You can take this idea further with two standard measurements used by graphic designers: the point and the pica.
There are 6 picas in an inch, and there 12 points in a pica (making 72 points in an inch). Points are used regularly to describe the size of a font, and make the inch evenly divisible by 2, 3, and 4. 10 point is a standard book type size -- with a standard two points of leading (extra space for linespacing) it takes up 12 points, 1 pica, per line of text. With 6 picas in an inch it is easy to count how many lines of text fit into a vertical space. That's why type sizes are usually 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 72 as relatively clean subdivisions of an inch.
Epson ink cartridges have a chip that prevent the printer from printing once the ink has dropped below a certain level, presumably to stop damage to the printers; however, the chip makes it difficult for aftermarket ink manufacturers to make compatible cartridges and forces you to buy ink more readily. I just had a cartridge run out and I know there is still ink in it. Sounds like a somewhat similar situation. Maybe some nice person will write a fix to allow me to use the rest of the ink that I purchased. Or is ink protected under the DMCA?
The Article is in reference to the Children's Internet Protection Act, which is abbreviated CIPA. Either the references are incorrect, or the poster made an error in submitting the article. I'm supporting the/. editors on this argument, as they did keep the original submission intact while reading the article.
I don't know why I'm replying to an Anonymous Coward, but whenever I sense myopic opinions, I feel I must. Firstly, Republicans and Democrats are not conservatives and liberals -- if you want a Liberal Party, go to Canada. Both parties contain left, right, and center members. While the Republican national agenda has been mostly conservative, the party as a whole is not. The Republican Party favors less federal involvement in the economy, more states' rights, and a less powerful central government. The Democratic Party draws support from women, minorities, working class families, and the poor because it supports social programs to help those who need it. I personally am a liberal Democrat, for I am willing to sacrifice some of what I earn to help those who need. My political motivation is not what comes in and out of my pockets but what I feel is morally just. The Republicans in power favor taking away power from the federal government, but it doesn't go to the people; it goes to big business. You cannot tell me that Dick Cheney does not support these massive enterprises; he is part of one. Without government intervention in business, we would have Standard Oil/AOL/Time Warner/Microsoft/[insert big cigarette company], and the open source advocates would be rolling in their graves. In addition, I do not like the Republican right's supporting of prayer in schools. My United States Constitution still guarantees a separation of Church and State. Or how about the fact that instead of allowing women to have the right to choose what to do with their bodies, the Republicans want a national (increasing national government are we?) law prohibiting abortion. How is that for not imposing morals on the American people?
Well, the majority of tabulature submitted to OLGA is for guitar in.tab or.crd (yay for text files!) with a little.btab for you bassists. I have found some very accurate tabs on OLGA, and I do feel it is a useful resource. While reprinting copyrighted material without the author's permission is illegal, I think this falls under fair use; it is like teaching a friend to play a song on guitar written by someone else. Except in this case, the friend is many Internet users, and the song is a lot of songs. Hehe... have you seen Office Space?:^)
While the OLGA network was shut down due to threats from the Harry Fox legal agency, a new incarnation of OLGA was started that is legally acceptable to both parties; the by-ear guitar tabulature of songs it contained may be posted, but they must be without the song lyrics which are copyrighted. New songs can be found at OLGA or Harmony Central.
You are correct in that the Constitution did not state our rights as citizens. In the preamble it does state that the Constitution was intended to secure the blessings of liberty by restraining the powers of government and guaranteeing civil liberties so that people may live in freedom. The rights were not specifically listed in the Constitution, that is why it was not ratified by the original 13 until it was amended. The Bill of Rights signifies the freedoms of speech, press, and assembly, the separation of church and state, the right to bear arms, and the fifth and fourteenth amendments (the fourteenth was added during Reconstruction) prohibit the states and national government from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property without due process of law."
This is not the same as Quake or Half-life at all. 1) Quake has not copy-protection or serial whatsoever. I think the game to which you are referring is Quake III Arena; however, it has a key that functions like that of Half-Life. 2) Those keys do not verify according to your hardware. When attempting to play a game online, the key stored in your registry/text file is compared to keys in the database. I have no problem with this. The games can be played on more than one computer without any problems but one at a time. It seems perfectly reasonable to me. 3) I have never had a problem with either the Q3A or HL master servers. The authentication also provides the game-makers a way to restrict cheating (although not entirely). I suspect that this goal will not come into fruition with Whistler. The release date is quite soon to implement something so seemingly large-scale. In the event Microsoft does attempt a unique computer ID verification system, they would have to only support certain hardware (oh boy I can see it now) and within a week, a cracked version of Whistler would appear on all of the warez sites, defeating their original intention.
Clinton only became more moderate (read: right) because he wanted to avoid a government shutdown. In a Congress controlled by conservative Republicans do you seriously think anything would be accomplished by having a serious left-wing Executive? The same thing would happen if any liberal was voted into office. The duty of the President (as well as all government) is to serve the best interests of the people. Obviously, the population was divided between left and right and it was best to serve a middle ground to make as many people happy as possible.
Now, onto your voting. The idea in voting is to vote for whoever can promote your ideals best, correct? Political Statement? Whoopty doo... I thought the whole idea was to vote about the issues and not the candidate. Not voting for Bush or Gore cleary shows that you don't have an interest in the future of the nation. There is no way that Browne or Nader would win! Pipe dreams... Btw, thank you for helping us [most likely] get Bush elected. Hope you like breathing polluted air (yes, he will cut the EPA) and seeing women and minorities losing rights. That doesn't even mention the fact that the public education system will collapse... oh yeah... and don't mention the National Endowment for the Arts or NPR or PBS!
It is truly sad that Bush can pull ahead [of Gore] in a poll on a site where people supposedly respect things like morality, intelligence, and selflessness. A vote for Gore is a vote against Stupid.
Even having two [major] political parties softens majority rule. You don't see either party seriously introducing legislation that is too different the other party's platform. While we might have (in my opinion) an overly conservative government, that government is a moderate conservative. If you read my comments above I was trying to push for moderate (even if it is not closest to your beliefs). Now, with the third parties in Congress, at the current time they will be a minority. Think practically. My whole position right now is based on practicality. There are a lot of things I would like to see, but they are not practical right now in the current state of our government. Change the government? Read the preceding two sentences again. Alright. Back to third parties in Congress. In order to get anything accomplished ever, at least two of the three parties would have to agree on the same things. If the party is liberal, chances are they would side Democratic (If they were conservative, likewise Republican [at the current time]). This would amount to little and in the end, the results would be like having two parties.
A third party representative would be possible. However, a large number is unlikely. If several third party seats are possible, then many are possible. A major third party wouldn't be effective either. Two would just side against the other one, and we'd be experiencing the same problems.
I'm not completely ignorant on the Canadian system, but I do not believe you can compare the governments of the two countries. The United States' government functions much differently from the Canadian Government; the idea behind a Republic is having representatives to present your position to the government. We unfortunately do not have a method of voting directly on issues. The best chance in America is to vote for whoever you think will not completely screw it up. You'd think that would lead us to vote for candidates who best represent our views (including third parties)... However, the political parties are so partisan that any measure put forth by a radical thinker (read: different) would be immediately shot down. Having a third party candidate in the Executive and Republicans and Democrats in Congress would destroy any chance of effectiveness in the government.
I'm suprised at the myopic views my fellow/. are expressing. I know this is late in the comments, so noone will ever see this, but it needs to be said. The problem with these and many other third-party candidates are that they are extremists; they do not represent the views of the majority of Americans. The major political parties, although having faults, do serve their purposes: political solidarity for propagating an agenda and clarifying those political agendas for voters. Without the big two, whatever effectiveness parties have would be lost. Imagine having to sort through the positions of 200 candidates in each election? There could be a candidate to fit every person's views! Why don't we all just run for President!
Now, regarding the two candidates. They have such a limited outlook that they are laughable. Abolish major taxes? Taxes exist to make sure our nation functions. Total freedom? Government restricts some freedoms to ensure that the fundamental freedoms of others are maintained. Our nation, as intended by the original founders, needs a moderate government. Government has the intent of preventing tyranny of the mass; it exists to provide the rules and the execution of those rules to keep society running. If majority will always persisted, the natural rights of the minorities would be ignored and infringed upon. Plus, an extremist nation would not be respected internationally. I do disagree with many of our governments restrictive and imposing policies and therefore [would] try to vote left-of-center in our right-of-center nation. Stopping up the "damn" government is not the way.
"of course, what's to stop Microsoft from releasing versions that won't work under Wine, ever?" Or you could just use the ones that work. What new features could they add to a word processor that are truly necessary?
I've been using mailandnews.com for about a year and am very pleased with their services. It seems to be a very down-to-earth operation (and I've never gotten spam!). However, I have had some experiences with server slowness and downtime that have caused some headaches. But I stay with them. Why? I haven't found a free service that is better...
"...to determine how difficult it would be to stop a terrorist attack." So basically the police should have a Counter-Strike LAN party every time they wish to "test" a new building. Sounds fun to me:)
I'm not very surprised about the candidates views on filtering-- I mean, it is the politically acceptable view by most people for public access be regulated by the government. Isn't that the case with television? (i.e. They do not show adult programs on broadcast television. You don't see many/.ers who think that is socially inacceptable.) What really got me nervous was when Bush said: "I think we ought to have character education in our schools. I know that doesn't directly talk about Hollywood, but it does reinforce the values you're teaching. I'd greatly expand character education funding, so that public schools will teach children values, values which have stood the test of time." This is just as bad as public prayer in schools. Anyway, doesn't this encroachment of government into the homes conflict with Bush's view of a smaller government? Maybe some of us don't want our heathen children to be raised as model Christians...
Alright. MP3.com and Sony settle. Sony drops the suit. So, MP3.com still has to face them in court? In my experience, if the prosecutor drops the case to settle, it is over. Now the judge wants to continue the proceedings, using taxpayer dollars to get two parties to agree on something they have already agreed upon? What happens if MP3.com wins? Will they still pay Sony? I think the might have alterior motives, persuing this trial because he/she wants to be the one to do "the trial that set the precedent." Plus, I'm sure there are many other music companies suing MP3.com (or at least they will in the future) so they can set the precendent. Will the court pay their legal fees (avoiding which is the reason to settle out-of-court)? This whole scenario is boggling me...
While I am against monopolistic practices, in some industries, in some times they can be warranted and a positive thing. I am behind 2600/DeCSS in this one, but other cases do not have the same conditions. Many cited uncivil practices against Rockefeller when he consolidated the oil industry under Standard Oil. At his time, the industry suffered from overproduction that drove the price of kerosene and crude oil so low that many producers could not afford to keep in business. The rags-to-riches-to-rags lives of most refiners and drillers was caused by a lack of organization. Standard Oil provided a haven, while a stifling haven, for these producers and brought stability to the industry. Without the monopoly, the industry might have collapsed (at least for a while) and production ended. Sometimes a giant umbrella can keep more dry than lots of little, flimsy ones.:)
Slashdot Mirror
You can take this idea further with two standard measurements used by graphic designers: the point and the pica.
There are 6 picas in an inch, and there 12 points in a pica (making 72 points in an inch). Points are used regularly to describe the size of a font, and make the inch evenly divisible by 2, 3, and 4. 10 point is a standard book type size -- with a standard two points of leading (extra space for linespacing) it takes up 12 points, 1 pica, per line of text. With 6 picas in an inch it is easy to count how many lines of text fit into a vertical space. That's why type sizes are usually 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 72 as relatively clean subdivisions of an inch.
Epson ink cartridges have a chip that prevent the printer from printing once the ink has dropped below a certain level, presumably to stop damage to the printers; however, the chip makes it difficult for aftermarket ink manufacturers to make compatible cartridges and forces you to buy ink more readily. I just had a cartridge run out and I know there is still ink in it. Sounds like a somewhat similar situation. Maybe some nice person will write a fix to allow me to use the rest of the ink that I purchased. Or is ink protected under the DMCA?
The Article is in reference to the Children's Internet Protection Act, which is abbreviated CIPA. Either the references are incorrect, or the poster made an error in submitting the article. I'm supporting the /. editors on this argument, as they did keep the original submission intact while reading the article.
I don't know why I'm replying to an Anonymous Coward, but whenever I sense myopic opinions, I feel I must. Firstly, Republicans and Democrats are not conservatives and liberals -- if you want a Liberal Party, go to Canada. Both parties contain left, right, and center members. While the Republican national agenda has been mostly conservative, the party as a whole is not. The Republican Party favors less federal involvement in the economy, more states' rights, and a less powerful central government. The Democratic Party draws support from women, minorities, working class families, and the poor because it supports social programs to help those who need it. I personally am a liberal Democrat, for I am willing to sacrifice some of what I earn to help those who need. My political motivation is not what comes in and out of my pockets but what I feel is morally just. The Republicans in power favor taking away power from the federal government, but it doesn't go to the people; it goes to big business. You cannot tell me that Dick Cheney does not support these massive enterprises; he is part of one. Without government intervention in business, we would have Standard Oil/AOL/Time Warner/Microsoft/[insert big cigarette company], and the open source advocates would be rolling in their graves. In addition, I do not like the Republican right's supporting of prayer in schools. My United States Constitution still guarantees a separation of Church and State. Or how about the fact that instead of allowing women to have the right to choose what to do with their bodies, the Republicans want a national (increasing national government are we?) law prohibiting abortion. How is that for not imposing morals on the American people?
Well, the majority of tabulature submitted to OLGA is for guitar in .tab or .crd (yay for text files!) with a little .btab for you bassists. I have found some very accurate tabs on OLGA, and I do feel it is a useful resource. While reprinting copyrighted material without the author's permission is illegal, I think this falls under fair use; it is like teaching a friend to play a song on guitar written by someone else. Except in this case, the friend is many Internet users, and the song is a lot of songs. Hehe... have you seen Office Space? :^)
While the OLGA network was shut down due to threats from the Harry Fox legal agency, a new incarnation of OLGA was started that is legally acceptable to both parties; the by-ear guitar tabulature of songs it contained may be posted, but they must be without the song lyrics which are copyrighted. New songs can be found at OLGA or Harmony Central.
You are correct in that the Constitution did not state our rights as citizens. In the preamble it does state that the Constitution was intended to secure the blessings of liberty by restraining the powers of government and guaranteeing civil liberties so that people may live in freedom. The rights were not specifically listed in the Constitution, that is why it was not ratified by the original 13 until it was amended. The Bill of Rights signifies the freedoms of speech, press, and assembly, the separation of church and state, the right to bear arms, and the fifth and fourteenth amendments (the fourteenth was added during Reconstruction) prohibit the states and national government from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property without due process of law."
They found a way to make Slash pretty. Congrats.
This is not the same as Quake or Half-life at all. 1) Quake has not copy-protection or serial whatsoever. I think the game to which you are referring is Quake III Arena; however, it has a key that functions like that of Half-Life. 2) Those keys do not verify according to your hardware. When attempting to play a game online, the key stored in your registry/text file is compared to keys in the database. I have no problem with this. The games can be played on more than one computer without any problems but one at a time. It seems perfectly reasonable to me. 3) I have never had a problem with either the Q3A or HL master servers. The authentication also provides the game-makers a way to restrict cheating (although not entirely).
I suspect that this goal will not come into fruition with Whistler. The release date is quite soon to implement something so seemingly large-scale. In the event Microsoft does attempt a unique computer ID verification system, they would have to only support certain hardware (oh boy I can see it now) and within a week, a cracked version of Whistler would appear on all of the warez sites, defeating their original intention.
I don't think any of you have actually used a NVidia card before... They have the best drivers and driver support of any card I've ever owned.
While I value the Hellmouth series and feel they were very well done, this is a bit "-1 Redundant." Maybe it would have been relevant last year...
Need I say more?
Now, onto your voting. The idea in voting is to vote for whoever can promote your ideals best, correct? Political Statement? Whoopty doo... I thought the whole idea was to vote about the issues and not the candidate. Not voting for Bush or Gore cleary shows that you don't have an interest in the future of the nation. There is no way that Browne or Nader would win! Pipe dreams... Btw, thank you for helping us [most likely] get Bush elected. Hope you like breathing polluted air (yes, he will cut the EPA) and seeing women and minorities losing rights. That doesn't even mention the fact that the public education system will collapse... oh yeah... and don't mention the National Endowment for the Arts or NPR or PBS!
It is truly sad that Bush can pull ahead [of Gore] in a poll on a site where people supposedly respect things like morality, intelligence, and selflessness. A vote for Gore is a vote against Stupid.
Even having two [major] political parties softens majority rule. You don't see either party seriously introducing legislation that is too different the other party's platform. While we might have (in my opinion) an overly conservative government, that government is a moderate conservative. If you read my comments above I was trying to push for moderate (even if it is not closest to your beliefs). Now, with the third parties in Congress, at the current time they will be a minority. Think practically. My whole position right now is based on practicality. There are a lot of things I would like to see, but they are not practical right now in the current state of our government. Change the government? Read the preceding two sentences again. Alright. Back to third parties in Congress. In order to get anything accomplished ever, at least two of the three parties would have to agree on the same things. If the party is liberal, chances are they would side Democratic (If they were conservative, likewise Republican [at the current time]). This would amount to little and in the end, the results would be like having two parties.
A third party representative would be possible. However, a large number is unlikely. If several third party seats are possible, then many are possible. A major third party wouldn't be effective either. Two would just side against the other one, and we'd be experiencing the same problems.
I'm not completely ignorant on the Canadian system, but I do not believe you can compare the governments of the two countries. The United States' government functions much differently from the Canadian Government; the idea behind a Republic is having representatives to present your position to the government. We unfortunately do not have a method of voting directly on issues. The best chance in America is to vote for whoever you think will not completely screw it up. You'd think that would lead us to vote for candidates who best represent our views (including third parties)... However, the political parties are so partisan that any measure put forth by a radical thinker (read: different) would be immediately shot down. Having a third party candidate in the Executive and Republicans and Democrats in Congress would destroy any chance of effectiveness in the government.
Now, regarding the two candidates. They have such a limited outlook that they are laughable. Abolish major taxes? Taxes exist to make sure our nation functions. Total freedom? Government restricts some freedoms to ensure that the fundamental freedoms of others are maintained. Our nation, as intended by the original founders, needs a moderate government. Government has the intent of preventing tyranny of the mass; it exists to provide the rules and the execution of those rules to keep society running. If majority will always persisted, the natural rights of the minorities would be ignored and infringed upon. Plus, an extremist nation would not be respected internationally. I do disagree with many of our governments restrictive and imposing policies and therefore [would] try to vote left-of-center in our right-of-center nation. Stopping up the "damn" government is not the way.
"of course, what's to stop Microsoft from releasing versions that won't work under Wine, ever?"
Or you could just use the ones that work. What new features could they add to a word processor that are truly necessary?
I've been using mailandnews.com for about a year and am very pleased with their services. It seems to be a very down-to-earth operation (and I've never gotten spam!). However, I have had some experiences with server slowness and downtime that have caused some headaches. But I stay with them. Why? I haven't found a free service that is better...
"...to determine how difficult it would be to stop a terrorist attack." So basically the police should have a Counter-Strike LAN party every time they wish to "test" a new building. Sounds fun to me :)
When they get back, are the astronauts going to run around here yelling "FW! First Walk!"?
I'm not very surprised about the candidates views on filtering-- I mean, it is the politically acceptable view by most people for public access be regulated by the government. Isn't that the case with television? (i.e. They do not show adult programs on broadcast television. You don't see many /.ers who think that is socially inacceptable.) What really got me nervous was when Bush said: "I think we ought to have character education in our schools. I know that doesn't directly talk about Hollywood, but it does reinforce the values you're teaching. I'd greatly expand character education funding, so that public schools will teach children values, values which have stood the test of time." This is just as bad as public prayer in schools. Anyway, doesn't this encroachment of government into the homes conflict with Bush's view of a smaller government? Maybe some of us don't want our heathen children to be raised as model Christians...
Alright. MP3.com and Sony settle. Sony drops the suit. So, MP3.com still has to face them in court? In my experience, if the prosecutor drops the case to settle, it is over. Now the judge wants to continue the proceedings, using taxpayer dollars to get two parties to agree on something they have already agreed upon? What happens if MP3.com wins? Will they still pay Sony? I think the might have alterior motives, persuing this trial because he/she wants to be the one to do "the trial that set the precedent." Plus, I'm sure there are many other music companies suing MP3.com (or at least they will in the future) so they can set the precendent. Will the court pay their legal fees (avoiding which is the reason to settle out-of-court)? This whole scenario is boggling me...
While I am against monopolistic practices, in some industries, in some times they can be warranted and a positive thing. I am behind 2600/DeCSS in this one, but other cases do not have the same conditions. Many cited uncivil practices against Rockefeller when he consolidated the oil industry under Standard Oil. At his time, the industry suffered from overproduction that drove the price of kerosene and crude oil so low that many producers could not afford to keep in business. The rags-to-riches-to-rags lives of most refiners and drillers was caused by a lack of organization. Standard Oil provided a haven, while a stifling haven, for these producers and brought stability to the industry. Without the monopoly, the industry might have collapsed (at least for a while) and production ended. Sometimes a giant umbrella can keep more dry than lots of little, flimsy ones. :)