You can already do something like that with XSLT, but XSLT has never seemed to really catch on, possibly because it's fairly complicated.
Huh?! I've been working in XSL almost exclusively for several years now. It's used widely, in my experience. It is not particularly complicated, just not the kind of complication you are used to.
Some posters are missing the point that this is tiering delivery for and charging premiums to content providers (read MPAssA, networks) for QOS over IP. Packet-level tiering is coming to you without touching your cable bill, but rolled into the cost of your DRM controlled media feed.
The Register has their typically informed and snarky take.
One more stake in the heart of the web. Even the bad new commercial internet will be gone soon. Plebes will be getting their government-mandated HD content at government-controlled pricing (think utility industries) and those of us in the know will be on the UnderNet.
This is a really outstanding result and leads to some interesting new territory. It would seem that there may well be two (or more?) discrete cognitive processes mediating reality for mind. Another blow to the idea of a comprehensive, unitary consciousness and the corresponding myth of a radical alterity labelled unconscious.
The relevant statute -- United States Copyright law of 1976 [17 USC 107]:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A [17 USC sects 106, 106A] the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
There is a real question of law here, but I consider that there is a case against Google. Indexing does not fall into any of the protected classes of use, has obvious commercial value and a clear, negative effect upon the value of the copyrighted work.
In relationship to the price of a loaf of bread, the average cost of sexual favors from prostitutes hasn't changed between the 1st century BC and modern times.
No one lives for two thousand years. In reality, the price of bread has been extraodinarily volatile for much of Western history and hoarding of flour after bad harvests managed to kill millions. These *short-run* distortions of market magic could last years.
The idea that one might live one's life in private and without fear of molestation is a *very* recent phenomenon. It's not passing out of the mainstream, it never quite arrived there.
The right to privacy is a post-war interpolation from the set of Constitutional rights. It was hardly a consideration before single-family households became common beyond the elite classes consequent to industrialisation. The very idea of private life took meaning from the distinction to be drawn between the public and private duties of the landed gentry, whether he was acting as public judge or administrator of his chattel. The idea that citizens required more privacy than that demanded by Christian modesty simply did not occur. It is only in the last generation that anyone became actually interested in the details of your private life. Before the information age, such trivia had no value beyond the prurient, of interest only to busibodies and the beat cop; again, unless you were a name.
John Doe #8 has also moved to dismiss this aspect of the suit.
You are right, it is an inside out class action, formed under Rule 20(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Doe #8's lawyers essentially argue that any link between the 25 co-defendants is fortuitous and insufficient to grant the jointure. The rule is designed to collect partners or other's who jointly benefit from the transaction or actions at issue.
No, actually, Zi Mei is a programmer hired by lawyers for John Doe #8, party to Atlantic vs John Does #1-25, to investigate and give expert opinion upon the RIAA's evidence gathering. Mei hasn't been accused of anything.
I am thinking of economy in its most general sense, a system of differential value. Your last remark is most salient. Looking closely, you will find systems and policies enforcing artificial scarcity throughout the ostensibly free western economies. The diamond market is an outstanding example, but a defacto monopoly is not required to introduce these distortions.
. ..support for the view that deflation can occur in virtual economies.
There is absolutely nothing virtual about online economies. Neither is there anything virtual about the social relationships that take place online. Perhaps, by the abusive current definition of the term, we can refer virtual violence or virtual worlds, but the economies and relationships, the social aspects of these games, are decidedly *not* virtual. They are merely mediated over TCP/IP. Is your phone-call to your moms virtual?
"We want to ensure that new residents have easy access to additional L$ without having to take yet another leap of trust to sign up and give payment information to a third party," said Linden Lab economic czar Lawrence Linden. But residents had already taken that leap of trust with GOM, and been rewarded.
Indeed. I daresay one would have greater trust in the third party, whose business solely relied upon professional integrity and actual fiduciary trust. Linden as market maker for L$ is the fox guarding the henhouse. GOM had no fiduciary interest in the exchange ratio, merely the conduct of exchanges.
I'm not calling anyone names, I am making a comparison between MS and a particular set of behaviors.
Spoiled children often display a lack of consideration for others, are prone to temper outbursts and are often manipulative. Their behavior is intrusive and obstructive.
I'll get excited when I see the collective realization that just the technology we currently have enables the defeat of many entrenched, obsoletesocialconstructs.
It's the withering away of the state; Lenin forsaw it but mistook it. It turns marxism and capitalism both ass-over-teakettle.
Why not use these techniques to defeat fearfuldemocratic and republican governments, as well? They are equally egregious, just the authoritarian regimes are less duplicitous and a damn sight rougher.
The pseudo-specificity of such language is intended not to explicitly describe anything constructive, but to induce a state of mental torpor in the examiner.
. . . these debates . . . create a neutral point of view that presents all the important facts.
This statement is so staggeringly devoid of value to this discussion as to beggar description. Such debates may or may not result in a consensus regarding what constitutes a fact and its relative significance. Scholarly debate, whether or no sanctioned by the academy, whether by encyclopaedists professional or amateur, whether electronic or carbon-based, is scholarly debate, friend.
Debate, by its nature, can create nothing but consensus or its lack.
Ask the guy sweeping up after hours at your neighborhood bar, sifting peanut shells for loose change.
Actually, my case may be unusual because I didn't start programming until my late 30s, but I'm 43 and writing AJAX and XSLT as a consultant for a good-sized internet property, where are you?
American corporations will not stand for being refused entry to a market encompassing a sixth of the world's population. This pressure began to build in the seventies and has only increased. This is the determining factor in all US/China dialogue.
Slashdot Mirror
You can already do something like that with XSLT, but XSLT has never seemed to really catch on, possibly because it's fairly complicated.
Huh?! I've been working in XSL almost exclusively for several years now. It's used widely, in my experience. It is not particularly complicated, just not the kind of complication you are used to.
Some posters are missing the point that this is tiering delivery for and charging premiums to content providers (read MPAssA, networks) for QOS over IP. Packet-level tiering is coming to you without touching your cable bill, but rolled into the cost of your DRM controlled media feed.
The Register has their typically informed and snarky take.
One more stake in the heart of the web. Even the bad new commercial internet will be gone soon. Plebes will be getting their government-mandated HD content at government-controlled pricing (think utility industries) and those of us in the know will be on the UnderNet.
This is a really outstanding result and leads to some interesting new territory. It would seem that there may well be two (or more?) discrete cognitive processes mediating reality for mind. Another blow to the idea of a comprehensive, unitary consciousness and the corresponding myth of a radical alterity labelled unconscious.
The relevant statute -- United States Copyright law of 1976 [17 USC 107]:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A [17 USC sects 106, 106A] the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
There is a real question of law here, but I consider that there is a case against Google. Indexing does not fall into any of the protected classes of use, has obvious commercial value and a clear, negative effect upon the value of the copyrighted work.
<sneer accent="french">How naïve to imagine that software development is driven by market forces.</sneer>
In relationship to the price of a loaf of bread, the average cost of sexual favors from prostitutes hasn't changed between the 1st century BC and modern times.
No one lives for two thousand years. In reality, the price of bread has been extraodinarily volatile for much of Western history and hoarding of flour after bad harvests managed to kill millions. These *short-run* distortions of market magic could last years.
Read Braudel
The idea that one might live one's life in private and without fear of molestation is a *very* recent phenomenon. It's not passing out of the mainstream, it never quite arrived there.
The right to privacy is a post-war interpolation from the set of Constitutional rights. It was hardly a consideration before single-family households became common beyond the elite classes consequent to industrialisation. The very idea of private life took meaning from the distinction to be drawn between the public and private duties of the landed gentry, whether he was acting as public judge or administrator of his chattel. The idea that citizens required more privacy than that demanded by Christian modesty simply did not occur. It is only in the last generation that anyone became actually interested in the details of your private life. Before the information age, such trivia had no value beyond the prurient, of interest only to busibodies and the beat cop; again, unless you were a name.
Lockheed officials have recommended using a handful of widely accepted formats such as the popular Internet software language HTML. .
Those responsible have been sacked.
John Doe #8 has also moved to dismiss this aspect of the suit.
You are right, it is an inside out class action, formed under Rule 20(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Doe #8's lawyers essentially argue that any link between the 25 co-defendants is fortuitous and insufficient to grant the jointure. The rule is designed to collect partners or other's who jointly benefit from the transaction or actions at issue.
No, actually, Zi Mei is a programmer hired by lawyers for John Doe #8, party to Atlantic vs John Does #1-25, to investigate and give expert opinion upon the RIAA's evidence gathering. Mei hasn't been accused of anything.
Read before you pick.
Very astute.
I am thinking of economy in its most general sense, a system of differential value. Your last remark is most salient. Looking closely, you will find systems and policies enforcing artificial scarcity throughout the ostensibly free western economies. The diamond market is an outstanding example, but a defacto monopoly is not required to introduce these distortions.
And this is different how?
. .
There is absolutely nothing virtual about online economies. Neither is there anything virtual about the social relationships that take place online. Perhaps, by the abusive current definition of the term, we can refer virtual violence or virtual worlds, but the economies and relationships, the social aspects of these games, are decidedly *not* virtual. They are merely mediated over TCP/IP. Is your phone-call to your moms virtual?
I wonder when the six million dollar man remake comes out?
We can rebuild him.
"We want to ensure that new residents have easy access to additional L$ without having to take yet another leap of trust to sign up and give payment information to a third party," said Linden Lab economic czar Lawrence Linden. But residents had already taken that leap of trust with GOM, and been rewarded.
Indeed. I daresay one would have greater trust in the third party, whose business solely relied upon professional integrity and actual fiduciary trust. Linden as market maker for L$ is the fox guarding the henhouse. GOM had no fiduciary interest in the exchange ratio, merely the conduct of exchanges.
I'm not calling anyone names, I am making a comparison between MS and a particular set of behaviors.
Spoiled children often display a lack of consideration for others, are prone to temper outbursts and are often manipulative. Their behavior is intrusive and obstructive.
Stop behaving like a spoiled child.
I'll get excited when I see the collective realization that just the technology we currently have enables the defeat of many entrenched, obsolete social constructs.
It's the withering away of the state; Lenin forsaw it but mistook it. It turns marxism and capitalism both ass-over-teakettle.
Why not use these techniques to defeat fearful democratic and republican governments, as well? They are equally egregious, just the authoritarian regimes are less duplicitous and a damn sight rougher.
If the robot can hold out long enough, it may gather enough data to settle the debate.
More likely just enough to exacerbate it.
Righteous.
The pseudo-specificity of such language is intended not to explicitly describe anything constructive, but to induce a state of mental torpor in the examiner.
Comforting thought, but false prima facia.
Scientific consensus is a consensus of scientists, not a special, privileged form of apprehension. One ignores Husserl at one's peril.
. . . these debates . . . create a neutral point of view that presents all the important facts.
This statement is so staggeringly devoid of value to this discussion as to beggar description. Such debates may or may not result in a consensus regarding what constitutes a fact and its relative significance. Scholarly debate, whether or no sanctioned by the academy, whether by encyclopaedists professional or amateur, whether electronic or carbon-based, is scholarly debate, friend.
Debate, by its nature, can create nothing but consensus or its lack.
Ask the guy sweeping up after hours at your neighborhood bar, sifting peanut shells for loose change.
Actually, my case may be unusual because I didn't start programming until my late 30s, but I'm 43 and writing AJAX and XSLT as a consultant for a good-sized internet property, where are you?
Wrecked 'em, hell, it killed 'em.
American corporations will not stand for being refused entry to a market encompassing a sixth of the world's population. This pressure began to build in the seventies and has only increased. This is the determining factor in all US/China dialogue.