Because slashdot summaries are always factually accurate in every way shape or form, and never distort or misrepresent the content of the article.
oh wait =)
Probably why the parent wanted to hear from a USER of the site, not parroting. However, I'd be amazed if a ruling like that went through with the initial premise being exactly the opposite.
On the other hand, it is time to grow up and put away childish things. Which hand would that be and what are you referring to. Kneejerk immaturity responses are meaningless.
Actually, everyone reaps the benefits of such actions, because we have [somewhat] free trade You really think that the distribution of wealth and affluence is that uniform? Hell, even IN the developed world there is a hefty inconsistency in the distribution of wealth. Are you telling me that as corps profit and develop new technologies that such technologies will be as accessable and proliferated amongst the developed world? That seems INCREDIBLY naive to me.
Looked at the state of pollution of our land here in the USA? I am canadian but have lived in new england, maryland, colorado, and spent a fair amount of time in the georgia/florida area. The state of pollution IS pretty sad, but its fairly similar to what I have seen even in canada, just a question of density. The biggest thing is that although the damage is there, the quality of living in the USA has been drastically increased due to those damages. This is the discrepency that I am referring to, unless you think all developing nations should be subject to external control since we are the gateway to current technologies and methods.
Catch up in what, destruction of the biosphere? No, catch up in terms of industrialized infrastructure, support services, and quality of living...
Now i do not disagree with your final point concerning corporations, i just find it unlikely that i will see such reform in my lifetime. I find this especially sad as i'm only a quarter century into it.
I'd like to know what you think, now that i've clarified my points, but keep it objective.
Between moddable multiplayer games, MMO's with player created structures, areas, and interactables (vendors and such), and any game with comprehensive map editors being around for ages, is this even a question?
I'm pretty sure we've all known that without a massive potential for replayability in the original title, the only thing that keeps a game alive long term is the user created interactions and content (barring companies that keep ongoing updates and patch, like Cavedog did with TA back in the day [although that also had user created content]).
No one should be permitted to increase their emissions now, regardless of their technological base. That seems to be a pretty tricky concept. So because current developed nations were able to accelerate their development by polluting like mad FIRST they, and only they, reap the benefits of such actions. Not that i'm saying that because we polluted first, that developing nations should be able to pollute in the SAME way, but there has to be some leeway given to the developing nations to be able to catch up while those at the top attempt more drastic decreases.
The only problem with that is its a bit much of a entirely "socialist humanity" kind of setup, which would never be implemented as far as i can tell. If we froze emissions for developing nations, do you really expect the corps of the developed world to do anything but keep them that way, thus ensuring cheap labour costs in such countries?
Do we really want to divide the world into those who got here first, and those who must stay stuck with the realities of the past?
[Scene: A room that looks like a giant shoe box made to look like a dollhouse or a diorama (remember those from elementary school?) This whole skit is shot in black and white and has the tone of a fifties school film both in music and acting style.]
[The philosophers sit and, and drink and stroke their beards until Bruce turns to Mark.]
Bruce: Free Software is dead.
Announcer V.O.: Yes. "Free Software is dead", cried Hilf. And the cry has been heard for years. But for each philosopher, there has been a cynic. [Scott and Kevin pop out of nowhere]
Kevin: No way!
Scott: Prove it!
Announcer V.O.: And that is where the argument has stalemated... until now!
[We see a man holding a small body. Two other men stand in the back.]
Man: Free Software IS dead. And here is the body to prove it.
[The cynics appear, their hair messed]
Kevin: You've just blown my mind!
Scott: Our minds have been blown!
[We see the philosophers, looking very smug]
[A doctor examines the body and nods sadly at the camera.]
Announcer V.O.: The world is shocked. First to find out Free Software did in fact exist and second to find out it is now dead.
"These crimes, as we all know, also have a direct impact on our economy, costing victims millions of dollars and, if left unchecked, diminishing entrepreneurship," Gonzales said in announcing the bill. As we all know? As opposed to "As some purport", or more neutrally "As some claim"?
Thats a loaded statement to not include any data pertaining to the actual statement itself. Last I checked percentage of convictions has little to do with the impact of the crime itself. Shouldn't one be looking at those convictions and wonder why 43% of cases turn out with NO conviction? That seems like a pretty high percentage of total cases.
Wouldn't a more useful action be to find out why almost half of all cases do not result in conviction and see if reform can reduce the load on your courts? This entire piece seems to just be an advertisement stating "This message brought to you by: Your friendly neighborhood vexatious litigator.
The world already has enough religions, it doesn't need any more. I find this to be a particularly dangerous line of thought. Yes, scientology is full of it. Yes, hierarchal religion has been shown to be oft used as a means of crowd control and influence through mob mentality. However, I still believe that the world would be better served by there being MORE religions. Specifically, one each. Per person. Beliefs and Faiths are very personal concepts and I find that the more one tries to limit the scope of possible "faiths" to a set of categories, the more misunderstandings and random out-flippery we see.
Now not everyone feels the need for an external entity concerning faith or even to call it an ideology, but that doesnt change the fact that we all have our own idea as to what the deal is with life, the universe, and everything. Even those who label themselves this-religion or that-religion seem to find that they have two different lists, what they advertise as their beliefs and what they truely believe.
Granted scientologists scare me, but that again a reflection of my OWN personal beliefs.
That is precisely what i was meaning in terms of having the companies involved sort out their security details PRIOR to it become public. Reporting it publicly everywhere just gives people a how-to until such time as the vulnerability is fixed.
Is why would such contests HAVE to report what vulnerability successfully got through. Shouldnt the results be between the company holding the contest, the successful hacker, and companies whose software was involved in the vulnerabilities be the only ones who know?
Why couldn't one just announce "Joe Bob McHobo was the winner!" without publicizing the vulnerability itself before the softwares author gets a crack at it.
Once the source had been approved once, wouldnt they simply be able to generate a hash out of the entire set of source, AND of the binaries themselves, and simply compare the machines hashes to the evaluated ones periodically?
Thanks for the correction and the response, glad to see at least two people were able to read what i said and actually think about it rather than a kneejerk flamebait mod or reply.
Cannot really compare it that way without comparing total costs of living versus average income and everything. I still think you're right in your point that people will continue to refuse taking the responsibility over their usages themselves, the western world is nearly entirely on board the American bandwagon of "Its Not My Fault", but those numbers need context to mean anything.
So it cost cartoon network 2$mil in settlements plus their incidental costs with the case, added to the original investment for the terrist-ads themselves. Considering this got more press than most Superbowl advertisements it seems like the return on investment was pretty solid.
Applekid has hit the nail on the head in the way most people i know who ARENT american perceive america as a whole. Yes there is hyperbole, and I'm sure a significant fraction would be based entirely on humanities "mock what you fear, hate what you fear" mentality.
However the reason most RATIONAL people outside the US have this mentality is usually more to do with the intent of american foreign policy and the complete disregard for the rights of non-americans in the world. Sure they arent covered under your constitution but isnt the US constitution what americans should regard as their highest laws? Does a foreigner somehow not deserve such things as life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness?
Look into your own history, dont go by your AP US history courses. Read up about Reza Shah and american relations in Iran. Read up on early Iraq and the division of the middle east. Read up on the fact that the turmoil in israel is really more a british creation than american (one HUGE misconception that i'm sick of hearing is about america creating israel, although america WAS the impetus for completing the plan). Read up on the Iranian oil well conflict, and the involvement of the CIA.
Add to this history a climbing majority of fundamentalist rhetoric spewing forth from todays america (the vocal majority, obviously theres sanity underneath but they dont appear to shout as loud) and you have what looks like a theocracy in progress. (And of course the point of theocracy would be to get extra experience for your military units!)
Theres many MANY more reasons, these are just the ones that pop first to my mind. I wont bother claiming anything here as these past posts are flamebait enough, draw your own conclusions as to why us foreigners might be leery of the US if you actually care.
Hm, i hadnt thought of those measures that way and thats a very good point. I still want to know whether the ID is considered protected work, whether its state OR federal, and whether their image is still considered protected when included on a forged official document.
Any lawyers in copyright law that would know without spending precious lawyertime?
Ahh, I was quoting that straight out of the article, got nailed there. The point still stands though as to whether an official government document, state OR federal, would be considered protected work, as well as whether the image of the person itself would still be protected on a forged document like that.
Any inputs on those questions now that the semantics are pointed out to me =)
Actually the point is more that the DMCA notice is a legal document CLAIMING authorship of the fake ID. It wouldnt be perjury but its still monumentally stupid. You'd think that implicating yourself voluntarily performing an illegal activity in a legal document would be grounds for charges to be filed.
"Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture." says the U.S. Copyright office.
A fake ID, besides being illegal to create in the United States, is a derivative work of the United States Government, and is not an original creative work of authorship.
At least the article answers the questions of the summary directly. I like not having to think. Either way, trying to claim it was an original work seems really dangerous as its basically an admission of forgery. To any lawyers out there, is a DMCA Takedown notice considered a legal document for which charges could be filed if they implicate themselves within it?
Good question concerning the image of the individual itself from the FPer, does the fact that its included on an unauthorized document void the persons right to control over their own image? If not will video stores be forced to ban "BAD RENTER" walls and such other devices for shaming/controlling problem customers?
The deal could make it easier for the major networks to make their most popular shows available on demand free, according to the report. I don't believe for a moment that any new content will be free due to ad-support in this manner, or even reasonably recent content. I expect them to double dip too, but supposedly they're trying to make it one way OR the other according if one believes the article.
Reduce theatre prices, as obviously people want to spend 80$ every time you take the kids to a show. I know if I saw reasonable prices, i'd be thrown into a loop i might never resolve.
Slashdot Mirror
Because slashdot summaries are always factually accurate in every way shape or form, and never distort or misrepresent the content of the article.
oh wait =)
Probably why the parent wanted to hear from a USER of the site, not parroting. However, I'd be amazed if a ruling like that went through with the initial premise being exactly the opposite.
Now i do not disagree with your final point concerning corporations, i just find it unlikely that i will see such reform in my lifetime. I find this especially sad as i'm only a quarter century into it.
I'd like to know what you think, now that i've clarified my points, but keep it objective.
Between moddable multiplayer games, MMO's with player created structures, areas, and interactables (vendors and such), and any game with comprehensive map editors being around for ages, is this even a question?
I'm pretty sure we've all known that without a massive potential for replayability in the original title, the only thing that keeps a game alive long term is the user created interactions and content (barring companies that keep ongoing updates and patch, like Cavedog did with TA back in the day [although that also had user created content]).
The only problem with that is its a bit much of a entirely "socialist humanity" kind of setup, which would never be implemented as far as i can tell. If we froze emissions for developing nations, do you really expect the corps of the developed world to do anything but keep them that way, thus ensuring cheap labour costs in such countries?
Do we really want to divide the world into those who got here first, and those who must stay stuck with the realities of the past?
Connundrum indeed.
[Scene: A room that looks like a giant shoe box made to look like a dollhouse or a diorama (remember those from elementary school?) This whole skit is shot in black and white and has the tone of a fifties school film both in music and acting style.]
[The philosophers sit and, and drink and stroke their beards until Bruce turns to Mark.]
Bruce: Free Software is dead.
Announcer V.O.: Yes. "Free Software is dead", cried Hilf. And the cry has been heard for years. But for each philosopher, there has been a cynic. [Scott and Kevin pop out of nowhere]
Kevin: No way!
Scott: Prove it!
Announcer V.O.: And that is where the argument has stalemated... until now!
[We see a man holding a small body. Two other men stand in the back.]
Man: Free Software IS dead. And here is the body to prove it.
[The cynics appear, their hair messed]
Kevin: You've just blown my mind!
Scott: Our minds have been blown!
[We see the philosophers, looking very smug]
[A doctor examines the body and nods sadly at the camera.]
Announcer V.O.: The world is shocked. First to find out Free Software did in fact exist and second to find out it is now dead.
(paraphrased of course, thx- kids in the hall)
Thats a loaded statement to not include any data pertaining to the actual statement itself. Last I checked percentage of convictions has little to do with the impact of the crime itself. Shouldn't one be looking at those convictions and wonder why 43% of cases turn out
with NO conviction? That seems like a pretty high percentage of total cases.
Wouldn't a more useful action be to find out why almost half of all cases do not result in conviction and see if reform can reduce the load on your courts? This entire piece seems to just be an advertisement stating "This message brought to you by: Your friendly neighborhood vexatious litigator.
What a delightful moniker...Misty.
Now not everyone feels the need for an external entity concerning faith or even to call it an ideology, but that doesnt change the fact that we all have our own idea as to what the deal is with life, the universe, and everything. Even those who label themselves this-religion or that-religion seem to find that they have two different lists, what they advertise as their beliefs and what they truely believe.
Granted scientologists scare me, but that again a reflection of my OWN personal beliefs.
That is precisely what i was meaning in terms of having the companies involved sort out their security details PRIOR to it become public. Reporting it publicly everywhere just gives people a how-to until such time as the vulnerability is fixed.
Is why would such contests HAVE to report what vulnerability successfully got through. Shouldnt the results be between the company holding the contest, the successful hacker, and companies whose software was involved in the vulnerabilities be the only ones who know?
Why couldn't one just announce "Joe Bob McHobo was the winner!" without publicizing the vulnerability itself before the softwares author gets a crack at it.
Humanity is weird.
Once the source had been approved once, wouldnt they simply be able to generate a hash out of the entire set of source, AND of the binaries themselves, and simply compare the machines hashes to the evaluated ones periodically?
Thanks for the correction and the response, glad to see at least two people were able to read what i said and actually think about it rather than a kneejerk flamebait mod or reply.
Cannot really compare it that way without comparing total costs of living versus average income and everything. I still think you're right in your point that people will continue to refuse taking the responsibility over their usages themselves, the western world is nearly entirely on board the American bandwagon of "Its Not My Fault", but those numbers need context to mean anything.
So it cost cartoon network 2$mil in settlements plus their incidental costs with the case, added to the original investment for the terrist-ads themselves. Considering this got more press than most Superbowl advertisements it seems like the return on investment was pretty solid.
Disclaimer: I am a Canadian.
Applekid has hit the nail on the head in the way most people i know who ARENT american perceive america as a whole. Yes there is hyperbole, and I'm sure a significant fraction would be based entirely on humanities "mock what you fear, hate what you fear" mentality.
However the reason most RATIONAL people outside the US have this mentality is usually more to do with the intent of american foreign policy and the complete disregard for the rights of non-americans in the world. Sure they arent covered under your constitution but isnt the US constitution what americans should regard as their highest laws? Does a foreigner somehow not deserve such things as life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness?
Look into your own history, dont go by your AP US history courses. Read up about Reza Shah and american relations in Iran. Read up on early Iraq and the division of the middle east. Read up on the fact that the turmoil in israel is really more a british creation than american (one HUGE misconception that i'm sick of hearing is about america creating israel, although america WAS the impetus for completing the plan). Read up on the Iranian oil well conflict, and the involvement of the CIA.
Add to this history a climbing majority of fundamentalist rhetoric spewing forth from todays america (the vocal majority, obviously theres sanity underneath but they dont appear to shout as loud) and you have what looks like a theocracy in progress. (And of course the point of theocracy would be to get extra experience for your military units!)
Theres many MANY more reasons, these are just the ones that pop first to my mind. I wont bother claiming anything here as these past posts are flamebait enough, draw your own conclusions as to why us foreigners might be leery of the US if you actually care.
yeah, the canadian dollar has been dropping versus the brilliant strong worldwide american currency for years.
Oh wait....in the past 8 years its gone from about 1.5 per us dollar to around 1.1, skipping below 10 cents on the dollar.
baited by a troll, but breaktime at work lends to time to poke at the smug =D
Hm, i hadnt thought of those measures that way and thats a very good point. I still want to know whether the ID is considered protected work, whether its state OR federal, and whether their image is still considered protected when included on a forged official document.
Any lawyers in copyright law that would know without spending precious lawyertime?
Ahh, I was quoting that straight out of the article, got nailed there. The point still stands though as to whether an official government document, state OR federal, would be considered protected work, as well as whether the image of the person itself would still be protected on a forged document like that.
Any inputs on those questions now that the semantics are pointed out to me =)
Actually the point is more that the DMCA notice is a legal document CLAIMING authorship of the fake ID. It wouldnt be perjury but its still monumentally stupid. You'd think that implicating yourself voluntarily performing an illegal activity in a legal document would be grounds for charges to be filed.
"Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture." says the U.S. Copyright office.
A fake ID, besides being illegal to create in the United States, is a derivative work of the United States Government, and is not an original creative work of authorship.
At least the article answers the questions of the summary directly. I like not having to think. Either way, trying to claim it was an original work seems really dangerous as its basically an admission of forgery. To any lawyers out there, is a DMCA Takedown notice considered a legal document for which charges could be filed if they implicate themselves within it?
Good question concerning the image of the individual itself from the FPer, does the fact that its included on an unauthorized document void the persons right to control over their own image? If not will video stores be forced to ban "BAD RENTER" walls and such other devices for shaming/controlling problem customers?
Reduce theatre prices, as obviously people want to spend 80$ every time you take the kids to a show. I know if I saw reasonable prices, i'd be thrown into a loop i might never resolve.
No disassemble! No disassemble!
Don't worry, the damned dirty apes will be there to mock it.