First of all, the idea that developing countries will get larger quotas than they currently use is wrong.
To get the credit market to work, you need to make sure there are higher demand than supply, that should not be hard.
Here (in Norway) the state will not issue any "free" credits to the industry. The state will sell credits for up to 85% of our current emission levels, above that the industry will have to buy credits abroad or reduce their emissions.
Reduction abroad will in many cases be less expensive than domestic reductions (both because the implementation cost will be lower in a developing country, but also because the cheaper "early" improvements already has been done at home). As long as credits bought from abroad reduces emissions where they were bought, the system works.
There are also individuals and organizations positioning themselves to buy up credits without any intentions of using them.
The credit system will be make sure that existing emission-reduction technology will be implemented as soon as the credit price rise above a certain level. What it will not ensure is funding for long term research into new solutions.
Research into new energy sources and emission-reduction technology still needs heavy governmental support. A good start would be 1% of GDP for all industrialized countries.
The nonsense about the carbon credit system being a wealth redistribution system is just stupid. Giving / implementing emission-reduction technology to the industry in the developing is in no shape or form redistribution of wealth, it's saving our bacon.
And remember, a large part of the industry in the developing countries is owned by multinationals, if the carbon credit system did not include those countries, all that would happen is that even more of the worlds production would "globalize".
2. It is still their software, regardless if you agree or disagree. You don't buy software, you buy a license to use it.
Incorrect.
You do not need a license to make use of (for it's intended purpose) any goods you've bought.
You'd need a license to make additional copies, but not to use the one they sold to you.
Backup copies, copies needed to make the software fulfill it's intended purpose (ie. to HD and to ram) are excluded from copyright laws in most countries.
The "you need a license to run it" crap is a lie told so many times most people have started believing it.
(This only applies to physical goods; not downloads, services etc.)
In Norway, production has been removed from the implementation of the EUCD. It's still legal to produce and use hw/sw to decrypt it for your own use, but it is illigal to distribute it.
That means use (personal use), import (for personal use) or production (for personal use) of circumvention tools is still legal.
It was not implemented (the EUCD) back when this started, that is why I said was/is.
It has also been stated that the purpose of the Norwegian implementation of the EUCD is *not* to limit personal copying. If the industry does not come up with solutions that will allow this, the law is supposed to be changed (a date for evaulation has been set). The copyright owner does not have absolute monopoly on distribution in Norway.
If the crime had been assault or theft of a laptop or breaking and entering would anyone with material evidence of the crime be justified in not cooperating with the investigation in order to protect the privacy of the alleged perpetrators?
If the investigation was done by the someone else than the police, then YES.
Why does that matter? What products do you know of that currently use ActiveX and run under Linux? None, probably. So what's the difference?
You missed the context, he argued that ActiveX was not a proprietary extension since you could add ActiveX plugins to non-MS producs. That is only true for windows programs, and it doesn't change the fact that it *is* a proprietary extension.
His point was that Firefox should have ActiveX support, and my point was that his approach would only work with the windows version (using a MS plugin). The new Netscape does this.
Um yeah. A Windows user trying to switch to FireFox or OO doesn't give a flying fuck if AX will work on Linux or not. Pardon my bluntness, but you're rationalizing NOT putting a feature in that some people need. That's bullshit.
I'd rather have a true cross-platform product. MS can keep their shit to them selves.
Besides, ActiveX is a security nightmare. It is simply not worth it; whatever the problem is, ActiveX is never the solution:-)
I guess my concern is that this guy is doing this more for himself than for the people he's giving these cards to, out of a misguided sense of altruism. I can almost guarantee that none of these people he's going to be giving these CD's to could care less about Linux - he obviously cares a lot more than they do, if he feels it necessary to jam these Linux CD's down their throats.
I mean they can download Linux the same way he can, but they haven't.
You seem to be under the impression most people are capable of installing Linux themselves. They are not. Most people don't know how to download a live-CD, burn it and boot from it.
Most people haven't heard about Linux and don't know what it is. Those few who've heard of it, thinks it's something for the über-geek, and way to complicated for them. That would never consider trying it, because they feel they don't know how. Giving away live-CDs demystifies Linux a bit for those who try.
I will not be sending out live'cds for Xmas, but when someone calls me to help with a crashed windows installation (happens all to often), I always bring a Knoppix CD to backup any important data before going at it with windows recovery. When I'm finished I give them the Knoppix CD. Some of them try it out, some don't.
Nothing ever changes unless you never do anything about it. When it comes to computers, most people don't know what's good for them, so they need a little help.
I only leave Knoppix CDs with people I have to help fix something, but I install FireFox on every computer I get my hands on.
When you start sharing content with anyone who asks for it, you ARE a publisher. Yes, I agree. But downloading something from an unauthorised publisher would still be legal though (for the time being, and not in the US as I understand it).
I want a functional waste-like p2p network, with only a limited number of people who I know connected (any sharing a network based on pre-existing social connections would be legal here).
Even if the patent system is reformed, who's going to make sure a new system isn't dictated by the robber barons who own congress.
I bet the a system would favor the current corporate patent holders with large patents portfolios, while reducing the power of smaller IP-only parasites (EOLA, bellboy etc.).
Copyright does exist, and just saying "well it's only for a few friends" does not excuse you from complying with it. You have NO LEGAL RIGHT to copy those copyrighted CD's unless they say you can.
Well, copyright controlls just a small fraction of what you can do with those CD's. It's supposed to regulate mass production and distribution, not private copying. The DMCA might have fucked this up a bit for "protected" CD's in the US and some of the EU countries (for those who implemented EUCD without exemtion for private copies), but for most other countries copyright law does not prohibit private copying. This form of copying, combined with radio/tv based distribution, is what turns art into culture.
You have obvioulsy bought the RIAA propaganda sink and hook. Copyright is something *we* grant the artists in hope of gaining more art.
Thanks for the advice on the HD, I was kind of fretting over that, how much faster the 10k rpm drives are. They are quite a bit more, and it looks like a 74 gig is the max you can get at $175 which is rather pricey. But looking back on it, doing SATA RAID level 1 mirroring with two 7200 rpm drives for increased speed might be better, since I can get two 7200 rpm drives for the price of a 10k rpm drive, plus I'd have some kind of redundancy in case a drive died. I know RAID isn't a backup solution, but it should hopefully keep my system up and running in case a drive dies.
You'd need 4 drives if you want both speedup and redundancy. RAID 0+1 or something.
For creative as in cultural: yes For inventive as in useful: no
This also happens to be the basis of copyright law in my country. It's perfectly legal to copy any movie or music file of the internet, and it is also legal make copies for friends and family (both from bought and downloaded).
I don't se anything wrong with this, and neither do lawmakers here. Sharing of culture is not wrong.
Joe Casemodder sends Apple a letter saying "You are infringing on my invention. Please send me a nickel for every machine you ship
Do you think Apple will lisence the pattent away for a nickle a PC to Dell?
No? Then why should Joe Casemodder?
And my first point still stands, obvious patents costs so much to get approved for any normal person can't afford it. It's a game played by corporations to screw us over.
PS if everything is so obvious, why haven't you patented it? People here are like Nostradamus fans: everything is obvious (predictions are accurate) after the fact.
Because getting obvious ideas patented costs lots of money, and is not worth anything if you can't spend even more defending it in court. How well do you think Joe Casemodder would do in court defending a "put lights inside my cool boxen" patent if Apple or Dell decided they didn't want to pay for his "patented technology"?
Thousands of years to travel 4 lightyears? I think not. From ca. 1975 and onward we've had the technology to cross that distance in a matter of decades (Orion, nuclearbomb powered propulsion).
We lack the will to fund such a trip, and the stomake to accept the potensial loss of human life from nuclear fallout.
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, the idea that developing countries will get larger quotas than they currently use is wrong.
To get the credit market to work, you need to make sure there are higher demand than supply, that should not be hard.
Here (in Norway) the state will not issue any "free" credits to the industry.
The state will sell credits for up to 85% of our current emission levels, above that the industry will have to buy credits abroad or reduce their emissions.
Reduction abroad will in many cases be less expensive than domestic reductions (both because the implementation cost will be lower in a developing country, but also because the cheaper "early" improvements already has been done at home). As long as credits bought from abroad reduces emissions where they were bought, the system works.
There are also individuals and organizations positioning themselves to buy up credits without any intentions of using them.
The credit system will be make sure that existing emission-reduction technology will be implemented as soon as the credit price rise above a certain level. What it will not ensure is funding for long term research into new solutions.
Research into new energy sources and emission-reduction technology still needs heavy governmental support. A good start would be 1% of GDP for all industrialized countries.
The nonsense about the carbon credit system being a wealth redistribution system is just stupid.
Giving / implementing emission-reduction technology to the industry in the developing is in no shape or form redistribution of wealth, it's saving our bacon.
And remember, a large part of the industry in the developing countries is owned by multinationals, if the carbon credit system did not include those countries, all that would happen is that even more of the worlds production would "globalize".
Incorrect.
You do not need a license to make use of (for it's intended purpose) any goods you've bought.
You'd need a license to make additional copies, but not to use the one they sold to you.
Backup copies, copies needed to make the software fulfill it's intended purpose (ie. to HD and to ram) are excluded from copyright laws in most countries.
The "you need a license to run it" crap is a lie told so many times most people have started believing it.
(This only applies to physical goods; not downloads, services etc.)
In Norway, production has been removed from the implementation of the EUCD.
It's still legal to produce and use hw/sw to decrypt it for your own use, but it is illigal to distribute it.
That means use (personal use), import (for personal use) or production (for personal use) of circumvention tools is still legal.
It was not implemented (the EUCD) back when this started, that is why I said was/is.
It has also been stated that the purpose of the Norwegian implementation of the EUCD is *not* to limit personal copying. If the industry does not come up with solutions that will allow this, the law is supposed to be changed (a date for evaulation has been set). The copyright owner does not have absolute monopoly on distribution in Norway.
Ost
If the investigation was done by the someone else than the police, then YES.
- Ost
You missed the context, he argued that ActiveX was not a proprietary extension since you could add ActiveX plugins to non-MS producs. That is only true for windows programs, and it doesn't change the fact that it *is* a proprietary extension.
His point was that Firefox should have ActiveX support, and my point was that his approach would only work with the windows version (using a MS plugin). The new Netscape does this.
- Ost
The new netscape based on firefox is supposed to support AX on windows.
Transgaming is working on a mozilla plugin for AX, for linux running winex / cedega.
For openoffice, I think macros (with import from ms formats) would be more useful than AX (who uses AX in a document?)
- Ost
I'd rather have a true cross-platform product. MS can keep their shit to them selves.
Besides, ActiveX is a security nightmare. It is simply not worth it; whatever the problem is, ActiveX is never the solution
- Ost
BTW, you REALLY don't understand what ActiveX is. Heh. Non-MS products can open ActiveX plugins.
No, you don't understand.
It's still a proprietary MS extension even if you can add it to non-MS products.
Oh and you can't add it to Linux products.
- Stian
128MB ram is *a lot* for WinCE + applications.
No need for any disk cache or swap file.
This is not a PC, it's an appliance with a embedded small footprint OS.
- Ost
You seem to be under the impression most people are capable of installing Linux themselves. They are not. Most people don't know how to download a live-CD, burn it and boot from it.
Most people haven't heard about Linux and don't know what it is. Those few who've heard of it, thinks it's something for the über-geek, and way to complicated for them. That would never consider trying it, because they feel they don't know how. Giving away live-CDs demystifies Linux a bit for those who try.
I will not be sending out live'cds for Xmas, but when someone calls me to help with a crashed windows installation (happens all to often), I always bring a Knoppix CD to backup any important data before going at it with windows recovery. When I'm finished I give them the Knoppix CD. Some of them try it out, some don't.
Nothing ever changes unless you never do anything about it. When it comes to computers, most people don't know what's good for them, so they need a little help.
I only leave Knoppix CDs with people I have to help fix something, but I install FireFox on every computer I get my hands on.
- Ost
When you start sharing content with anyone who asks for it, you ARE a publisher.
The context was "make copies of CDs to give away to your friends", that's not publishing.
- Ost
When you start sharing content with anyone who asks for it, you ARE a publisher.
Yes, I agree. But downloading something from an unauthorised publisher would still be legal though (for the time being, and not in the US as I understand it).
I want a functional waste-like p2p network, with only a limited number of people who I know connected (any sharing a network based on pre-existing social connections would be legal here).
- Ost
It is part of copyright law in most european countries (but not UK). It's not called fair use, but serves the same purpose (but is less limited).
Copyrighlaws were supposed to limit publishers, not users.
- Ost
Hmm missed the last line:
But it will not help us at all (open software comunity)
- Ost
But will it help?
Even if the patent system is reformed, who's going to make sure a new system isn't dictated by the robber barons who own congress.
I bet the a system would favor the current corporate patent holders with large patents portfolios, while reducing the power of smaller IP-only parasites (EOLA, bellboy etc.).
- Ost
Copyright does exist, and just saying "well it's only for a few friends" does not excuse you from complying with it. You have NO LEGAL RIGHT to copy those copyrighted CD's unless they say you can.
Well, copyright controlls just a small fraction of what you can do with those CD's. It's supposed to regulate mass production and distribution, not private copying. The DMCA might have fucked this up a bit for "protected" CD's in the US and some of the EU countries (for those who implemented EUCD without exemtion for private copies), but for most other countries copyright law does not prohibit private copying. This form of copying, combined with radio/tv based distribution, is what turns art into culture.
You have obvioulsy bought the RIAA propaganda sink and hook. Copyright is something *we* grant the artists in hope of gaining more art.
- Ost
Thanks for the advice on the HD, I was kind of fretting over that, how much faster the 10k rpm drives are. They are quite a bit more, and it looks like a 74 gig is the max you can get at $175 which is rather pricey. But looking back on it, doing SATA RAID level 1 mirroring with two 7200 rpm drives for increased speed might be better, since I can get two 7200 rpm drives for the price of a 10k rpm drive, plus I'd have some kind of redundancy in case a drive died. I know RAID isn't a backup solution, but it should hopefully keep my system up and running in case a drive dies.
You'd need 4 drives if you want both speedup and redundancy. RAID 0+1 or something.
- Ost
For creative as in cultural: yes
For inventive as in useful: no
This also happens to be the basis of copyright law in my country. It's perfectly legal to copy any movie or music file of the internet, and it is also legal make copies for friends and family (both from bought and downloaded).
I don't se anything wrong with this, and neither do lawmakers here. Sharing of culture is not wrong.
- Ost
I can't see this Quickie thingy you're talking about anywhere on my box, but the trailers work just fine...
- Ost
Do you think Apple will lisence the pattent away for a nickle a PC to Dell?
No? Then why should Joe Casemodder?
And my first point still stands, obvious patents costs so much to get approved for any normal person can't afford it. It's a game played by corporations to screw us over.
- Ost
Because getting obvious ideas patented costs lots of money, and is not worth anything if you can't spend even more defending it in court.
How well do you think Joe Casemodder would do in court defending a "put lights inside my cool boxen" patent if Apple or Dell decided they didn't want to pay for his "patented technology"?
- Ost
Doesn't matter. Norway still has to implement EUCD.
Thousands of years to travel 4 lightyears?
I think not. From ca. 1975 and onward we've had the technology to cross that distance in a matter of decades (Orion, nuclearbomb powered propulsion).
We lack the will to fund such a trip, and the stomake to accept the potensial loss of human life from nuclear fallout.
- Ost