I'm rereading my copy of The Axemaker's Gift by James Burke, and I just got past the bit about the Industrial Revolution. Frankly, I felt pretty disgusted by the manipulation that took place for the sake of wealthy factory-owners. I mean, the Victorians wrote hymns to be sung in church intended to brainwash the working class into accepting the fact that they'd die working stiffs. Unfortunately, just as I started to think, "we have it so much better now," the painful realization hit me that we're just repeating history. Take a good look at the Victorian era and the Industrial Revolution, and you'll see some shocking similarities to our situation today. Then, people were faceless units of production. Today, we're faceless units of consumption.
I guess this was kinda offtopic, but I just felt like bringing that out. Read the book, too. Especially if you're a James Burke fan.
No, I suppose we wouldn't. But they won't work for us 'cause we don't have gobs of liquid cash to fling at them. And even if we did, would they risk pissing off their real customers? Kindly remove your head from your butt.
My PC has a really funky Asus motherboard. It was designed to take either a dual pentium or dual pentium pro daughtercard that had the actual sockets on it. I think the selling point was supposed to be that when upgrade time came around, all you'd have to replace would be the daughtercard. Doesn't look like it worked that way though, as it looks like they abandoned the concept.
On a lighter note, getting that motherboard into the midtower case I had was my first experience with hardware hacking. You see, the 3 1/2" drive bays got in the way of the daughtercard, which is as long as the motherboard and sticks out perpendicular. So I had to make a trip to Wal-Mart to get a hacksaw... I ended up sawing on it outside the dorm in the courtyard to keep from covering the lobby carpet with metal shavings, so everyone who walked by got a good laugh.
Centralizing this creates not just a single-point-of-failure, but would facilitate censorship. It need not be formal policy; merely a quiet sandbagging of "unpopular" works.
Excellent point. Who watches the watchmen? Frankly, we don't have enough oversight in our present system to determine whether our tax dollars are getting used responsibly... This basically boils down to needing a requirement for independant oversight. Isn't the Fed kept to some independant standard of behavior?
Who would define the pay scale? What is the relative worth of a Harry Potter book when compared with an Esperanto translation of Proust?
I want to say that every creative work is of equal worth. However, that's incredibly naive. Especially considering the fact that somebody could lock a few thousand monkeys in a room with some typewriters and then claim the result as a creative work... I don't mean to say that an IP creator can't attempt to make money from distribution. Autographed copies of books, for instance, would be a good suggestion for a revenue stream. The one-time fee is to guarantee creators a minimum return on their work. After that, it's all market forces.
What about intellectual properties that have literally dozens of creators (like film: producers, directors, screenwriters, script doctors, cinematographers, sound designers, etc.)? Corporations can create, too.
And when they do, they pander to the least common denominator and don't produce anything of real value. Three different Scream movies??? What sort of value did we get out of that? Seriously, the corporate generation of "content" is what has gotten us into this bind in the first place.
Doesn't this buck the trend of privatization that's been going on for the last couple of decades? I mean, there are private prisons in Texas, fer chrissake.
And I hope for our sakes that neither of us ever ends up in one. Just because it's privatized doesn't mean it's any better. It just means it's cheaper. Now, I'm not a big fan of "prisoner perks", but are people actually getting any sort of rehabilitation out of these facilities? I'm probably off base here, but I get the feeling that the state-run institutions are a little more willing to offer genuine ways for criminals to become contributing members of society after their sentences are up.
That said, I think the biggest problem with this idea is that it would take a constitutional amendment or two to implement...:) However, it's a pretty good gedanken exercise...
As I understand it, the irony itself is the point of the GPL. It's a tounge-in-cheek comment on the state of copyright law. It is, in short, RMS's practical joke. You're supposed to see the irony in the situation.
Of course, I suppose understanding it is a totally different ball of wax.
Ok. This is going to get buried under the heap, but maybe somebody will be willing to debate me on it.
Proposal: reform the patent and copyright system so that it pays an up-front fee out of taxes in exchange for putting IP into the public domain. This would only be payable to the original creator, of course (corporations need not apply). Better yet, detach this office from the "official" Federal Government, much the way the Fed works. That way creators of IP get income from it, but we can get all the copies we want for free. In fact, this encourages creative activities even more than the present system, because to get more money, you need to create more IP.
Problems, of course, abound.
1) The restrictions on prior art and such would have to be tightened profoundly. However, I think the only reason USTAPO sits on it's ass on this is that it doesn't directly cost the government money when a frivolous patent goes through the system. It's the consumers who bear the economic brunt.
2) Jesse Helms doesn't want his taxes going to subsidize the publishing of Hefty Hooters Magazine. I'm tempted to say "tough shit". I wouldn't want to have to pay for any IP generated by the Christian Coalition either, but I'd be willing to make the sacrifice for the sake of freedom.
So, my question is... Does anyone have constructive arguments on why this wouldn't work?
Actually, from what I understand, the brain actually prunes paths as a child grows. In other words, a newborn has the most braincells it will ever have in its life, and the number declines from there. Maybe logic becomes fuzzier as the pathways are pruned and individual neurons start performing multiple functions...
Even more ironic is the fact that PEthicalTA had the same thing happen to their site, ringlingbros.com. Apparently they were protesting the circus' treatment of animals on the site, and got sued... I guess they figured they had precedent behind them to go after PEatingTA...
We're not living in a capitalist society. We're living in a consumerist society.
Back when capitalism was first concieved as an economic system, it was stipulated that the market would be driven by informed consumers, who would vote with their money for the best product at the best price and everything would click along nicely. What we have now is uninformed consumers blindly plopping down their money for shoddy goods that they really don't need. You're absolutely right in your analysis otherwise though. --Fesh
Sounds like an urban legend, but if true they need to be nominated for a Darwin Award... Since even if they survived, the sterilization was probably permanent... What the hell could they have been thinking?
TIMMY: "Mr. Lizard, what would happen if I tried to temporarily sterilize myself with a shipboard radar set?"
MR. LIZARD: "Well, Timmy, I just happen to have a shipboard radar set right here! Why don't you stand in front of it for five minutes while I get behind this lead shield!"
Humming, zapping sounds
TIMMY: "Oooh, my insides are tingling!"
MR. LIZARD: "Just a little longer, Timmy..."
TIMMY bursts into flames and crumples in a pile of ashes. MR. LIZARD pokes his head from behind the LEAD SHIELD.
Girl? Try Gungan. I firmly predict that when Episode II comes out, the face behind the mask of the universe's most kick-ass bounty hunter will be none other than that of Jar-Jar Binks. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Of course, I'm staying well away from any rumors which might in any way spoil it for me...
His device broke a single laser beam into 20 sub-beams and recombined them into a spot about an inch across that could move anywhere across an 8 inch circle.
Sounds an awful like a description of the SuperTurbolaser on the Death star... *grin* Star Wars technology inspired by Star Wars... Gotta love it. --Fesh
Heh, and I remember my GEOS disks eating themselves within days... Of course, everyone else I've talked to says that they never had any problems, so it probably means that our floppy drive was hopelessly out of alignment... I guess. Or were they running one of those funky copy protection schemes? I remember clearly the fact that they encouraged making backup disks...
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. Can a click be considered a binding signature when you can go and sign documents with an "X" in meatspace? (Not that one would want to, but as far as I know, making a mark is just as valid a signature as writing your name [IANAL]...)
Offtopic, but had I been drinking coffee when I read this, I probably would have ended up executing the command... *laugh*
--Fesh
Re:Ask not for whom the bell tolls...
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, and now there's a booming market in conversion boards to convert Slot 1 to just about anything you'd happen to want. Intel's not dead because their efforts to lock in the consumer were ineffective. As soon as a company's efforts to lock a consumer's freedom of choice becomes effective, that's when the shit hits the fan. It almost renews my faith in humanity... Almost.
Hehehe! I doubt the drafters of the law were this vague, but if the law didn't specifically say computer virus, imagine the possibilities! You could prosecute Mormons, $cientologists, and Jehova's Witnesses for intentionally spreading thought viruses!
I want more information on the "beatings and burglaries" bit that they were talking about... Are they forced to give hard evidence in court that these events actually occured and that they were directly linked to the work of the victims? Or can they just assert this without backing it up? This sounds very vague and contrived to me
I agree that information that could be used to identify the deposition-givers should not be disclosed... That's just good sense. But to withhold relevant information bearing on the case itself is definitely un-kosher.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess this was kinda offtopic, but I just felt like bringing that out. Read the book, too. Especially if you're a James Burke fan.
--Fesh
--Fesh
--Fesh
Holy Roman Empire, Batman!
--Fesh
On a lighter note, getting that motherboard into the midtower case I had was my first experience with hardware hacking. You see, the 3 1/2" drive bays got in the way of the daughtercard, which is as long as the motherboard and sticks out perpendicular. So I had to make a trip to Wal-Mart to get a hacksaw... I ended up sawing on it outside the dorm in the courtyard to keep from covering the lobby carpet with metal shavings, so everyone who walked by got a good laugh.
--Fesh
Excellent point. Who watches the watchmen? Frankly, we don't have enough oversight in our present system to determine whether our tax dollars are getting used responsibly... This basically boils down to needing a requirement for independant oversight. Isn't the Fed kept to some independant standard of behavior?
Who would define the pay scale? What is the relative worth of a Harry Potter book when compared with an Esperanto translation of Proust?
I want to say that every creative work is of equal worth. However, that's incredibly naive. Especially considering the fact that somebody could lock a few thousand monkeys in a room with some typewriters and then claim the result as a creative work... I don't mean to say that an IP creator can't attempt to make money from distribution. Autographed copies of books, for instance, would be a good suggestion for a revenue stream. The one-time fee is to guarantee creators a minimum return on their work. After that, it's all market forces.
What about intellectual properties that have literally dozens of creators (like film: producers, directors, screenwriters, script doctors, cinematographers, sound designers, etc.)? Corporations can create, too.
And when they do, they pander to the least common denominator and don't produce anything of real value. Three different Scream movies??? What sort of value did we get out of that? Seriously, the corporate generation of "content" is what has gotten us into this bind in the first place.
Doesn't this buck the trend of privatization that's been going on for the last couple of decades? I mean, there are private prisons in Texas, fer chrissake.
And I hope for our sakes that neither of us ever ends up in one. Just because it's privatized doesn't mean it's any better. It just means it's cheaper. Now, I'm not a big fan of "prisoner perks", but are people actually getting any sort of rehabilitation out of these facilities? I'm probably off base here, but I get the feeling that the state-run institutions are a little more willing to offer genuine ways for criminals to become contributing members of society after their sentences are up.
That said, I think the biggest problem with this idea is that it would take a constitutional amendment or two to implement... :) However, it's a pretty good gedanken exercise...
--Fesh
--Fesh
Of course, I suppose understanding it is a totally different ball of wax.
--Fesh
Proposal: reform the patent and copyright system so that it pays an up-front fee out of taxes in exchange for putting IP into the public domain. This would only be payable to the original creator, of course (corporations need not apply). Better yet, detach this office from the "official" Federal Government, much the way the Fed works. That way creators of IP get income from it, but we can get all the copies we want for free. In fact, this encourages creative activities even more than the present system, because to get more money, you need to create more IP.
Problems, of course, abound.
1) The restrictions on prior art and such would have to be tightened profoundly. However, I think the only reason USTAPO sits on it's ass on this is that it doesn't directly cost the government money when a frivolous patent goes through the system. It's the consumers who bear the economic brunt.
2) Jesse Helms doesn't want his taxes going to subsidize the publishing of Hefty Hooters Magazine. I'm tempted to say "tough shit". I wouldn't want to have to pay for any IP generated by the Christian Coalition either, but I'd be willing to make the sacrifice for the sake of freedom.
So, my question is... Does anyone have constructive arguments on why this wouldn't work?
--Fesh
--Fesh
--Fesh
--Fesh
--Fesh
Back when capitalism was first concieved as an economic system, it was stipulated that the market would be driven by informed consumers, who would vote with their money for the best product at the best price and everything would click along nicely. What we have now is uninformed consumers blindly plopping down their money for shoddy goods that they really don't need. You're absolutely right in your analysis otherwise though.
--Fesh
TIMMY: "Mr. Lizard, what would happen if I tried to temporarily sterilize myself with a shipboard radar set?"
MR. LIZARD: "Well, Timmy, I just happen to have a shipboard radar set right here! Why don't you stand in front of it for five minutes while I get behind this lead shield!"
Humming, zapping sounds
TIMMY: "Oooh, my insides are tingling!"
MR. LIZARD: "Just a little longer, Timmy..."
TIMMY bursts into flames and crumples in a pile of ashes. MR. LIZARD pokes his head from behind the LEAD SHIELD.
MR. LIZARD: "We're going to need another Timmy!"
--Fesh
--Fesh
Sounds an awful like a description of the SuperTurbolaser on the Death star... *grin* Star Wars technology inspired by Star Wars... Gotta love it.
--Fesh
--Fesh
--Fesh
"You mean they're fish boots?"
Sorry... Just had to throw that in. Suicide Kings, folks... The only movie I know of that stars both Dennis Leary and Christopher Walken.
--Fesh
Offtopic, but had I been drinking coffee when I read this, I probably would have ended up executing the command... *laugh*
--Fesh
--Fesh
Lincoln: Elected in 1860
Garfield: Elected in 1880
McKinley: Elected in 1900
Kennedy: Elected in 1960
Reagan: Elected in 1980
Looks like we're about due... *grin*
(Note for the humor-impaired: Yes, I left out Jackson, both Roosevelts, and Truman. More info can be found here.)
--Fesh
--Fesh
I agree that information that could be used to identify the deposition-givers should not be disclosed... That's just good sense. But to withhold relevant information bearing on the case itself is definitely un-kosher.
--Fesh