Enh, so it wasn't Microsoft that did the innovative work. It's still a damn impressive demo (although you know what they say about demos...); you're missing out. (Ad was annoying, though.)
"300" is an excellent example of why you should be outraged. So here we've got a movie... based on a comic book... strongly derived from an earlier movie ("The 300 Spartans", 1962)... based on two millenia of written and oral history... based on an actual event.
"Good artists borrow; great artists steal." Picasso said that.
The truth is, all works of art--which, for the purposes of discussion, we'll count "300" as--are inspired from earlier works. Without access to those works, creativity would be set back to the stoneage. Society determined that it would be worth our while to offer a limited-time monopoly on the distribution of a new work of art, as economic incentive to artist to produce and spread their work, so that there would be more works available to inspire future works.
Continuing copyright extensions and drm are stealing. From us, from society, from our future; in order to line the pockets of a selected, greedy few.
Your history, repackaged, and inaccessible from now on and for the rest of time; now available in Blu-ray.
When collecting a set of rules, you have to make a choice; any engineers in the audience may find it somewhat familiar:
Consistent, Complete, Contained; pick two.
As its basis, science seeks out consistent rules. As its goal, science desires complete rules. Therefore, the rules will never be contained; there will always be more things to learn. Consider it a practical application of Godel's incompleteness theorem.
And which "even handed" "reliable" news source told you that? The same one that breathed a sigh of relief yesterday when Gonzalez was finally able to admit that it was all his just-resigned assistant's fault?
That's part of the issue; that all these emails SHOULD have gone through government accounts, for precisely the reasons you mention. Instead they were using georgewbush.com. When people started asking questions, that was when they claimed hundreds of emails were "lost".
Oh, right; I'd forgotten. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to only describe things for people who have at least already bought the text book and had a PhD explain it to them for 5 months. Anyone who hasn't already been through the same trials as you should just go buy The Big Yellow School Bus Explores Metric Space.
An encyclopedia is for the LAYMEN, not for experts to show-off how smart they are to eachother.
I'm an idiot about music theory, so I figured Wikipedia would be a good place to start. But there are so many show-offs trying to one-up each other by trying to sound overly academic, that it took me hours, and way to much cross-referencing, to get a good handle on the subject.
It's an ENCYCLOPEDIA, it's meant to get you started; if you want detailed knowledge, you should go to a detailed source. I'm shocked and insulted that the first 3 replies to your post said, more or less, "if you need something simpler, buy a kids book". What ever happened to "all the knowledge of the world"? Whatever happend to "an educational resource"? And they've been doubly stupid since it's not like Wikipedia is running out of room; we can have the extra-technical information if someone wants it--on a seperate page, or futher down on the page--but the top of the article should describe, in a simple way, what it's about, in a way that anyone who's graduated from elementary school, with no expert knowledge on the subject, should be able to understand it.
Oh thank god someone pointed that out. I was getting worried when I passed three PAGES of highly-modderated comments that were just blatantly wrong, pontificating about the merits of the case, the probable outcomes of the case, and so and so forth.
But I'm terrified because there are still pages more of comments below this.
Someday... someday the editors will read links before posting them...
Your lack of understanding of legal concepts is astounding. I find it terrifying that you've been moded up more than once. You, sir, are part of the problem with intellectual property in the U.S. and the world.
Cheating? How's it cheating? When you "play" (i.e., grind) WoW, you wander around, clicking on things until they die. When this bot "plays", it wanders around, clicking on things until they die. It takes just as long, only you don't have to be there, bored, watching it.
What if I let my little brother wander around with my character, clicking things? Is that cheating?
What if I paid him to do it? Is that cheating?
What if he played for years, and I bought the account off him only after he'd grinded (ground?) the character up?
What if it's just a random guy in China instead of my brother?
An AimBot cheats; it reads information from the game state that the player doesn't necessarily have access to (namely the precise position of the opponent's character's head) and takes advantage of that. This though? This is just people getting pissed at having to grind, and other people getting pissed back at them because they didn't "earn" their... whatever through the same repetitive, boring, "honorable" ("stupid") way they did.
Using a bot is NOT a copyright violation (how could it be? The bot is using my copy of the game, and my copy is legitimate); it may be a terms-of-use violation, but that's not the same thing. Blizzard barked up the wrong tree, and their case is just another example of how companies misunderstand and abuse the DMCA to punish just about anything they don't like.
I'm already paying for an always-on broadband connection at home. For no additional cost, I can access as many "Gigabytes of free storage" as I care to hook up to my home system, and I don't have to worry about some corp reading my private documents, either. I don't understand why more people don't do that (or, to put it another way, why there isn't a piece of software that makes doing it easy enough for everyone and their mother). Dynamic IPs are tricky, but the workarounds aren't that hard to come up with.
Maybe if one of these online music stores would open up and allow indy artists to put their music on them and not ruin it with DRM then you'd see a rise in people paying for music.
Seriously. Everyone knows how to find the "live" article on wikipedia and send links to it to their friends. It takes two non-obvious clicks from there to to get to the permanent, static link. (You have to click history, and then the most recent version.) There should be a big, shiny, flaming, "Permanent link to this version" button, or every "live" page should auto-redirect to the most recent static page (so the url in the address bar is a static page), or something.
"I'm in what is almost certainly a tiny minority of Slashdotters in that I actually create copyrightable material"
Well aren't we all high-and-mighty. Forget something though?
"All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster."
(Virtually) EVERY expression of an idea is copyrightable; including every lame post made to/.. You've fallen for the same trap as so many others (artists, politicians, even everyday people) of believing that it only "counts" if it's used to turn a profit.
It's not so much "catching on" as "these things go in cycles". For a while, the big thing was to have a seperate math co-processor; now that's been folded back in. Now, the big thing is a seperate graphics processor; this is about folding that back in.
So what you're saying is, you don't own a graphics card?
Because that's what they're talking about, replacing your graphics card with a graphics-dedicated section on the CPU. So if you think dedicated cores are stupid, you must think graphics cards are stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Enh, so it wasn't Microsoft that did the innovative work. It's still a damn impressive demo (although you know what they say about demos...); you're missing out. (Ad was annoying, though.)
"Good artists borrow; great artists steal." Picasso said that.
The truth is, all works of art--which, for the purposes of discussion, we'll count "300" as--are inspired from earlier works. Without access to those works, creativity would be set back to the stoneage. Society determined that it would be worth our while to offer a limited-time monopoly on the distribution of a new work of art, as economic incentive to artist to produce and spread their work, so that there would be more works available to inspire future works.
Continuing copyright extensions and drm are stealing. From us, from society, from our future; in order to line the pockets of a selected, greedy few.
Your history, repackaged, and inaccessible from now on and for the rest of time; now available in Blu-ray.
It's a very nice hat, my sister made it; which I tell you just so you know how serious I am.
Consistent, Complete, Contained; pick two.
As its basis, science seeks out consistent rules. As its goal, science desires complete rules. Therefore, the rules will never be contained; there will always be more things to learn. Consider it a practical application of Godel's incompleteness theorem.
(I recommend Extreme 2 for PS2, or Ultramix 3 for Xbox.)
grep -i attorney constitution
Who says what now?
And which "even handed" "reliable" news source told you that? The same one that breathed a sigh of relief yesterday when Gonzalez was finally able to admit that it was all his just-resigned assistant's fault?
That's part of the issue; that all these emails SHOULD have gone through government accounts, for precisely the reasons you mention. Instead they were using georgewbush.com. When people started asking questions, that was when they claimed hundreds of emails were "lost".
An encyclopedia is for the LAYMEN, not for experts to show-off how smart they are to eachother.
encyclopedia article != journal submission
People should keep that in mind when editing.
New policy: the first paragraph of every article should be written so a 14 year old could understand it. The rest? Do what you want.
I'm an idiot about music theory, so I figured Wikipedia would be a good place to start. But there are so many show-offs trying to one-up each other by trying to sound overly academic, that it took me hours, and way to much cross-referencing, to get a good handle on the subject.
It's an ENCYCLOPEDIA, it's meant to get you started; if you want detailed knowledge, you should go to a detailed source. I'm shocked and insulted that the first 3 replies to your post said, more or less, "if you need something simpler, buy a kids book". What ever happened to "all the knowledge of the world"? Whatever happend to "an educational resource"? And they've been doubly stupid since it's not like Wikipedia is running out of room; we can have the extra-technical information if someone wants it--on a seperate page, or futher down on the page--but the top of the article should describe, in a simple way, what it's about, in a way that anyone who's graduated from elementary school, with no expert knowledge on the subject, should be able to understand it.
Readability first. Details second.
Who modded this up? You, and parent, should both re-take astrophysics 101.
But I'm terrified because there are still pages more of comments below this.
Someday... someday the editors will read links before posting them...
The penalty for copying a DVD can be higher than the penalty for commiting rape; how can we, as a society, justify that?
Your lack of understanding of legal concepts is astounding. I find it terrifying that you've been moded up more than once. You, sir, are part of the problem with intellectual property in the U.S. and the world.
What if I let my little brother wander around with my character, clicking things? Is that cheating?
What if I paid him to do it? Is that cheating?
What if he played for years, and I bought the account off him only after he'd grinded (ground?) the character up?
What if it's just a random guy in China instead of my brother?
An AimBot cheats; it reads information from the game state that the player doesn't necessarily have access to (namely the precise position of the opponent's character's head) and takes advantage of that. This though? This is just people getting pissed at having to grind, and other people getting pissed back at them because they didn't "earn" their... whatever through the same repetitive, boring, "honorable" ("stupid") way they did.
And no one's forcing you to play, either.
Using a bot is NOT a copyright violation (how could it be? The bot is using my copy of the game, and my copy is legitimate); it may be a terms-of-use violation, but that's not the same thing. Blizzard barked up the wrong tree, and their case is just another example of how companies misunderstand and abuse the DMCA to punish just about anything they don't like.
I'm already paying for an always-on broadband connection at home. For no additional cost, I can access as many "Gigabytes of free storage" as I care to hook up to my home system, and I don't have to worry about some corp reading my private documents, either. I don't understand why more people don't do that (or, to put it another way, why there isn't a piece of software that makes doing it easy enough for everyone and their mother). Dynamic IPs are tricky, but the workarounds aren't that hard to come up with.
It's a work in progress; they announced the plan just last week. More info from a boingboing blog.
Seriously. Everyone knows how to find the "live" article on wikipedia and send links to it to their friends. It takes two non-obvious clicks from there to to get to the permanent, static link. (You have to click history, and then the most recent version.) There should be a big, shiny, flaming, "Permanent link to this version" button, or every "live" page should auto-redirect to the most recent static page (so the url in the address bar is a static page), or something.
Well aren't we all high-and-mighty. Forget something though?
"All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster."
(Virtually) EVERY expression of an idea is copyrightable; including every lame post made to /.. You've fallen for the same trap as so many others (artists, politicians, even everyday people) of believing that it only "counts" if it's used to turn a profit.
Why do you think they merged with ATI?
Because that's what they're talking about, replacing your graphics card with a graphics-dedicated section on the CPU. So if you think dedicated cores are stupid, you must think graphics cards are stupid.
Why do you think AMD just merged with ATI?