Last time I checked, its illegal to take something that is not yours and you didn't pay for.
That's completely false when we are talking about information (which is the topic here). What about Shakespeare's plays? Or the Linux source code? These things were made by someone else, but I can legally make copies and distribute them without paying anyone.
And it has been that way for thousands of years.
Even if we are talking about copyright infringement here, copyright has only been around a few hundred years.
First of all, we begin with the right to freely copy other people's published work by default. It's a natural thing for humans to do with their culture. It's a natural right. However, it's a bit hard for someone to make a living creating things when anyone can copy them. So copyright is invented. The public waives the right to make copies of works, temporarily. This encourages artists, writers, etc., to make things.
In the pre-digital age, the public wasn't really losing anything: copying things was hard. The liberties lost couldn't be practiced anyway. This made the copyright trade-off, as long as it remained temporary, a great deal.
However, we live in the digital age now, where anything can be massively copied by anyone easily. This trade-off is no longer worth the large cost of lost civil liberties. Also, the system is twisted and corrupt, and copyrights are practically no longer temporary.
We also have this giant, worldwide network whose entire function is to transfer data quickly and cheaply, and we have dozens of protocols for doing it very efficiently. It would be stupid for humankind to not take advantage of the greatest communication system ever devised. Imagine outlawing the printing press when it was invented. It would be extreme myopia to not take advantage of the Internet for the sake of a few individual's short-term profit.
Anyone who is still relying on scarcity of digital information is a buggy whip manufacturer. It's a completely pointless endeavor because copying is so easy and natural, and laws against it are unethical.
Business models need to change so that they do not depend on digital scarcity (and some have changed).
It is definitely not breaking the spec in any manner. When you register an account with Google mail, they give you literally a google (10^100) different e-mail addresses. That's a hell of a lot of addresses. Most people only use one of them.
Where does my mom buy that "Linux" thing? Or is she supposed to find out what Linux is and figure out which distro is good for her?
Not to mention if you do a Google search for "linux" the first result is the worthless linux.org domain squatter. The third result is an "under construction" page.
I guess you missed the HD part of my comment. What I have seen so far is that the HD version will be an MP4 containing a Quicktime stream. It's not flash video junk.
Everyone under here is missing the point. These encryption schemes are all forms of end-to-end encryption, and, as such, wouldn't allow the server to keep logs, which one of the requirements. He needs client/server encryption, which is already provided in XMMP by TLS and SASL.
I haven't seen anyone say that Konami shouldn't be allowed to make and distribute the game. Therein lies the difference. There is no inconsistency here.
It features practically every BASH feature human beings could ever use, while being a tiny fraction of the size.
I am not sure which size you are talking about. If it is the binary size, then on my system (Debian) stripped ksh is 1108044 bytes, and stripped bash is 730856. ksh is bigger here. If we are looking at the process size (and if I am measuring this right), a fresh ksh takes up 831 pages and a fresh bash takes up 975 pages. Hardly a "tiny fraction" in that case.
If we are talking about code base, then you are probably right. I don't feel like checking right now.
I can see why you don't like bash, though. I am getting annoyed with it recently too, especially after the new "smart" auto-completion arrived.
Freedom is to being able to NOT BUY INTO THEIR SHIT.
In many countries we don't even have that choice. They extort money one way or another, such as a musician having to pay other people royalties for playing his own original music or paying a blank media tax. That Ubuntu ISO you burned? You probably paid the music/movie industry royalties for it.
but they're within their rights to disallow us to copy their material without giving them a krona
They only have that right because we the people gave it to them. We did it to encourage them to make lots of stuff. And it is only supposed to be temporary. The deal is broken now, so I don't have to uphold my half of it. I copy as I please, thank you.
Slashdot Mirror
12.7 MW sounds a bit low. Even a DeLorean could generate 1.21 GW.
I'm sure that in your time plutonium is available in every corner drug store, but in 2009 it's a little hard to come by.
that people don't have the right to the product of their own ideas, etc.
No one has the right to control public information. It isn't property.
Take the high road and support individual rights across the board, and reject government intervention in the economy.
Copyright is government intervention. Individual rights is opposed to copyright law, as copyright is entirely about removing individual rights.
Last time I checked, its illegal to take something that is not yours and you didn't pay for.
That's completely false when we are talking about information (which is the topic here). What about Shakespeare's plays? Or the Linux source code? These things were made by someone else, but I can legally make copies and distribute them without paying anyone.
And it has been that way for thousands of years.
Even if we are talking about copyright infringement here, copyright has only been around a few hundred years.
First of all, we begin with the right to freely copy other people's published work by default. It's a natural thing for humans to do with their culture. It's a natural right. However, it's a bit hard for someone to make a living creating things when anyone can copy them. So copyright is invented. The public waives the right to make copies of works, temporarily. This encourages artists, writers, etc., to make things.
In the pre-digital age, the public wasn't really losing anything: copying things was hard. The liberties lost couldn't be practiced anyway. This made the copyright trade-off, as long as it remained temporary, a great deal.
However, we live in the digital age now, where anything can be massively copied by anyone easily. This trade-off is no longer worth the large cost of lost civil liberties. Also, the system is twisted and corrupt, and copyrights are practically no longer temporary.
We also have this giant, worldwide network whose entire function is to transfer data quickly and cheaply, and we have dozens of protocols for doing it very efficiently. It would be stupid for humankind to not take advantage of the greatest communication system ever devised. Imagine outlawing the printing press when it was invented. It would be extreme myopia to not take advantage of the Internet for the sake of a few individual's short-term profit.
Anyone who is still relying on scarcity of digital information is a buggy whip manufacturer. It's a completely pointless endeavor because copying is so easy and natural, and laws against it are unethical.
Business models need to change so that they do not depend on digital scarcity (and some have changed).
I don't think you understand how powerful package managers are. Or how they work. You should try one sometime.
Once he's been bought off, he STAYS bought off.
Look on the bright side: at the very least he's being consistent!
Wow. I got this joke immediately. I feel uber-geeky.
Soca, his eyes open!
This is a little bit like the way Freenet works, but it also has a bunch of performance-cost anonymizing measures in place too.
Oh, whoops! Thanks for the correction. I feel like an idiot now. :-P
Has it ever occured to you that maybe Microsoft has a monopoly because users don't want more variants of OS's?
They have it thanks to shady and unethical business practices.
It is definitely not breaking the spec in any manner. When you register an account with Google mail, they give you literally a google (10^100) different e-mail addresses. That's a hell of a lot of addresses. Most people only use one of them.
Where does my mom buy that "Linux" thing? Or is she supposed to find out what Linux is and figure out which distro is good for her?
Not to mention if you do a Google search for "linux" the first result is the worthless linux.org domain squatter. The third result is an "under construction" page.
Unfortunately, funding shortages and other considerations have made it more difficult for museums to collect animals as often as they did in the past.
YOU CAN'T CUT BACK ON FUNDING, YOU WILL REGRET THIS!
like playing your starters against their backups.
Could you change that into a car analogy? Thanks!
Then if Google pays up they append this to it,
Winners never quit!
I guess you missed the HD part of my comment. What I have seen so far is that the HD version will be an MP4 containing a Quicktime stream. It's not flash video junk.
they even let people download the original video
youtube-dl - you can grab the HD videos too.
Everyone under here is missing the point. These encryption schemes are all forms of end-to-end encryption, and, as such, wouldn't allow the server to keep logs, which one of the requirements. He needs client/server encryption, which is already provided in XMMP by TLS and SASL.
OTR is end-to-end encryption and wouldn't allow the server to keep logs, which is what is needed.
I haven't seen anyone say that Konami shouldn't be allowed to make and distribute the game. Therein lies the difference. There is no inconsistency here.
He can code if we wants to. He can leave his friends behind. 'Cause his friends don't code and if they don't code, well they're no friends of mine.
It features practically every BASH feature human beings could ever use, while being a tiny fraction of the size.
I am not sure which size you are talking about. If it is the binary size, then on my system (Debian) stripped ksh is 1108044 bytes, and stripped bash is 730856. ksh is bigger here. If we are looking at the process size (and if I am measuring this right), a fresh ksh takes up 831 pages and a fresh bash takes up 975 pages. Hardly a "tiny fraction" in that case.
If we are talking about code base, then you are probably right. I don't feel like checking right now.
I can see why you don't like bash, though. I am getting annoyed with it recently too, especially after the new "smart" auto-completion arrived.
Freedom is to being able to NOT BUY INTO THEIR SHIT.
In many countries we don't even have that choice. They extort money one way or another, such as a musician having to pay other people royalties for playing his own original music or paying a blank media tax. That Ubuntu ISO you burned? You probably paid the music/movie industry royalties for it.
but they're within their rights to disallow us to copy their material without giving them a krona
They only have that right because we the people gave it to them. We did it to encourage them to make lots of stuff. And it is only supposed to be temporary. The deal is broken now, so I don't have to uphold my half of it. I copy as I please, thank you.
I like that idea. From now on all my friends and family get a signed photograph of me for their birthdays. They'll love it.