in Texas for murder and arson based (...) many arson experts now believe he was almost certainly innocent. Oops.

Another strong argument against the death penalty.

Also another argument against leaving decisions on technical matters to prosecutors. There were many chances to save that guy's life, and none were taken. There was testimony in good time that showed that there was no evidence that he had deliberately caused the fire, but it wasn't listened to.

In any case, if a person is being found guilty of such a crime, I believe the jury needs to say what evidence was key in convicting. In this case, the key bit was that the fire had been started deliberately and, more specifically, that an accelerant had been used. If that testimony had been invalidated (which it later was), then basically the glove didn't fit, and the man should have been acquitted. This would have given the man an opportunity to put his effort into disproving the one key bit of evidence that was nailing him.

Comment Re:Some of you, remember you voted for this. (Score 1) 667

NOAA does not build or launch or maintain satellites. They don't. NASA does. That's what they do. NOAA does not have flight ops. NOAA does not have a launchpad. NOAA does not have giant clean room facilities for building satellites. NOAA provides the requirements, NASA builds/launches/maintains the satellites.

And they don't need to. I use a computer with complicated software every day for work. But I don't know how to build that complicated software, or the computer, or the chair I sit on.

There are a lot of companies out there, and a few countries too, that will happily design and put satellites in space for a fee. One of the big problems with government funded research (and I say this as someone who does not have a philosophical opposition to governments funding research) is that sooner or later, government departments see the big pile of money that is available for climate change programs, and want a piece of the action. NASA - because we know space, and can watch the climate from space. The army, because defending the country requires understanding the weather . climate - hence we want some of that action. EPA - because we protect the environment, and therefore we need to get in on the climate science action and therefore want that funding.

Why can't there be one organisation whose job it is to study the earth and climate, and let all other organisations do what they are meant to do, like look out into space, and find ways of protecting the environment without all needing to justifying everything on climate.

Comment Re:horse has left the barn (Score 1) 376

Your failure to blend the real world needs like cost, or the capabilities of third world nations, with your imagination is the reason you won't be taken seriously by anyone. You are proposing solutions that don't stand a fat chance in hell of being accepted, or require advancements that won't come for 50 years. Get real dude.

If wealthy countries invest now in those big solutions, developing countries can jump onto those solutions later once they are ready. For example, electric cars might not be an efficient solution for poor Africa right now, but once Africa has developed the necessary infrastructure, electric cars can contribute to emissions reduction.

And many times, the high cost of the solutions is only because we have not developed huge industries and the requisite economies of scale around them.

Slashdot Top Deals

panic: kernel trap (ignored)