Recent Posts
(see attachment in previous post)
Train eavesdropper tweets former spy chief's briefing-Arizona Hot (October 25, 2013, 01:50 PM)
A Voluntaryist Contest
How Do You Explain to People That Taxation Is Theft?
How thoughtful of them to make it so easy to pay up in order to ransom your files back!-40hz (October 25, 2013, 11:45 AM)
Wikipedia Fights Back Against Socking
from the sock-it-to-them dept
The idea that Wikipedia is dying has become one of the Internet's recurrent stories. Because something used by so many people every day is completely free and dependent on the selfless dedication of relatively few individuals, there is perhaps an underlying fear that it will disappear, and it will be our fault for not supporting it better. However, alongside major issues like the need for an influx of new contributors from more diverse backgrounds, one of the lesser-known challenges Wikipedia faces is the rise of "socking", or sock puppetry. Here's how Wikipedia defines the term:
The use of multiple Wikipedia user accounts for an improper purpose is called sock puppetry (often abbreviated in discussion as socking). Improper purposes include attempts to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, or otherwise violate community standards and policies. The term comes from sock puppet, an object shaped roughly like a sock and used on the hand to create a character to entertain or inform. In Internet terminology it is an online identity used for deception.
Please name some regulation that isn't bad. But before you tell me what it is, ask yourself if there isn't already some law to deal with the situation already in place. It's harder than it sounds.-Renegade (October 23, 2013, 10:26 PM)
Keith Alexander Says The US Gov't Needs To Figure Out A Way To Stop Journalists From Reporting On Snowden Leaks
from the because-the-first-amendment-means-as-much-as-the-fourth dept
Apparently not satisfied with just setting fire to the 4th Amendment, NSA boss Keith Alexander's next target is the 1st Amendment. In an interview with the Defense Department's "Armed With Science" blog, it appears that Alexander felt he'd have a friendly audience, so he let loose with some insane claims, including suggesting that the government needs to find a way to "stop" journalists from reporting on the Snowden leaks.
As noted by Politco, General Alexander isn't a fan of journalists doing anything about these documents:
"I think it’s wrong that that newspaper reporters have all these documents, the 50,000—whatever they have and are selling them and giving them out as if these—you know it just doesn’t make sense," Alexander said in an interview with the Defense Department's "Armed With Science" blog.
"We ought to come up with a way of stopping it. I don’t know how to do that. That’s more of the courts and the policymakers but, from my perspective, it’s wrong to allow this to go on," the NSA director declared.
It's not the policymakers and the courts. It's the Constitution, and it says there's freedom of the press.
An effort in the United Nations by Brazil and Germany to hold back government surveillance is quickly picking up steam, as the uproar over American eavesdropping grows.
The German and Brazilian delegations to the U.N. have opened talks with diplomats from 19 more countries to draft a General Resolution promoting the right of privacy on the Internet. Close American allies like France and Mexico -- as well as rivals like Cuba and Venezuela -- are all part of the effort.
The push marks the first major international effort to curb the National Security Agency's vast surveillance network. Its momentum is building. And it comes as concerns are growing within the U.S. intelligence community that the NSA may be, in effect, freelancing foreign policy by eavesdropping on leaders like Germany's Angela Merkel.
Apparently American Banks think we're playing Monopoly
(see attachment in previous post)-wraith808 (October 24, 2013, 02:01 PM)
Renegade are you posting in comments again?-wraith808 (October 24, 2013, 02:04 PM)
What do you think the law would look like if it were an API/SDK?-Renegade (October 23, 2013, 10:26 PM)
ROFL ...That could only happen in a mythical land where computers could count to at least 3.Code: C++ [Select]
Their subscription plan doesn't tie you in in any way. As 40 mentioned, the programs run even if you're not subscribed. You can actually use the new plan like a tradition one-time purchase option, all you need to do is opt out of the plan after the purchase is made. The update model is way more flexible - it ends up being cheaper if you don't want every new feature the minute it's released and lets users with a smaller budget catch up to the latest versions for a nominal charge, if and when they find it worthwhile. I honestly don't see any pitfalls - which is why I posted about this here, to see if there's something I missed.-nosh (October 24, 2013, 06:21 AM)
@Ren- it's not really running as a service. Their apps download and run locally. It's their update mechanism that requires a subscription. It's more like a paid WSUS. You also don't need a web connection to use the app itself. Once the license gets validated you never need to go online to Collectorz again if you don't want to update it..-40hz (October 24, 2013, 05:38 AM)
Software Licensing - I'm on Your Side
Oct 13
Written by: Renegade
Saturday, October 13, 2007 12:00 AM
I get people asking me about my upgrade policies for Guitar & Drum Trainer every now and then. I don't have an “official policy” for upgrades posted. I suppose I really should though. The problem for me in posting one is that software licensing isn't all that easy or straight-forward. Sometimes it's just downright complicated. And that makes things tough for me to simplify.
I don't ever want to charge for upgrades. I'd like to say “free upgrades forever!” But I know that's just not possible.
There are things that I'd like to put in GDT that would cost money that I couldn't afford to not charge for. e.g. AAC support. AAC is a patented technology and bears royalties. To put that in GDT without a token fee would be very difficult and entirely not practical. It's not like some software where I could just plop down a few hundred dollars and be done with it. To start, I'd have to plop down thousands of dollars. To start...
There's one thing that I'd like to do, but dropping $25,000 on it seems a bit much. That certainly wouldn't be possible for free upgrades as I'm not independently wealthy. Let's all hope that I win a lottery because then it's not a problem at all!
So saying “FREE UPGRADES” is pretty much out of the question if I'm going to be honest about it. The alternative is to say “free upgrades withing a major version,” but I don't want to charge for major version upgrades.
Having ruled out both upgrade policies, how do I post a policy? Catch-22.
I suppose the way around that is to have those things that would cost too much to put in as extra “add-ins” for GDT. But that seems unnecessarily complicated and not something that I'd want to deal with as a customer.
There's still time though, as I haven't added any of those things in to GDT.
I get a good amount of email from GDT users, and really, I consider myself very lucky. They are some of the nicest people you'd ever meet. I've been very blessed with a fantastic customer base of people that love music, and find my software is something worth spending a few dollars on to help them with their music.
Some people email me and tell me that they used to use the competition software, but needed to pay for the upgrade, found mine and bought it instead. I suppose I need to thank the competition for that!
At the end of the day, I suppose I'm just another sucky guitarist with a problem to solve, and a solution to that problem that I can make available to other people. My take on it is that I like to be treated well, and I should pass that on as much as possible.
So, in short, I hate being milked with upgrade fees (yes - I still have software licenses where they royally milk me for money and I keep upgrading...) and will do everything I can to not be a “software milkmaid.”
Upgrades are free whenever possible.
Cheers,
Ryan
Bombardier is already the world’s third-largest aircraft manufacturer, but that’s just a nice way of saying that it’s really “the best of the small players”—an apt metaphor for Canada itself.
^ and the Mosquito bombers that my grandfather helped build.-sword (October 23, 2013, 03:21 PM)
Just keeping track of all those flying contraptions buzzing around in the skies! Not all regulation is automatically bad.-40hz (October 23, 2013, 11:29 AM)
This gets us back to our discussions of how the entire internet is becoming an advertising delivery platform.
Apple can give away the OS because they make a fortune on the hardware and they can kill off any competition that is charging for the operating system.
Google can give away its services and kill off all competition, as long as they are making huge profits off of forcing ads down our throats.
These corporations are always happy to make half their product free as long when doing so kills their competition and doesn't interfere with the way they are getting rich.
The real question I think we are going to be asking ourselves in a decade is, how can we get back to a world where we just PAY reasonable amounts for the things that we value. Instead of playing this game where everything *SEEMS* free but in reality it's just a bait and switch or a delay until they become a monopoly.
I'm really starting to long for products and services that charge enough for each item/service to make a reasonable profit on that item/service. What a crazy idea.-mouser (October 23, 2013, 09:34 PM)
I'm really starting to long for products and services that charge enough for each item/service to make a reasonable profit on that item/service. What a crazy idea.-mouser (October 23, 2013, 09:34 PM)
I've started with Apple a bit... it's depressing, but I just haven't had good experience with Linux when I tried it before. I'm past the point of wanting to learn how to use something... I just want it to work.-wraith808 (October 23, 2013, 06:31 PM)
(I understand many of these things far above my ability to explain/teach on the topic.) I was thinking more in term of a comparision with 1800 or even 1900 (referencing your quote that money had lost so much value in the last 2 to 300 years). It's easy to cherry pick a very short period of time when average people did reasonably well, and say that's what the world would be like if [xyz].-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
But I dont see much logic there, nor much to convince me of anything really. I could just as easily argue that times were good then because banks were much more regulated (and we might both be right - or wrong, or it might just be the case that there's an awful lot more going on at any time, than any simple idea/concept can explain).-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
Why do I feel like I'm being cheated when you compare minimum wage in 1964 and today in terms of silver-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
We've touched on this before (my post in basement thread about greenback dollars). SeraphimLabs claims a deflationary model is unstable (second post @ the link above). I dont know about his qualifications, but you didnt respond directly.-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
As I say I'm not qualified to talk about it, but off the top of my head, if money was related to, say, silver, and silver was increasing in value all the time, then wages would probably have to be reduced proportionately, otherwise companies would go bust. Not sure that would go down too well...-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
if money was related to, say, silver...-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
...and silver was increasing in value all the time...-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
From the Fed even! ...then wages would probably have to be reduced proportionately, otherwise companies would go bust.-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
I know that you know a lot about the flaws in fiat money Ren. But I get the impression that you dont know a whole lot more about economics than I do, yet you seem so very sure about your ideas. That sets off alarm bells for me. No offence intended - it's the ideas I'm on about-tomos (October 23, 2013, 06:53 AM)
Entrepreneurs and start-up companies looking for backing will be able to solicit small investments over the Internet from the general public under a new proposal to be released by U.S. regulators on Wednesday.
The Securities and Exchange Commission's "crowdfunding" plan is a requirement in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act, a 2012 law enacted with wide bipartisan support that relaxes federal regulations to help spur small business growth.
Equity crowdfunding lets small companies raise money by pooling together tiny investments from people around the country in exchange for a potential financial return.
If adopted by the five-member SEC, the rule would be a major shift in how small U.S. companies can raise money in the private securities market.
Private companies are now only allowed to solicit investors deemed to be "accredited," meaning they have a net worth of $1 million, excluding the value of their home, or an individual annual income over $200,000. The crowdfunding rule would let small businesses raise over $1 million a year by tapping unaccredited investors.
Companies could sell stakes to mom-and-pop investors without registering the securities with the SEC, a move designed to make it cheaper and less cumbersome for struggling startups trying to get their businesses off the ground. They would still be required to raise the money through regulated broker-dealers such as CircleUp or through crowdfunding portals.
So, if it cost $0.05 to buy a loaf of bread 100 years ago (when the standard of living was lower), and today it costs $5.00 (with a higher standard of living), then, when a loaf of bread costs $500.00 then what?-Renegade (October 22, 2013, 08:44 PM)
I dont really care what something costs in comparision to x years ago (maybe I should) - I care what it costs in relation to what I can earn/make in an hour/day/week/month/year. That's my point when I ask "can you seperate the "value" of e.g. the dollar from the standard of living?".-tomos (October 23, 2013, 01:31 AM)
