So this is my question: Is installing it via a different installer ( than the original one) is considered a derivative work? Even though the program is identical to the one installed with the default installer.
(I am not an expert on these things so bear with me): But what I understood is that when they created a new installer to install the unmodified software (let's say firefox) with another software ( the adware) this can't be thought as an infringement... Or the software can be only installed via it's original installer ?
I could be mistaken, but after the rise of the Abbasid Empire in what is called nowadays Iraq, science flourished a period of time, and as well with the Ottoman empire.
I think the reason is more of that Muslims have this sense they were supposed to be the last and best of what God sent, and for a period of time they were, they controlled large parts of the ancient world, they were the place to go where people wanted to study, they were the most advanced civilization for a long period of time. However with the demise of the Ottoman empire, and the way all modern science/technology came from what they see as "the inferior Christian west", I think they can't comprehend why! Why it's not them who is advanced and not doing all this might things. Now I do agree with you, and I see religion as detrimental to scientific progress. But that's not the way they see it. Advanced is evil if it's not a created from the Islamic culture.
I suppose yes, and you should have both. Example: back to Lebanon, I left that country for many reasons, but while I don't believe in God or religion ( actually even bordering on being an anti-theist but that's another issue) I am still technically A Muslim Sunni as far the civil authorities back there. So you see you can't be without religion over there, as far the state is concerned I am still recognized as a subject of the Sunni courts in matters of heritage, marriage, death and life, etc etc. So over there you can have freedom of religion, but not from religion. I could be mistaken, but If I do get myself completely crossed out of "religion"( meaning to be officially recognized as an atheist) I can't own a land, I can't get a passport, I might lose many of my civil liberties ( there is no civil marriage in Lebanon, though it is recognized if it is done outside of the country).
Now recently there have been some efforts to remove the indication of religion on some official papers, but you still belong to one, but government employees are showing a lot of reluctance ( and even out right refusing sometimes) to do the paper works for citizens who ( like me) wants to do it.
So back to the original point, yes:
1) Freedom of religion means freedom to choose or not choose a religion. Whether you want to be a Sikh, worship the devil, or simply without any sort of beliefs.
2) Freedom from religion means not being subjugated to the whims of the religious groups.
I went to university in a country where more than half of the population is Muslim(I am talking about Lebanon). I remember during Quantum Mechanics and Relativity lectures "religious" students tend to object more often and refuse to accept certain things, most of the objections were on a religious basis.
I still remember a certain day, when the speed of light in vacuum was being discussed, and some students stormed out of class, because the the professor ( whether he correctly used the term or not) used a term which described the speed as absolute, and the objection was that only Allah/God can be absolute, and that they can't tolerate staying in a class where such blasphemy was taught. It was 4 students out of ~50.
It doesn't matter if in two years we would be experiencing better graphics, just imagine playing a PS3 like graphics on something that barely consume 1W ( or dunno how much a mobile device should), and I would bet it wouldn't cost that much either.
While I do agree with you, and once we are all gone, the planet will ( one way or another ) go back to way it was. The point is, we want it to go back to way it was with us still on it. However I don't think that will ever happen ( unless we discover some great technology), and we don't have much time left on the planet...
Observations done on apes ( specially on chimps) showed extra cooperation and leveling of the hierarchical order when the animals were hunting/eating meat. If anything meat should make you more sociable. Seeing how much we resemble them, I would be sceptical about these results as well.
Experts in this domain do not consider psychopaths as sick people!
Regardless of what you and I might consider normal and not, it is not our job to determine who is and who is not sick.
Are you saying that the psychopath who never committed a crime before, and only left a trail of lets say 'damaged relationships' be put in an asylum ? because if he is sick, that's where he should go!
Wouldn't it be more cost effective to, you know, hire attentive teachers to watch the kids in the first place so they don't escape?
Are you seriously suggesting that there is some 'error-prone' people out there ? If you had 10 teachers per child you would still have a chance of one of them going missing. This one is a pretty good idea, when outside be sure to get a warning if a child is close to escaping...
Slavery is illegal ? But if I sign a paper that says I'm ok with it, it is cool now ? WTF ???
If I am not mistaken this sort of things was fought in courts in Germany right ? maybe it was on whether you are bonded by en EULA if you didn't read it or not. I don't remember!
But how will they screw us in this case ? Absolutely unacceptable. If you do not want to be tracked you should take measures beyond your technical capabilities to do so. Companies has right to make a profit out of you!
Now I'll Cite few laws of free market and free speech, so you would understand why you shouldn't get a free ride of them, do you get me now ?
Under what assumption are you considering bipolar disorder disturbing ? Human ? The point is, as far as we know the universe might be one big jerk! If the universe is really indeed bipolar ( behaves differently at different scales ) then what is the problem ? Why are you trying to simplify things (or force them to be simple)?
I'm not taking sides here, as a human being I would like it to be simple, but as a physicist I have to accept the universe as it is. I would rather much prefer to describe the whole Universe with one small equation. But that's probably never going to happen, and it's ok.
The analogy is flawed, they can't compare Android to IE. IE was shipped with WinOS. WinOS was the more or less the only used OS out there ( I mean for the general population) , that's why it was anti-competitive to give for free ( or why it was anti-competitive by MS ). Now the case with Android is that it does not enjoy a monopoly, the hardware is diverse, and on the same hardware provider ( Like HTC for example) is offering different OS. If they want to offer it for free then it's not the Open Handset Alliance's problem, if others want to out compete Android, then they must offer something distinguished so that people will consider paying for it. It is the same more or less with Linux on the desktop.
I am not trying to be a pessimist here, but I would think there is some small loophole in the new law, that would give the British equivalent of RIAA or MPAA some leverage. Anyone knows anything about this ?
My problem is this artificial high place we constructed for ourselves. What is the problem in blurring the lines between us and the rest of the animal kingdom ?
- Activity that could potentially lead to our end as a race. -> Everything we do in science has the potential to exterminate us.
- Activity that increases the suffering of individuals or groups without their consent. -> I would agree with you with this one, but this is not the issue here, the modification are done on animals not humans.
- Activity designed to ultimately remove our freedoms/rights. -> Again not relevant
- Activity that would terminate individuals groups without their consent. -> same as before
I am not saying there is no abuse, the point I am trying to make is that most objections that will come ( and proposed abuses) will be based on religious doctrines, and there where the problem lies.
Slashdot Mirror
How about these banks kiss my private shiny ass!
So this is my question: Is installing it via a different installer ( than the original one) is considered a derivative work? Even though the program is identical to the one installed with the default installer.
(I am not an expert on these things so bear with me): But what I understood is that when they created a new installer to install the unmodified software (let's say firefox) with another software ( the adware) this can't be thought as an infringement... Or the software can be only installed via it's original installer ?
Why won't APPLE build 100,000 new data centers ?
I could be mistaken, but after the rise of the Abbasid Empire in what is called nowadays Iraq, science flourished a period of time, and as well with the Ottoman empire. I think the reason is more of that Muslims have this sense they were supposed to be the last and best of what God sent, and for a period of time they were, they controlled large parts of the ancient world, they were the place to go where people wanted to study, they were the most advanced civilization for a long period of time. However with the demise of the Ottoman empire, and the way all modern science/technology came from what they see as "the inferior Christian west", I think they can't comprehend why! Why it's not them who is advanced and not doing all this might things. Now I do agree with you, and I see religion as detrimental to scientific progress. But that's not the way they see it. Advanced is evil if it's not a created from the Islamic culture.
I suppose yes, and you should have both. Example: back to Lebanon, I left that country for many reasons, but while I don't believe in God or religion ( actually even bordering on being an anti-theist but that's another issue) I am still technically A Muslim Sunni as far the civil authorities back there. So you see you can't be without religion over there, as far the state is concerned I am still recognized as a subject of the Sunni courts in matters of heritage, marriage, death and life, etc etc. So over there you can have freedom of religion, but not from religion. I could be mistaken, but If I do get myself completely crossed out of "religion"( meaning to be officially recognized as an atheist) I can't own a land, I can't get a passport, I might lose many of my civil liberties ( there is no civil marriage in Lebanon, though it is recognized if it is done outside of the country). Now recently there have been some efforts to remove the indication of religion on some official papers, but you still belong to one, but government employees are showing a lot of reluctance ( and even out right refusing sometimes) to do the paper works for citizens who ( like me) wants to do it. So back to the original point, yes: 1) Freedom of religion means freedom to choose or not choose a religion. Whether you want to be a Sikh, worship the devil, or simply without any sort of beliefs. 2) Freedom from religion means not being subjugated to the whims of the religious groups.
I went to university in a country where more than half of the population is Muslim(I am talking about Lebanon). I remember during Quantum Mechanics and Relativity lectures "religious" students tend to object more often and refuse to accept certain things, most of the objections were on a religious basis. I still remember a certain day, when the speed of light in vacuum was being discussed, and some students stormed out of class, because the the professor ( whether he correctly used the term or not) used a term which described the speed as absolute, and the objection was that only Allah/God can be absolute, and that they can't tolerate staying in a class where such blasphemy was taught. It was 4 students out of ~50.
With a quick search, there is this : http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/communications/ASCAP.html I think it is ridiculous...
It doesn't matter if in two years we would be experiencing better graphics, just imagine playing a PS3 like graphics on something that barely consume 1W ( or dunno how much a mobile device should), and I would bet it wouldn't cost that much either.
While I do agree with you, and once we are all gone, the planet will ( one way or another ) go back to way it was. The point is, we want it to go back to way it was with us still on it. However I don't think that will ever happen ( unless we discover some great technology), and we don't have much time left on the planet...
Observations done on apes ( specially on chimps) showed extra cooperation and leveling of the hierarchical order when the animals were hunting/eating meat. If anything meat should make you more sociable. Seeing how much we resemble them, I would be sceptical about these results as well.
This morning that crazy Italian MP and now this, what the fuck is going on today with the world ???
Fuck you!
Experts in this domain do not consider psychopaths as sick people! Regardless of what you and I might consider normal and not, it is not our job to determine who is and who is not sick. Are you saying that the psychopath who never committed a crime before, and only left a trail of lets say 'damaged relationships' be put in an asylum ? because if he is sick, that's where he should go!
Wouldn't it be more cost effective to, you know, hire attentive teachers to watch the kids in the first place so they don't escape?
Are you seriously suggesting that there is some 'error-prone' people out there ? If you had 10 teachers per child you would still have a chance of one of them going missing. This one is a pretty good idea, when outside be sure to get a warning if a child is close to escaping...
Slavery is illegal ? But if I sign a paper that says I'm ok with it, it is cool now ? WTF ??? If I am not mistaken this sort of things was fought in courts in Germany right ? maybe it was on whether you are bonded by en EULA if you didn't read it or not. I don't remember!
I'm amazed how companies can get away with such shit! Is this even legal ?
But how will they screw us in this case ? Absolutely unacceptable. If you do not want to be tracked you should take measures beyond your technical capabilities to do so. Companies has right to make a profit out of you! Now I'll Cite few laws of free market and free speech, so you would understand why you shouldn't get a free ride of them, do you get me now ?
OOps, I misunderstood the last part of your sentence.
Under what assumption are you considering bipolar disorder disturbing ? Human ? The point is, as far as we know the universe might be one big jerk! If the universe is really indeed bipolar ( behaves differently at different scales ) then what is the problem ? Why are you trying to simplify things (or force them to be simple)? I'm not taking sides here, as a human being I would like it to be simple, but as a physicist I have to accept the universe as it is. I would rather much prefer to describe the whole Universe with one small equation. But that's probably never going to happen, and it's ok.
The analogy is flawed, they can't compare Android to IE. IE was shipped with WinOS. WinOS was the more or less the only used OS out there ( I mean for the general population) , that's why it was anti-competitive to give for free ( or why it was anti-competitive by MS ). Now the case with Android is that it does not enjoy a monopoly, the hardware is diverse, and on the same hardware provider ( Like HTC for example) is offering different OS. If they want to offer it for free then it's not the Open Handset Alliance's problem, if others want to out compete Android, then they must offer something distinguished so that people will consider paying for it. It is the same more or less with Linux on the desktop.
I am not trying to be a pessimist here, but I would think there is some small loophole in the new law, that would give the British equivalent of RIAA or MPAA some leverage. Anyone knows anything about this ?
My problem is this artificial high place we constructed for ourselves. What is the problem in blurring the lines between us and the rest of the animal kingdom ?
- Activity that could potentially lead to our end as a race. -> Everything we do in science has the potential to exterminate us. - Activity that increases the suffering of individuals or groups without their consent. -> I would agree with you with this one, but this is not the issue here, the modification are done on animals not humans. - Activity designed to ultimately remove our freedoms/rights. -> Again not relevant - Activity that would terminate individuals groups without their consent. -> same as before I am not saying there is no abuse, the point I am trying to make is that most objections that will come ( and proposed abuses) will be based on religious doctrines, and there where the problem lies.
But what is abuse ? can you define one in a meaningful way ?