Assuming this is copyright infringement, your logic is wrong.
Just because the consumer of the product agrees to receiving modified content, it does not allow someone to modify a copyrighted work.
That's a bit like saying free speech should protect you from libel and inciting racial hatred.
Free speech does not give you the right to make other people's lives hell.
but if he said offensive things to the person's face, what would the punishment be?
I don't think that's an equal comparison, that'd be more equivalent to sending a user a message.
I didn't RTFA, but it appears that the memorial page had an open comment section and they expected it to not get trolled. It doesn't matter who is in the right here, but that's an unreasonable expectation.
And people on the internet need to learn a bit more about real life. The internet does not actually define the rules of law.
Car analogy: pedestrians have the right of way. That doesn't mean you should try to walk across a 6 lane road with heavy traffic.
In the UK any road of that size is likely to be a motorway where pedestrians do not have the right of way:)
At the end of the day, your behaviour online still falls under the laws of the Real World. You can be held accountable for copyright infringement, libel and malicious communications amongst many things.
In this case the length of the sentence is likely to have been weighed up with the seriousness of the intent involved, along with how public it all was. Don't forget he'll likely serve less than 12 weeks of the sentence (assuming good behaviour).
Speaking as someone whose significant other has a psychotic ex-boyfriend, what Randi is suggesting would mean people in her position would either have to take the chance that their knife wielding ex's stalk their online presence and maybe eventually turn up at their door, or that they can't use the internet.
The fundamental problem with the idea that you have to be a real person online is that it brings all the 'real world' problems with it, and all these bright sparks never seem to address these issues.
What will be more interesting is if MS wake up and realise that Apple is a greater threat to their core business than Google. As a technology co. MS is waning and has been for a few years now, Google doesn't have a coherent desktop/mobile strategy (in fact they really don't care about the desktop). Apple on the other hand does (on both counts).
If it wasn't for the "we must p0wn this business space" attitude, I could easily see that MS might get behind Android rather than throw a huge amount of money around with WP7. In that case they might have a good chance of competing against Apple and profiting from the mobile space over the next 10+ years. As it stands they're trying to climb a mighty steep hill.
N.B. I am a Windows 7 user and it did say when I installed that Windows 7 was not supported.
I dropped iTunes out of my home setup a while back and thought I've give Songbird a go. I've been running it for about 4 months now and I have to say, in IMO, it is one aweful piece of software which I rarely use now. Barring the crashes (ack. NB above) its usability is pretty poor.
I hope others have hade better experiences with it.
I know this is Slashdot an' all but really? You've got to the point where you have to bitch about tabs settings in MS's development environment. Have MS not been squishing enough small companies or something equally evvvvvvil for you lately? Quick everyone, another example of MS being a horrible overlord, they've combined tabs and indent in Visual Studio!
None of these facts are relevant to the discussion. They're relevant to the discussion that you're trying to avoid.
I personally would have started the conversation privately. However...
The way that Theo and others are trying to deflect from the original and serious issue displays an absolute lack of professionalism.
Seriously, if all the driver developer gets is a public scolding then maybe he should think himself lucky.
And in other news: apples were proven to equal oranges.
As you suggest, not everything is equal (e.g. we also live in a more affluent society that understands technology better and is likely to test/adopt it faster) so statements such as in this "article" are completely pointless, apart from to grab a quick headline if you're pedalling the format.
Using your example, you are therefore saying that some future technology will be capable of holding all the videos that are available in the present.
That is most likely going to be true but it doesn't mean that there will be something that can store all the videos available when that technology exists. Apart from anything else, there is an enormous difference in the size of the files between the diferent time periods in your example.
Slashdot Mirror
Assuming this is copyright infringement, your logic is wrong. Just because the consumer of the product agrees to receiving modified content, it does not allow someone to modify a copyrighted work.
That's a bit like saying free speech should protect you from libel and inciting racial hatred.
Free speech does not give you the right to make other people's lives hell.
I don't think that's an equal comparison, that'd be more equivalent to sending a user a message.
And people on the internet need to learn a bit more about real life. The internet does not actually define the rules of law.
In the UK any road of that size is likely to be a motorway where pedestrians do not have the right of way :)
At the end of the day, your behaviour online still falls under the laws of the Real World. You can be held accountable for copyright infringement, libel and malicious communications amongst many things.
In this case the length of the sentence is likely to have been weighed up with the seriousness of the intent involved, along with how public it all was. Don't forget he'll likely serve less than 12 weeks of the sentence (assuming good behaviour).
...saying one thing to the public and then proceeding to do something different? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I say!
Most of the parties are happy to go back on their own manifesto policies so this really shouldn't surprise anyone.
Speaking as someone whose significant other has a psychotic ex-boyfriend, what Randi is suggesting would mean people in her position would either have to take the chance that their knife wielding ex's stalk their online presence and maybe eventually turn up at their door, or that they can't use the internet.
The fundamental problem with the idea that you have to be a real person online is that it brings all the 'real world' problems with it, and all these bright sparks never seem to address these issues.
What will be more interesting is if MS wake up and realise that Apple is a greater threat to their core business than Google. As a technology co. MS is waning and has been for a few years now, Google doesn't have a coherent desktop/mobile strategy (in fact they really don't care about the desktop). Apple on the other hand does (on both counts). If it wasn't for the "we must p0wn this business space" attitude, I could easily see that MS might get behind Android rather than throw a huge amount of money around with WP7. In that case they might have a good chance of competing against Apple and profiting from the mobile space over the next 10+ years. As it stands they're trying to climb a mighty steep hill.
Although the title is correct the body of the story is not, as it's not the driest region on earth, areas of the Antartic have that distinction.
...where it used to be one. And now you have to navigate a menu to do it.
K.I.S.S.
I'm guessing you don't know much about Mono then.
I've said for a long time that anyone who uses facebook gets exactly what they deserve.
You're lazy about security and you complain when someone actually tries to improve it because you haven't been bothered in 3 years to do it yourself.
Life must be terrible for you if this is the most you have to complain about.
N.B. I am a Windows 7 user and it did say when I installed that Windows 7 was not supported.
I dropped iTunes out of my home setup a while back and thought I've give Songbird a go. I've been running it for about 4 months now and I have to say, in IMO, it is one aweful piece of software which I rarely use now. Barring the crashes (ack. NB above) its usability is pretty poor.
I hope others have hade better experiences with it.
I know this is Slashdot an' all but really? You've got to the point where you have to bitch about tabs settings in MS's development environment. Have MS not been squishing enough small companies or something equally evvvvvvil for you lately? Quick everyone, another example of MS being a horrible overlord, they've combined tabs and indent in Visual Studio!
*sigh*
Let the kid go play outside in the real world whilst he's still a kid, instead of sitting in front of a screen making friends with pixels.
And that's exactly what this software is supposedly doing.
I personally would have started the conversation privately. However...
The way that Theo and others are trying to deflect from the original and serious issue displays an absolute lack of professionalism. Seriously, if all the driver developer gets is a public scolding then maybe he should think himself lucky.
And in other news: apples were proven to equal oranges.
As you suggest, not everything is equal (e.g. we also live in a more affluent society that understands technology better and is likely to test/adopt it faster) so statements such as in this "article" are completely pointless, apart from to grab a quick headline if you're pedalling the format.
SCO did some procedural jiggling to make sure they're not 'undervalued' during any procedure (i.e. the directors get more money than they're worth).
Take a look at this Groklaw article for a bit more detail.
Good faith won't save SCO wrt the Lanham act as the privilege only covers statements made to the court, not to the press.
Using your example, you are therefore saying that some future technology will be capable of holding all the videos that are available in the present.
That is most likely going to be true but it doesn't mean that there will be something that can store all the videos available when that technology exists. Apart from anything else, there is an enormous difference in the size of the files between the diferent time periods in your example.
...and I'll be commuting to Mars for work.
Sounds just like the BT 'technologist' who thought we'd be plugging cables directly into the back of our heads soon.