Ah, but therein lies the rub; he DOESN'T need to 'write something;' he can comment where comments are called for, and leave the rest to be. Hell, he could admit that they're not being dirty and deceptive anymore, they're just being good little capatailists and reacting to threats, the way, well gosh, the OSS community does, too.
Not to mention that their security 'sucks dead maggots through a straw.' Having run out of actual things to call Microsoft upon, it's nice to see the bulwarks of OSS are reduced to such as this.
Maybe one of these days I'll try out some dead-equine-flagellation myself; it seems to be awful fun. Happens so much around here, I MUST be missing out on something....
And, more to the point, the anime companies do tend to use the fansub community as an indicator of what properties they should bring to North America next.
That having been said, copyright does work differently in Japan; you can do alot more in terms of 'fan' derived work, so long as it's not commerical.
Quest for Glory 4, from Sierra, as originally released on four or five floppies, had a scripting error such that a major plot point simply wouldn't occur. This rendered the game unbeatable; you simply couldn't advance past a certain point, as a meeting with the mysterious girl wouldn't take place. Bummer.
At the risk of starting a flame war, by that definition, the Catholic Church, at several notable points during it's history, such as most of the middle ages, and, some would say what with the priest sex scandels to this very day, is a 'cult'.
This is the religion, after all, that sold indulgences and allowed family members to pay to get their deceased loved ones out of purgatory more quickly....
Cult: A small, unpopular religion.
Religion: A large, popular cult.
Re:My Girl Friend'S Decision Not To Be A Doctor
on
Complications
·
· Score: 2
I think that many many professions, medicine being one of them, need similar rules as airline pilots; there are laws about how many hours you can fly, how much rest you need between each flight, etc etc.
90 hour work weeks? That's insane! I don't want a sleep-deprived, annoyed doctor tinkering with my innards!
For much the same reason that, say, glibc is required for most Linux apps; once you have a better than 5 percent chance that multiple programs will use the same functionality, you put the buggers in a library. Then you expose the library. The fact that the libraries happen to come with a little wrapper executable not withstanding; like the man says, removing iexplore.exe doesn't remove the underlying guts anymore than removing ls removes the underlying filesystem.
And, yes, at this point, exposing app-level libs for common TCP/IP protocols makes sense. Has for years.
I don't think killing is bad; I'm actually quite for it, in the right circumstances.
My point here is that the *designer's intent* was to create a device to kill people more efficiently; that doesn't make it good, or evil, or assign it an intrinsic role; it was, however, explicitly designed to kill people.
Designer's intent. Say it with me...designer's intent.
Can you name anything else the designers of the firearm thought you might do with it, other than attempt to kill something/somebody with it?
The fact that you choose not to kill with it doesn't mitigate the fact that it's designed to kill. The fact that you can now come up with other things to do with it (say, sport shooting) doesn't mitigate the fact that it was designed, originally, to kill people.
As opposed to, say, the ball point pen, which was designed to make ink marks, but it was later discovered that, yes, you could stab somebody with it. That wasn't, however, the design intention.
By that, I mean write-once PROMs that can be popped into a digital camera; they can hold x number of pictures, and when you click the button, the picture gets burned right into the PROM.
Burn in a checksum or something as well, and you can tell if bits were removed. Build it so that it's not random access, and you can't swap bits around or anything.
Sure, you'd need another system if you WERE doing enhancements or changes or anything, but the ability to pull out a PROM chip and say 'here is the original photo, guarenteed unaltered' would be good.
I personally prefer the observer theory; anything which was observed as happening, will happen. Period. Cannot be altered.
I think, though that the Terminator series wound up going into the 'many universes' theory of continuum changes; each change creates a branch, and an entirely new reality.
True, but that wouldn't alter what *already happened.*
Skynet, being an intelligent computer, sends four separate terminators into the past. One, to kill Sarah Conner before she gets pregnant. One, to kill John Conner when he's a kid. One, to kill John Conner as an adult. And one, to kill John Conner while he's trying to organize the resistance.
Remember, in T2, another of Arnie's arms gets left behind in some gears. Plus, Teradyne would likely have offsite backups. Or something.
But the point is, that if Skynet could send back one Terminator, it could send back thousands. Now, the logical flaws occur in the 'why would it send back a T-800, then a T-1000, then a T-X? Why not send back a whack of it's top of the line model?' and other such issues, but what can you do?
Remember, it didn't send one back, wait to see if it worked, send another back, and so on; it sent a whack back. Only one ever needed to work. And if you look at it from a time paradox point of view, if the first Terminator had succeeded in killing Sarah Conner, Teradyne wouldn't have had the chips and what not to reverse-engineer the T-800.
I think that one of the things we might just find out is that each of the Terminators sent back were also programmed to 'seed' their technology into the world, to *ensure* that Skynet came about.
This movie could do a fine job of wrapping up several loose ends, or it could simply be a cash grab. We'll see, I guess.
Oh, and remember, the ORIGINAL ending for T2 specifically showed that the future turned out bright and sunny. They rewrote that to the 'highway' ending to leave it open.
Lawyer: We lawyers are here on behalf of the estate of Jimmy Durante, and object to this blatant infringement of my client's movies.
Grandpa: Would it be alright if I just laid down in the street and DIED?
Lawyer: (consults documents) Yes, that would be acceptable.
Ah, but not in Canada, where we have laws against that on the books, to prevent people from standing around, watching him die, saying 'Gosh, I'd help, but he looks litigious.....'
Lets say you kill somebody; even if you didn't know that murder is illegal, you committed murder; therefore, you are charged.
Now, lets say you came across an accident, tried to drag a man out of his burning car, not realizing he had a neck injury, and killed him. This is NOT murder; you did not intend to kill him. You intended to help him.
Now, ebook reader. If you write a program to crack PDFs so you can distribute them unencrypted, you're INTENDING to circumvent copyright. If you write a program to crack PDFs so you can then convert them to text to feed them into your text-to-speech program, as you're blind, you are NOT intending to circumvent copyright.
*nod* They can turn around and use this to get an official legal ruiling that a piece of software that *can* be used to circumvent copyright does NOT mean that it is intrinsically illegal, just like a knife *can* be used to murder somebody, but isn't intrinically illegal; it's useage and intent, not capability.
If they do that, they can set a precident allowing for other pieces of software to be pro-actively certified.
Note that this might not apply to DeCSS, now that I think about it, because the decrypt key they're using was stolen from another piece of software.
No, but it *does* undermine the way in which the corps wanted to *use* the law.
This will make it a lot harder for any company to send out a DMCA notice; they now have to have reasonable belief that a copyright infringement was intended to be a copyright infringement; DeCSS, for example, was not so intended.
Before this, it was 'you're infringing, you get smacked.' Now, it's 'You're infringing, and you MEAN to be infringing, so you get smacked.'
I wonder if HARM missles; which home in on radar sets and the like from their own emissions, would also home in on your little Linksys AP at that point...hmmmmm.
If I had mod points, they'd be yours, my good man.
Except for that last line. The REAL way to get revenge on a mom&pop is not, of course, to get some really really nice card stock, print out some fancy looking 'gift certificates' or 'free item giveaway' flyers, and anonymously leave them at a local place of congregation. That would be wrong, probably illegal, and very very mean.
Let us speak of the dark times, the burning times. There was a time, young'uns, when programmers were so common that there wasn't enough work for them all. But then, as entropy set in, systems broke down. There was a terrible backlash against the system developers. Then, in 2012, the so called Gates Law passed, making it legal to hunt and kill programmers. This gave rise to a new breed of hunter...the devloppers.
*bang bang bang* Open the door, 'grammer! We know you're teaching C in there!
Quickly children! Out the trapdoor and into the woods! I'll try to stall them as long as I can!
There is a Japanese word, I forget the exact pronounciation, but it translates as '(member of) the beside-the-window tribe.'
This term is applied to a company employee that simply will not do anything else of note, will not advance, has reached his limits. However, they won't insult him by firing him. So they give him a nice office, with a nice window view (hence the term) and leave him to look out the window until he retires, quits, or jumps.
It's not a matter of 'keeping the workers happy,' it's a matter of 'thanks for supporting us by working for us; let us return the favour by supporting you by not firing you as soon as it's no longer expediant to keep you around.' It's a mutual respect thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, but therein lies the rub; he DOESN'T need to 'write something;' he can comment where comments are called for, and leave the rest to be. Hell, he could admit that they're not being dirty and deceptive anymore, they're just being good little capatailists and reacting to threats, the way, well gosh, the OSS community does, too.
Not to mention that their security 'sucks dead maggots through a straw.' Having run out of actual things to call Microsoft upon, it's nice to see the bulwarks of OSS are reduced to such as this.
Maybe one of these days I'll try out some dead-equine-flagellation myself; it seems to be awful fun. Happens so much around here, I MUST be missing out on something....
And, more to the point, the anime companies do tend to use the fansub community as an indicator of what properties they should bring to North America next.
That having been said, copyright does work differently in Japan; you can do alot more in terms of 'fan' derived work, so long as it's not commerical.
Quest for Glory 4, from Sierra, as originally released on four or five floppies, had a scripting error such that a major plot point simply wouldn't occur. This rendered the game unbeatable; you simply couldn't advance past a certain point, as a meeting with the mysterious girl wouldn't take place. Bummer.
At the risk of starting a flame war, by that definition, the Catholic Church, at several notable points during it's history, such as most of the middle ages, and, some would say what with the priest sex scandels to this very day, is a 'cult'.
This is the religion, after all, that sold indulgences and allowed family members to pay to get their deceased loved ones out of purgatory more quickly....
As seen on a /. sig...
I think that many many professions, medicine being one of them, need similar rules as airline pilots; there are laws about how many hours you can fly, how much rest you need between each flight, etc etc.
90 hour work weeks? That's insane! I don't want a sleep-deprived, annoyed doctor tinkering with my innards!
For much the same reason that, say, glibc is required for most Linux apps; once you have a better than 5 percent chance that multiple programs will use the same functionality, you put the buggers in a library. Then you expose the library. The fact that the libraries happen to come with a little wrapper executable not withstanding; like the man says, removing iexplore.exe doesn't remove the underlying guts anymore than removing ls removes the underlying filesystem.
And, yes, at this point, exposing app-level libs for common TCP/IP protocols makes sense. Has for years.
I don't think killing is bad; I'm actually quite for it, in the right circumstances.
My point here is that the *designer's intent* was to create a device to kill people more efficiently; that doesn't make it good, or evil, or assign it an intrinsic role; it was, however, explicitly designed to kill people.
Designer's intent. Say it with me...designer's intent.
Can you name anything else the designers of the firearm thought you might do with it, other than attempt to kill something/somebody with it?
The fact that you choose not to kill with it doesn't mitigate the fact that it's designed to kill. The fact that you can now come up with other things to do with it (say, sport shooting) doesn't mitigate the fact that it was designed, originally, to kill people.
As opposed to, say, the ball point pen, which was designed to make ink marks, but it was later discovered that, yes, you could stab somebody with it. That wasn't, however, the design intention.
Well, that's easy enough; make 'digital film.'
By that, I mean write-once PROMs that can be popped into a digital camera; they can hold x number of pictures, and when you click the button, the picture gets burned right into the PROM.
Burn in a checksum or something as well, and you can tell if bits were removed. Build it so that it's not random access, and you can't swap bits around or anything.
Sure, you'd need another system if you WERE doing enhancements or changes or anything, but the ability to pull out a PROM chip and say 'here is the original photo, guarenteed unaltered' would be good.
I personally prefer the observer theory; anything which was observed as happening, will happen. Period. Cannot be altered.
I think, though that the Terminator series wound up going into the 'many universes' theory of continuum changes; each change creates a branch, and an entirely new reality.
"Organic" doesn't necessarily mean "carbon based."
True, but that wouldn't alter what *already happened.*
Skynet, being an intelligent computer, sends four separate terminators into the past. One, to kill Sarah Conner before she gets pregnant. One, to kill John Conner when he's a kid. One, to kill John Conner as an adult. And one, to kill John Conner while he's trying to organize the resistance.
Remember, in T2, another of Arnie's arms gets left behind in some gears. Plus, Teradyne would likely have offsite backups. Or something.
But the point is, that if Skynet could send back one Terminator, it could send back thousands. Now, the logical flaws occur in the 'why would it send back a T-800, then a T-1000, then a T-X? Why not send back a whack of it's top of the line model?' and other such issues, but what can you do?
Remember, it didn't send one back, wait to see if it worked, send another back, and so on; it sent a whack back. Only one ever needed to work. And if you look at it from a time paradox point of view, if the first Terminator had succeeded in killing Sarah Conner, Teradyne wouldn't have had the chips and what not to reverse-engineer the T-800.
I think that one of the things we might just find out is that each of the Terminators sent back were also programmed to 'seed' their technology into the world, to *ensure* that Skynet came about.
This movie could do a fine job of wrapping up several loose ends, or it could simply be a cash grab. We'll see, I guess.
Oh, and remember, the ORIGINAL ending for T2 specifically showed that the future turned out bright and sunny. They rewrote that to the 'highway' ending to leave it open.
Hell, one of the simplest things you can do is log all root/admin commands to a hardcopy printer at a differnet location.
Yup, it did, and it wasn't a bad little game, either.
I think I actually got it in a bundle with Privateer/Privateer: Righteous Fire.
Home of the Underdogs has it here: http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?name=Strike+ Commander
Ah, but not in Canada, where we have laws against that on the books, to prevent people from standing around, watching him die, saying 'Gosh, I'd help, but he looks litigious.....'
Nope, that's different.
Lets say you kill somebody; even if you didn't know that murder is illegal, you committed murder; therefore, you are charged.
Now, lets say you came across an accident, tried to drag a man out of his burning car, not realizing he had a neck injury, and killed him. This is NOT murder; you did not intend to kill him. You intended to help him.
Now, ebook reader. If you write a program to crack PDFs so you can distribute them unencrypted, you're INTENDING to circumvent copyright. If you write a program to crack PDFs so you can then convert them to text to feed them into your text-to-speech program, as you're blind, you are NOT intending to circumvent copyright.
*nod* They can turn around and use this to get an official legal ruiling that a piece of software that *can* be used to circumvent copyright does NOT mean that it is intrinsically illegal, just like a knife *can* be used to murder somebody, but isn't intrinically illegal; it's useage and intent, not capability.
If they do that, they can set a precident allowing for other pieces of software to be pro-actively certified.
Note that this might not apply to DeCSS, now that I think about it, because the decrypt key they're using was stolen from another piece of software.
No, but it *does* undermine the way in which the corps wanted to *use* the law.
This will make it a lot harder for any company to send out a DMCA notice; they now have to have reasonable belief that a copyright infringement was intended to be a copyright infringement; DeCSS, for example, was not so intended.
Before this, it was 'you're infringing, you get smacked.' Now, it's 'You're infringing, and you MEAN to be infringing, so you get smacked.'
I wonder if HARM missles; which home in on radar sets and the like from their own emissions, would also home in on your little Linksys AP at that point...hmmmmm.
If I had mod points, they'd be yours, my good man.
Except for that last line. The REAL way to get revenge on a mom&pop is not, of course, to get some really really nice card stock, print out some fancy looking 'gift certificates' or 'free item giveaway' flyers, and anonymously leave them at a local place of congregation. That would be wrong, probably illegal, and very very mean.
ROFL
Let us speak of the dark times, the burning times. There was a time, young'uns, when programmers were so common that there wasn't enough work for them all. But then, as entropy set in, systems broke down. There was a terrible backlash against the system developers. Then, in 2012, the so called Gates Law passed, making it legal to hunt and kill programmers. This gave rise to a new breed of hunter...the devloppers.
*bang bang bang* Open the door, 'grammer! We know you're teaching C in there!
Quickly children! Out the trapdoor and into the woods! I'll try to stall them as long as I can!
There is a Japanese word, I forget the exact pronounciation, but it translates as '(member of) the beside-the-window tribe.'
This term is applied to a company employee that simply will not do anything else of note, will not advance, has reached his limits. However, they won't insult him by firing him. So they give him a nice office, with a nice window view (hence the term) and leave him to look out the window until he retires, quits, or jumps.
It's not a matter of 'keeping the workers happy,' it's a matter of 'thanks for supporting us by working for us; let us return the favour by supporting you by not firing you as soon as it's no longer expediant to keep you around.' It's a mutual respect thing.