Rightfully disallow? Surely you mean the scam offers. There's nothing inherently wrong with monetizing lead generation, as long as you do it in a legitimate and safe ways. As a matter of fact, it's probably best to keep 3rd parties out of the process, but that's just MHO.
d) The hospital for not only allowing internet access from a computer with personally identifiable information, but for also allowing the spyware to get installed.
Bingo. They failed to take steps a reasonably prudent person would have taken to protect patient confidentiality under Federal law. Spyware installation via email is not exactly news.
Just because somebody's door is unlocked doesn't mean you can rob their house.
..With transparency? Hell the federal government can't account for the money it's spending (by knowing where it's being spent), much less keep track of many of its records. I'm curious to see how spewing them all over the Internet is going to help us track on everything.
You act like the technology and processes use to generate this catalog are going to remain deficient indefinitely. You ignore the fact that consumer demand for better (metadata|accuracy|whathaveyou) will drive improvements in the technology. In the meantime, we get access to the early iterations of the technology and the benefits it can provide today.
What is needed is an open standard for scanned works, with minimum resolution, minimum quality, and minimum verified metadata such as subject, author, publisher, year etc.
Necessity is the mother invention. Wait for one to pop up, or go make one up. Nobody's stopping you.
All those are trivially listed on the title page of every book. All one has to do is open the damn book and flip a few pages, but that appears to be too hard for some people.
Opening the covers of every possible resource you use is quite easy when you have a discrete, present set of resources to thumb through. What if your resources aren't present, are high in number, or (lo!) are undefined...because you don't even know what exactly it is you're looking for?
This is a long term project for humanity. There's absolutely no point in having crappy scans with garbage metadata available quickly today, when it could be available correctly with good quality in say five years.
I think you're absolutely wrong. It's naive to assume we can just have an instant rubber-meets-the-road system available in x years without rigorous testing and input on the part of users. No point? Hah! This is absolutely the best way to go about things! Let the system work itself out with angry users pushing technicians to improve archives to have the best working system in the end. The Google system is hardly "done" and it's only going to get better with time.
The current dreck that's online only causes duplication and waste. Take a look someday at archive.org (for example), and see how many copies of the same book are available, if it's a popular book.
God forbid we have multiple copies of popular books in different archives.
black and white or colour none of which is truly good quality: broken characters, pages with dark margins, missing pages, typos or incorrect titles, wrong authors etc.
Quality is relative. Why prohibit use because we lack perfection?
Why did they bother?
Why did you bother? Why did I bother? Why does anybody bother? Probably because we all feel like it.
Just get modded "Funny: 5". That's your first class ticket to good karma. Insightful and Informatives are hard to get and you should only reach for them if you know spot on what you're talking about.
You're kidding me, 10-14% is a good royalty rate for an author?! That's disgusting.
It sounds disgusting, but the publisher has all the overhead (presses, distribution, marketing, and staff to support) and pretty much all the risk. e-Books excluded, books cost money to edit, typeset, print, ship, get shelf space, etc. Not to mention they also have a shelf life in this particular case. The publisher is absorbing all these costs and the author collects his or her royalties. Yeah it sucks to be getting paid that "little" relatively speaking, but note that the in the case of publishing, most of the heavy lifting is done by these companies, especially in the case of these tech books, where the content isn't so extreme and complex to write about as it would be in many engineering, math, and science textbooks. 10-14% seems pretty reasonable to me, IMHO, but I don't write or publish books.
A paradigm shit? I didn't even know they had anuses, or could even eat or drink for that matter. Do you have a camera? Could you take a picture? Or tell me where it is shitting?
Back then a militia was really comprised of a bunch of randos who brought their own guns from home ala "minuteman". You think the founding fathers would really write "a ragtag buncha dudes?" or "scruffy looking nerfherders with guns?" They just wrote it there to...put lipstick on a pig if you will.
That's pretty much exactly what I think a patent troll is. How would building up a massive portfolio with ambiguous wide-spanning patents on all your property imaginable not help deter patent trolls? Especially if they come at you with patents that overlap your own? I think we're talking past each other.
This isn't a solution, it's a self-centered kludge. A solution might have been to lobby strenuously for the abolition of software techniques or for the reform of how they are granted in the U.S.
I think Gates was opting for a more pragmatic solution. Lobbying for change takes time and money that may never pay off. Having huge patent exchanges was his quick way to secure as much of his company's IP from being pillaged by patent trolls (many of whom are lawyers and have lawyer friends in the political business...). Self-centered? I'd hope so, he was the CEO of M$ and it's his job to look out for his company's best interests. Besides, his proposal was completely legal and much more feasible to execute than "abolishing software techniques [sic]". Kludge? More like decisive.
I think that's actually "redneck" from the Jeff Foxworthy standup routine. Texans are a bit classier than your average redneck (usually hailing from southern Midwest (Arkansas, southern Missouri, Oklahoma, TN, and KY)...but not by much.
...take away consumers right to class action lawsuits? I thought requiring arbitration was one of those things like signing a waiver from liability, it gives the illusion of some legal protection, but it's not always the case? IANAL Please advise/inform if you know.
I think he meant the IBM PC platform, not so much IBM. An open platform probably won't work for apple, and it probably never will, and Apple will probably be set in the #2 for computers forever. But hey, they're still rolling in money with the rest of their product line + their computers.
That's pretty optimistic of you. The days of Apple being in a homebrew computer club ended decades ago. Steve Jobs could have been in a computer club back around his Stanford days, but he also has a board of directors, interested media parties, and other business partners to deal with Apple is just as corporate as any other big computer company. It has a bottom line, and shareholders to worry about....just like everybody else. I think the real reason why Apple is so lax is because it doesn't view these other guys as a viable threat (yet).
Slashdot Mirror
Rightfully disallow? Surely you mean the scam offers. There's nothing inherently wrong with monetizing lead generation, as long as you do it in a legitimate and safe ways. As a matter of fact, it's probably best to keep 3rd parties out of the process, but that's just MHO.
"Leave things alone until the government fucks it up" is not a good way to pursue public policy.
There, fixed that for you :-).
I dunno about any genies in bottles, but I do know about cats in bags.
d) The hospital for not only allowing internet access from a computer with personally identifiable information, but for also allowing the spyware to get installed. Bingo. They failed to take steps a reasonably prudent person would have taken to protect patient confidentiality under Federal law. Spyware installation via email is not exactly news.
Just because somebody's door is unlocked doesn't mean you can rob their house.
..With transparency? Hell the federal government can't account for the money it's spending (by knowing where it's being spent), much less keep track of many of its records. I'm curious to see how spewing them all over the Internet is going to help us track on everything.
What is needed is an open standard for scanned works, with minimum resolution, minimum quality, and minimum verified metadata such as subject, author, publisher, year etc.
Necessity is the mother invention. Wait for one to pop up, or go make one up. Nobody's stopping you.
All those are trivially listed on the title page of every book. All one has to do is open the damn book and flip a few pages, but that appears to be too hard for some people.
Opening the covers of every possible resource you use is quite easy when you have a discrete, present set of resources to thumb through. What if your resources aren't present, are high in number, or (lo!) are undefined...because you don't even know what exactly it is you're looking for?
This is a long term project for humanity. There's absolutely no point in having crappy scans with garbage metadata available quickly today, when it could be available correctly with good quality in say five years.
I think you're absolutely wrong. It's naive to assume we can just have an instant rubber-meets-the-road system available in x years without rigorous testing and input on the part of users. No point? Hah! This is absolutely the best way to go about things! Let the system work itself out with angry users pushing technicians to improve archives to have the best working system in the end. The Google system is hardly "done" and it's only going to get better with time.
The current dreck that's online only causes duplication and waste. Take a look someday at archive.org (for example), and see how many copies of the same book are available, if it's a popular book.
God forbid we have multiple copies of popular books in different archives.
black and white or colour none of which is truly good quality: broken characters, pages with dark margins, missing pages, typos or incorrect titles, wrong authors etc.
Quality is relative. Why prohibit use because we lack perfection?
Why did they bother?
Why did you bother? Why did I bother? Why does anybody bother? Probably because we all feel like it.
Just get modded "Funny: 5". That's your first class ticket to good karma. Insightful and Informatives are hard to get and you should only reach for them if you know spot on what you're talking about.
How many tech authors do you know make their sole source of income by sitting around writing tech books?
Yeah whoops on that. Thanks for nitpicking my comment :-P
You're kidding me, 10-14% is a good royalty rate for an author?! That's disgusting.
It sounds disgusting, but the publisher has all the overhead (presses, distribution, marketing, and staff to support) and pretty much all the risk. e-Books excluded, books cost money to edit, typeset, print, ship, get shelf space, etc. Not to mention they also have a shelf life in this particular case. The publisher is absorbing all these costs and the author collects his or her royalties. Yeah it sucks to be getting paid that "little" relatively speaking, but note that the in the case of publishing, most of the heavy lifting is done by these companies, especially in the case of these tech books, where the content isn't so extreme and complex to write about as it would be in many engineering, math, and science textbooks. 10-14% seems pretty reasonable to me, IMHO, but I don't write or publish books.
I was about to try this out. Now I'm keeping Pidgin. TY Slashdot for the save!
Why all these games have pictures of half naked women running around in the snow like it's no big deal. They look really, really cold.
I'm seeing a paradigm shit here
A paradigm shit? I didn't even know they had anuses, or could even eat or drink for that matter. Do you have a camera? Could you take a picture? Or tell me where it is shitting?
or "Faith you'll need to Change in".
Back then a militia was really comprised of a bunch of randos who brought their own guns from home ala "minuteman". You think the founding fathers would really write "a ragtag buncha dudes?" or "scruffy looking nerfherders with guns?" They just wrote it there to...put lipstick on a pig if you will.
That's pretty much exactly what I think a patent troll is. How would building up a massive portfolio with ambiguous wide-spanning patents on all your property imaginable not help deter patent trolls? Especially if they come at you with patents that overlap your own? I think we're talking past each other.
This isn't a solution, it's a self-centered kludge. A solution might have been to lobby strenuously for the abolition of software techniques or for the reform of how they are granted in the U.S.
I think Gates was opting for a more pragmatic solution. Lobbying for change takes time and money that may never pay off. Having huge patent exchanges was his quick way to secure as much of his company's IP from being pillaged by patent trolls (many of whom are lawyers and have lawyer friends in the political business...). Self-centered? I'd hope so, he was the CEO of M$ and it's his job to look out for his company's best interests. Besides, his proposal was completely legal and much more feasible to execute than "abolishing software techniques [sic]". Kludge? More like decisive.
I think that's actually "redneck" from the Jeff Foxworthy standup routine. Texans are a bit classier than your average redneck (usually hailing from southern Midwest (Arkansas, southern Missouri, Oklahoma, TN, and KY)...but not by much.
And things turned out well for Mussolini. Just sayin'. Too soon?
...take away consumers right to class action lawsuits? I thought requiring arbitration was one of those things like signing a waiver from liability, it gives the illusion of some legal protection, but it's not always the case? IANAL Please advise/inform if you know.
I think he meant the IBM PC platform, not so much IBM. An open platform probably won't work for apple, and it probably never will, and Apple will probably be set in the #2 for computers forever. But hey, they're still rolling in money with the rest of their product line + their computers.
Bullsh*T! Software programmers aren't people!
That's pretty optimistic of you. The days of Apple being in a homebrew computer club ended decades ago. Steve Jobs could have been in a computer club back around his Stanford days, but he also has a board of directors, interested media parties, and other business partners to deal with Apple is just as corporate as any other big computer company. It has a bottom line, and shareholders to worry about....just like everybody else. I think the real reason why Apple is so lax is because it doesn't view these other guys as a viable threat (yet).
Exactly, you're still paying to break free of DRM one way or the other.
Story at 11. Really guys, how is it news that the RIAA is looking for more ways to extend their failed business models?