diqu · HackerTrans

Maybe it was never reviewed for obsolence. Or maybe two sources in the reference section aren't enough. Either way, there are only two direct references in the article body, which seems lacking. I'd assume the last two paragraphs could use some citations and sources.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

Which boils down to the old "consumers view computers as black boxes" argument. The question is whether we should care about that or not, and whether the pain of not being able to run GenPop's favorite software grows too big. Being locked into the respective device's app store hides that pain to a degree. And whenever it becomes noticable, GenPop rather considers switching to a different vendor than considering the tech in question. As long as people put band-aids around the architecture, I'm not sure why any consumer would want care about the underlying hardware in question.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

> I think "without anyone really noticing" should really mean "without anyone in the general public really noticing".

I think that's implied when a mainstream news outlet writes about it, and not some tech magazine.

> In general I think that the press and the general public only becomes aware of these things long after they have reached a dominant market position and are employed almost universally.

which seems evident, here. ARM becomes dominant -> Guardian writes about it -> the general public learns about it.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

Saying you want your circadian rhythm match the outside light, then adding that you generally can't get to sleep while being steamrolled in the morning, sounds an aweful lot like you're not sleeping in accordance with your biological clock. Are you aware of delayed sleep phase syndrom?[0]? I have the same "issue" and it took me years to find a name for it, so I'd rather throw this at you, even if you knew.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_sleep_phase_disorder

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

Thank you, had the same problem on Debian. This made it work.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

> Can't agree with that.

You don't have to. When I first found out about the suckless project, it seemed completely inaccessible, due to the lack of in-depth documentation. After reading around a bit, it seems intentional. My impression was that suckless doesn't aim for quantity, but for quality, even among its userbase, hence the lack of documentation is an entry barrier, a minimum of technical literacy required to get in. Look at the source and you don't need a wiki. My gut reaction says, that's quite elitist - which itself is negatively connoted when everyone aims for widespread adoption and usability. In the end, I agree with this idea. Software is supposed to serve a purpose. It doesn't have to suit everyone. It can be for a selected few, and still be a great project. What changed my mind was that dwm doesn't use configuration files. I came from openbox and more than once broke the menu because of a syntax error in the xml-based config. In dwm, you change the source config and recompile. This way, any and all errors are returned to you, you can fix it and try again, without ever risking any configuration issues or breakages. They do the same with st, their terminal. I'm absolutely convinced by this approach.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

He used to be a console engine dev, so - naturally - he wrote even that from scratch. On his own. Quite admirable, I think.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

> University computing centers can donate storage space to the project

If we leave the publishing-as-a-business area, I wonder how much university libraries currently pay annually for their subscriptions. And I do wonder, if it would make sense for universities to let their libraries take care of archiving and publishing the respective uni's publications. Open-access everything, host it at home.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

This is already happening, even with agencies like the FDA in place. It's called off-label use: http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/tre...

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

You say that like there's a sane and safe alternative.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

But that brings us back to mbillie and "if <x> were so great, everyone would already use/do <x>". Does popularity necessarily imply superiority? Adoption just means it's easy for anyone to get aboard. But that doesn't mean it's implicitly good, in any other way. Worse is better works, for example, if one option is more approachable than the other. Decentralization is good, as a rule of the thumb. Not having everyone on the same network, but having the ability to set up your own network or service based on the technology, is a good thing. Why would you want to have everyone on the same network? Networks are often topic-related. For example Freenode for programming-related topics. Minecraft is pretty focused on EsperNet. Quakenet used to be the place to online gaming. This is usefull and good, since communities sort themselves by interest, views, tools or what have you, by default. So why not encourage self-sustainability through means of decentralization?

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

> I hear tell that a couple of guys even used an old language like Lisp to implement a startup.

Just to specify this, reddit for example started out in Lisp and moved to Python, eventually: http://www.redditblog.com/2005/12/on-lisp.html

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

I think this would be sound advice in this context. "Write like you see yourself talking when imagining your speech".

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

> If a derivative of the label were, for example, being used on another wine bottle without licensing, it would unambiguously be copyright infringement.

To be honest, I don't think the copyright is the most important part here, but rather trademark laws, as another user noted here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10442882 since it'd be causing a disrupting confusion, IE making consumers believe they buy a product which they actually don't buy.

The problem with fair use is that it's ambigous. Only courts can declare fair use with authority; an artist claiming fair use for their work has no authority, in the sense that they can still get sued, and neither do their lawers hold defining authority about this aspect. This, effectively, creates a large legal gray zone. eevee is arguing from the perspective of a creator, and people seem to get a little worked up with elaborate, imaginary examples. The important part, though, is the idea behind the post, that being: Artists are subject to a lot of legal insecurity. Copyright is one of the most empowering and simulatanously most crippling insecurities. Remixes and DJ-sets on youtube and soundcloud, publishing street photography, creating fan art, as some examples. All of these are to a varying degree both legal and illegal, most importantly depending on your specific location. In my case, my country knows a case similar to fair use: if said bottle label was reproduced in a recognizable manner, and it was a major part of the work, it would be an infrigement. If it was a minor part (dubbed 'padding') of the art work, it's considered a sibling of US fair use. But only courts can decide either. And artists often aren't well-funded, hence avoid anything which might smell like a lawsuit, hence freedom of expression is hindered in a significant way, for no particular reason but lack of legal clarity. I'm just writing all this, because you seemed very emphatic in your view. But this is a really ambigious topic, which requires a lot of consideration and empathy on all sides. So I wanted to add a little perspective. /edit: not you, swhipple, but hn seemed very emphatic, while you, swhipple, seemed to recognize a need for clarity, so I wanted to add some perspective under your considerate opionion. Pardon my misaccredition. I didn't mean to sound rude or devalue your view as inconsiderate. Your "It isn't entirely binary. I support expanding fair use in ways that benefit the public while not hindering artists." made me chime in.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

> Those items (cheese, wine) are not covered by copyright, as they have no literary or artistic value themselves.

In case of actual still-lifes, the labels might bear illustrations or otherwise protected content, like fonts, distinct bootle designes, or trademarks. While the latter might be allowed under fair use, what about reproduced, if even only stylized, illustrations? Do you expect an artist to find the illustrator and pay a license fee, in order to sell their own work?

Also, fair use is a us-american practice and isn't applicable to copyright and similar concepts in general, as far as I'm aware.

diqu

11 anni fadiscuss

But would you argue that this is a flaw in the model of mail or in the perception and attitude towards emails and newsletters? If it's the latter, well, that's up to each themselves, and would deem mails and newsletters a still-viable way of notifying reliably about updates. While, if there are actual, inherent flaws in the idea of aggregated mails that make you and others dismiss them, another approach might in fact be better. N.B.: There at least seems to be a curious niche where even daily newsletters like thelistserve.com or nowiknow.com have their little space, for whatever that's worth.

comments