Active Topics
-
List of well performing apps on Leste (35)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by smatkovi - 2 days, 17 hrs ago -
Porting apps to Leste (43)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 2 days, 23 hrs ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (13)
to SailfishOS by edp17 - 3 days, 15 hrs ago -
Sailfish OS for the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 (SM-N910C) - (treltexx) (79)
to SailfishOS by edp17 - 3 days, 15 hrs ago -
U-Boot for Nokia RX-51 with BootMenu (updated version 2012.10-rc3-1) (843)
to Alternatives by Arno_11 - 3 days, 20 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (5)
to Community by dredlok706 - 6 days, 15 hrs ago -
Re-commissioning N9 in 2018 (127)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 6 days, 18 hrs ago - more...
|
2010-03-05
, 05:55
|
|
Posts: 307 |
Thanked: 157 times |
Joined on Jul 2009
@ Illinois, USA
|
#272
|
I'm gonna way in on this conversation, after now having read the first 15 pages, browsed the next 5 pages, and skimmed the rest.
I think I understand where azorni is going, and I can see clearly that none of you are grasping the concept he's trying to put forward.
What is a program? Its just one giant number thats n bits long in base 2 (n being the total number of bits that represents the program in question). Theres no cost at all except a negligible electricity cost in duplicating this long number. That cost isn't even necessarily passed along to the original developer!
So what gives this really long number value? Well, in certain contexts, the program it represents may offer some functionality that is desirable. The other contexts being on unsupported platforms. On those platforms, that long number doesn't mean ****.
Bridges provide a desirable function that reduces time or effort in crossing a natural obstacle.
Cars are tangible products that reduce time and effort in transporting things. If you sell a car, you deprive its previous user of the use of that functionality.
Certainly a developer's time and knowledge is worth good money. Also, the fruits of his labor is worth money. However, the real question is whether the fruit of his labor is the code, or the functionality. Granted they are inseparably tied together. That doesn't satisfy the philospher in me though. Maybe somebody can build off this.
By the way, the problem isn't necessarily limited to Software. Consider this post, and the future of recipe makers. With the ability to arbitrarily create any food we want, where will that leave professional chefs and their creations?
Last edited by mmurfin87; 2010-03-05 at 06:19.
I think I understand where azorni is going, and I can see clearly that none of you are grasping the concept he's trying to put forward.
What is a program? Its just one giant number thats n bits long in base 2 (n being the total number of bits that represents the program in question). Theres no cost at all except a negligible electricity cost in duplicating this long number. That cost isn't even necessarily passed along to the original developer!
So what gives this really long number value? Well, in certain contexts, the program it represents may offer some functionality that is desirable. The other contexts being on unsupported platforms. On those platforms, that long number doesn't mean ****.
Bridges provide a desirable function that reduces time or effort in crossing a natural obstacle.
Cars are tangible products that reduce time and effort in transporting things. If you sell a car, you deprive its previous user of the use of that functionality.
Certainly a developer's time and knowledge is worth good money. Also, the fruits of his labor is worth money. However, the real question is whether the fruit of his labor is the code, or the functionality. Granted they are inseparably tied together. That doesn't satisfy the philospher in me though. Maybe somebody can build off this.
By the way, the problem isn't necessarily limited to Software. Consider this post, and the future of recipe makers. With the ability to arbitrarily create any food we want, where will that leave professional chefs and their creations?
Last edited by mmurfin87; 2010-03-05 at 06:19.
|
|
2010-03-05
, 05:59
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#273
|
Originally Posted by mmurfin87
Well, it is quite pleasant to be understood, at last. I particularly like what you said about a software being nothing more after all than a huge number.
I'm gonna way in on this conversation, after now having read the first 15 pages, browsed the next 5 pages, and skimmed the rest.
I think I understand where azorni is going, and I can see clearly that none of you are grasping the concept he's trying to put forward.
What is a program? Its just one giant number thats n bits long in base 2 (n being the total number of bits that represents the program in question). Theres no cost at all except a negligible electricity cost in duplicating this long number. That cost isn't even necessarily passed along to the original developer!
So what gives this really long program value? Well, in certain contexts, it may offer some functionality that is desirable. The other contexts being on unsupported platforms. On those platforms, that long number doesn't mean ****.
Bridges provide a desirable function that reduces time or effort in crossing a natural obstacle.
Cars are tangible products that reduce time and effort in transporting things. If you sell a car, you deprive its previous user of the use of that functionality.
Certainly a developer's time and knowledge is worth good money. Also, the fruits of his labor is worth money. However, the real question is whether the fruit of his labor is the code, or the functionality. Granted they are inseparably tied together. That doesn't satisfy the philospher in me though. Maybe somebody can build off this.
By the way, the problem isn't necessarily limited to Software. Consider this post, and the future of recipe makers. With the ability to arbitrarily create any food we want, where will that leave professional chefs and their creations?
According to this point of view, a software is not much of a creation. Rather, it is a discovery. And this has philosophical and economical implications.
This reminds me a debate I had once about mathematics being invented or discovered by human kind. I was supporting the idea that mathematics were discovered. Now that I think about it, to me this explains why I don't have to pay when I use some maths theorem or formula.
I'll try to have a look at your link some day.
Thanks.
Last edited by azorni; 2010-03-05 at 06:17.
|
|
2010-03-05
, 06:00
|
|
Posts: 1,746 |
Thanked: 2,100 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#274
|
Originally Posted by mmurfin87
Probably right where they are. Even with fancy food printers, people would still want something hand-cooked. Even Star Trek had restaurants despite replicators being everywhere
With the ability to arbitrarily create any food we want, where will that leave professional chefs and their creations?
|
|
2010-03-05
, 06:04
|
|
Posts: 307 |
Thanked: 157 times |
Joined on Jul 2009
@ Illinois, USA
|
#275
|
Originally Posted by wmarone
Granted, but you're still not embracing the problem, only escaping the heavy thinking by taking tangents away from the problem.
Probably right where they are. Even with fancy food printers, people would still want something hand-cooked. Even Star Trek had restaurants despite replicators being everywhere
 |
|
2010-03-05
, 06:04
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#276
|
Are we evaluating product values by their material costs now?
That a painting is nothing more than a canvas and some tubes of paints?
How about a TV show? Just the cost of the reel or recording medium that it's on?
That a painting is nothing more than a canvas and some tubes of paints?
How about a TV show? Just the cost of the reel or recording medium that it's on?
__________________
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Follow the MeeGo Coding Competition!
|
|
2010-03-05
, 06:15
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#277
|
Originally Posted by ysss
A painting is indeed nothing more than a canvas and some paint on it. But with a very precise arrangement of the painting.
Are we evaluating product values by their material costs now?
That a painting is nothing more than a canvas and some tubes of paints?
A random arrangement has very high entropy and worths therefore not much more than the sum of its components.
But a master piece has very low entropy and this is what you pay.
How about a TV show? Just the cost of the reel or recording medium that it's on?
Nobody said that marginal cost IS the price of a product. What it does is influencing the dynamic of its evolution.
Last edited by azorni; 2010-03-05 at 06:18.
|
|
2010-03-05
, 06:17
|
|
Posts: 307 |
Thanked: 157 times |
Joined on Jul 2009
@ Illinois, USA
|
#278
|
Originally Posted by ysss
Are we evaluating product values by their material costs now?
That a painting is nothing more than a canvas and some tubes of paints?
How about a TV show? Just the cost of the reel or recording medium that it's on?
Originally Posted by mmurfin87
So what gives this really long number value? Well, in certain contexts, the program it represents may offer some functionality that is desirable.
Originally Posted by mmurfin87
I'm asking you.
However, the real question is whether the fruit of his labor is the code, or the functionality.
|
|
2010-03-05
, 06:33
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#279
|
Originally Posted by azorni
Entropy?
A painting is indeed nothing more than a canvas and some paint on it. But with a very precise arrangement of the painting.
A random arrangement has very high entropy and worths therefore not much more than the sum of its components.
But a master piece has very low entropy and this is what you pay.
Take a guess of how much this painting goes for:
$10k? more
$100k? more
$1M? more
$10M? more
$100M??
more.
You can stop fabricating theories as you go along now.
__________________
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Follow the MeeGo Coding Competition!
|
|
2010-03-05
, 06:45
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#280
|
Selling information is a tricky business. Journalists, for instance, know very well about that.
If you're a journalist and you have a scoop, you must absolutely keep it secret until it is printed and published by the journal you work for.
A scoop is something that might have a colossal value. But as soon as it is unleashed, its value immediately vanishes until it reaches zero. Of course, you might try to create some laws that forbid to give your journal to someone else, or to tell anyone about what you've read in it. But this would be a silly waste of public force resource, and society should not do that. I guess you would agree that a « non redistribution clause » on a paper journal would be absurd.
Information does have value, but only its publication can be converted into price, not its diffusion. Diffusion may still be commercialized, as long as it requires a physical media with non zero marginal cost. This is more or less still the case for journalism, for paper still being better lecture media than electronic screens. But when information can be reduced to its pure form, such as a scoop that basically is an information which stands in one sentence and can therefore be learned by heart and passed orally, only its publication can be monetized.
Nor software, nor any digital entertainment, are much different.
Last edited by azorni; 2010-03-05 at 07:26.
If you're a journalist and you have a scoop, you must absolutely keep it secret until it is printed and published by the journal you work for.
A scoop is something that might have a colossal value. But as soon as it is unleashed, its value immediately vanishes until it reaches zero. Of course, you might try to create some laws that forbid to give your journal to someone else, or to tell anyone about what you've read in it. But this would be a silly waste of public force resource, and society should not do that. I guess you would agree that a « non redistribution clause » on a paper journal would be absurd.
Information does have value, but only its publication can be converted into price, not its diffusion. Diffusion may still be commercialized, as long as it requires a physical media with non zero marginal cost. This is more or less still the case for journalism, for paper still being better lecture media than electronic screens. But when information can be reduced to its pure form, such as a scoop that basically is an information which stands in one sentence and can therefore be learned by heart and passed orally, only its publication can be monetized.
Nor software, nor any digital entertainment, are much different.
Last edited by azorni; 2010-03-05 at 07:26.
The bottom line is: if you respect the content creator's wishes, then you just don't pirate their products.
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc