That only applies if you're hiring a guy to do search engine optimisations on your website. With affiliate programs it's different because affiliates' links must point to the affiliate network's website (the website then determines where to send the person that clicked the link)
>Doing what you say in your first sentence is already illegal. Not if you rephrase it and make it into "news about the news" which is what websites do these days.
>The fact that those are not supporting the news operations has nothing to do with posting links, etc. Really? Nothing? How do journalists earn money? By reading other newspapers and writing articles on the topics read? Because that's what most websites on the net do. Of course they provide a link to the original, which is the newspaper that initially reported it, but how much incentive is there for a person to go and read something they have already read in a similar phrasing?
Slashdotters really should go and read the original. What the judge recommends doing is to allow news papers to survive is to bar websites from reposting the full news story (paraphrased or not) found in the newspapers. So slashdot is safe, since it only provides a summary of the news story, and so is the internet, since only linking to news articles found in newspapers is discussed.
For everyone's information: the page the author links to as the one that has javascript munging also has a noscript tag with the email out in the open. Guess what Google and spammers' email-crawlers really do?;)
When Windows 95 came out - it also had just a notepad that worked on it. What would happen if the GUI libraries were replaced with different ones because of "licensing problems"? The OS would easily loose a huge market share, and those users would move to MacOS and Linux. Because since 1995 windows has grown from a platform with a notepad into this hugely popular platform with thousands of applications developed for it. And thousands of users are now using Windows just because of all those applications.
If Mono is removed because of licensing issues, not only the ISVs that relied on it are toast, but also Debian and others whom Microsoft chooses will loose the users that relied on those.NET/Mono apps. And guess what platform those users will switch to?
The biggest problem with this is that if mono is installed by default on systems that makes it more acceptable for ISVs to write their software for Mono/.NET which will hurt the (Debian or any other) platform if Microsoft suddenly decides to sue and Mono has to be removed.
Returning to the original thread. It was said that Microsoft is better at marketing than it is at making products. Not that microsoft is better at marketing than others.
Communism doesn't exist in China, nor did it ever exist in any of the communist-controlled states past or present. What you called communism is actually authoritarianism. And this is not the merits of communism that are discussed, it is in fact the actual circumstances.
As long as the creators of products use a business model that is built on the concept of selling copies of a product they created once, there will be piracy. Moreover the cheaper it is to create a copy of the original product and the closer this copy is in quality to the orignal, the more this product will be copied. Which makes digital products the most copied, and things like the design of coke bottles or tables the least copied.
This has nothing to do with generating interrupts or blocking routines.
Selecting a piece of text in the text window works like so: 1. you click and hold the left mouse button and a LeftButtonDown event is generated 2. the event is sent to the application which enters Selection Mode upon recieving it and saves the starting position of the cursor. 3. You move the mouse and a MouseMove event is generated 4. The application recieves the event and checks where the cursor is - to find out how much to select. 5. The application highlights the selected text
If the cursor goes outside of the window area the application knows this because it still receives the MouseMove event and what it does is scroll the window a little (one line for example) to select the content that didn't fit. If you don't move the mouse afterwards then no events are sent to the window, so nothing happens.
A human is like a robot with survival programmed as one of its objectives. An AI with a different set of objectives will do everything to reach those objectives, whether or not it means surviving in the end. In other words: you have to actually program the AI to want to survive before it does something to survive. And after that you need to teach it the concept of how it can use a weapon to stop a human wanting to disable it.
Of course, killing humans isn't necessarily done in order to survive. It could be done because the human was literally standing in the way, and using a rocket launcher was considered more energy efficient solution than walking around the human...
Unfortunately not the ones involved in making decisions...
Why on earth would you want to upgrade an army computer to Vista (or Windows 7) is beyond me. Better spend those money on Linux - in the end it will prove to be less expensive, and the US army doesn't look like an organisation that may not be around in 20 years...
Actually, from what I've read, Corey doesn't claim that it will solve the piracy problem. He tries to tackle the problem of individuals creating derivative works without hiring lawyers to negotiate a license. For example if some person remixes a song, they either have to negotiate a deal with the record company and pay them royalties (and this involves hiring a lawyer to negotiate), or do it without hiring a lawyer, and thus be called a pirate. The latter is what Corey tries to address.
Problem is, for mosquitos to stop feeding off humans would mean developing some sort of mechanism to differentiate between a human and an animal. So far they don't. So the more probable evolutionary path would be for mosquitos to feed and die until only the ones that survive after feeding off humans are left.
On a more serious note, though. Some time from now, if this vaccine is developed and becomes widespread, the mosquitos will adapt to the poison in it (this is what evolution is all about), and we'll have mosquitos that are resistant to the poison.
Of course it is also possible that evolution will take another path and mosquitos stop feeding on humans and switch to animals, but not any more possible than the prospect of mosquitos becoming vegetarians.
Slashdot Mirror
And for the photographer, since they are credited.
Parents also send their kids to school and make them do chores y'know... We should not tolerate this parental tyrrany any more! /sarcasm
So what this means is that the McAfee antivirus is so thorough it even finds trojans and viruses that MS ships. Symantec's product manager is right!
Have you tried?
No it's not the women, it's the president himself :)
That only applies if you're hiring a guy to do search engine optimisations on your website. With affiliate programs it's different because affiliates' links must point to the affiliate network's website (the website then determines where to send the person that clicked the link)
>Doing what you say in your first sentence is already illegal.
Not if you rephrase it and make it into "news about the news" which is what websites do these days.
>The fact that those are not supporting the news operations has nothing to do with posting links, etc.
Really? Nothing? How do journalists earn money? By reading other newspapers and writing articles on the topics read? Because that's what most websites on the net do. Of course they provide a link to the original, which is the newspaper that initially reported it, but how much incentive is there for a person to go and read something they have already read in a similar phrasing?
Slashdotters really should go and read the original. What the judge recommends doing is to allow news papers to survive is to bar websites from reposting the full news story (paraphrased or not) found in the newspapers. So slashdot is safe, since it only provides a summary of the news story, and so is the internet, since only linking to news articles found in newspapers is discussed.
It's GNOME. AFAIK Debian developers basically want to lessen the amount of resources devoted to repackaging GNOME.
For everyone's information: the page the author links to as the one that has javascript munging also has a noscript tag with the email out in the open. Guess what Google and spammers' email-crawlers really do? ;)
Now, imagine the appeals court rules SCO has the rights to Unix! Won't that be fun!
When Windows 95 came out - it also had just a notepad that worked on it. What would happen if the GUI libraries were replaced with different ones because of "licensing problems"? The OS would easily loose a huge market share, and those users would move to MacOS and Linux. Because since 1995 windows has grown from a platform with a notepad into this hugely popular platform with thousands of applications developed for it. And thousands of users are now using Windows just because of all those applications.
.NET/Mono apps. And guess what platform those users will switch to?
If Mono is removed because of licensing issues, not only the ISVs that relied on it are toast, but also Debian and others whom Microsoft chooses will loose the users that relied on those
The biggest problem with this is that if mono is installed by default on systems that makes it more acceptable for ISVs to write their software for Mono/.NET which will hurt the (Debian or any other) platform if Microsoft suddenly decides to sue and Mono has to be removed.
Returning to the original thread. It was said that Microsoft is better at marketing than it is at making products. Not that microsoft is better at marketing than others.
Communism doesn't exist in China, nor did it ever exist in any of the communist-controlled states past or present. What you called communism is actually authoritarianism. And this is not the merits of communism that are discussed, it is in fact the actual circumstances.
I don't think software can be called art...
As long as the creators of products use a business model that is built on the concept of selling copies of a product they created once, there will be piracy. Moreover the cheaper it is to create a copy of the original product and the closer this copy is in quality to the orignal, the more this product will be copied. Which makes digital products the most copied, and things like the design of coke bottles or tables the least copied.
This has nothing to do with generating interrupts or blocking routines.
Selecting a piece of text in the text window works like so:
1. you click and hold the left mouse button and a LeftButtonDown event is generated
2. the event is sent to the application which enters Selection Mode upon recieving it and saves the starting position of the cursor.
3. You move the mouse and a MouseMove event is generated
4. The application recieves the event and checks where the cursor is - to find out how much to select.
5. The application highlights the selected text
If the cursor goes outside of the window area the application knows this because it still receives the MouseMove event and what it does is scroll the window a little (one line for example) to select the content that didn't fit. If you don't move the mouse afterwards then no events are sent to the window, so nothing happens.
It will if you program it to do so.
A human is like a robot with survival programmed as one of its objectives. An AI with a different set of objectives will do everything to reach those objectives, whether or not it means surviving in the end. In other words: you have to actually program the AI to want to survive before it does something to survive. And after that you need to teach it the concept of how it can use a weapon to stop a human wanting to disable it.
Of course, killing humans isn't necessarily done in order to survive. It could be done because the human was literally standing in the way, and using a rocket launcher was considered more energy efficient solution than walking around the human...
Just because a robot doesn't care if it wins doesn't mean that it will start loosing on purpose.
Unfortunately not the ones involved in making decisions...
Why on earth would you want to upgrade an army computer to Vista (or Windows 7) is beyond me. Better spend those money on Linux - in the end it will prove to be less expensive, and the US army doesn't look like an organisation that may not be around in 20 years...
>Questions have also been raised over the BSA's methodology
BSA has a methodology?
Uh, how did you infer that was the goal from the GP's post?
Simple: I misunderstood :)
Actually, from what I've read, Corey doesn't claim that it will solve the piracy problem. He tries to tackle the problem of individuals creating derivative works without hiring lawyers to negotiate a license. For example if some person remixes a song, they either have to negotiate a deal with the record company and pay them royalties (and this involves hiring a lawyer to negotiate), or do it without hiring a lawyer, and thus be called a pirate. The latter is what Corey tries to address.
Problem is, for mosquitos to stop feeding off humans would mean developing some sort of mechanism to differentiate between a human and an animal. So far they don't. So the more probable evolutionary path would be for mosquitos to feed and die until only the ones that survive after feeding off humans are left.
On a more serious note, though. Some time from now, if this vaccine is developed and becomes widespread, the mosquitos will adapt to the poison in it (this is what evolution is all about), and we'll have mosquitos that are resistant to the poison.
Of course it is also possible that evolution will take another path and mosquitos stop feeding on humans and switch to animals, but not any more possible than the prospect of mosquitos becoming vegetarians.