Broken Window fallacy cannot apply here if this is a matter of common good, as opposes to matters that target specific businesses. Considering American companies as a whole and the nature of climate affecting everyone, the EPA regulations, with enough evidence of harm, is enough to act as a public good for change where individual businesses as a collective has failed. Other examples include public health, segregation, labor laws, traffic laws and so forth.
Pain depends on the afferent nerves. If you cut off the pathway of your nerves to the brain, then you cannot feel it. Our brains can also be trained to ignore these signals over time, or to recreate the memory of pain. Since they are just neuron signals, some people can even enjoy pain.
The issue is: who will be in charge of ICANN in the future?
ICANN's job is: to accept or reject domain names and to say which domain names point to which IP addresses.
The source of problem is: the U.S. has refused to give up control of ICANN to UN. Other countries want the U.S. to give up control of ICANN.
The stake of controlling ICANN is: money from taxing domain names and power to censor news and information.
The consequence is: domain names will point to different computers depending on where you are. You have to manually type in the IP address to specify the domain name server or web server you want to use, especially if you travel out of country or do business with foreign entities.
The impact is: If you are a geek, it is only a minor disruption. If you are working for a company, it means more work. If you are not a geek, your IT admin will take care of it and you probably won't notice any different while surfing the net.
The U.S. strength is: the U.S. is the largest market in the world for trades and businesses. Its military is the best in the world. Countries do not want to risk disrupting their trade communications with the U.S. or any retaliation from the U.S.
The U.S. weakness is: Many root servers (internet infrastructure if you will) are located outside the U.S. allowing other countries to set up their own systems if they wanted. The U.S. depends on oil and goods from these countries to power its market.
Why do you care who gets what? Let the corporations fight among themselves. As far as I am concern, the tax allows us to listen to the music the way we want, and run office 2005...
Once upon a time, you don't get a browser with your OS. You need to get it from a disk or somewhere else. Then, Microsoft changes the rules. Now, we have people thinking what is the point of the browser wars: "OS first, browser selection consequential" indeed!
Imagine this then: netscape wins the war, develops all the network libraries (wireless, dialup, home network, etc) and the COM interfaces (sort of advanced version of plug-in or xul). Then probably, all your office applications will be written in Java and runs as part of a network. Computers become terminals and a household probably has a unix-like server with cable connection and many winxp-like terminals. How's that?
"Title 17, Chapter 1, Sec. 107. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors";
.. that they can pull this off. In these days and age, they should be able to make a few decent shots of the moon landings. Though I am not so sure if they can beat Hollywood's movie magic.
In FPS, the boundary of the world is usually a curtain of texture behind a wall or a sea or some sort of unpassable terrains. We live in a sperical earth surrounded by empty space and bounded by a somewhat arbituary constant, the speed of light, that prevent us from getting out of this universe. It is kind of similar, isn't it?
The premise of censorship is that offensive content contaminates the hearts and minds of people. But you can only have censorship if someone can judge content without himself being contaminated. This contradicts the premise of censorship, which alleges that these contaminating powers exist inherently in the offensive material. On the other hand, if a censor can censor without being contaminated, that implies that offensive content does not automatically contaminate the mind or heart of a person. In that case, you would be admitting that censorship is unnecessary. That is the contradiction of censorship.
In making these statements, you assumed that all minds are equal and capable of judging content, which is not necessary true.
Your current product line still sucks. Think long-term. All products will become obsolete in time. The key is to create a better feedback loop between marketing your products and getting good comments for future improvements.
- Listen to developers. - Make sure the developers have everything they need and more. - Reduce the barriers between your own developers and them. - Get your sales people into developments. - Create trust.
We all know that something is definitely different for GPL violations. That's right. It is after an individual and small company copy the software (which is actually legal), they modify the software (legal) and distribute it (legal) without the source (oh oh) So GPL violations is not okay. The principle of the matter is different because the individual and small company is claiming ownership of the software.
"Thou shalt not steal" the opportunity for me to learn these software!
You are only stealing software because the law say so. In fact, software is not a property and nothing in the law says that piracy is stealing. The worst this can be is copyright violation. Malaysia as a country can create an exception for such "stealing". Of course, U.S. and other countries can also do what they want.
But he is genuinely passionate about open source, and for that we can all learn something from him. I know I am not looking forward to the day RMS is unable to continue his mission with the open source movement.
I would like to see RMS's reaction to this comment.
In the first Vivendi's amendment to the lawsuit, Vivendi claims that BNETD copied source code from Blizzard by examine the source code available at sourceforge. Well, who can say it is the reverse that happened? - http://www.bnetd.org/case_letters.php
please restrict fair use
on
Coding Fair Use
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
A few of these articles has this heading: "Please do not cite or quote without permission." This says much more than the article itself. Oops, i just quote from the article!
Well, they aren't getting my friend's money and my friend's friend's money. That means I won't recommend this game for them and I am giving away my copy because it wasn't worth keeping. hah!
It is hard to copy Microsoft's standards, but it is easy for Mozilla to simply follow the W3C standard. Then we will see who is defying the standards, though many AOL users may not know the difference.
And the result of this mockup experiment is the uconn physicist will have an element particle travels through 10^-32 seconds of time, so that the rest of the physicists may spend the next 200 year proving/disputing the claim. Fermat's Last Theorem, anyone?
Whether Linux go mainstream or not is secondary to what we stand up for as a community. Would you trade some parts of the GPL just for that? I'll certainly not.
Yes, software consumers may not be capable of independently producing their own software, which is why they generally don't know what they want, if they haven't seen what is available. Consumers always describe what they want in terms of what is available, like windows that doesn't crash.
But, do they have to independently producing their own software? In free software development model, you don't need to independently producing software. Perhaps consumers may find enough producers once all the proprietary licenses are gone.
Your analogy is better suited to USA than RMS. RMS is not anti-freedom. He is anti-the-freedom-of-choosing-proprietary-license (which to him is poison) and anti-the-freedom-of-producers-to-choose-to-poison- the-consumer-with-proprietary-license.
A better analogy would be stopping a country who has invaded us and claims to be democratic. RMS is making people realize that they don't need proprietary software, because he tasted them.
------- You may choose to eat a bullet, but you may not choose to shoot anyone. Consumers may claim freedom of what software to use because it only affects themselves. Producers may not claim freedom of what license to use because this so-called freedom is aimed directly at the consumers.
Slashdot Mirror
Broken Window fallacy cannot apply here if this is a matter of common good, as opposes to matters that target specific businesses. Considering American companies as a whole and the nature of climate affecting everyone, the EPA regulations, with enough evidence of harm, is enough to act as a public good for change where individual businesses as a collective has failed. Other examples include public health, segregation, labor laws, traffic laws and so forth.
Pain depends on the afferent nerves. If you cut off the pathway of your nerves to the brain, then you cannot feel it. Our brains can also be trained to ignore these signals over time, or to recreate the memory of pain. Since they are just neuron signals, some people can even enjoy pain.
The issue is: who will be in charge of ICANN in the future?
ICANN's job is: to accept or reject domain names and to say which domain names point to which IP addresses.
The source of problem is: the U.S. has refused to give up control of ICANN to UN. Other countries want the U.S. to give up control of ICANN.
The stake of controlling ICANN is: money from taxing domain names and power to censor news and information.
The consequence is: domain names will point to different computers depending on where you are. You have to manually type in the IP address to specify the domain name server or web server you want to use, especially if you travel out of country or do business with foreign entities.
The impact is: If you are a geek, it is only a minor disruption. If you are working for a company, it means more work. If you are not a geek, your IT admin will take care of it and you probably won't notice any different while surfing the net.
The U.S. strength is: the U.S. is the largest market in the world for trades and businesses. Its military is the best in the world. Countries do not want to risk disrupting their trade communications with the U.S. or any retaliation from the U.S.
The U.S. weakness is: Many root servers (internet infrastructure if you will) are located outside the U.S. allowing other countries to set up their own systems if they wanted. The U.S. depends on oil and goods from these countries to power its market.
The solution is: ???
This might actually result in a higher quality crop of students in the next few years.
Dream on. The class will be popuplated by many genuine indians from the mystical offshore.
Why do you care who gets what? Let the corporations fight among themselves. As far as I am concern, the tax allows us to listen to the music the way we want, and run office 2005...
You can be part of the the Class action if you are willing to admit that you are stupid.
I permenantly lose 0.68 seconds reading these messages.
Once upon a time, you don't get a browser with your OS. You need to get it from a disk or somewhere else. Then, Microsoft changes the rules. Now, we have people thinking what is the point of the browser wars: "OS first, browser selection consequential" indeed!
Imagine this then: netscape wins the war, develops all the network libraries (wireless, dialup, home network, etc) and the COM interfaces (sort of advanced version of plug-in or xul). Then probably, all your office applications will be written in Java and runs as part of a network. Computers become terminals and a household probably has a unix-like server with cable connection and many winxp-like terminals. How's that?
personal use == scholarship ? Quote :
"Title 17, Chapter 1, Sec. 107. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors";
An article meant to clarify confused the hell out of /.ers. That's ironic.
.. that they can pull this off. In these days and age, they should be able to make a few decent shots of the moon landings. Though I am not so sure if they can beat Hollywood's movie magic.
In FPS, the boundary of the world is usually a curtain of texture behind a wall or a sea or some sort of unpassable terrains. We live in a sperical earth surrounded by empty space and bounded by a somewhat arbituary constant, the speed of light, that prevent us from getting out of this universe. It is kind of similar, isn't it?
Perhaps 60% of p2p traffic is spam, 60% of spam traffic is porn, 60% of porn traffic runs on p2p.
The premise of censorship is that offensive content contaminates the hearts and minds of people. But you can only have censorship if someone can judge content without himself being contaminated. This contradicts the premise of censorship, which alleges that these contaminating powers exist inherently in the offensive material. On the other hand, if a censor can censor without being contaminated, that implies that offensive content does not automatically contaminate the mind or heart of a person. In that case, you would be admitting that censorship is unnecessary. That is the contradiction of censorship.
In making these statements, you assumed that all minds are equal and capable of judging content, which is not necessary true.
Transfer rate of full 4 Megapixel picture = 47 seconds per picture
Transfer rate of vga resolution image = 1.5 seconds per picture
Transfer rate of Thumbnail pictures = 6.5 frame per second
Also, zdnet:
Starting time = 0.9 seconds
shutter time lag = 0.35 seconds
Time between shots = 1.7 seconds
It supports memory stick.
Your current product line still sucks. Think long-term. All products will become obsolete in time. The key is to create a better feedback loop between marketing your products and getting good comments for future improvements.
- Listen to developers.
- Make sure the developers have everything they need and more.
- Reduce the barriers between your own developers and them.
- Get your sales people into developments.
- Create trust.
We all know that something is definitely different for GPL violations. That's right. It is after an individual and small company copy the software (which is actually legal), they modify the software (legal) and distribute it (legal) without the source (oh oh) So GPL violations is not okay. The principle of the matter is different because the individual and small company is claiming ownership of the software.
"Thou shalt not steal" the opportunity for me to learn these software!
You are only stealing software because the law say so. In fact, software is not a property and nothing in the law says that piracy is stealing. The worst this can be is copyright violation. Malaysia as a country can create an exception for such "stealing". Of course, U.S. and other countries can also do what they want.
But he is genuinely passionate about open source, and for that we can all learn something from him. I know I am not looking forward to the day RMS is unable to continue his mission with the open source movement.
I would like to see RMS's reaction to this comment.
In the first Vivendi's amendment to the lawsuit, Vivendi claims that BNETD copied source code from Blizzard by examine the source code available at sourceforge. Well, who can say it is the reverse that happened? - http://www.bnetd.org/case_letters.php
A few of these articles has this heading: "Please do not cite or quote without permission." This says much more than the article itself. Oops, i just quote from the article!
Unless you run Mozilla with Sun Java plugin.
Well, they aren't getting my friend's money and my friend's friend's money. That means I won't recommend this game for them and I am giving away my copy because it wasn't worth keeping. hah!
It is hard to copy Microsoft's standards, but it is easy for Mozilla to simply follow the W3C standard. Then we will see who is defying the standards, though many AOL users may not know the difference.
And the result of this mockup experiment is the uconn physicist will have an element particle travels through 10^-32 seconds of time, so that the rest of the physicists may spend the next 200 year proving/disputing the claim. Fermat's Last Theorem, anyone?
Whether Linux go mainstream or not is secondary to what we stand up for as a community. Would you trade some parts of the GPL just for that? I'll certainly not.
- the-consumer-with-proprietary-license.
Yes, software consumers may not be capable of independently producing their own software, which is why they generally don't know what they want, if they haven't seen what is available. Consumers always describe what they want in terms of what is available, like windows that doesn't crash.
But, do they have to independently producing their own software? In free software development model, you don't need to independently producing software. Perhaps consumers may find enough producers once all the proprietary licenses are gone.
Your analogy is better suited to USA than RMS. RMS is not anti-freedom. He is anti-the-freedom-of-choosing-proprietary-license (which to him is poison) and anti-the-freedom-of-producers-to-choose-to-poison
A better analogy would be stopping a country who has invaded us and claims to be democratic. RMS is making people realize that they don't need proprietary software, because he tasted them.
-------
You may choose to eat a bullet, but you may not choose to shoot anyone. Consumers may claim freedom of what software to use because it only affects themselves. Producers may not claim freedom of what license to use because this so-called freedom is aimed directly at the consumers.