It wouldn't make sense to have compulsory licensing if the price could then be negotiated.
Huh? With most of the copyright compulsory licenses, the price is in fact negotiated, with the result that the actual price is usually far below the compulsory license rate.
Pretty much everyone who can understand the paper can get it for much less than $40. They either have a subscription to the journal, or they have ready access to a library with it, where they can photocopy it for cheap.
For the typical consumer how has no idea what Linux is, there is little point in a preloaded Linux system. Windows is fine for them, and has more consumer-type software.
That leaves as the market for these things the people that actually want Linux. But people who know enough about Linux to actually want it probably want a specific distribution. If the preloaded distribution is that one, great!
But if the one they want is not the preloaded one, then they are going to end up doing their own install anyway. In that case, the only advantage they really get buying one of the preloaded Linux systems is that they know the hardware works with Linux (maybe--some companies that do preloads simply don't support all of their own hardware under Linux).
But there is also a disadvantage. Windows often comes bundled with third party software, and there also often ads from third parties included in the packaging. The companies that make the bundled software, or that the ads are for, pay the computer companies to be included. The computer company often makes enough money that way to more than pay for the Windows license. Because of this, it is often cheaper for them to sell a given model with Windows than to sell it without Windows.
If this is the case, the Linux fan who is going to install his own distro over the preloaded one is better off, financially, buying the Windows computer and wiping it.
Bottom line: the market for whom Linux preloads makes sense is only a small subset of the people that want to run Linux on their new computer. Hence, it is no surprise that manufacturers are not finding it worthwhile.
The only reason why it came to light with Chrome is that the language didn't make a lick of sense in that context. Since you weren't uploading user-generated content, Google's TOS read as if they auto-claimed the entire internet
That's not quite correct--the reason it was a problem in Chrome is that users of a browser DO often upload content. For example, you yourself almost certainly used a browser to upload your post to Slashdot, and I am using a browser to upload my response.
The key is that with Chrome, users would be using it to upload content to sites that were NOT Google.
If users never uploaded with a browser, but just read, then it would indeed not have mattered. Even if it were interpreted as trying to claim rights to anything you viewed, it would have been ineffective, due to lack of privity between Google and the content owner. (Fundamental principle of property law, both real property and intellectual: you can't give away a right that you don't have).
But users do frequently upload, and it was those uploads that Google was (accidently) trying to claim.
Another example: You are a state. You build roads and freeways. Someone is transporting illegal drugs around in a vehicle, using your roads and freeways to do so. Is it your fault or theirs? Theirs!
How about this? You build a road. You brag about how convenient your road is for transporting illegal drugs. You take steps to make it so the police will have trouble catching drug transporters on your road. Shouldn't you bear some of the responsibility for drug transport on your road?
That's entirely due to lack of interest on the part of virus makers and spyware makers, as OS/2 is not very secure. For example, important libraries used by all processes are mapped to shared, writable memory. It's trivial for a malicious process to take over any other process and run arbitrary code in that other process.
From a security point of view, OS/2 is in the same ballpark as Windows 95, far below Linux, OS X, and any Windows decended from NT (such as NT, 2K, XP, Vista).
But standardized formats are meaningless when they cannot be implemented, not even by the company who bought and paid for the format to become a standard.
OOXML can, and has, been implemented. All current implementations have slight deviations from the standard, though. The Office 2007 implementation has some attribute names wrong, for example, due to those attribute names being changed during standardization.
They are going to say that OOXML is an ISO standard, but their own products don't follow the ISO standard.
How exactly is this different from, say, ODF? No existing product follows the ISO standard for ODF (or even the draft standards for the next version of ODF). They all have minor deviations, very similar to the deviations that OOXML has from the ISO standard.
You should try actually researching this stuff, rather than just repeating FUD that came from IBM bloggers.
Here you go, courtesy of the "Summarize" service on my Mac:
And half an hour later the thought that it was time to go to sleep would awaken me; I would try to put away the book which, I imagined, was still in my hands, and to blow out the light; I had been thinking all the time, while I was asleep, of what I had just been reading, but my thoughts had run into a channel of their own, until I myself seemed actually to have become the subject of my book: a church, a quartet, the rivalry between FranÃfois I and Charles V.
For a long time I used to go to bed early. Sometimes, when I had put out
my candle, my eyes would close so quickly that I had not even time to say
"I'm going to sleep." And half an hour later the thought that it was time
to go to sleep would awaken me; I would try to put away the book which, I
imagined, was still in my hands, and to blow out the light; I had been
thinking all the time, while I was asleep, of what I had just been
reading, but my thoughts had run into a channel of their own, until I
myself seemed actually to have become the subject of my book: a church, a
quartet, the rivalry between FranÃois I and Charles V. This impression
would persist for some moments after I was awake; it did not disturb my
mind, but it lay like scales upon my eyes and prevented them from
registering the fact that the candle was no longer burning. Then it would
begin to seem unintelligible, as the thoughts of a former existence must
be to a reincarnate spirit; the subject of my book would separate itself
from me, leaving me free to choose whether I would form part of it or no;
and at the same time my sight would return and I would be astonished to
find myself in a state of darkness, pleasant and restful enough for the
eyes, and even more, perhaps, for my mind, to which it appeared
incomprehensible, without a cause, a matter dark indeed.
It's below sea level in one of the most hurricane prone places on earth. Why are rebuilding and living there?
The same can be said of pretty much every major populated area--the only difference is that it would be a different threat in other areas. Earthquakes for the entire west coast, for example.
Note that the article was written by the CTO of Opera. If that's the kind of thinking that goes into Opera, I am not surprised their market share is so low.
They still try to do so, generally under the guise of a "use tax" that's conveniently only applied to purchases from out-of-state, but as far as I'm aware such unequal taxes have never been tested in court. IANAL, of course
Yes, it's been tested, in the Supreme Court.
What the court has decided is that there is no Constitutional problem as long as the net result is to bring the total tax on out of state goods to exactly the same as the total tax on in state goods.
Note this means that if you buy an item in state X, and state X collects, say, 3% sales tax, and then you ship it to state Y, and Y would have collected 8% tax had the item been purchased in Y, then Y can only collect 5% from you for the use tax, not the normal 8%. If you bought a similar item in state Z, which collects no tax, and shipped it to Y, Y could go for 8%.
It's not really a completely free distro, as they allow documentation that uses the GFDL license with invariant sections. Many (including Debian) consider that to be a non-free license, and do not allow it.
Coming from someone with many systems, completely exposed to the Internet, with thousand day uptimes, these RedHat folk are in fact sufficiently paranoid
Anyone with a system that is exposed to the internet, with a thousand day uptime, is NOT sufficiently paranoid. A thousand days is far longer than the interval between kernel patchs for remotely exploitable kernel bugs.
Tesla used an entirely different mechanism. The present work is related to Tesla's method in approximately the same way digital photography is related to cave drawings.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? With most of the copyright compulsory licenses, the price is in fact negotiated, with the result that the actual price is usually far below the compulsory license rate.
When was the last time a major military power was pissed off at a cruise liner for helping its citizens find dissident information?
Pretty much everyone who can understand the paper can get it for much less than $40. They either have a subscription to the journal, or they have ready access to a library with it, where they can photocopy it for cheap.
For the typical consumer how has no idea what Linux is, there is little point in a preloaded Linux system. Windows is fine for them, and has more consumer-type software.
That leaves as the market for these things the people that actually want Linux. But people who know enough about Linux to actually want it probably want a specific distribution. If the preloaded distribution is that one, great!
But if the one they want is not the preloaded one, then they are going to end up doing their own install anyway. In that case, the only advantage they really get buying one of the preloaded Linux systems is that they know the hardware works with Linux (maybe--some companies that do preloads simply don't support all of their own hardware under Linux).
But there is also a disadvantage. Windows often comes bundled with third party software, and there also often ads from third parties included in the packaging. The companies that make the bundled software, or that the ads are for, pay the computer companies to be included. The computer company often makes enough money that way to more than pay for the Windows license. Because of this, it is often cheaper for them to sell a given model with Windows than to sell it without Windows.
If this is the case, the Linux fan who is going to install his own distro over the preloaded one is better off, financially, buying the Windows computer and wiping it.
Bottom line: the market for whom Linux preloads makes sense is only a small subset of the people that want to run Linux on their new computer. Hence, it is no surprise that manufacturers are not finding it worthwhile.
Good question. Perhaps someone will write A WoW Player's Guide to Warhammer to answer this for us?
That's not quite correct--the reason it was a problem in Chrome is that users of a browser DO often upload content. For example, you yourself almost certainly used a browser to upload your post to Slashdot, and I am using a browser to upload my response.
The key is that with Chrome, users would be using it to upload content to sites that were NOT Google.
If users never uploaded with a browser, but just read, then it would indeed not have mattered. Even if it were interpreted as trying to claim rights to anything you viewed, it would have been ineffective, due to lack of privity between Google and the content owner. (Fundamental principle of property law, both real property and intellectual: you can't give away a right that you don't have).
But users do frequently upload, and it was those uploads that Google was (accidently) trying to claim.
How about this? You build a road. You brag about how convenient your road is for transporting illegal drugs. You take steps to make it so the police will have trouble catching drug transporters on your road. Shouldn't you bear some of the responsibility for drug transport on your road?
That's entirely due to lack of interest on the part of virus makers and spyware makers, as OS/2 is not very secure. For example, important libraries used by all processes are mapped to shared, writable memory. It's trivial for a malicious process to take over any other process and run arbitrary code in that other process.
From a security point of view, OS/2 is in the same ballpark as Windows 95, far below Linux, OS X, and any Windows decended from NT (such as NT, 2K, XP, Vista).
OOXML can, and has, been implemented. All current implementations have slight deviations from the standard, though. The Office 2007 implementation has some attribute names wrong, for example, due to those attribute names being changed during standardization.
How exactly is this different from, say, ODF? No existing product follows the ISO standard for ODF (or even the draft standards for the next version of ODF). They all have minor deviations, very similar to the deviations that OOXML has from the ISO standard.
You should try actually researching this stuff, rather than just repeating FUD that came from IBM bloggers.
Here you go, courtesy of the "Summarize" service on my Mac:
Anyone compared "The Numerati" with "Super-Crunchers" by Ian Ayers?
For a long time I used to go to bed early. Sometimes, when I had put out my candle, my eyes would close so quickly that I had not even time to say "I'm going to sleep." And half an hour later the thought that it was time to go to sleep would awaken me; I would try to put away the book which, I imagined, was still in my hands, and to blow out the light; I had been thinking all the time, while I was asleep, of what I had just been reading, but my thoughts had run into a channel of their own, until I myself seemed actually to have become the subject of my book: a church, a quartet, the rivalry between FranÃois I and Charles V. This impression would persist for some moments after I was awake; it did not disturb my mind, but it lay like scales upon my eyes and prevented them from registering the fact that the candle was no longer burning. Then it would begin to seem unintelligible, as the thoughts of a former existence must be to a reincarnate spirit; the subject of my book would separate itself from me, leaving me free to choose whether I would form part of it or no; and at the same time my sight would return and I would be astonished to find myself in a state of darkness, pleasant and restful enough for the eyes, and even more, perhaps, for my mind, to which it appeared incomprehensible, without a cause, a matter dark indeed.
They want their news back. Slashdot really needs to speed up the story approval process.
The same can be said of pretty much every major populated area--the only difference is that it would be a different threat in other areas. Earthquakes for the entire west coast, for example.
Leo seems to be keeping himself busy, with about five billion different podcasts he hosts each week.
Note that the article was written by the CTO of Opera. If that's the kind of thinking that goes into Opera, I am not surprised their market share is so low.
All those examples put together won't come anywhere near 250 GB.
I wouldn't say the 45th known Mersenne prime has been found. I'd say the first unknown Mersenne prime has been found.
Yes, it's been tested, in the Supreme Court.
What the court has decided is that there is no Constitutional problem as long as the net result is to bring the total tax on out of state goods to exactly the same as the total tax on in state goods.
Note this means that if you buy an item in state X, and state X collects, say, 3% sales tax, and then you ship it to state Y, and Y would have collected 8% tax had the item been purchased in Y, then Y can only collect 5% from you for the use tax, not the normal 8%. If you bought a similar item in state Z, which collects no tax, and shipped it to Y, Y could go for 8%.
I liked how Nadar was described by the host on "Wait Wait...Don't Tell Me": for when voting for Ron Paul isn't throwing your vote away enough.
It's not really a completely free distro, as they allow documentation that uses the GFDL license with invariant sections. Many (including Debian) consider that to be a non-free license, and do not allow it.
Four? Trivial! I can visualize 11 dimensions...but 8 of them are very very small.
The Intel system is based on this. It's nothing like anything Tesla is known to have worked on.
Anyone with a system that is exposed to the internet, with a thousand day uptime, is NOT sufficiently paranoid. A thousand days is far longer than the interval between kernel patchs for remotely exploitable kernel bugs.
Tesla used an entirely different mechanism. The present work is related to Tesla's method in approximately the same way digital photography is related to cave drawings.