Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | chii's comments login

But you do have the right to transcribe your VHS copy to bluray yourself. Format conversion is not illegal.

Isn’t this discussion about that’s ethical and moral, rather that what’s legal?

Morals and ethics have no place in a court of law. Or, another way to think about it: morals and ethics cover human-to-human transactions. Legality covers human-to-corporate interactions.

Because corporations are not people. They are composed of people, but the people of a corporation are fungible and to consider them differently is, to my mind, a huge error.


For VHS yes but breaking DRM on Blu Rays is illegal and you have to do it to copy them. However, to my knowledge no one has ever been prosecuted for breaking the DRM on a blu ray. Unless they shared the copy online.

> significantly mitigates this.

not if patents become a weapon against actual innovation - which it has devolved into being today.

Far from being made to progress science and the arts, patents have become a method for which large corporations can add moats to competition. Things like codecs for video/audio, which are purely mathematical expressions, have been patented. Genes and molecules, even tho they might occur naturally, can be patented (a very tenuous form of invention - it's discovered, even if not naturally occurring!).

And not to mention design patents.

I say the entire patent system needs to be abolished, or at least, made such that only applicable to physical mechanisms, and not software, nor biological systems.


it's because only those companies with this subculture have time to answer surveys, because everybody else is just too busy working hard.

if there was an objective way to value the quality of a commit, rather than how long it took, then yes, this method of rating would work.

The length of time is not proportionally related to the quality (it's not even inversely proportional - i think there's no relationship between time taken to do a commit and its quality).


Do you really think it’s impossible for a manager to rate a commit or completed ticket (including taking into consideration how long it took vs how long they think it should have taken).

I don’t think many software developers would want to work under such a system. Yet we build them for other people.


> Do you really think it’s impossible for a manager to rate a commit

if the manager is able to know how long something would've taken, it is because the task is simple and already well specified. Therefore, the work will be similar to delivery analogy from the OP. I do believe some places (such as oracle) do this sort of rating (heard from the grapevines).

However, most work i find that require a developer isn't simple tasks, but complex cognitive thinking to come up with a solution. I dont believe a rating system works for such work. Peer judgement, as well as long term results (such as a stable, working system that expands as required in a timely manner) work much better. But by the time the long term comes, the developer's contributions would've been diluted if the team expands massively due to success, or have moved on!


You are misunderstanding. They are not suggesting this would be a good or objective system. The problem is that ratings for drivers/deliveries/restaurants are just as arbitrary as this. I have seen people give 1 star reviews to a restaurant saying that the food was extraordinary but the waiter told them that it is possible to tip by card without them asking.

Ostensibly that's true, but in the long term we're all dead anyway.

So the company's shareholders might only want the term to be just long enough to cash out.


Most of us will be dead in decades.

What I mean by long term here is more than two or three years.

> So the company's shareholders might only want the term to be just long enough to cash out.

Which means they need to sell to people who think the business has enough of a future for them to cash out. That stretches the terms a bit, but not long enough from the point of view of employees, customers, or what is good of the economy as a while.

Depends on the composition of shareholders too. One thing I recall from my time in investment management was the problem of clients who were reluctant to sell because it would create a capital gains tax liability. At the other extreme are fund managers whose most pressing concern is where they will appear in this year's performance league tables.


> don't make the game fun

the fun is no longer the game in an anarchy server. It's in beating other play's strategies - which actually makes it quite close to a real war in the physical world.

For example, the 2b2t minecraft wars between factions involve logistics, misinformation and intelligence (such as spies, fakes etc). It's no longer just minecraft. But that's what makes it fun and interesting.


Yeah but that's not fun, that's tedious work 99% of the time that culminates in some rare fun.

> tedious work 99% of the time that culminates in some rare fun

Welcome to the multiplayer gaming, especially games like Minecraft or ARK.


Online games without hacks are usually fun the whole time, even Minecraft SMP. Lots of people play those casually.

The money for stock repurchase is profit, which the stockholders prefer to get, rather than be used to fund employees that may not earn more profit (or at least not quickly enough).

> the concept of electron.

but this claims that the concept-of-electron as a discrete entity which the what-we-call-electron only approximates at best.

But because concept-of-electron is unscientific (aka, it is not produced from a falsifiable hypothesis), you can claim anything from it, including that it exists and supercedes the what-we-call-electron.

aka, it's akin to claiming god.


> puts me in the top 5% nationally

the nation is not completely homogeneous. In the situation where you are looking to purchase housing, the only comparison is in the immediate region (such as the county or at most, the state), as only others in the region competes with you, not somebody in a faraway state whose wages are much lower.


> an older generation trying to tell the younger one about putting money in a savings account and letting it earn compound interest

i have not heard a single older person saying this. Every one of them says to invest in assets, not bank interest.


I heard it from parents, grandparents, high school teachers and college professors. And the comment I replied to specifically mentioned "compound interest"

I've heard the savings/bond/CD advice from older people who were working during the Volcker years.

Sure, I started an IRA account in 1985 with CDs paying 10+%

But, I bought my house in 1982 with a 15.5% mortgage, refinanced @ 11.25 after a couple years and again @ 8.5% until it was paid off in 2002


What happened to the value of your home in that time?

The point is that mortgage rates and savings rates move together, so your experience is determined by whether you are a saver or borrower.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: