"Guidelines" are open to interpretation. As long as the interpretation is consistent that is okay, but a bad "authority" figure can change the interpretation based on what they want in a specific situation.
I've had several experiences like this as well with one editor deciding the he was the end all and be all of what was significant and worthy of note. I had other bad experiences as well. As a matter of fact every time I've tried to contribute I've had a bad experience. So no more for me... they have people on power trips that are out of control. It's sad because the idea behind Wikipedia is so good and solid as long as it's kept OPEN and FAIR. I don't think it's either at the moment.
Who cares. They are still a patent troll if they're trying to milk money out of somebody because of a bogus patent that never should have been granted.
What gets me is this... all many writers in mainstream outlets have to do to get an opinion on how ridiculous their tech writing is would be call up one of their solid I.T. guys at their organization.
But the arrogance level of most reporters is way too high to admit that some tech guy (a job that holds a lowly place in their mind) might know more about this stuff then they do. They are way to self-absorbed to think that they might be getting it wrong. But they are actually good writers so they can put it into a piece and make it make sense therefore people without tech knowledge think it's legitimate white all the people with any tech knowledge are laughing their ass off behind their backs...
Going to a college used to be about being educated.
There should be many options open for straight job training if that's what you want. You should be able to go to college to learn and to "learn to learn."
It's a shame that University does equal job training in so many people's mind and the doors on so many options have slammed shut.
In a way it's too bad that this didn't go to trial. Back when I was working in the Academic sector there was occasionally firestorms between students and faculty about this subject.
The major university I worked for (which will remain unnamed obviously) had it in the student contract (or code or bylaws or whatever) that the copyright of anything turned in by a student was owned by the university. I am guessing many universities do the same thing.
So it would have been interesting to see if that sort of fine print clause in a student agreement with a state institution would of held up. If it does I would think that the student didn't really have a case.
Because this would make it so the school district would actually have to put a technical person on their payroll.
From what I gather 1) school districts tend to not want techs of any sort on the payroll and 2) most school districts don't have the money for techs anyway.
I am not on the inside of any school district so I might be wrong, but it seems that most schools have a strong bias against techs for whatever reason. Again though this is just my impression.
When we (Slashdot readers who are against this kind of Copyright abuse) talk in this debate from now on we should refuse to use to use the term "Intellectual Property."
It's obvious by this view that the RIAA doesn't want you to be able to buy a damn thing. When you sell "Property" you don't get the right for it to revert back to you.
So STFU and don't use that term. Come up with something else, RIAA greedhead.
How can you guarantee a closed source package or project isn't going to stop without notice, hmm?
And how many commercial software companies feel "no obligation to the project or its users."
Seems to me I've gotten bit more by commercial companies not maintaining their product than open source projects suddenly dieing. At least the source code is available for the latter.
Same here... only slightly younger and I haven't used it since grade school.
If a teacher got on to me during school about not writing in cursive, I did one assignment in cursive and then they never complained about it again. I didn't have the hand muscle coordination to write like that and it didn't hurt me one bit to write in block letters... and people could read it.
Now it's easier to type an assignment than to write it. I don't see what's wrong with that as long as civilization doesn't collapse and we still have computers.
Slashdot Mirror
And rather than being a story about 'scarcity of resources', isn't it more one of Wikipedia approaching perfection?
Huh? How is it possible to have perfect knowledge of anything?
"Guidelines" are open to interpretation. As long as the interpretation is consistent that is okay, but a bad "authority" figure can change the interpretation based on what they want in a specific situation.
I've had several experiences like this as well with one editor deciding the he was the end all and be all of what was significant and worthy of note. I had other bad experiences as well. As a matter of fact every time I've tried to contribute I've had a bad experience. So no more for me... they have people on power trips that are out of control. It's sad because the idea behind Wikipedia is so good and solid as long as it's kept OPEN and FAIR. I don't think it's either at the moment.
How is this even enforceable?
Beuler?
Who cares. They are still a patent troll if they're trying to milk money out of somebody because of a bogus patent that never should have been granted.
it would also include pagers, I would think. When those were in widespread use we could easily send pages to certain pre-designated groups of people.
shit! I guess I know why I'm not a copy editor now...
What gets me is this... all many writers in mainstream outlets have to do to get an opinion on how ridiculous their tech writing is would be call up one of their solid I.T. guys at their organization.
But the arrogance level of most reporters is way too high to admit that some tech guy (a job that holds a lowly place in their mind) might know more about this stuff then they do. They are way to self-absorbed to think that they might be getting it wrong. But they are actually good writers so they can put it into a piece and make it make sense therefore people without tech knowledge think it's legitimate white all the people with any tech knowledge are laughing their ass off behind their backs...
Going to a college used to be about being educated.
There should be many options open for straight job training if that's what you want. You should be able to go to college to learn and to "learn to learn."
It's a shame that University does equal job training in so many people's mind and the doors on so many options have slammed shut.
No doubt about that. The consultant hey hired that gave them that idea must of been a 17 year old haxor.
Because that's their primary business now, apparently...
In a way it's too bad that this didn't go to trial. Back when I was working in the Academic sector there was occasionally firestorms between students and faculty about this subject.
The major university I worked for (which will remain unnamed obviously) had it in the student contract (or code or bylaws or whatever) that the copyright of anything turned in by a student was owned by the university. I am guessing many universities do the same thing.
So it would have been interesting to see if that sort of fine print clause in a student agreement with a state institution would of held up. If it does I would think that the student didn't really have a case.
Because this would make it so the school district would actually have to put a technical person on their payroll.
From what I gather 1) school districts tend to not want techs of any sort on the payroll and 2) most school districts don't have the money for techs anyway.
I am not on the inside of any school district so I might be wrong, but it seems that most schools have a strong bias against techs for whatever reason. Again though this is just my impression.
What is it u Hurd?
I want to hur it, too.
When we (Slashdot readers who are against this kind of Copyright abuse) talk in this debate from now on we should refuse to use to use the term "Intellectual Property."
It's obvious by this view that the RIAA doesn't want you to be able to buy a damn thing. When you sell "Property" you don't get the right for it to revert back to you.
So STFU and don't use that term. Come up with something else, RIAA greedhead.
Be sure to live your life scared of everything in the world around you. It's the modern, 21st Century way of life!
How can you guarantee a closed source package or project isn't going to stop without notice, hmm?
And how many commercial software companies feel "no obligation to the project or its users."
Seems to me I've gotten bit more by commercial companies not maintaining their product than open source projects suddenly dieing. At least the source code is available for the latter.
I get a lot of mod points these days, but I don't have any when I really need them.
Parent is definitely +1 Insightful.
That's a lot of responsibility for a single person. What would happen if, for example, he were to be hit by a bus one day?
PPPFt... hahaha. I wish you would tell this to my boss.
He's just spending time with his soul mate in Argentina.
Somebody tried to patent the blackboard?
Now THERE's a stretch...
...the girls actually ARE getting more beautiful.
The rest of the "more beautiful" crap is just in our heads.
Same here... only slightly younger and I haven't used it since grade school.
If a teacher got on to me during school about not writing in cursive, I did one assignment in cursive and then they never complained about it again. I didn't have the hand muscle coordination to write like that and it didn't hurt me one bit to write in block letters... and people could read it.
Now it's easier to type an assignment than to write it. I don't see what's wrong with that as long as civilization doesn't collapse and we still have computers.
They are lawyers, it's a given that they are crooks.
All lawyers are crooks except the one trying to help you out of your mess!
thanks. The haunting "Torgo Theme" is back in my head.
It only took 10 years to get rid of it the first time.