Re: What will Linux become?
Posted: Sat 14 May 2011, 18:09
What economic theory is that?Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
READ-ONLY Archive
https://oldforum.puppylinux.com/
What economic theory is that?Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
I think he's confusing the descriptive inverse relationship of supply and demand in classical, 100-level economic theory with an analogous causal relationship, and then applying that idea broadly, but that's just my guess from his tone.rcrsn51 wrote:What economic theory is that?Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
Thanks for the rudeness, but I wasn't entering into a serious discussion about copyright law, merely noting that I find it interesting to see some of the images and symbols which have been 'protected' over the years... I did not once say there were copyrighted or trademarked.Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:To correct anyone you'd first have to know something about copyrights.
Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
Your problem is that you're too wordy and misuse technical expressions. Linux is worth what it is and my words have nothing to do with its market value or public demand for it. Modern quantum physics questions the notion of causality which is based on thought from two thousand years ago. I made no “claimTheAsterisk! wrote:Your problem is twofold: you've used two meanings of "demand," one which hinges upon market and retail value and one which you have used to denigrate the worth of Linux, and you ignore that I am addressing the notion of causality and consequence. The inverse relationship between supply and demand does indeed hold, but my point is a sort of chicken-v-egg thing, in that the demand ($) in this case is low as a result of the huge supply, and not- as you seem to claim- that the demand is low because of technical and practical inferiority.
Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
It's called the Law of Supply and Demand, about the only "law" in the soft sciences that has some validity. Supply goes up, demand goes down. Supply goes down, demand goes up.rcrsn51 wrote: What economic theory is that?
No.Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:It's called the Law of Supply and Demand, about the only "law" in the soft sciences that has some validity. Supply goes up, demand goes down. Supply goes down, demand goes up.
Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:It's called the Law of Supply and Demand, about the only "law" in the soft sciences that has some validity. Supply goes up, demand goes down. Supply goes down, demand goes up.
Not exactly.rcrsn51 wrote: No.
Price goes up, demand goes down. Price goes down, demand goes up.
For example, my local utility company can supply an almost unlimited amount of water. But that has zero effect on the demand for water. It's the price they charge that determines how much water people use.
OTOH, a municipality with limited water supply would surely have lower demand - either because people couldn't afford the water or they practised conservation.
Please provide examples.Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
Right, so the law is about the combined effect of supply and demand on price. But it was you that said supply affects demand:Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:Price is an interaction between both supply and demand. It is an effect, not a cause.
And price affects demand:A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.
The latter statement is essentially the same as what rcrsn then saidPeople will accept some things free that they aren't willing to buy.
Price goes down, demand goes up
Maybe not, in which case the pet isn't backward compatible with 2.12, but if someone really needs to use 2.12 it could be compiled for 2.12.Today’s Puppy pet won’t work with 2.12
You mean because you haven't installed the necessary dependencies on Lucid?and the 2.14 pups won’t work with Lucid
Puppy should be able to handle (almost?) all Linux apps.Oh, wait, Puppy can't handle the vast majority of Linux apps.
How do you know what hardware most Puppy users have? Seriously. Some here talk of having a 2.8Ghz processor with 4GB RAM and Puppy has 64-bit versions. I started with Wary and I have a modern computer. I have XP and Office 2000 (both the Pro versions) but mine could handle Win7 and Office 2010. I also use DSL with even fewer requirements than Puppy.disciple wrote:Regarding backward compatibility, most Puppy users are using hardware which would no longer be supported by Windows Vista or 7, or Office 2007, 2010, or probably 2003. A number are using hardware which would struggle with Windows XP.
I’ve had more trouble installing software in Puppy in three months than I ever had in using Windows since 3.1 in 1992. I’ve had more trouble installing software in Puppy in three months than I ever had in using any version of Linux. The Preview editions of PCLOS were a bit of a hassle but no where nearly as bad as Puppy. Debian and Mepis were almost as good as Windows. Poor old Lindows that I used for a while in ‘04, a Linux product that cost real money and was a great idea in design but a marketing bust, worked just as well as Windows. It had over 38,000 apps in its repository at its peak. Access cost $20 a year for the basic tier, $50 a year for gold with one click installation. The Linux OpenSourcers hated it and Microsoft sued them over the name but ended up having to pay them about 20 million dollars.disciple wrote: And I can assure you it is a lot less painful to get the software I want installed on Puppy than on Windows
Yes, you're right. I have no way of knowing this. That is my guess based on my observations from hanging around this forum as much as I do. I could be completely wrong.Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:How do you know what hardware most Puppy users have?disciple wrote:Regarding backward compatibility, most Puppy users are using hardware which would no longer be supported by Windows Vista or 7, or Office 2007, 2010, or probably 2003. A number are using hardware which would struggle with Windows XP.
1. They might have become sick and tired of fixing the rubbish OS that came with the machine.Exactly why would a person need an OS other than the one that came with the machine?
Nobody said anything to this effect. And BTW I would never buy Office 2007 or 2010 - I use it all the time and it is a heap of junk.Why would a person who purchased a legal copy of Office 2010 (list $279.99, street $200) have trouble buying the hardware to use it?
Well, some of us agreed above that an office suite is the software people are most likely to need, other than a browser. If you think they don't even need an office suite, then what do they need?Yes, I do know most people using "old" hardware are better off with Linux, much better off even. I doubt that people using old hardware really need or use Office all that much.
Yes, as I said above, depending on what you want to install, that's what I'd expect, given that on most distros a user would very rarely compile anything themself.I’ve had more trouble installing software in Puppy in three months than I ever had in using any version of Linux.
then later refer to 'reality'Modern quantum physics questions the notion of causality
It is not Linux which fails in the marketplace...it is the market itself, and an unreal 'economy' based on equally wacky supply/demand philosophies to yours....well, that and a debt/money 'supply'Linux failed in the marketplace (and there were dozens of Linux distros that sold for cash). Its last hope was giving it away.
Intelligence tests are comprised of little tasks that you can measure, like putting together little puzzles, doing arithmetic in your head, recalling strings of numbers forward and backwards, knowledge of vocabulary words, etc.; great for academia. They don't measure talent, creativity, wisdom, social/emotional intelligence, or the ability to utilize information in any meaningful way. Creative brilliance can't be measured. Generally, those with creative talent leave academic institutions fairly quickly, and often do poorly.Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:
I lost any lingering humility many years ago in my 30's when I became a self-made millionaire. After that what others (outside my own family) thought didn't much matter to me. In fact I lost most of my humility in the 1950's when the US Army told me that I was the smartest human being they had ever tested in their labs confirming what two university labs had found.
Firstly, I'm verbose because it's usually easier to dissuade borderline trolls and/or true believers from continuing the conversation. Secondly, I very well may have misused jargon, but not English; I'm an college student, not an economist or something.Bernie_by_the_Sea wrote:Your problem is that you're too wordy and misuse technical expressions.
I call bullcrap here. Firstly, "it is what it is" is just a restatement of the identity function ("x=x"), and it's just a tautology in this discussion. Secondly, by bringing up price, "what people want" and arguing in economic terms, you have indeed brought market value and public demand into the discussion.Linux is worth what it is and my words have nothing to do with its market value or public demand for it.
No, it does not. Causality stands, but limitations of the precision of instruments have forced physicists to deal with the particles in terms of probability rather than absolute or relative position. (For example, if the potential error of your measurement of position of a particle is several times the size of the particle, straightforward measurement of position is pretty useless. Instead, you basically predict the likelihood of particles being in certain regions at certain times. Sci-fi writers and bullcrap artists have been misapplying the resulting and ordinary lack of absolute probabilities and outcomes for a long time now.)Modern quantum physics questions the notion of causality which is based on thought from two thousand years ago.
I made no “claim
I guess they would be, since scoring generally stops at 150 (although I've seen 155 used).TheAsterisk! wrote: Besides that, IQ tests are amusingly inconsistent and unreliable once you get over 180 or so.