Slashdot Mirror

A few carefully crafted google searches revealed the other two articles in the series (although the Arizona Star seems to think it's a four-part series- I guess we'll find out tomorrow):

Part 1: It's a war, and spam foes are losing

Part 3: Anti-spam tools more aggressive but frustrated by e-mail's 'dumb' nature

I believe the applicable law here is Title VIII of the Lanham act, which deals with "False designations of origin and false descriptions".

On this page you can read about a case where Monty Python successfully sued ABC TV under the Lanham Act, for editing and thus "damaging the integrity of the work":

the court upheld these claims on the theory that the ABC edits had substantially altered the work and exceeded the scope of the licensing agreement. The court held, on alternative grounds, that when ABC edited the work and attributed it to Monty Python, it erroneously attributed authorship of the edited work to the group and that such attribution constituted a false designation of origin and thus misrepresented the author's work in violation of federal trademark laws

Note that the court argued both sides of the issue, which could apply in the Cage case too.

However, it's a sad comment on the state of the arts in America that such a simple, whimsical attribution becomes subject to a legal dispute.

Apparently Batt's propaganda campaign is succeeding! :) I think it's simplistic to dismiss this issue in that way. The laws in this area exist for good reasons, and "whimsically" attributing authorship of a song without explanation is a lot like inserting "whimsical" statements into a legal contract. A reasonable person could look at Batt's album and come to the conclusion that the "work" in question had something to do with Cage, so Cage's estate has a legitimate interest on that basis and under law.

Finally, one could see this as simply an extension of Cage's original conception beyond the artistic sphere and into the legal sphere, which is consistent with Cage's contention that "art and life should no longer be separate, but one and the same". Consider this legal action a piece of performance art, perhaps in fulfilment of Cage's piece 4'33" No. 2 (described at the above link), which exhorts the artist to "fulfil an obligation to others" with "maximum amplification" (in this case, provided by the web). Cage's estate is thus both performing a Cage work, and fulfilling their obligation to protect Cage's name. We should applaud! ;)

4'33", pronounced "four minutes, thirty-three seconds", (Cage himself referred to it as "four, thirty-three") is often mistakenly referred to as Cage's "silent piece". He made it clear that he believed there is no such thing as silence, defined as a total absence of sound. In 1951, he visited an anechoic chamber at Harvard University in order to hear silence. "I literally expected to hear nothing," he said. Instead, he heard two sounds, one high and one low. He was told that the first was his nervous system and the other his blood circulating. This was a major revelation that was to affect his compositional philosophy from that time on. It was from this experience that he decided that silence defined as a total absence of sound did not exist. "Try as we may to make a silence, we cannot," he wrote. "One need not fear for the future of music."

no

it was very much a deliberate work

I think the theory behind John Cage's 4'33" is not so much that it's a silent piece, but rather to get the audience to listen to ambient "noise" around them. The music is produced by the environment, not by the piano. You could call it conceptual art. There's a good article here.
With this in mind, I wonder what direction the legal case should take...

According to this analysis of the composition, an inaudible watermark would not violate the intent of the piece, however any recording of it would.

The point of the piece is that even in the absense of intentional sound there is always the presence of incidental and unintended sound. The wind, people shuffling, the turning of the pages, the sound of your own heartbeat. A recording of a specific set of incidental sounds destroys the concept - the listener is supposed to be hearing his current enviornment.

If we take both of these points into consideration we get a rather peculiar result - it would be completely fine to add a watermark - but only to the live proformance. Yes, you could add a watermark to live sound. What a truely twisted concept, lol!

-

I have to totally disagree with this notion of "built in obsolesence." In fact, the general consensus (even amongst wintel folks) is that Apple computers hold their value far longer than any other brand out there (see here and here for examples). Just take a stroll through the Apple section on eBay if you don't believe me (although, I admit that people on eBay will pay more for anything just for the joy of buying on ebay, but you can still make the comparison).

I will use my own set up as an example:
I have 4 Macs. My mp3 server is a Performa 6400 (200 MHz 603ev processor) from 1996. It runs OS 9.1 and serves as my stereo system and sometimes backup file server. My intranet web server is a Powerbook G3 (233 Mhz PPC 750 processor) with 288 MB of RAM. It runs apache and a host of other apps through OS 10.1.2 and is connected to my lan with a wireless ethernet pc card. It was purchased in 1998. My ftp, hotline and test box is a Beige G3 (266 MHz) with 640 mb of RAM and a 30gb maxtor hd. It runs OS 9.2 and webstar's ftp server. I've had it since early 1998. My everday machine is a G4 titanium which is the absolute best piece of hardware I have ever owned. :)

So, I have machines that are 6 years that still fulfill a worthwhile purpose on my home network. Excluding the oldest (the 6400) machine that will probably be donated to someone else in the near future, I still have 4 and 5 year old Macs that I have no need, and no foreseeable need, to replace.

Comparing Apples to BMWs is an old cliche, but it is quite appropriate in this argument. They cost a little more in the beginning but they hold their value for an amazing length of time.

Frank

What with all the Internet kiosks and all. Jamie's input alone will make this a hypercool event. Plus, everything that goes over the Lounge's sound system is streamed live to the Internet. Does that include CodeCon, I wonder?

Still, it's too bad it couldn't have been held in JWZ's old Tent of Doom (essentially a cubicle wrapped in 500' of camo netting to ward off the ST:TNG theme of the Netscape office decor). I know it's ancient history now, but his TOD page was an inspiration to cubicle-dwellers everywhere, when it was up. Like the once-bright promise of Netscape, it will be missed.

It does rather blow one's mind that Richard Stenger, paid by CNN for "Sci-Tech" reporting, would look at a bunch of proposals and papers referring to the FAR side of the moon, and still write "DARK side."

Anyway, CNN may not be very good at commenting on this stuff, but Slashdot isn't either. These postings are weird! (That one about the meteors is so embarrassing that I was hoping I could meta-moderate it, but all I got was junk about Quake parties...)

You should read the proposal. I'm not sure /. readers know what they are actually talking about building. It's like a bunch of Pathfinders with radio antennas on them, plus a control module. The big "dish" is done with baseline interferometry, like the VLA in New Mexico.

We absolutely have the tech to get these things up there, red herrings about the Saturn V notwithstanding. This is a run of the mill planetary probe... with a lot more trips, but each one only takes a few days or weeks, depending on the boost method used.

One thing we don't have is a TDRS-type relay satellite to communicate with the farside. We could park one at the Lagrangian libration zones L-4 or L-5 - diagram here - depending on which crater was chosen, or we could low-orbit a fleet of them and play relay games.

A farside radio observatory is a reasonable proposal and the researchers discussing it have already thought through most of the casual objections raised here, so I hope it's given further study.

Here's where Fox got the story from, for those that would rather avoid any contact with FOX and go straight to the source.

http://www.azstarnet.com/star/mon/11112tinylights2 ftse2fmst2f.html

Fox is pretty much the sleaze of the earth... kind of like what would become of an AOL/MSNBC/National Enquirer/Hustler mega-merger.

This is the network that runs "NASA never got us on the moon" stories posing as news, just when special interest groups are lobbying Congress to privatize NASA and "open" space to responsible development (not).

Fox is as important to the GOP (Republicans) as "the games" were to the Romans.

we can always port bash to Windows

Now I need to check and see if someone's ported tcsh yet...

The brave new list of Do's and Don'ts regarding writing your congressperson:

1. Don't write. They don't open their mail for fear of Anthrax.

2. Don't call. LSD/A>, lightning, viruses, and many other things make congress fearful of phones, and not likely to answer them.

3. Don't fax. After all, a fax is really just a glorified phone call. (see #2)

4. Don't email. They all heard about that Good Times virus, and are really afraid of getting it.

5. Don't drive there in person. Especially if you drive a white van, and try to park in front of the building.

In conclusion, the best way to contact your congressperson now seems to be standing on the tallest building near them and yelling. Just don't get too close to them.

It was called 4'33'' written in 1952 for any instrument by John Cage

Reminds me of that cartoon by Bill Mauldin. You know, the one where Joe & Willie are peering out of a foxhole:
Joe: Hey, someone just shot at us! Think we should shoot back?
Willie: Naw, we need to wait for the lawyers to give us the green light. We don't want to violate anyone's due process rights.

Except the ones who would perpetuate homophobia with federal money.

---

I thought this was kind of interesting and some of the pictures are even quite nice:

evolutionary art.

Yeah, the guy wrote the program and imbued it with some concepts of what's 'nice' and what isn't, but so did the LISP thing in the story above.

Cheers!

Costyn.

---

We all know Lord British was assassinated in 1997, at the hands of a lowly thief named Rainz, while attempting to give a speech to the denizens of the Ultima Online beta. What are you saying, he didn't really die? I SAW IT HAPPEN.

This low-level thief filched a firewall spell from a random knight, cast it, and suddenly, a wall of flame appeared out of nowhere before the real Lord British.

Then, with the hardened arrogance that several years of omnipotence might visit upon any of us , Lord British cried out, "Ah ha ha! You can't kill me!" as he wandered into the flames. Where he died instantly.

I barely escaped with my own life, since Lord Blackthorn, British's right-hand-man, completely panicked and summoned four daemons from the bowels of hell to unleash demonic slaughter on the mass of innocent bystanders. What an atrocity! Now we see the violence inherent in the system!

So who really gave that interview? Because Lord British is a dead man. Miss him. Miss him.

Recently there have been lots of "anti-terrorist" domestic military exercises taking place in major US cities, as well as the escalating usage of military weapons/personnel against protest efforts by peaceful American citizens during events such as the WTO conference recently in Seattle, constituting possible violations against the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.

The increasing use of military force right here in America lends weight to the idea that "non-lethal weaponry" is being deployed more as a domestic deterrent rather than as true war weaponry for use against other countries. Obviously they don't want to kill American citizens if they don't have to, but a zap from something like this would, apparently, be acceptable to the People In Charge...

__

Well, John Cage's 4'33" is sort of open source in the sense that it can be modified. The piece can be played by any number and type of musicians, and need not last 4'33" at all. On the other hand, it must be in three movements, and their length must be determined randomly if the "official" timings are not used.

More info here.

I suppose you really mean "released under the Open Content License" though.

> relative speed of the languages.

I agree. Here is another study of languages for scientific processing. O'Caml is doing pretty well (same order as C++ compilers).

And here is a more general study (but older, O'Caml has improved quite a lot since them). O'Caml is doing quite well again, except for the memory usage on one of the tests.

www.azstartnet.com/~rovedo/mph2c.html - military police history - has this entry:

January 31, 1945 - Pvt. Eddie D. Slovik is executed by a firing squad of military police, after his conviction by a court martial of desertion in December 1944. He is the first soldier executed since the Civil War, for desertion. Slovik was only one of approximately 21,000 soldiers who deserted up until this time. Of those convicted of desertion, 49 were sentenced to death, six were considered for the death penalty, but Slovik is the only one in which the sentence is actually carried out. He is buried in France with 94 other soldiers hanged for murder and rape. His body is returned to the United States in 1987.

There is also a movie about the case starting Martin Sheen. It shows that *everyone* in the firing squad missed his heart in the first round of shots, which left Slovik alive (briefly) and in incredible pain. The men were chewed out, issued another round, but IIRC Slovik was declared dead before another volley was fired.

(Sorry about the hyperlink - Slashcode decided to nuke the closing tag for reasons known only to itself).

There was one particular lawsuit where someone sued a grocery store, and they brought up alcohol purchases on his club card in their legal defense.

That happened to Robert Riveria, in a supermarket named Vons, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Safeway.

Briefly, what happened is that Mr. Riveria sued because he slipped in a yogurt spill that hadn't been cleaned up yet. (Seems a bit frivolous to me - but that's just my opinion.) According to Mr.Riveria's attorney, the mediator assigned to the case said Vons' lawyers informed them that theys had used his purchasing information to determine that he regularly purchased alchololic information, and they might imply in court that that was the reason why Mr. Riveria was unable to successfully negotiate his way around the wet cleanup.

Vons asserts their lawyers asked them for the information from the card record department, but it was never granted. (Interestingly, they didn't actually deny that their attorneys made the threat, only that it was baseless.) Note that the information was never used in court, and in fact it was the plantiff who held the press conference reporting it.

I'm note sure this is a case of black and white. Make the judgement yourself. You can find some info about it here

Here's a direct link to the RealVideo.

I laughed. I cried. It was better than Cats.
--

Here's a direct link to the RealVideo.

I laughed. I cried. It was better than Cats.
--

• Christianity was clearly the driving force behind the worldwide elimination of slavery. (A first in world history, by the way...)
  • In those days, almost *everything* was argued from a religious standpoint. If you wanted to convince someone, you made sure to make a lot of references to God. The pro-slavery camp also used Christianity to defend their position. Christianity was used as a debating rhetoric tool by both sides of the debate, so you are wearing blinders if you only see the anti-slavery camp's use of it.

• Further, understand that the radical ideas in the constitution you claim to support were a direct outgrowth of Protestantism - our government is more closely modeled on Presbyterian church than on anything else that existed in 1776.
  • The founders of the country were Christian, but they certainly didn't use Christianity as a basis for the government. Quite the opposite in fact. Check this site:
    Some quotes by "founding fathers" of this country.
    Some more
    And some more
    Yes, they were Christians of one stripe or another, but it was their stepping away from orthodoxy and into a weaker more fuzzy religion that was the springboard for their ideals. They were men of "The Enlightenment", which was the beginning of the end for dogmatic religions. That they didn't drop their religion outright all at once doesn't change the fact that they were slowly losing faith. The irony is that a seperation of church and state actually helps the church. (Keep church and state tied together as was done in Europe, and each successive generation grows up more and more cynical toward religion.)

And finally, as to the more on-topic point: It doesn't matter whether or not you favor censoring porn when there doesn't even exist software that can do it correctly. What we have is software that attempts to filter just porn, but instead filters out non-porn as well (for example, denying access to yahoo altogether because some searches occasionally come up with sex sites). It also lets some porn through. In other words, the means to implement the censorship is flakey and broken, and as such the whole point is moot. Or at least it would be if the voting public had any clue how the internet works.

Simply put, you're the one guy in the world in whose presence I would have been in awe of. I wouldn't bother asking for Michael Jordan's autograph, didn't shed a tear for JFK Jr., and couldn't care less about shaking the hand of a U.S. President, but it would have been a great honor just to say "hi" to you in person.

Your work served as the foundation of my own work, and many others as well. The most influential book in my life so far has been Unix Network Programming -- without it, I simply would have done what most college students do and simply go to class just to get it over with. Your work inspired me to do something outside the realm of the classroom and filled my head with ideas and dreams, and for that I can't thank you enough.

Your obituary cites you as a "noted author of computer books", but your books weren't simply "computer books" nor "programming books", nor were you simply an author. Your works stand as great works of computer science.

We will miss you, W. Richard Stevens, and we regret that you were taken from us when surely you had 20 more years of knowledge yet to bestow upon us.

Sincerely,
Mike Gleason
NcFTP Software

The web site of the Tucson Daily Star has the same info for the Stevens funeral notice. I don't know the relationship with the other obit which has the same content.

The web site of the Tucson Daily Star has the same info for the Stevens funeral notice. I don't know the relationship with the other obit which has the same content.

There's an article today that knight ridder wrote about using brainwaves for computer input. You can find the article in the Arizona Daily Star