Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Novell the stewards of UNIX?
No. According to the dictionary definition of the word, a "Steward" manages another's property (not their own).
Novell is not a steward of UNIX, they own it.
However, the implication of your statement is correct, namely, the SCO Group is not a steward of UNIX either. Novell has revoked their privelege of being a steward (license reseller) for violating the terms of their contract, something SCO is of course neglecting to tell anyone.
Congress needs to get a clue. When they relaxed regulation of utilities my bills went up and service went down. This happens every time because greed will always overcome intelligent business practices.
Congress knows exactly what it is doing, and every congressperson probably understands those consiquences perfectly.
You erroneously assume your "representative" gives a hoot about you, the increast costs you bear, or the inherent unfairness and inaccessiblity of a monopoly marketplace.
They don't. The care far more about the bribes *cough* campaign contributions they receive from the monopolists. What you are witnessing is a positive feedback loop, where the monopolists get ever richer, the rest of us get ever poorer, and the ever richer have ever more money to buy ever more politicians and legislation.
It will not end well, for any of us, and the cyle appears to be too far gone to stop.
But of course, last time I expounded on another set of symptoms of this trend I was accused of advocating armed revolt, when in fact I was expressing fear and concern that such is probably going to happen in our lifetimes, and the hope that I would be elsewhere if and when it does. I expect the amateur right-wing spinmeisters to do the same in this thread, so let me say clearly that, while I think catastrophic failure of our society, politically, economically, and socially is becoming all but inevitable thanks to shit like this (and a thousand other things that have been done over the last few years, some worse, some not as bad, all combining to undermine the basic democratic foundations of our society), I by no means desire this. In fact, quite the opposite--I wish fervently to be wrong and would gladly accept being laughed at over being right about this. Unfortunately, I don't think I am--though I'm sure those currently digging our grave will find a way to blame "Liberals" for the consiquences of their policies just the same (but I digress).
Yeah. I know this is a bad thing. But I'm starting to suffer from 'outrage fatigue'. It's getting damn tiring hearing about our rights being eroded and getting angry about it.
That is exactly what they count on, and why they win.
From the RIAA/MPAA on down to Bush Junior, they simply brazen it out and do what they like, the will of the people and the good of society/their country/their neighbors be damned.
They know our energy to feel outrage and fight them is far less than the amount of atrocity and abuse they can heap on us, and thus the lowest common demonominator governance wins.
Welcome to the New World Order. All Your Thoughts Belong to Us, and Are a Violation of Our Copyright.
One wonders if that could not be done cheaper in a vacuum chamber on earth
Yeah, but not nearly as much fun.:-)
Seriously, if they had used a vacuum chamber on Earth they would have had to simulate extreme heat and cold (passing from sunlight to shadow), radiation levels, etc. All of which are subject to guestimates and error.
Far better to stick a little mouse in the cargo hold along with the gyroscope and everything else they're taking up there anyway, and get the science exactly right without introducing simulation errors into the experiment.
You have only one vote in a representative democracy, and usually it comes down to voting for one of two parties, so it is a yes or no.
That's an excuse for violent revolution? Holy shit! Go read the grandparent post. That's what he was advocating as a solution to patents.
Yes, please do go read the grandparent post. In true Republican spinmeister fashion, this jackass is misquoting me and implying I stated the exact opposite of what was actually written, as part of a straw man attack against my argument, probably because he takes exception to my disapproval of right-wing idiots touting the "Golden Rule" as though it were some kind of social truism when in fact it is (a) a symptome of rampent, self-destructive corruption and (b) designed to foster attitudes that allow such corruption to run even more rampent.
I said I fear that the course we are on will lead to violent upheaval, that patents are merely a symptom of a greater underlying issue, and that I doubted they would be the catalyst of violence, though they certainly help to foster an environment where conducting business and making a living is ever more difficult for average folk, at the behest of the ruling elite, and thus potentially add fuel to the fire.
Expressing concern and fear is not advocacy, indeed it is the opposite. Clearly, however, logic and critical thinking are skills beyond the ken of those so proud to be to the right of Ghengis Khan.
If your read the article to the end, you'll notice the passage that they put some material samples in a bag to see how they fare in open space environment. Well, let this to be told: one of these samples was a LIVE MOUSE !
Hmmm... that's one very expensive mousetrap.
On a more serious note, I imagine they're running this experiment to prepare for the eventual necessity of resusitating a human after exposure to vacuum. We use animals in medical experiments, to test new food additives, and even to make sure our beauty products are safe for people.
So, unless you want to give up medical research, beauty products, and dozens of other things that we take for granted--and need to ascertain are safe before they come to market--get over it. They aren't tortuing animals for the thrill of it, they're doing important science designed to save human lives, and regardless of what propoganda may be coming out of the mouths of PETA zealots, human life is more valuable than animal life. That's why we eat the critters and wear their skins, after all (or have you never owned a pair of leather shoes?).
If you think patents are evil enough that you're willing to violently reorganize society to get rid of them, then you need to talk to your psychiatrist about adjusting your medication.
Learn to read.
I never advocated violently reorganizing society, nor did I say patents would be a reason for it (in fact, I stated the opposite).
What I stated was that the architectures of control, designed to strip the average person of their ability to compete on a level playing field with established players, i.e. patents and copyrights, are a symptom of a greater problem, that of corporate (moneyed) control of our government, and that such memes as "the Golden Rule" actively foster such a situation. I further stated that such a situation, where the people are disempowered, creates an unstable situation where the only possible means of change is reduced to one of violence. At that point, it is not a question of if, it is a question of when, violent revolution will come, and what the catalyst will be.
Get over your misguided patriotism. You have nothing to be "proud" about for happening to be born on a particular piece of land, and your worship of your country is misguided. Try looking at the broader, historical picture, and the path the current corrupt regime has placed us on.
In other words, open your eyes, and stop trying to put up straw man arguments that have nothing to do with anything I have said, such as my "being willing to violently reorganize society to get rid of [patents]" when I have clearly and unequivocably stated the opposite.
Expressing concern and fear of a trend and its future consiquences is not, and never has been, the same as advocating such an event. Quite the opposite, as grade school reading comprehension courses, which you appear to need remedial help in, would clarify.
Holy cow, man. What kind of crap do they feed you over there?
Well, since "over there" would be the United States, what's your point? Open your eyes, try getting your news from a source other than Fox, and gain a little perspective. The current administration is systematically wrecking every democratic institution we have, placing us squarely on a path that can only lead to rather dire consiqences. But go ahead, launch ad hominem attacks against the messenger and live in denial.
And don't come crying to me, or anyone else, when the consiquences come and bite you in the ass.
This despicable, toxic, and inaccurate meme needs to die the death it so richly deserves, before it becomes a self-fulfilling expectation that takes all of society down into the toilet from which it was spawned.
Those who have the gold make the rules....until the rabble (that's us, folks) get fed up with it and decide to topple the entire system, society and all. Which typically happens shortly after such notions as yours become commonly accepted.
Historical examples include the American War of Independence, the French Revolution, the Bolschevik Revolution, and others.
At the end of the day, the people can and do excersize final veto power of the almighty [insert favorite currency here]. The Europeans are fortunate enough to have a functioning democratic system of sorts, and a politically involved electorate that keeps money from becoming the sole determinator of public policy. The United States, unfortunately, does not, and is probably as a result much closer to a societal reboot through violent uprising and discontent.
I once said I hoped to never live to see the day--not only because such scenerios are horrible in and of themselves, but because, as horrible as they are, the excesses of the ruling elite are generally just as bad when they precipitate such action from the people.
I no longer have hope that such a day won't come while I'm still alive (assuming I live a normal, reasonably expected lifespan). Now I merely hope to be elsewhere when it does.
Not that it will happen because of patents, or copyright abuses, or any number of other architectures of control we've come to accept over the centuries. Though they certainly play a part in adding fuel to the fire through the impoverishment of all of us they create, the catalyst will almost certainly be something else (probably something none of us are thinking about at the moment). Could be as simple as hunger after a Monsanto seed shipment fails and our sterile crops leave us with no seed corn, and no crops, the following year (and ensuing mass starvation), or it could be as complex as religious, social, and political manueverings that topple a separation of church and state and leave one sect in power abusing all the others (along with those of us who believe in "none of the above") and fomenting a violent backlash to their abuses. Who knows?
What is clear is that the cynical dismissal of our democratic institutions, as encouraged, even insisted upon, by the stupid notion that money is the sole, or even the dominant, factor in public policy in a normal, healthy democracy such as we once had, is the foundation of such a scenerio, where the people stop participating in or even believing in their civil society and let things rot until the only possible scenerios left all result in oppression and violent uprisings, successful or not, against said oppression.
The US is perilously close to such a state right now--perhaps even past the point of no return (though I sincerely hope not). There is absolutely no good reason to export the stupid memes we've bought into, that have brought us to this place, to those who thus far have been wise enough to actually be engaged in politics and make a difference.
Oh, and in case you forgot, it wasn't money that determined the outcome of the European Software Patent debate. It was political involvement by activists and the people, and the side with much, much less power, money, and influence ultimately won, through sheer logic, lobbying, and activism. So much for your "golden rule."
America may be too far gone for recovery, but Europe clearly is not.
These laws are ridiculous. I don't care if they are legal, they aren't in the spirit of freedom (in the sense of living in a free country).
The United States is not a free country, and hasn't been for quite some time (at least 2000, arguably since much earlier).
Just this week, in Chicago, a prominant Republican was fired from his job for coming out against Chicago Mayor Daley. His employer feared their association with such a strong (and outspoken) dissenter from the City's One True Party(tm) would hamper their business. Given the level of corruption in this town, from the Mayor on down, they were probably right.
Democrats are routinely fired from jobs when their employers are Bush supporters and they are not. Not always, obviously, but with surprising frequency, particularly if said employee is successful in their promotion of their political ideals and actually manages to get media attention.
In a free country, it would be as illegal to fire someone for persuing their political agenda in their free time (no matter how successfully, and how much media attention they receive) as it is to fire a person for being black, an athiest for being an athiest, or a woman for being a woman.
If an employer or other powerful entity can threaten your livelihood, your ability to provide yourself and your family with food and shelter, for excersizing political dissent, then you are not free in any meaningful, non-doublespeak sense of the word.
However, it is perfectly legal in the United States for companies to fire people for exactly this reason, and it is done very frequently, making a sick joke of every freedom our constitution was designed to protect.
Non-compete clauses are just an ugly extention of the fact that we do not live in anything resembling even superficially a free society anymore, but rather are little more than drones living in a Corpratist Fascist state, with little to no real self-determination, and at perpetual risk of severe, even crippling, economic retaliation if any of our efforts at political dissent are ever seen as partiuclarly effective. This problem pervades everything, and affects everyone, Republican, Democrat, independent, liberal, conservative, secular, religious, male, female, black, white, green and purple alike. If you aren't part of the "in group" in power, your right to expression is severely curtailed, as will be your paycheck if you try to excersize it.
Welcome to the New World Order. It bears more resemblence to the political realities of the twelfth century than it does the ideals of our founding fathers and the rhetorical whitewashing of today.
This is NOT about the UN looking out for the best interests of the world population. This is NOT about liberating the internet from the evil Americans. This will NOT impact censorship or any freedoms that we enjoy on the internet.
This is about the UN trying to get control and power where they currently have none. They want this power so that they can be more like a government. The problem is, they are a treaty organization, not a government. They are not elected. They are not accountable to the people they want to govern.
Exactly right. I'm all for the world setting up an alternative set of more egalitarian root servers, but ICANN is hardly a democratically run organization, and has, quite frankly, demonstrated even more corruption than Verisign in this context (and that's saying a lot).
People forget that the UN's constituents aren't the people of the world, their constituents are the governments, most of whom are actively oppressing the people. Expecting liberation from a body that, by and large, represents oppressors, and certainly represents rulers, is a fool's bet.
Okay, Jeff Bezos claims he gets these patents defensively to prevent someone else from getting them and suing Amazon. But the effort he goes to in convincing the patent office they're even valid seems enormous.
He didn't use his rediculous "one-click" patent defensively against Barnes and Noble, unless your definition of defense includes either "a good offense" (which is effectively just doublespeak for negating the difference between two antonyms) or "no competition whatsoever," which is today's business monopolist's notion of "a free market."
Either way, Bezos is a despicable, disingenous, antisocial jerk who is working the system to the detriment of the internet, technologists, and the free market.
If the terrorists want to kill you at 30k feet...... then you die. Seriously, do you really believe terrorists won't be using strong encryption, knowing their data packets are probably being sniffed by the feds. This isn't going to stop a single terrorist--all it will do is allow greater snooping with less oversight on regular civilians going about their lives, who happen to take a commercial flight and use the net at the same time.
Here's something I never understood about the liberals on this site. They're all for making technological advancements that improve productivity and make things faster and easier for everyone, but then they complain when the feds wants to use this technology to make THEIR jobs faster and easier.
Here's something I never understood about the humanitarians on this site. They're all for making technological advancements that improve health, safety, and quality of life, but then they complain when the feds want to use this technology to improve THEIR ability to kill en masse.
See the flaw in your reasoning?
People object because technology, like everything else, is a double edged sword. It can improve people's lives, add to our quality of living, and empower us. It can also be used as a tool for unprecidented oppression. Most of us support and are working hard for the former, and vehemently decry steps toward the latter.
That having been said, in this particular case, there is no expectation of privacy on board a public, commercial aircraft (private aircraft are another story, and should be treated like private automobiles or homes), so I don't really have a problem with the feds (or anyone else) tapping communications on board a commercial airliner. You don't conduct private business on a busy street corner with dozens of (probably evesdropping) bystanders, nor would any sensible person do so in a public aircraft. But one can make credible, even compelling, arguments that this sort of laxidasical attitude toward authority evesdropping on private conversations in any context, be it a public street, a commercial flight, or a private residence, amounts to the same level of inappropriate intrusion by government into private life, particularly when infrastructure makes such capabilities the default, and court oversight becomes more and more a rubber stamp for letting the feds do whatever they like, whenever they like, often with little or no real justification.
Finally, your characterization of people encouraging what they see as a good use of technology and decrying what they see as a bad use of the same technology is disingenuous. Most people (myself included) don't embrace technology for technology's sake--we embrace it insofar as it enhances our lives and our freedoms, and reject its use when we see it being exploited to do the opposite.
For the most part these patents only exist to create some sort of nuclear stalemate - where your competitors are too afraid to sue you since it's certain that they violate some of your patents.
You're joking, right? Surely you aren't really that naive.
Amazon has already sued Barnes and Noble for "violating" (read: independently developing) one-click purchasing capabilities on their competing website. In other words, Barns and Noble were competing, in age old fashion, by trying to make their on-line store at least as convinient and easy to use as their competitors' (Amazon, in this case).
Amazon is doing anything but collecting a portfolio of defensive patents...they are actively stockpiling offensive weapons to use against any competitor, anywhere, for any reason they like. Usually that reason is because said competitor is simply too successful for Bezos' taste.
Add to that his sleazy misrepresentation of PriorArt as an anti-patent cooperative (when in fact he was using it as his own private research group for strengthening his own patents), and you have one asocial prick. He may be a rich and successful asocial prick, and he may have built a company that, despite its despicable patent record, does have redeaming qualities (I buy on Amazon occasionally, and as a book shop it is quite good. However, as an "inventor" it leaves a lot to be desired), but his actions define him, nevertheless, as an asocial prick.
Christians wave gay hate signs, and athiests try to get every reference to the 10 commandments removed.
Yeah, because asking to have Christian dogma removed from (ostensibly) secular government institutions (such as ostensibly fair and balanced courts of law) is oh so similar to waving hate signs and encouraging violence against an oppressed minority.
Right.
One side is commiting significantly worse offenses than the other, and that would be the Taliban American Style religious right, whether it is trying to return women to the status of State and Church chattel for nine months if they should have the misfortune of becoming empregnated (be it via gang-rape, or simply because the local fundamentalist pharamacist refuses to sell a woman birth control--don't laugh, it is happening in Milwaukee, Wisconsin as I type this), encouraging hate crimes against gays (and encoding discrimination against those people into law), taking over our schools and turning them from secular places of education to weekday sunday school slash religious propoganda centers, or dissolving the separation of church and state entirely.
I don't approve of any misguided athiest doing any sort of vandalism, but compared to the full on assault by the American Taliban against the founding pillars of American Secular Democracy, what they have done pales by comparison so much as to be negligable.
Is anyone else tired of all this dietary/health "science" telling you what you should and should not be eating, and what you should or should not be doing? [...] All this research seems to contradict itself every few years anyway.
Every few years? Try every few weeks . . . which brings us to:
Cattle mutilations are up. Which means... you guessed it! A glut of beef in the market, and our Dietary Overlords, I mean, uh, "nutritionists" declaring that Atkins is back in again!
Low carb will be replaced again by low fat once the beef glut (and mad cow disease scare) is over, which in turn will be replaced by the magical mystery popcorn diet after record bumper harvests this fall.
The Ice Cream Diet as the sole US RDA compliant diet is on the backburner until the dairy industry coughs up the required bribe, I mean, "campaign contribution."
Oh, and get your hands off that bacon and eggs! Neither are on this week's approved list(tm), infidel.
Yes... because that structure of thought really worked well for the "war on drugs". When will they ever learn!
"They" have learned perfectly:
'Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia. Since the beginning of your life, since the beginning of the Party, since the beginning of history, the war has continued without a break, always the same war. Do you remember that?'
War on Drugs, War on Terror, War on Copyright Violators, and the forthcoming War on Patent Violators will be no different.
Welcome to the new world order. Second Verse, same as the first.
* In a few years Windows will be competitive with Linux for clusters
Yeah, but is it true? I'm rather doubtful windows will ever be competative with Linux for clusters.
Longhorn will be "supercocmpetitive" with apache.
Again, how much "truth" is there in this statement? Longhorn remains vaporous, and when it finally ships (late), will it be competative based on features, security, or deliberately introduced incompatabilities?
Is it the case thah people can see through the fud, so they're concentrating on reality?
No, its the case of more FUD, misrepresentations, and outright lies masquerading as the "truth." The difference is, lying about their own products, particularly ones that don't exist yet, isn't quite as transparent as lying about existing products that consistently and demonstrably perform better and cheaper than Microsoft asserts.
Or they will more intelligently do neither saying "Anyone can modify our open source client to do whatever they want, for whatever reason they want."
Do you really think google doens't understand open source?
I think you make a very good point. This is perhaps more of an example of Google "doing no evil", creating a tool that, by default, for most casual users, promotes their video feed, while at the same time using a good free software project that allows those who want to, to bypass this setting.
If most people find the restriction onerous, they'll download a patched version (probably from websites that are also offering video). Social and market dynamics can take care of the rest. It seems a fairly reasonable position for Google to take ("we'll try this restriction, and if people really find it offensive, they'll modify the source and outcompete our offering, and we can write it off to experience and not try imposing these sorts of restrictions again. Either way, it probably won't affect our video feed business much.")
I doubt very much it is incompetence--google has much of the best talent around--nor is it a lack of understanding opensource/free software on the part of google, as they've been active in the community for many years.
If we don't keep those religious zelots in check in the ME (and they do want the distruction of western civilization, can't argue it any other way), eventually an atomic bomb will be smuggled in.
"If we don't keep those religious zelots in check in the USA (and they do want the distruction of western secular society, can't argue it any other way), eventually all our freedoms will be subjugated by the Church[1]"
You illegally parked the word "technecally". Just so you know.
Your use of the trademarked phrase "just so you know"(tm) violates my trademark, and my intellectual property.
You may send your check, in the amount of $1,000,000, to the following address, or face legal repurcussions.
I 0wn U Sucka 600 Financial Way RapeTheMasses, WA 37337 United Corporate States of America
Thank you,
W. Own Itall, esq. Attorney in Law
Disclaimer: the aforementioned is entirely fictional, a joke, meant as humor. Anyone taking it seriously has an IQ lower than that of the guy who started this thread misrepresenting the poster as endorsing copyright infringement, when in fact what was endorsed was a new marketing strategy of selling content via the Internet directly to the viewership. No rights reserved, do with this post what you like. Excessive repetition can have rare but serious side effects, including splitting of sides, damaged and abraded knees, and a general melting of the brain. Compliant with all F.C.C. Part 666 regulations for a class FU device.
Try a remedial course in reading
on
P2P and TV
·
· Score: 1
Frankly, I'm all for this method of distribution, as I barely watch 'regular' TV anymore.
Only on slashdot is stealing* encouraged and applauded when it involves Television, music, and movie copyrights, but God forbid anybody violates the GPL.
*Yes i know it's not technically stealing.
Good Lord, your statement is so full of holes it must either be a troll or a sign of a one-digit IQ.
First, distributing a copy of a pilot that is destined for the dustbin isn't even the moral equivelent of jaywalking, much less "stealing", regardless of its legality.
Second, the quote you so misrepresented was, when taken in context, clearly not lauding the illegal sharing of said file (despite the fact that said sharing has demonstrably helped the project), it was lauding the notion of releasing pilots on the internet and selling the series as a DVD-set in place of broadcasting it on telelvision.
This is the model that could eliminate the cultural middlemen (the broadcast industry) that has created a vast cultural wasteland where art and creativity should be flourishing, an dinstead allow artists to bring their creations directly to the appreciative citizen.
That is what was being lauded, and everyone with the exception of the monopolist cartels you are shilling stands to benefit from it.
Slashdot Mirror
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Novell the stewards of UNIX?
No. According to the dictionary definition of the word, a "Steward" manages another's property (not their own).
Novell is not a steward of UNIX, they own it.
However, the implication of your statement is correct, namely, the SCO Group is not a steward of UNIX either. Novell has revoked their privelege of being a steward (license reseller) for violating the terms of their contract, something SCO is of course neglecting to tell anyone.
Congress needs to get a clue. When they relaxed regulation of utilities my bills went up and service went down. This happens every time because greed will always overcome intelligent business practices.
Congress knows exactly what it is doing, and every congressperson probably understands those consiquences perfectly.
You erroneously assume your "representative" gives a hoot about you, the increast costs you bear, or the inherent unfairness and inaccessiblity of a monopoly marketplace.
They don't. The care far more about the bribes *cough* campaign contributions they receive from the monopolists. What you are witnessing is a positive feedback loop, where the monopolists get ever richer, the rest of us get ever poorer, and the ever richer have ever more money to buy ever more politicians and legislation.
It will not end well, for any of us, and the cyle appears to be too far gone to stop.
But of course, last time I expounded on another set of symptoms of this trend I was accused of advocating armed revolt, when in fact I was expressing fear and concern that such is probably going to happen in our lifetimes, and the hope that I would be elsewhere if and when it does. I expect the amateur right-wing spinmeisters to do the same in this thread, so let me say clearly that, while I think catastrophic failure of our society, politically, economically, and socially is becoming all but inevitable thanks to shit like this (and a thousand other things that have been done over the last few years, some worse, some not as bad, all combining to undermine the basic democratic foundations of our society), I by no means desire this. In fact, quite the opposite--I wish fervently to be wrong and would gladly accept being laughed at over being right about this. Unfortunately, I don't think I am--though I'm sure those currently digging our grave will find a way to blame "Liberals" for the consiquences of their policies just the same (but I digress).
Yeah. I know this is a bad thing. But I'm starting to suffer from 'outrage fatigue'. It's getting damn tiring hearing about our rights being eroded and getting angry about it.
That is exactly what they count on, and why they win.
From the RIAA/MPAA on down to Bush Junior, they simply brazen it out and do what they like, the will of the people and the good of society/their country/their neighbors be damned.
They know our energy to feel outrage and fight them is far less than the amount of atrocity and abuse they can heap on us, and thus the lowest common demonominator governance wins.
Welcome to the New World Order. All Your Thoughts Belong to Us, and Are a Violation of Our Copyright.
One wonders if that could not be done cheaper in a vacuum chamber on earth
:-)
Yeah, but not nearly as much fun.
Seriously, if they had used a vacuum chamber on Earth they would have had to simulate extreme heat and cold (passing from sunlight to shadow), radiation levels, etc. All of which are subject to guestimates and error.
Far better to stick a little mouse in the cargo hold along with the gyroscope and everything else they're taking up there anyway, and get the science exactly right without introducing simulation errors into the experiment.
That would have been funnier if I said it right. I wear all-cotton clothing, it's the only proper way to keep cool in the heat.
:-)
It's hilarious either way. Pass the A-1, would you please?
You have only one vote in a representative democracy, and usually it comes down to voting for one of two parties, so it is a yes or no.
That's an excuse for violent revolution? Holy shit! Go read the grandparent post. That's what he was advocating as a solution to patents.
Yes, please do go read the grandparent post. In true Republican spinmeister fashion, this jackass is misquoting me and implying I stated the exact opposite of what was actually written, as part of a straw man attack against my argument, probably because he takes exception to my disapproval of right-wing idiots touting the "Golden Rule" as though it were some kind of social truism when in fact it is (a) a symptome of rampent, self-destructive corruption and (b) designed to foster attitudes that allow such corruption to run even more rampent.
I said I fear that the course we are on will lead to violent upheaval, that patents are merely a symptom of a greater underlying issue, and that I doubted they would be the catalyst of violence, though they certainly help to foster an environment where conducting business and making a living is ever more difficult for average folk, at the behest of the ruling elite, and thus potentially add fuel to the fire.
Expressing concern and fear is not advocacy, indeed it is the opposite. Clearly, however, logic and critical thinking are skills beyond the ken of those so proud to be to the right of Ghengis Khan.
If your read the article to the end, you'll notice the passage that they put some material samples in a bag to see how they fare in open space environment. Well, let this to be told: one of these samples was a LIVE MOUSE !
... that's one very expensive mousetrap.
Hmmm
On a more serious note, I imagine they're running this experiment to prepare for the eventual necessity of resusitating a human after exposure to vacuum. We use animals in medical experiments, to test new food additives, and even to make sure our beauty products are safe for people.
So, unless you want to give up medical research, beauty products, and dozens of other things that we take for granted--and need to ascertain are safe before they come to market--get over it. They aren't tortuing animals for the thrill of it, they're doing important science designed to save human lives, and regardless of what propoganda may be coming out of the mouths of PETA zealots, human life is more valuable than animal life. That's why we eat the critters and wear their skins, after all (or have you never owned a pair of leather shoes?).
If you think patents are evil enough that you're willing to violently reorganize society to get rid of them, then you need to talk to your psychiatrist about adjusting your medication.
Learn to read.
I never advocated violently reorganizing society, nor did I say patents would be a reason for it (in fact, I stated the opposite).
What I stated was that the architectures of control, designed to strip the average person of their ability to compete on a level playing field with established players, i.e. patents and copyrights, are a symptom of a greater problem, that of corporate (moneyed) control of our government, and that such memes as "the Golden Rule" actively foster such a situation. I further stated that such a situation, where the people are disempowered, creates an unstable situation where the only possible means of change is reduced to one of violence. At that point, it is not a question of if, it is a question of when, violent revolution will come, and what the catalyst will be.
Get over your misguided patriotism. You have nothing to be "proud" about for happening to be born on a particular piece of land, and your worship of your country is misguided. Try looking at the broader, historical picture, and the path the current corrupt regime has placed us on.
In other words, open your eyes, and stop trying to put up straw man arguments that have nothing to do with anything I have said, such as my "being willing to violently reorganize society to get rid of [patents]" when I have clearly and unequivocably stated the opposite.
Expressing concern and fear of a trend and its future consiquences is not, and never has been, the same as advocating such an event. Quite the opposite, as grade school reading comprehension courses, which you appear to need remedial help in, would clarify.
Holy cow, man. What kind of crap do they feed you over there?
Well, since "over there" would be the United States, what's your point? Open your eyes, try getting your news from a source other than Fox, and gain a little perspective. The current administration is systematically wrecking every democratic institution we have, placing us squarely on a path that can only lead to rather dire consiqences. But go ahead, launch ad hominem attacks against the messenger and live in denial.
And don't come crying to me, or anyone else, when the consiquences come and bite you in the ass.
The Golden Rule still applies
...until the rabble (that's us, folks) get fed up with it and decide to topple the entire system, society and all. Which typically happens shortly after such notions as yours become commonly accepted.
This despicable, toxic, and inaccurate meme needs to die the death it so richly deserves, before it becomes a self-fulfilling expectation that takes all of society down into the toilet from which it was spawned.
Those who have the gold make the rules.
Historical examples include the American War of Independence, the French Revolution, the Bolschevik Revolution, and others.
At the end of the day, the people can and do excersize final veto power of the almighty [insert favorite currency here]. The Europeans are fortunate enough to have a functioning democratic system of sorts, and a politically involved electorate that keeps money from becoming the sole determinator of public policy. The United States, unfortunately, does not, and is probably as a result much closer to a societal reboot through violent uprising and discontent.
I once said I hoped to never live to see the day--not only because such scenerios are horrible in and of themselves, but because, as horrible as they are, the excesses of the ruling elite are generally just as bad when they precipitate such action from the people.
I no longer have hope that such a day won't come while I'm still alive (assuming I live a normal, reasonably expected lifespan). Now I merely hope to be elsewhere when it does.
Not that it will happen because of patents, or copyright abuses, or any number of other architectures of control we've come to accept over the centuries. Though they certainly play a part in adding fuel to the fire through the impoverishment of all of us they create, the catalyst will almost certainly be something else (probably something none of us are thinking about at the moment). Could be as simple as hunger after a Monsanto seed shipment fails and our sterile crops leave us with no seed corn, and no crops, the following year (and ensuing mass starvation), or it could be as complex as religious, social, and political manueverings that topple a separation of church and state and leave one sect in power abusing all the others (along with those of us who believe in "none of the above") and fomenting a violent backlash to their abuses. Who knows?
What is clear is that the cynical dismissal of our democratic institutions, as encouraged, even insisted upon, by the stupid notion that money is the sole, or even the dominant, factor in public policy in a normal, healthy democracy such as we once had, is the foundation of such a scenerio, where the people stop participating in or even believing in their civil society and let things rot until the only possible scenerios left all result in oppression and violent uprisings, successful or not, against said oppression.
The US is perilously close to such a state right now--perhaps even past the point of no return (though I sincerely hope not). There is absolutely no good reason to export the stupid memes we've bought into, that have brought us to this place, to those who thus far have been wise enough to actually be engaged in politics and make a difference.
Oh, and in case you forgot, it wasn't money that determined the outcome of the European Software Patent debate. It was political involvement by activists and the people, and the side with much, much less power, money, and influence ultimately won, through sheer logic, lobbying, and activism. So much for your "golden rule."
America may be too far gone for recovery, but Europe clearly is not.
These laws are ridiculous. I don't care if they are legal, they aren't in the spirit of freedom (in the sense of living in a free country).
The United States is not a free country, and hasn't been for quite some time (at least 2000, arguably since much earlier).
Just this week, in Chicago, a prominant Republican was fired from his job for coming out against Chicago Mayor Daley. His employer feared their association with such a strong (and outspoken) dissenter from the City's One True Party(tm) would hamper their business. Given the level of corruption in this town, from the Mayor on down, they were probably right.
Democrats are routinely fired from jobs when their employers are Bush supporters and they are not. Not always, obviously, but with surprising frequency, particularly if said employee is successful in their promotion of their political ideals and actually manages to get media attention.
In a free country, it would be as illegal to fire someone for persuing their political agenda in their free time (no matter how successfully, and how much media attention they receive) as it is to fire a person for being black, an athiest for being an athiest, or a woman for being a woman.
If an employer or other powerful entity can threaten your livelihood, your ability to provide yourself and your family with food and shelter, for excersizing political dissent, then you are not free in any meaningful, non-doublespeak sense of the word.
However, it is perfectly legal in the United States for companies to fire people for exactly this reason, and it is done very frequently, making a sick joke of every freedom our constitution was designed to protect.
Non-compete clauses are just an ugly extention of the fact that we do not live in anything resembling even superficially a free society anymore, but rather are little more than drones living in a Corpratist Fascist state, with little to no real self-determination, and at perpetual risk of severe, even crippling, economic retaliation if any of our efforts at political dissent are ever seen as partiuclarly effective. This problem pervades everything, and affects everyone, Republican, Democrat, independent, liberal, conservative, secular, religious, male, female, black, white, green and purple alike. If you aren't part of the "in group" in power, your right to expression is severely curtailed, as will be your paycheck if you try to excersize it.
Welcome to the New World Order. It bears more resemblence to the political realities of the twelfth century than it does the ideals of our founding fathers and the rhetorical whitewashing of today.
This is NOT about the UN looking out for the best interests of the world population. This is NOT about liberating the internet from the evil Americans. This will NOT impact censorship or any freedoms that we enjoy on the internet.
This is about the UN trying to get control and power where they currently have none. They want this power so that they can be more like a government. The problem is, they are a treaty organization, not a government. They are not elected. They are not accountable to the people they want to govern.
Exactly right. I'm all for the world setting up an alternative set of more egalitarian root servers, but ICANN is hardly a democratically run organization, and has, quite frankly, demonstrated even more corruption than Verisign in this context (and that's saying a lot).
People forget that the UN's constituents aren't the people of the world, their constituents are the governments, most of whom are actively oppressing the people. Expecting liberation from a body that, by and large, represents oppressors, and certainly represents rulers, is a fool's bet.
Okay, Jeff Bezos claims he gets these patents defensively to prevent someone else from getting them and suing Amazon. But the effort he goes to in convincing the patent office they're even valid seems enormous.
He didn't use his rediculous "one-click" patent defensively against Barnes and Noble, unless your definition of defense includes either "a good offense" (which is effectively just doublespeak for negating the difference between two antonyms) or "no competition whatsoever," which is today's business monopolist's notion of "a free market."
Either way, Bezos is a despicable, disingenous, antisocial jerk who is working the system to the detriment of the internet, technologists, and the free market.
If the terrorists want to kill you at 30k feet... ... then you die. Seriously, do you really believe terrorists won't be using strong encryption, knowing their data packets are probably being sniffed by the feds. This isn't going to stop a single terrorist--all it will do is allow greater snooping with less oversight on regular civilians going about their lives, who happen to take a commercial flight and use the net at the same time.
Here's something I never understood about the liberals on this site. They're all for making technological advancements that improve productivity and make things faster and easier for everyone, but then they complain when the feds wants to use this technology to make THEIR jobs faster and easier.
Here's something I never understood about the humanitarians on this site. They're all for making technological advancements that improve health, safety, and quality of life, but then they complain when the feds want to use this technology to improve THEIR ability to kill en masse.
See the flaw in your reasoning?
People object because technology, like everything else, is a double edged sword. It can improve people's lives, add to our quality of living, and empower us. It can also be used as a tool for unprecidented oppression. Most of us support and are working hard for the former, and vehemently decry steps toward the latter.
That having been said, in this particular case, there is no expectation of privacy on board a public, commercial aircraft (private aircraft are another story, and should be treated like private automobiles or homes), so I don't really have a problem with the feds (or anyone else) tapping communications on board a commercial airliner. You don't conduct private business on a busy street corner with dozens of (probably evesdropping) bystanders, nor would any sensible person do so in a public aircraft. But one can make credible, even compelling, arguments that this sort of laxidasical attitude toward authority evesdropping on private conversations in any context, be it a public street, a commercial flight, or a private residence, amounts to the same level of inappropriate intrusion by government into private life, particularly when infrastructure makes such capabilities the default, and court oversight becomes more and more a rubber stamp for letting the feds do whatever they like, whenever they like, often with little or no real justification.
Finally, your characterization of people encouraging what they see as a good use of technology and decrying what they see as a bad use of the same technology is disingenuous. Most people (myself included) don't embrace technology for technology's sake--we embrace it insofar as it enhances our lives and our freedoms, and reject its use when we see it being exploited to do the opposite.
We as owners of .net domains we will be screwed soon. Question is what is ICANN getting out of it?
Bribes.
For the most part these patents only exist to create some sort of nuclear stalemate - where your competitors are too afraid to sue you since it's certain that they violate some of your patents.
You're joking, right? Surely you aren't really that naive.
Amazon has already sued Barnes and Noble for "violating" (read: independently developing) one-click purchasing capabilities on their competing website. In other words, Barns and Noble were competing, in age old fashion, by trying to make their on-line store at least as convinient and easy to use as their competitors' (Amazon, in this case).
Amazon is doing anything but collecting a portfolio of defensive patents...they are actively stockpiling offensive weapons to use against any competitor, anywhere, for any reason they like. Usually that reason is because said competitor is simply too successful for Bezos' taste.
Add to that his sleazy misrepresentation of PriorArt as an anti-patent cooperative (when in fact he was using it as his own private research group for strengthening his own patents), and you have one asocial prick. He may be a rich and successful asocial prick, and he may have built a company that, despite its despicable patent record, does have redeaming qualities (I buy on Amazon occasionally, and as a book shop it is quite good. However, as an "inventor" it leaves a lot to be desired), but his actions define him, nevertheless, as an asocial prick.
Christians wave gay hate signs, and athiests try to get every reference to the 10 commandments removed.
Yeah, because asking to have Christian dogma removed from (ostensibly) secular government institutions (such as ostensibly fair and balanced courts of law) is oh so similar to waving hate signs and encouraging violence against an oppressed minority.
Right.
One side is commiting significantly worse offenses than the other, and that would be the Taliban American Style religious right, whether it is trying to return women to the status of State and Church chattel for nine months if they should have the misfortune of becoming empregnated (be it via gang-rape, or simply because the local fundamentalist pharamacist refuses to sell a woman birth control--don't laugh, it is happening in Milwaukee, Wisconsin as I type this), encouraging hate crimes against gays (and encoding discrimination against those people into law), taking over our schools and turning them from secular places of education to weekday sunday school slash religious propoganda centers, or dissolving the separation of church and state entirely.
I don't approve of any misguided athiest doing any sort of vandalism, but compared to the full on assault by the American Taliban against the founding pillars of American Secular Democracy, what they have done pales by comparison so much as to be negligable.
Is anyone else tired of all this dietary/health "science" telling you what you should and should not be eating, and what you should or should not be doing? [...] All this research seems to contradict itself every few years anyway.
... you guessed it! A glut of beef in the market, and our Dietary Overlords, I mean, uh, "nutritionists" declaring that Atkins is back in again!
Every few years? Try every few weeks . . . which brings us to:
Cattle mutilations are up. Which means
Low carb will be replaced again by low fat once the beef glut (and mad cow disease scare) is over, which in turn will be replaced by the magical mystery popcorn diet after record bumper harvests this fall.
The Ice Cream Diet as the sole US RDA compliant diet is on the backburner until the dairy industry coughs up the required bribe, I mean, "campaign contribution."
Oh, and get your hands off that bacon and eggs! Neither are on this week's approved list(tm), infidel.
"They" have learned perfectly:
War on Drugs, War on Terror, War on Copyright Violators, and the forthcoming War on Patent Violators will be no different.
Welcome to the new world order. Second Verse, same as the first.
7.???????
7. Die a horrible, lingering, humiliating death
#5 remains ambiguous, however, though I suspect it will read something like
5. Get laughed out of court (making SCO's pathetic and laughable case look good in comparison)
A new era of Honesty in Marketing
* In a few years Windows will be competitive with Linux for clusters
Yeah, but is it true? I'm rather doubtful windows will ever be competative with Linux for clusters.
Longhorn will be "supercocmpetitive" with apache.
Again, how much "truth" is there in this statement? Longhorn remains vaporous, and when it finally ships (late), will it be competative based on features, security, or deliberately introduced incompatabilities?
Is it the case thah people can see through the fud, so they're concentrating on reality?
No, its the case of more FUD, misrepresentations, and outright lies masquerading as the "truth." The difference is, lying about their own products, particularly ones that don't exist yet, isn't quite as transparent as lying about existing products that consistently and demonstrably perform better and cheaper than Microsoft asserts.
Or they will more intelligently do neither saying "Anyone can modify our open source client to do whatever they want, for whatever reason they want."
Do you really think google doens't understand open source?
I think you make a very good point. This is perhaps more of an example of Google "doing no evil", creating a tool that, by default, for most casual users, promotes their video feed, while at the same time using a good free software project that allows those who want to, to bypass this setting.
If most people find the restriction onerous, they'll download a patched version (probably from websites that are also offering video). Social and market dynamics can take care of the rest. It seems a fairly reasonable position for Google to take ("we'll try this restriction, and if people really find it offensive, they'll modify the source and outcompete our offering, and we can write it off to experience and not try imposing these sorts of restrictions again. Either way, it probably won't affect our video feed business much.")
I doubt very much it is incompetence--google has much of the best talent around--nor is it a lack of understanding opensource/free software on the part of google, as they've been active in the community for many years.
If we don't keep those religious zelots in check in the ME (and they do want the distruction of western civilization, can't argue it any other way), eventually an atomic bomb will be smuggled in.
:-(
"If we don't keep those religious zelots in check in the USA (and they do want the distruction of western secular society, can't argue it any other way), eventually all our freedoms will be subjugated by the Church[1]"
Oops . . . too late.
[1]But probably SOMEONE ELSES church, not YOURS
You illegally parked the word "technecally". Just so you know.
Your use of the trademarked phrase "just so you know"(tm) violates my trademark, and my intellectual property.
You may send your check, in the amount of $1,000,000, to the following address, or face legal repurcussions.
I 0wn U Sucka
600 Financial Way
RapeTheMasses, WA 37337
United Corporate States of America
Thank you,
W. Own Itall, esq.
Attorney in Law
Disclaimer: the aforementioned is entirely fictional, a joke, meant as humor. Anyone taking it seriously has an IQ lower than that of the guy who started this thread misrepresenting the poster as endorsing copyright infringement, when in fact what was endorsed was a new marketing strategy of selling content via the Internet directly to the viewership. No rights reserved, do with this post what you like. Excessive repetition can have rare but serious side effects, including splitting of sides, damaged and abraded knees, and a general melting of the brain. Compliant with all F.C.C. Part 666 regulations for a class FU device.
Frankly, I'm all for this method of distribution, as I barely watch 'regular' TV anymore.
Only on slashdot is stealing* encouraged and applauded when it involves Television, music, and movie copyrights, but God forbid anybody violates the GPL.
*Yes i know it's not technically stealing.
Good Lord, your statement is so full of holes it must either be a troll or a sign of a one-digit IQ.
First, distributing a copy of a pilot that is destined for the dustbin isn't even the moral equivelent of jaywalking, much less "stealing", regardless of its legality.
Second, the quote you so misrepresented was, when taken in context, clearly not lauding the illegal sharing of said file (despite the fact that said sharing has demonstrably helped the project), it was lauding the notion of releasing pilots on the internet and selling the series as a DVD-set in place of broadcasting it on telelvision.
This is the model that could eliminate the cultural middlemen (the broadcast industry) that has created a vast cultural wasteland where art and creativity should be flourishing, an dinstead allow artists to bring their creations directly to the appreciative citizen.
That is what was being lauded, and everyone with the exception of the monopolist cartels you are shilling stands to benefit from it.