Despite the fact that I myself am a starving college student, I'd be interested in getting in on this.
I think you've got the idea wrong though. What the article is suggesting is that shareholders nominate a representative to vote in their place at a shareholder meeting (the term proxy). To start up a group to do this, all you'd need is an efficient way of filing the paperwork for each shareholder to be represented by the entity we're trying to create.
What it seems you're trying to do, along with half of slashdot, is to get people to pool their money and buy a big chunk of shares. The article only mentions this because it saves on commissions. This is a good idea, but to get this entity off the ground faster, wouldn't it be easier to just sign over proxy votes?
Since I have absolutely NO experience in investing, I'd be cautious about sending an organization money to buy stock for me. However I'd be glad to sign over a vote that I have no other way of getting voiced.
Hmmm, sounds like the same basic story. Someone writes a program that CAN, but was not originaly intended to, be used to do something illegal. How long will it be before these programs have preliminary injunctions slapped against them?
`Protection under this chapter shall not be available for a design that is-- `(4) dictated solely by a utilitarian function of the article that embodies it;
What does that mean? What about this:
`(f) REVERSE ENGINEERING- (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
`(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.
`(3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law other than this section.
`(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term `interoperability' means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged.
There seems to be a fine line between use for interoperability and intent to circumvent encryption. Can someone enlighten me on this?
A more fitting way to describe this may be to say that your VCR can record any cable channel. However you cannot watch it on your television unless you purchase a key from the cable company. Well what if you have 2 televisions, and one of them isn't capable of using the provided key to let you watch the recording. You ask the cable company for a key to let you watch it, and they offer to sell you another one. So you figure out what makes your first television let you watch the recording, and apply that to your other television. Now you did pay for a key, so you should be able to watch it on anything you want. That's all that's been done here.
The means now in use, Content Scramble System or CSS, is an encryption-based security and authentication system that requires the use of appropriately configured hardware such as a DVD player or a computer DVD drive to decrypt, unscramble and play back, but not copy, motion pictures on DVDs.
What he is saying is that the current legal DVD players do not allow you to copy DVD's. Did nobody tell him that you can do a bit for bit copy without the DeCSS?
CSS has facilitated enormous growth in the use of DVDs for the distribution of copyrighted movies to consumers.
What he really means is that when they were selling the DVD format to the picture companies, they lied to them and said that CSS would prevent copying. Therefore, armed with CSS the MPAA started producing millions of DVDs. But what about VHS? Don't need a decryption program to watch those, so let's forget about them.
The Motion Picture Association of America ("MPAA'') almost immediately acted under the provisions of the DMCA by demanding that Internet service providers remove DeCSS from their servers and, where the identities of the individuals responsible were known, that those individuals stop posting DeCSS. These efforts succeeded in removing a considerable share of the known postings of DeCSS.
So now ISP's are content providers?
They contend that plaintiffs' posting of DeCSS violates Section 1201(a)(2) of the statute, which prohibits unauthorized offering of products that circumvent technological measures that effectively control access to copyrighted works.
IANAL, however wouldn't purchasing a DVD give you the right to gain access to the DVD?
"[C]ircumvent a technological measure'' is defined to mean descrambling a scrambled work, decrypting an encrypted work, or "otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner.''11 The statute explains further that "a technological measure `effectively controls access to a work' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to a work.''12
Again, how is it that purchasing a DVD is not considered the consent of the copyright holder to allow you to view the copyrighted material?
They contend that DeCSS is necessary to achieve interoperability between computers running on the Linux system and DVDs and that this exception therefore is satisfied.20 This contention fails for three reasons.
First, defendants have offered no evidence to support this assertion.
If this is true, then the lawyers for the defense really dropped the ball here. Would it really have been that difficult to show DeCSS running on Linux?
Second, even assuming that DeCSS runs under Linux, it concededly runs under Windows---a far more widely used operating system---as well. It therefore cannot reasonably be said that DeCSS was developed "for the sole purpose'' of achieving interoperability between Linux and DVDs.
Is the Judge speaking for those who developed it? How the hell does he know exactly why they developed DeCSS? Because that's what the MPAA said? They didn't develop it, so how could they know? And why didn't the defendants explain why it was developed on Windows first?
Finally, and most important, the legislative history makes it abundantly clear that Section 1201(f) permits reverse engineering of copyrighted computer programs only and does not authorize circumvention of technological systems that control access to other copyrighted works, such as movies.21 In consequence, the reverse engineering exception does not apply.What about for system interoperability? Doesn't the lack of a DVD player for Linux proove this point?
The dissemination and use of circumvention technologies such as DeCSS would permit anyone to make flawless copies of DVDs at little expense.52 Without effective limits on these technologies, copyright protection in the contents of DVDs would become meaningless and the continued marketing of DVDs impractical. This obviously would discourage artistic progress and undermine the goals of copyright.
The Defense didn't show that copying a DVD using DeCSS would be 1)expensive, 2)DeCSS is not necessary for copying a DVD, 3)and making ONE personal copy for backup purposes is still legal.
I hope that when this goes to trial the Judge and Jury have at least SOME common sense.
Funny I can take the material that I supposedly "memorized" and apply it in various situations (such as posting to slashdot) without just reciting the things chapter and verse.
Because you can spew the information out in a different form than what you learned shows that you did more than merely memorize the information. This is where standardized tests lack. There is so much information on them that there is hardly enough time to cover the subjects, let alone get involved to the point where you can show that you understand the actions and reasons behind it. How does testing your vocabulary do this?
Could someone please tell me in the late 20th century early 21st century in America how exactly can one *not* get a HS education? Maybe if they have a severe series of operations or maybe they are physically beaten up on the way to school then it might prevent this. However even the poorest student in the USA has some local school where he/she can get access to education.
What if you do not want to get it? There are plenty of people that I went to high school with who were not there to learn. They never did any work, they *frequently* skipped classes and they still managed to get a high school diploma. Many of them even dropped out because they just didn't see a need to wate all day at school when they weren't learning anything. You are correct only if you add that you have to want to get a HS diploma.
So colleges now become the centers of remedial education. These people will undoubtally end up taking level 0900 classes or equivelent and not starting out in freshmen level classes like the rest of the people.
This will happen in some colleges. Just as high schools graduate kids that cannot read, some colleges will lower their standards. I suppose lots of colleges who feel the need/requirement to diversify their student body might lower their standards with the impression that it would increase minority students. Any institution that does this however also shows that they believe that the minorities are less intelligent; according to the standarized tests they are. Just because they are testing out a new way to asses the students does not mean that they are not capable of college level courses. The tests are designed to FIND these students who can perform. The students have been reccomended by high school counselors, administrators and teachers. Then selected students were further weeded out by the colleges before they were allowed to take the "Lego" test. Don't assume that because they had difficulty on the standardized tests that they are less intelligent.
It would be intersting to give the "Lego" test to students who did well on the standardized tests. Would it show that those who can take standardized tests well are less qualified than those who took the "Lego" test? If it weren't so time consuming it might even be beneficial to an institution to asses all incoming students this way. It certainly gives a student more of a chance to show what they can do. But then again, what if you did miserable on the "Lego" test but scored a 1600 on your SAT's? Would the university deny you?
I've been fiddling with this for a while now. Every time I save it, notepad will only allow me to save it as a.txt file. If I put the period after it, it still comes out as.txt. Is there any extension at all for it?
Just patent your business plan. When some other company uses it just sue them for all they're worth. Or at least enough to get your own company off the ground.
Re:Dumb Laws of Pennsylvania
on
Dumb Laws
·
· Score: 1
Same law in Greene NY during a concert. There must be a story here.
etoy should have suggested that eToys.com move to a.us domain. I bet that would get some laughs.
Keyboard of the "Future"
on
Interface Zen
·
· Score: 1
Forget about where you want the CONTROL key to be placed, what about the "internet" key, or "sleep" or the ones that control the CD player?
I don't consider myself a hacker, and the only code I write is HTML, but I have found a keyboard that seems to work quite well for me.Check it out It's the one in the top left. This is an ergonomic keyboard on steroids. It looks really difficult to get used to, but I will never go back to a straight keyboard again. It took about one week to get used to. The arrow keys are arranged in a circle, below the gap in the space bar. Which brings up another question, when I learned how to type, we were only supposed to press the space bar with the right thumb, so I don't get why they'd take up so much room with it on the left half of the keyboard. The ESCAPE key is all by itself in the corner, very difficult to get it confused with any other key. However, the banished keys, insert, end, home, etc. are radicly differently placed and will take a lot of adjusting.
The more expensive version of this keyboard comes with a touch pad inside the arrow keys, which could be controlled with the left thumb rather easily. I find this arrow setup to be ideal for gaming, as there is absolutely no way to get the arrows confused, and while you're holding one of the arrows down, the entire left half of the keyboard is easily accessible.
Another of the really noticeable features of this keyboard is that the numeric pad is completely separate from the letters, this means that if space is at a premium, you can unplug it, or tuck it towar the back of your keyboard tray then slide it forward to crunch some numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you've got the idea wrong though. What the article is suggesting is that shareholders nominate a representative to vote in their place at a shareholder meeting (the term proxy). To start up a group to do this, all you'd need is an efficient way of filing the paperwork for each shareholder to be represented by the entity we're trying to create.
What it seems you're trying to do, along with half of slashdot, is to get people to pool their money and buy a big chunk of shares. The article only mentions this because it saves on commissions. This is a good idea, but to get this entity off the ground faster, wouldn't it be easier to just sign over proxy votes?
Since I have absolutely NO experience in investing, I'd be cautious about sending an organization money to buy stock for me. However I'd be glad to sign over a vote that I have no other way of getting voiced.
Hmmm, sounds like the same basic story. Someone writes a program that CAN, but was not originaly intended to, be used to do something illegal. How long will it be before these programs have preliminary injunctions slapped against them?
`Protection under this chapter shall not be available for a design that is--
`(4) dictated solely by a utilitarian function of the article that embodies it;
What does that mean? What about this:
`(f) REVERSE ENGINEERING- (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
`(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.
`(3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law other than this section.
`(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term `interoperability' means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged.
There seems to be a fine line between use for interoperability and intent to circumvent encryption. Can someone enlighten me on this?
A more fitting way to describe this may be to say that your VCR can record any cable channel. However you cannot watch it on your television unless you purchase a key from the cable company. Well what if you have 2 televisions, and one of them isn't capable of using the provided key to let you watch the recording. You ask the cable company for a key to let you watch it, and they offer to sell you another one. So you figure out what makes your first television let you watch the recording, and apply that to your other television. Now you did pay for a key, so you should be able to watch it on anything you want. That's all that's been done here.
What he is saying is that the current legal DVD players do not allow you to copy DVD's. Did nobody tell him that you can do a bit for bit copy without the DeCSS?
CSS has facilitated enormous growth in the use of DVDs for the distribution of copyrighted movies to consumers.
What he really means is that when they were selling the DVD format to the picture companies, they lied to them and said that CSS would prevent copying. Therefore, armed with CSS the MPAA started producing millions of DVDs. But what about VHS? Don't need a decryption program to watch those, so let's forget about them.
The Motion Picture Association of America ("MPAA'') almost immediately acted under the provisions of the DMCA by demanding that Internet service providers remove DeCSS from their servers and, where the identities of the individuals responsible were known, that those individuals stop posting DeCSS. These efforts succeeded in removing a considerable share of the known postings of DeCSS.
So now ISP's are content providers?
They contend that plaintiffs' posting of DeCSS violates Section 1201(a)(2) of the statute, which prohibits unauthorized offering of products that circumvent technological measures that effectively control access to copyrighted works.
IANAL, however wouldn't purchasing a DVD give you the right to gain access to the DVD?
"[C]ircumvent a technological measure'' is defined to mean descrambling a scrambled work, decrypting an encrypted work, or "otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner.''11 The statute explains further that "a technological measure `effectively controls access to a work' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to a work.''12
Again, how is it that purchasing a DVD is not considered the consent of the copyright holder to allow you to view the copyrighted material?
They contend that DeCSS is necessary to achieve interoperability between computers running on the Linux system and DVDs and that this exception therefore is satisfied.20 This contention fails for three reasons.
First, defendants have offered no evidence to support this assertion.
If this is true, then the lawyers for the defense really dropped the ball here. Would it really have been that difficult to show DeCSS running on Linux?
Second, even assuming that DeCSS runs under Linux, it concededly runs under Windows---a far more widely used operating system---as well. It therefore cannot reasonably be said that DeCSS was developed "for the sole purpose'' of achieving interoperability between Linux and DVDs.
Is the Judge speaking for those who developed it? How the hell does he know exactly why they developed DeCSS? Because that's what the MPAA said? They didn't develop it, so how could they know? And why didn't the defendants explain why it was developed on Windows first?
Finally, and most important, the legislative history makes it abundantly clear that Section 1201(f) permits reverse engineering of copyrighted computer programs only and does not authorize circumvention of technological systems that control access to other copyrighted works, such as movies.21 In consequence, the reverse engineering exception does not apply.What about for system interoperability? Doesn't the lack of a DVD player for Linux proove this point?
The dissemination and use of circumvention technologies such as DeCSS would permit anyone to make flawless copies of DVDs at little expense.52 Without effective limits on these technologies, copyright protection in the contents of DVDs would become meaningless and the continued marketing of DVDs impractical. This obviously would discourage artistic progress and undermine the goals of copyright.
The Defense didn't show that copying a DVD using DeCSS would be 1)expensive, 2)DeCSS is not necessary for copying a DVD, 3)and making ONE personal copy for backup purposes is still legal.
I hope that when this goes to trial the Judge and Jury have at least SOME common sense.
Because you can spew the information out in a different form than what you learned shows that you did more than merely memorize the information. This is where standardized tests lack. There is so much information on them that there is hardly enough time to cover the subjects, let alone get involved to the point where you can show that you understand the actions and reasons behind it. How does testing your vocabulary do this?
Could someone please tell me in the late 20th century early 21st century in America how exactly can one *not* get a HS education? Maybe if they have a severe series of operations or maybe they are physically beaten up on the way to school then it might prevent this. However even the poorest student in the USA has some local school where he/she can get access to education.
What if you do not want to get it? There are plenty of people that I went to high school with who were not there to learn. They never did any work, they *frequently* skipped classes and they still managed to get a high school diploma. Many of them even dropped out because they just didn't see a need to wate all day at school when they weren't learning anything. You are correct only if you add that you have to want to get a HS diploma.
So colleges now become the centers of remedial education. These people will undoubtally end up taking level 0900 classes or equivelent and not starting out in freshmen level classes like the rest of the people.
This will happen in some colleges. Just as high schools graduate kids that cannot read, some colleges will lower their standards. I suppose lots of colleges who feel the need/requirement to diversify their student body might lower their standards with the impression that it would increase minority students. Any institution that does this however also shows that they believe that the minorities are less intelligent; according to the standarized tests they are. Just because they are testing out a new way to asses the students does not mean that they are not capable of college level courses. The tests are designed to FIND these students who can perform. The students have been reccomended by high school counselors, administrators and teachers. Then selected students were further weeded out by the colleges before they were allowed to take the "Lego" test. Don't assume that because they had difficulty on the standardized tests that they are less intelligent.
It would be intersting to give the "Lego" test to students who did well on the standardized tests. Would it show that those who can take standardized tests well are less qualified than those who took the "Lego" test? If it weren't so time consuming it might even be beneficial to an institution to asses all incoming students this way. It certainly gives a student more of a chance to show what they can do. But then again, what if you did miserable on the "Lego" test but scored a 1600 on your SAT's? Would the university deny you?
John Lavioe
Anyone want to write some plug-ins for Netscape, IE or Mozilla?
I've been fiddling with this for a while now. Every time I save it, notepad will only allow me to save it as a .txt file. If I put the period after it, it still comes out as .txt. Is there any extension at all for it?
Just patent your business plan. When some other company uses it just sue them for all they're worth. Or at least enough to get your own company off the ground.
Same law in Greene NY during a concert. There must be a story here.
Couldn't a judge just order NSI to pull the domain name? Not that I really know anything about this sort of thing, but just a guess.
etoy should have suggested that eToys.com move to a .us domain. I bet that would get some laughs.
I don't consider myself a hacker, and the only code I write is HTML, but I have found a keyboard that seems to work quite well for me.Check it out It's the one in the top left. This is an ergonomic keyboard on steroids. It looks really difficult to get used to, but I will never go back to a straight keyboard again. It took about one week to get used to. The arrow keys are arranged in a circle, below the gap in the space bar. Which brings up another question, when I learned how to type, we were only supposed to press the space bar with the right thumb, so I don't get why they'd take up so much room with it on the left half of the keyboard. The ESCAPE key is all by itself in the corner, very difficult to get it confused with any other key. However, the banished keys, insert, end, home, etc. are radicly differently placed and will take a lot of adjusting.
The more expensive version of this keyboard comes with a touch pad inside the arrow keys, which could be controlled with the left thumb rather easily. I find this arrow setup to be ideal for gaming, as there is absolutely no way to get the arrows confused, and while you're holding one of the arrows down, the entire left half of the keyboard is easily accessible.
Another of the really noticeable features of this keyboard is that the numeric pad is completely separate from the letters, this means that if space is at a premium, you can unplug it, or tuck it towar the back of your keyboard tray then slide it forward to crunch some numbers.