We may jail more people... Or we may not. Perhaps we are simply being more honest about how many people we jail, and when we jail them we actually jail them, not "reeducate" them. In a country of 1 billion people, they almost certainly lose track of many thousands of inmates. Also I'd bet the mortality rate in the prison is higher, both from execution and from poor living conditions. What you have to look at isn't just how many are in the typical caged room but how many have been arrested, how many are put into the caged room only to die(the more in prison deaths the lower the prison population), look at what they do with people who get arested and NOT sent to a traditional prison or execution. A higher number of people in our prisons just may be a mark in our favor, depending on how the other factors pan out.
This doesn't make what they are doing any more legal. However, it is certainly a result that should get the RIAA to look more carefully at whats going on. If the RIAA is smart(pretty low hopes for that though) they will start there own study to determine why, and start sending out their own Mp3s in a manner which emphasizes what makes Napster users buy more music. Perhaps record companies can release samplers of all their groups on CD? Ask all their artists to select one or two tracks that they believe epitomize the heart of their music, Mp3 them, and send it out on CD for a low price. Or put them up on the web, with links to allow online ordering. Perhaps a for pay Mp3 subscription where you automatically get certain Mp3s emailed to you regularly? Or a free email containing an Mp3 from a groups new album, either a full track or samples of multiple tracks. These tactics will help RIAA turn Mp3 to their side, rather than just pissing off Mp3 users.
I see your point... It still is more appropriate as a.org. Perhaps if the.org/.net/.com/.gov/.mil structure was actually followed correctly, people might just understand it. As for the rest of my comment, the TLD structure is irrelevant to it.
this is an unpopular view hes promoting but far from a troll. Just because we don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be heard. If anything seeing the other side helps us refine our own views and arguments in support of our views.
Bullshit. Who has had a claim to the name Corinthians longer? Christians, who have used it for at least 1500 or so years, or this soccer team?
A case _could_ be made for both having an equal claim, at the most. In a case where two parties have an equal claim to a domain name, whoever registered it first assuming they did not resort to illegal practices to impede the others registration or speed theirs, gets it. Period.
Religion is totally irrelevant in this case. Its a matter of two groups, one with several centuries of use of a term, one with a few decades at best, both wanting it for a domain name. Gee guess whos the obvious winner?
This is wrong. I'm all for freedom of religion, and seperation of church and state and all that stuff.. But this is dumb.
Lets say I go out and register for my family www.worroll.com. And then a company(that probably had rights to the name worroll for less time than my family has been in the USA) decides I'm infringing on their trademark? Who wins?
This is the same thing... A Christian person has as much right to use www.corinthians.com as anyone else, probably moreso due to the age of the context they were using it in. Did this soccer team get the rights to use the name before or after the Christians did? If they did, good call by the judge. Whats that you say? The bible is verifiably older than soccer? Oh well who cares theres more money in soccer. This makes me sick. It makes me scared to use my own name to register a domain. I know theres a magazine named George. I've seen the name Worroll used for a business at least once before, can't remember the business or even business type though... Does this mean that I can't use a name that I have every right to that has been traced back prior to 1900, and is certain to go farther back? This is ludicrous. Shoot the judge. Better yet, someone come up with a legitimate claim to his family name and register it.
Nausicaa movie was horrid. Read the manga... Of course, I haven't seen any anime other than Gunsmith Cats that did the original manga justice, only cutting out the blatantly sexual stuff, but I've only seen one video(Bulletproof, and I'm pretty sure theres at least one other) so maybe that stuff is in the other. the Japanese version of Sailor Moon was good but the manga was still MUCH better. Battle Angel was also a shitty manga-anime conversion.
I'd rather live free in Hell than a slave in heaven. Sure your chances of a violent end are greater here. But the chances that you can rise above the circumstances of your birth are also greater.
If everyone says "I won't do anything cause it won't do any good anyways" then it won't do any good. But if people take a stand publicly like this, more people will notice and may gain that little bit of courage to do it themselves when the time comes. Never give up. As one the best Marine Corps officer I've served with was known for saying, "Die first. Then quit."
From a graphic design standpoint it isn't too bad. The interface except for the popup window thing isn't bad either. What is bad is horribly excessive Javascript. THe splash.htm file sucks too. Does nothing except redirect the user. IT also prevents access completely if you don't have Javascript capability or your support is buggy or turned off. I don't see anything on there that really requires anything other than straight HTML. Can anyone tell me why EVERY hyperlink is in Javascript?? Even the ones that don't pop up new windows? With the exception of the popup windows(if for some reason they insist) the changing photos on the main page(which are actually a nice touch in ths case) and the login... NOTHING on the site requires or should use Javascript. Doing more of it in straight HTML(and most of the stuff Javascript would be OK for could be done in HTML if you wanted). I think the site looks decent... But from a technical analysis from an amateur web designer, its horrible. I can't say if the contract was violated. I do have AOL 4.0 on my laptop(and the idiot who returned it to sears left his account info on it) so I may see if it works in that after work. If it doesn't, and it was in writing in the contract that it has to, then they have grounds to sue. Without a copy of the contract and more time to analyze the site I cant really say if its a breach or not with any certainty.
(Why would you subscribe if you don't already use it?)
Simple. The idly curious. Lets say you never used linux before and have been curious about it. So you want to pick it up. Downloading and installing that way can be a pain in the ass especially if you don't have a CD burner. So you go to the local 7-11 and see this colorful cool looking magazine, Maximum Linux and look for the 7.99 price it includes a Linux CD, not just Linux software but the WHOLE OPERATING SYSTEM. So you buy the magazine, maybe run to the book store to pick up Linux for Dummies or something liek that, or not... and go home and install. Granted, Maximum Linux's install instructions should have been more in depth but for 7.99 getting the OS, a magazine with instructions on installing it, and lots of other articles on the linux community and on using Linux, you can't really beat that as an intro for the idly curious non geek. ITs also a cheap upgrade for those of us who are stuck on a 56k connection.
Normally I only complain that your articles are the only place where the phrase "redundant redundancy" is not at all redundant when describing them. But making a french vandal, who a case could be made against as a terrorist, into the poster child for Independence day???? THis article is offensive trash. Just go to hell.
>>Bzzt! Wrong, scientists are part of the cult of atheism which has attempted to have decent Christian teachings banned in our schools to be replaced with their cold mechanistic view of a "clockwork universe" in which the love of God has no place>>
Religion has NO place in public school. What you must realize is that faith must come from the heart to be worth anything. If I was a christian, no matter how dedicated I was if my faith was not true I'd live a miserable life on earth aping through rituals I don't believe in and end up going to hell anyways. You'd get alot of this false faith if religion(outside of a general study of it and its impact on society) was part of the public school system. People who hate life and go to hell anyways.
Without religion being taught and preached in public schools, people will feel more free to follow their heart... They will be able to develop into good people with a true faith in whatever deity they choose for themselves. In fact, I'd say a greater portion will be true Christians than if Christianity was part of the curriculum, because their following it comes from their heart, not rote repitition. This is one of the reasons the LDS church is the branch of christianity I most respect, they recognize this vital part of religious faith.
And even from a Christian viewpoint... Shouldn't you understand God? Strive to know him? How else to do so than looking at him through his creations? Much more direct and less subject to meddling by medeival Kings with their personal political agendas.
"Assuredly I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel! And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matthew 8:10-12
Gee... Apparently not just Christians get to heaven. This was said referring to a PAGAN Roman Centurion. For the article I got this from, click on this link and ope your eyes. Your god is not so exclusive. click here
And anyways, if Heaven is populated by assholes like you I'll take Hell 500 times worse than even our Creator can imagine.
Probably an MFM drive. Find an old MFM controller, plug it into your ISA slot, and run with it. You may be able to find one at a computer store bargain bin, Ebay, or if not email me and I may be able to get my little brother to part with one.
What is wrong with this??? Most comments I see at 4 or 5 on every discussion are more trollish than this one. So he marked a potentially contreversial part of his post?? If anything that makes him less of a troll.
In all honesty, I'm surprised that Microsoft hasn't pulled out the First Amendment card. As my rant below points out, the First amendment can be interpreted VERY broadly, and even more so than I cover here. And all without even bending the letter of the law(though thoroughly trashing the spirit).
Microsoft... Could claim that their products were primarily conduits of information, and restricting traditional conduits of information such as newspapers cannot be restricted by hampering their abilities to interoperate, thus Microsoft is protected under the first amendment Freedom of the Press. Technically, that fits the letter of the law, not the spirit. Read on for a more in depth exampl regarding the school prayer you brought up.
"Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion"
It is clear that what is intended here is a seperation of religious authority and temporal authority. Having sectarian religious practices performed as part of a governmental occasion is not appropriate. If money, apportioned by the United States Congress, is funding this school in part or in whole, then that means whatever law Congress passed to authorize such funding is helping to establish religion, whether that is the intended result or not, Congress is aiding a group that is establishing expected religious practices.
However, they may be able to challenge this on the grounds of States Rights. To do so they would not be able to accept federal funds for their schools. If the Supreme Court wants to get overly broad, they could make a case that any federal money that gets spent, at all, indirectly funds any state that benefits from it. I mean, you make a federal housing project in a city and put out federal loans to get business going, you benefit that area and the state can spend the money it would have spent dealing with those people, somewhere else, thus they were indirectly funded by the feds.
So the First amendment does cover it. It is perhaps a more broad interpretation than intended, but it can be extrapolated to cover the issue.
Tripods TOS does not allow you to post nudity on your site, and bans hyperlinking to outside sites done for the purpose of getting around their TOS content restrictions.
>the had someone look at all the images that were >flagged.
Which shows that they realize the software is not perfect, and check the results against the best image recognition hardware available, the human eye.
They used the software as it should be used. As a tool to make their enforcement of their TOS more efficient, not as an automatic blocker/account tosser. As blocking software I'd say its next to useless. But as part of a monitoring program where the humans make the final decisions, it can be useful.
Actually, in the US, if prior art exists, the patent is not supposed to be issued. With an overworked(I hope thats the reason) patent office, things slip through. And the patent people being non-technical people, things dealing with computers and such can slip by more easily. If this actually goes to court, BT will lose and their patent will be pulled due to prior art.
Of course, it would have been better that the patent never got issued, but it did, and the US court system will fix that mistake.
Even if the patent was legitimate(burning 8 permanent willpower to say that) there is no way in hell they would win the case. Just imagine how much money is available to fight this. AOL or Microsoft could handle it.. Wait not Microsoft, they lose in court. But EVERY ISP, everyone who runs a webpage who could be added, all the geeks who would donate to the already multibillion dollar legal defense fund... My god they think they can win against that force?
This patent seems to cover pretty much the entire Internet. Remember gopher? It could be navigated by entering a key for the information that you want and brought pages of information to be displayed on your CRT.
Looking further this might not cover HTML... It refers to "The details relating to the page of information may be retained in the computer, for example, in a special register provided for the purpose," which could mean since the details relating to pages in HTML are stored on the terminal, not the server(which is apparently what they mean by "computer") HTML is fine. But what they are trying to patent in 1989 was done on bulletin boards, Gopher, just about any client/server setup prior to the WWW. Even if it covers HTML, it certainly seems to cover those as well. They have no leg to stand on. Every BBS and Gopher system prior to 1989 qualifies as prior art.
There has not been, according to the article, a Doom port with code from all three licenses. It was a hypothetical situation that could happen. Nothing in the article abour it actually happening yet. BTW, what happened with that whole Quake GPL violation Carmack was so pissed about?
This would most likely violate the GPL. If the code you wish to use is under the LGPL(Library(old form) or Lesser(new form) GPL) you might be able to get away with it by setting up the LGPL code as a library. You could also set up the GPL or the closed code as a server, and the other code as a client. If you go the second route, it would probably be a violation of the GPL if you made it so that only your client can communicate with your server. If neither of those strategies will work, you have to
A) Release it all under the GPL. b) Ditch the whole thing. c) Rewrite the GPL'd code
Speaking of option C, how significant must the rewrite be? Could you use a slightly different but still valid syntax and get away with it? Do you have to come up with a totally new method of accomplishing the task?
What if I come up on my own with this bit of code(syntax is probably horrid, apologies)
Something like that (and even a more complex bit) could conceivably be written identically by multiple programmers. For coding conventions that are horribly common like this, can I use it in a closed source program even if its in a GPL program, that I know about? This example assumes I know how common that bit of code is across the board.
Disclaimer: IANAL This would most likely violate the GPL. If the code you wish to use is under the LGPL(Library(old form) or Lesser(new form) GPL) you might be able to get away with it by setting up the LGPL code as a library. You could also set up the GPL or the closed code as a server, and the other code as a client. If you go the second route, it would probably be a violation of the GPL if you made it so that only your client can communicate with your server. If neither of those strategies will work, you have to A) Release it all under the GPL. b) Ditch the whole thing. c) Rewrite the GPL'd code Speaking of option C, how significant must the rewrite be? Could you use a slightly different but still valid syntax and get away with it? Do you have to come up with a totally new method of accomplishing the task? What if I come up on my own with this bit of code(syntax is probably horrid, apologies) #include "iostream.h" main() { cout "Hello World"; return 0; } Something like that (and even a more complex bit) could conceivably be written identically by multiple programmers. For coding conventions that are horribly common like this, can I use it in a closed source program even if its in a GPL program, that I know about? This example assumes I know how common that bit of code is across the board.
Lightsabers have mass only in the handle. The blade itself causes no drag, no weight... That is why in the Star Wars RPG by West End you need to have the Force to use it with any degree of safety. If lightsabers were real, you could overswing and miss with extreme ease, the blade has no weight so it is easy to overcompensate. But there is still the matter of when the two blades impact each other.
Perfect Blue was good. Gunsmith Cats Bulletproof(imagine Girls-With-Guns movie with a Blues Brothers feel) is good too. Battle Angel however... Horrible. They trashed an excellent manga and turned it into a gore fest. The second half of the video was acceptable, but the first half was so totally horrendous that I'd pay more money to buy just the second half and a couple vital scenes with Hugo in the first, than I did for the whole thing. Its just that bad. Nausicaa of the Valley of the wind was similarly massacred. Sailor Moon is great, if you can get past the initial silliness. The movies are awesome. Go for the original Japanese if possible, the series actually has a far darker tone than the American fluff(of course you can make sailor moon ALOT darker before its considered dark on its own merits). The subtitled movies are great, they weren't done by DIC. As with Battle Angel and Nausicaa, the manga is better. Magic Knight Rayearth is another great magical girl series. Rei Rei and Magical Twilight are good for the animated porn stuff, they are funny on their own even without the sex. Macross(translated and strung together with other series as Robotech) and Macross II are good. Ranma 1/2... Imagine a teenage Jackie Chan that changes between male and female, and has suitors in both lives, who are often enemies in the other life. It is hillarious. Wings of Honnemaise is good too.
Slashdot Mirror
We may jail more people... Or we may not. Perhaps we are simply being more honest about how many people we jail, and when we jail them we actually jail them, not "reeducate" them. In a country of 1 billion people, they almost certainly lose track of many thousands of inmates. Also I'd bet the mortality rate in the prison is higher, both from execution and from poor living conditions. What you have to look at isn't just how many are in the typical caged room but how many have been arrested, how many are put into the caged room only to die(the more in prison deaths the lower the prison population), look at what they do with people who get arested and NOT sent to a traditional prison or execution. A higher number of people in our prisons just may be a mark in our favor, depending on how the other factors pan out.
This doesn't make what they are doing any more legal. However, it is certainly a result that should get the RIAA to look more carefully at whats going on. If the RIAA is smart(pretty low hopes for that though) they will start there own study to determine why, and start sending out their own Mp3s in a manner which emphasizes what makes Napster users buy more music. Perhaps record companies can release samplers of all their groups on CD? Ask all their artists to select one or two tracks that they believe epitomize the heart of their music, Mp3 them, and send it out on CD for a low price. Or put them up on the web, with links to allow online ordering. Perhaps a for pay Mp3 subscription where you automatically get certain Mp3s emailed to you regularly? Or a free email containing an Mp3 from a groups new album, either a full track or samples of multiple tracks. These tactics will help RIAA turn Mp3 to their side, rather than just pissing off Mp3 users.
I see your point... It still is more appropriate as a .org. Perhaps if the .org/.net/.com/.gov/.mil structure was actually followed correctly, people might just understand it. As for the rest of my comment, the TLD structure is irrelevant to it.
this is an unpopular view hes promoting but far from a troll. Just because we don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be heard. If anything seeing the other side helps us refine our own views and arguments in support of our views.
Bullshit. Who has had a claim to the name Corinthians longer? Christians, who have used it for at least 1500 or so years, or this soccer team?
A case _could_ be made for both having an equal claim, at the most. In a case where two parties have an equal claim to a domain name, whoever registered it first assuming they did not resort to illegal practices to impede the others registration or speed theirs, gets it. Period.
Religion is totally irrelevant in this case. Its a matter of two groups, one with several centuries of use of a term, one with a few decades at best, both wanting it for a domain name. Gee guess whos the obvious winner?
This is wrong. I'm all for freedom of religion, and seperation of church and state and all that stuff.. But this is dumb.
Lets say I go out and register for my family www.worroll.com. And then a company(that probably had rights to the name worroll for less time than my family has been in the USA) decides I'm infringing on their trademark? Who wins?
This is the same thing... A Christian person has as much right to use www.corinthians.com as anyone else, probably moreso due to the age of the context they were using it in. Did this soccer team get the rights to use the name before or after the Christians did? If they did, good call by the judge. Whats that you say? The bible is verifiably older than soccer? Oh well who cares theres more money in soccer. This makes me sick. It makes me scared to use my own name to register a domain. I know theres a magazine named George. I've seen the name Worroll used for a business at least once before, can't remember the business or even business type though... Does this mean that I can't use a name that I have every right to that has been traced back prior to 1900, and is certain to go farther back? This is ludicrous. Shoot the judge. Better yet, someone come up with a legitimate claim to his family name and register it.
Nausicaa movie was horrid. Read the manga... Of course, I haven't seen any anime other than Gunsmith Cats that did the original manga justice, only cutting out the blatantly sexual stuff, but I've only seen one video(Bulletproof, and I'm pretty sure theres at least one other) so maybe that stuff is in the other. the Japanese version of Sailor Moon was good but the manga was still MUCH better. Battle Angel was also a shitty manga-anime conversion.
I'd rather live free in Hell than a slave in heaven. Sure your chances of a violent end are greater here. But the chances that you can rise above the circumstances of your birth are also greater.
If everyone says "I won't do anything cause it won't do any good anyways" then it won't do any good. But if people take a stand publicly like this, more people will notice and may gain that little bit of courage to do it themselves when the time comes. Never give up. As one the best Marine Corps officer I've served with was known for saying, "Die first. Then quit."
From a graphic design standpoint it isn't too bad. The interface except for the popup window thing isn't bad either. What is bad is horribly excessive Javascript. THe splash.htm file sucks too. Does nothing except redirect the user. IT also prevents access completely if you don't have Javascript capability or your support is buggy or turned off. I don't see anything on there that really requires anything other than straight HTML. Can anyone tell me why EVERY hyperlink is in Javascript?? Even the ones that don't pop up new windows? With the exception of the popup windows(if for some reason they insist) the changing photos on the main page(which are actually a nice touch in ths case) and the login... NOTHING on the site requires or should use Javascript. Doing more of it in straight HTML(and most of the stuff Javascript would be OK for could be done in HTML if you wanted). I think the site looks decent... But from a technical analysis from an amateur web designer, its horrible. I can't say if the contract was violated. I do have AOL 4.0 on my laptop(and the idiot who returned it to sears left his account info on it) so I may see if it works in that after work. If it doesn't, and it was in writing in the contract that it has to, then they have grounds to sue. Without a copy of the contract and more time to analyze the site I cant really say if its a breach or not with any certainty.
(Why would you subscribe if you don't already use it?)
Simple. The idly curious. Lets say you never used linux before and have been curious about it. So you want to pick it up. Downloading and installing that way can be a pain in the ass especially if you don't have a CD burner. So you go to the local 7-11 and see this colorful cool looking magazine, Maximum Linux and look for the 7.99 price it includes a Linux CD, not just Linux software but the WHOLE OPERATING SYSTEM. So you buy the magazine, maybe run to the book store to pick up Linux for Dummies or something liek that, or not... and go home and install. Granted, Maximum Linux's install instructions should have been more in depth but for 7.99 getting the OS, a magazine with instructions on installing it, and lots of other articles on the linux community and on using Linux, you can't really beat that as an intro for the idly curious non geek. ITs also a cheap upgrade for those of us who are stuck on a 56k connection.
Normally I only complain that your articles are the only place where the phrase "redundant redundancy" is not at all redundant when describing them. But making a french vandal, who a case could be made against as a terrorist, into the poster child for Independence day???? THis article is offensive trash. Just go to hell.
>>Bzzt! Wrong, scientists are part of the cult of atheism which has attempted to have decent Christian teachings banned in our schools to be replaced with their cold mechanistic view of a "clockwork universe" in which the love of God has no place>>
Religion has NO place in public school. What you must realize is that faith must come from the heart to be worth anything. If I was a christian, no matter how dedicated I was if my faith was not true I'd live a miserable life on earth aping through rituals I don't believe in and end up going to hell anyways. You'd get alot of this false faith if religion(outside of a general study of it and its impact on society) was part of the public school system. People who hate life and go to hell anyways.
Without religion being taught and preached in public schools, people will feel more free to follow their heart... They will be able to develop into good people with a true faith in whatever deity they choose for themselves. In fact, I'd say a greater portion will be true Christians than if Christianity was part of the curriculum, because their following it comes from their heart, not rote repitition. This is one of the reasons the LDS church is the branch of christianity I most respect, they recognize this vital part of religious faith.
And even from a Christian viewpoint... Shouldn't you understand God? Strive to know him? How else to do so than looking at him through his creations? Much more direct and less subject to meddling by medeival Kings with their personal political agendas.
"Assuredly I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel! And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matthew 8:10-12
Gee... Apparently not just Christians get to heaven. This was said referring to a PAGAN Roman Centurion. For the article I got this from, click on this link and ope your eyes. Your god is not so exclusive.
click here
And anyways, if Heaven is populated by assholes like you I'll take Hell 500 times worse than even our Creator can imagine.
Probably an MFM drive. Find an old MFM controller, plug it into your ISA slot, and run with it. You may be able to find one at a computer store bargain bin, Ebay, or if not email me and I may be able to get my little brother to part with one.
I'll just wait for my trinary!(yes/no/maybe)
Just use open source, they would play QUITE nicely together
If you don't understand, go look up Salon.coms article on sex and hackerdom from a couple weeks ago...
What is wrong with this??? Most comments I see at 4 or 5 on every discussion are more trollish than this one. So he marked a potentially contreversial part of his post?? If anything that makes him less of a troll.
In all honesty, I'm surprised that Microsoft hasn't pulled out the First Amendment card. As my rant below points out, the First amendment can be interpreted VERY broadly, and even more so than I cover here. And all without even bending the letter of the law(though thoroughly trashing the spirit).
Microsoft... Could claim that their products were primarily conduits of information, and restricting traditional conduits of information such as newspapers cannot be restricted by hampering their abilities to interoperate, thus Microsoft is protected under the first amendment Freedom of the Press. Technically, that fits the letter of the law, not the spirit. Read on for a more in depth exampl regarding the school prayer you brought up.
"Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion"
It is clear that what is intended here is a seperation of religious authority and temporal authority. Having sectarian religious practices performed as part of a governmental occasion is not appropriate. If money, apportioned by the United States Congress, is funding this school in part or in whole, then that means whatever law Congress passed to authorize such funding is helping to establish religion, whether that is the intended result or not, Congress is aiding a group that is establishing expected religious practices.
However, they may be able to challenge this on the grounds of States Rights. To do so they would not be able to accept federal funds for their schools. If the Supreme Court wants to get overly broad, they could make a case that any federal money that gets spent, at all, indirectly funds any state that benefits from it. I mean, you make a federal housing project in a city and put out federal loans to get business going, you benefit that area and the state can spend the money it would have spent dealing with those people, somewhere else, thus they were indirectly funded by the feds.
So the First amendment does cover it. It is perhaps a more broad interpretation than intended, but it can be extrapolated to cover the issue.
Tripods TOS does not allow you to post nudity on your site, and bans hyperlinking to outside sites done for the purpose of getting around their TOS content restrictions.
>the had someone look at all the images that were >flagged.
Which shows that they realize the software is not perfect, and check the results against the best image recognition hardware available, the human eye.
They used the software as it should be used. As a tool to make their enforcement of their TOS more efficient, not as an automatic blocker/account tosser. As blocking software I'd say its next to useless. But as part of a monitoring program where the humans make the final decisions, it can be useful.
Actually, in the US, if prior art exists, the patent is not supposed to be issued. With an overworked(I hope thats the reason) patent office, things slip through. And the patent people being non-technical people, things dealing with computers and such can slip by more easily. If this actually goes to court, BT will lose and their patent will be pulled due to prior art.
Of course, it would have been better that the patent never got issued, but it did, and the US court system will fix that mistake.
IANAL-
Even if the patent was legitimate(burning 8 permanent willpower to say that) there is no way in hell they would win the case. Just imagine how much money is available to fight this. AOL or Microsoft could handle it.. Wait not Microsoft, they lose in court. But EVERY ISP, everyone who runs a webpage who could be added, all the geeks who would donate to the already multibillion dollar legal defense fund... My god they think they can win against that force?
This patent seems to cover pretty much the entire Internet. Remember gopher? It could be navigated by entering a key for the information that you want and brought pages of information to be displayed on your CRT.
Looking further this might not cover HTML... It refers to "The details relating to the page of information may be retained in the computer, for example, in a special register provided for the purpose," which could mean since the details relating to pages in HTML are stored on the terminal, not the server(which is apparently what they mean by "computer") HTML is fine. But what they are trying to patent in 1989 was done on bulletin boards, Gopher, just about any client/server setup prior to the WWW. Even if it covers HTML, it certainly seems to cover those as well. They have no leg to stand on. Every BBS and Gopher system prior to 1989 qualifies as prior art.
There has not been, according to the article, a Doom port with code from all three licenses. It was a hypothetical situation that could happen. Nothing in the article abour it actually happening yet. BTW, what happened with that whole Quake GPL violation Carmack was so pissed about?
Disclaimer: IANAL
This would most likely violate the GPL. If the code you wish to use is under the LGPL(Library(old form) or Lesser(new form) GPL) you might be able to get away with it by setting up the LGPL code as a library. You could also set up the GPL or the closed code as a server, and the other code as a client. If you go the second route, it would probably be a violation of the GPL if you made it so that only your client can communicate with your server. If neither of those strategies will work, you have to
A) Release it all under the GPL.
b) Ditch the whole thing.
c) Rewrite the GPL'd code
Speaking of option C, how significant must the rewrite be? Could you use a slightly different but still valid syntax and get away with it? Do you have to come up with a totally new method of accomplishing the task?
What if I come up on my own with this bit of code(syntax is probably horrid, apologies)
#include "iostream.h"
main()
{
cout (("Hello World";
return 0;
}
Something like that (and even a more complex bit) could conceivably be written identically by multiple programmers. For coding conventions that are horribly common like this, can I use it in a closed source program even if its in a GPL program, that I know about? This example assumes I know how common that bit of code is across the board.
Disclaimer: IANAL This would most likely violate the GPL. If the code you wish to use is under the LGPL(Library(old form) or Lesser(new form) GPL) you might be able to get away with it by setting up the LGPL code as a library. You could also set up the GPL or the closed code as a server, and the other code as a client. If you go the second route, it would probably be a violation of the GPL if you made it so that only your client can communicate with your server. If neither of those strategies will work, you have to A) Release it all under the GPL.
b) Ditch the whole thing.
c) Rewrite the GPL'd code
Speaking of option C, how significant must the rewrite be? Could you use a slightly different but still valid syntax and get away with it? Do you have to come up with a totally new method of accomplishing the task? What if I come up on my own with this bit of code(syntax is probably horrid, apologies) #include "iostream.h" main() { cout "Hello World"; return 0; } Something like that (and even a more complex bit) could conceivably be written identically by multiple programmers. For coding conventions that are horribly common like this, can I use it in a closed source program even if its in a GPL program, that I know about? This example assumes I know how common that bit of code is across the board.
Lightsabers have mass only in the handle. The blade itself causes no drag, no weight... That is why in the Star Wars RPG by West End you need to have the Force to use it with any degree of safety. If lightsabers were real, you could overswing and miss with extreme ease, the blade has no weight so it is easy to overcompensate. But there is still the matter of when the two blades impact each other.
Perfect Blue was good. Gunsmith Cats Bulletproof(imagine Girls-With-Guns movie with a Blues Brothers feel) is good too.
Battle Angel however... Horrible. They trashed an excellent manga and turned it into a gore fest. The second half of the video was acceptable, but the first half was so totally horrendous that I'd pay more money to buy just the second half and a couple vital scenes with Hugo in the first, than I did for the whole thing. Its just that bad. Nausicaa of the Valley of the wind was similarly massacred.
Sailor Moon is great, if you can get past the initial silliness. The movies are awesome. Go for the original Japanese if possible, the series actually has a far darker tone than the American fluff(of course you can make sailor moon ALOT darker before its considered dark on its own merits). The subtitled movies are great, they weren't done by DIC. As with Battle Angel and Nausicaa, the manga is better. Magic Knight Rayearth is another great magical girl series. Rei Rei and Magical Twilight are good for the animated porn stuff, they are funny on their own even without the sex. Macross(translated and strung together with other series as Robotech) and Macross II are good. Ranma 1/2... Imagine a teenage Jackie Chan that changes between male and female, and has suitors in both lives, who are often enemies in the other life. It is hillarious. Wings of Honnemaise is good too.