From: punditster@gmail.com
On 1/31/2026 10:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 09:57:40 -0800, Dude wrote:
>
>> On 1/31/2026 7:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 22:12:41 -0800, dart200
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/30/26 6:35 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 16:02:00 -0800, dart200
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/30/26 2:10 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 13:46:19 -0800, dart200
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/30/26 7:27 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 02:11:00 -0800, dart200
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> we finally invented a type of good that has a zero-cost to copy,
and we
>>>>>>>>>> still can't seem to figure out how to build a production system
where
>>>>>>>>>> all the products are freely distributed, cause we're so concerned
about
>>>>>>>>>> getting payment upfront
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So there you have it. This is why commercialism always fails.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> bruh i'm talking about digital goods that are zero-cost to copy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But not zero cost to produce. As a programmer myself, I have always
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i feel u just entire missed the point of why i started this thread
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> pushed back against the idea that programmers don't need to get paid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> only by donation if people feel it's warranted
>>>>>
>>>>> Remember shareware? A hodge podge of unfinished somethings, thrown
>>>>
>>>> remember linux??? oh wait, that runs like most of the internet by now,
>>>> it's impossible to forget
>>>>
>>>> also like *all* programming infrastructure anyone uses to build anything
>>>>
>>>>> out there to see if there might be any interest.
>>>>> 1) No great rush of interest, so I won't waste my time finishing it
>>>>> 2) It is unfinished, so why would I be interested in it?
>>>>
>>>> look bro, i'm suggesting we *ban* the sale of close sourced software,
>>>> and remove copyrights for it
>>>>
>>>> this isn't a competition between paradigms, this is changing the
>>>> paradigm such that we develop the will to support it
>>>>
>>>> will some software then not get developed??? sure, but we're drowning in
>>>> *way* to much software so that's a good thing. more is not better, even
>>>> if most economists are moronically allergic to the notion that making
>>>> money =/= societal benefit
>>>
>>> So you want to trash an entire industry and a scholastic discipline.
>>> Are you expecting much pushback on that idea?
>>>
>>> I say, for the most part, shareware has been a failed idea. And
>>> linux, to be marginally comprehensible to the average dontnomuch,
>>> needed Red Hat to come along and commercialize it. The last time I
>>> tried linux, it was a bitch trying to get drivers for the moderately
>>> high end amd radeon graphic card that I tend to run some years behind
>>> the market.
>>>
>>> Like I tell wilson, sure the system we have is rotten. And it is in
>>> dire need of improvement, but simply throwing away decades of social
>>> evolution and returning to some old failed previous idea is not going
>>> to make things better.
>>>
>>> Why do we have the systems we have, what problems were they meant to
>>> solve, and how can we actually try again and do better this time? A
>>> little bit better, As we continually go three steps forward and two
>>> back. Let's not make it an entire hike down the mountain back.
>>>
>> So, I would recommend to you both, to just get yourself a Chrome Book.
>> You probably don't need much in the way of PC power for just texting on
>> the internet. YMMV.
>
> If that were all I need, that is all I would have.
>
Did you know that Chrome Books have a free text editor?
>
>>>>>
>>>>>> u can choose to not code, that's fine ... 99.99% of the industry is bull
>>>>>> jobs so the less coders the better
>>>>>>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
