> I don't care that Britney Spears did not sign an agreement.
I frequently get entangled in debates about copy write. One thing I've noticed is that Britney Spears is used 90% of the time as an example. Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with this. She's hot.
You have a valid point. But the purpose of code is not to cause an emotional response in the viewer, but to perform some functional purpose. Professors do not teach their students to express their feelings through coding. They teach their students to solve problems through coding. You can have a piece of code that angers the hell out of you, and at the end of the day its still just crappy code. On the other hand, an angry song or poem can still be a considered a moving piece of artwork.
This is a very subjective question, as is art in general. You cannot answer this question with a straightforward logical answer. That is just not the nature of artwork. You can't just apply a general rule that says, "such and such is art, and such and such is not."
But in most circumstances, a piece of code can be respected as highly ingenuitive, but not as artistic. I think these two qualities are getting confused. Not to say that artists are any better or more important then programmers, they're just different skills...Apples and oranges.
My definition of art is something that can convey some emotion to the viewer. Yes, you can have elegant, creative, even beautiful code, but you can't really portray anger or love or fear with a piece of code.
I'd be curious as to what kind of projects the government would pay to have developed. Would they really pay to have things like a Linux kernel and Apache worked on? If every developer on these projects got a reasonable salary for their work, these would quickly turn into extremely expensive projects. This kind of thing doesn't strike me as something tax dollars should be spent on. Maybe I'm missing something here.
The problem is not the voting system.
on
eLection '04
·
· Score: 1
I believe the problem here is not our system of voting. Granted it has its problems, but it was never designed to settle elections with such precision. The problem is that our parties have put forward two candidates that nobody really cares about. I think most voted for their candidate because of their party or they simply flipped a coin. Of course the election is going to be this close. If we had some candidates of substance, I believe the voter's would have been more decisive, and the question of accuracy would not have been an issue.
As for digitizing our voting system, I'm all for making things electronic, but I think voting is one place where the pen and paper still work out better. The paper ballot provides a physical record of what happened on Election Day. I know it has its problems, but personally, I trust this much more then I would trust a binary digit in the memory of some server somewhere.
Using computers also adds complexity. I know that anyone reading slashdot would have no problem at all using an electronic system, but there are some people out there who have never even touched a Computer. Look how confused people get with the butterfly ballot.
Perhaps someday we'll be ready for an electronic system, but in this day it is not yet necessary or practical.
ATG's Dynamo is becoming increasingly popular for web development. It would have been interesting to see how their.jhtml/Dynamo Servlet concept rates compared to the other technologies.
Re:Why all Internet access should be taxed
on
EU Web Tax Proposed
·
· Score: 1
> recoup losses to date from previous online sales, then in a few years, lower it down to a more managable 5-6%.
"Tempory" taxes have a tendancy to be not so temporary. We've had our "temporary" toll booths in mass for quite some time now. I believe that even the federal income tax was originally temporary, although I'm not certain. Anyway, if you set a tax at 10%, don't hold your breath waiting for it to go down to 5%.
I had a friend, Sean, who was involved in a similar situation. He had a band teacher in his high school he didn't get along with. Sean put up a website called raymondsucks.org which made the review on teacher review look pretty tame. When the school saw this they suspended him for a few weeks and even talked about expelling him. Sean's father decided this violated his son's first amendment rights and sued the school system. They ended up winning $30,000. Here is an article about it from wired. The raymondsucks.org domain is long gone, but the original site can be found on bluevan.net, a tribute to Sean who has since pasted away.
Anyway, if the same precedent used in Sean's case is used with the Teacher Review case, it would seem to me that the Teacher Review would have the stronger case.
I receive plenty of spam, and it annoys me. But people are too quick to give up their freedoms for the promise of things such as no more spam. Sure it sounds nice, but is it really worth passing legislation for? I'd just assume hit the delete button a few times a day rather then let uncle sam muck around w/ internet regulation.
Slashdot Mirror
I frequently get entangled in debates about copy write. One thing I've noticed is that Britney Spears is used 90% of the time as an example. Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with this. She's hot.
This is a very subjective question, as is art in general. You cannot answer this question with a straightforward logical answer. That is just not the nature of artwork. You can't just apply a general rule that says, "such and such is art, and such and such is not." But in most circumstances, a piece of code can be respected as highly ingenuitive, but not as artistic. I think these two qualities are getting confused. Not to say that artists are any better or more important then programmers, they're just different skills...Apples and oranges.
My definition of art is something that can convey some emotion to the viewer. Yes, you can have elegant, creative, even beautiful code, but you can't really portray anger or love or fear with a piece of code.
I'd be curious as to what kind of projects the government would pay to have developed. Would they really pay to have things like a Linux kernel and Apache worked on? If every developer on these projects got a reasonable salary for their work, these would quickly turn into extremely expensive projects. This kind of thing doesn't strike me as something tax dollars should be spent on. Maybe I'm missing something here.
I believe the problem here is not our system of voting. Granted it has its problems, but it was never designed to settle elections with such precision. The problem is that our parties have put forward two candidates that nobody really cares about. I think most voted for their candidate because of their party or they simply flipped a coin. Of course the election is going to be this close. If we had some candidates of substance, I believe the voter's would have been more decisive, and the question of accuracy would not have been an issue.
As for digitizing our voting system, I'm all for making things electronic, but I think voting is one place where the pen and paper still work out better. The paper ballot provides a physical record of what happened on Election Day. I know it has its problems, but personally, I trust this much more then I would trust a binary digit in the memory of some server somewhere.
Using computers also adds complexity. I know that anyone reading slashdot would have no problem at all using an electronic system, but there are some people out there who have never even touched a Computer. Look how confused people get with the butterfly ballot.
Perhaps someday we'll be ready for an electronic system, but in this day it is not yet necessary or practical.
ATG's Dynamo is becoming increasingly popular for web development. It would have been interesting to see how their .jhtml/Dynamo Servlet concept rates compared to the other technologies.
"Tempory" taxes have a tendancy to be not so temporary. We've had our "temporary" toll booths in mass for quite some time now. I believe that even the federal income tax was originally temporary, although I'm not certain. Anyway, if you set a tax at 10%, don't hold your breath waiting for it to go down to 5%.
Anyway, if the same precedent used in Sean's case is used with the Teacher Review case, it would seem to me that the Teacher Review would have the stronger case.
I receive plenty of spam, and it annoys me. But people are too quick to give up their freedoms for the promise of things such as no more spam. Sure it sounds nice, but is it really worth passing legislation for? I'd just assume hit the delete button a few times a day rather then let uncle sam muck around w/ internet regulation.