Well, even there, I would argue that yes, there's a difference between "Give me document 12345, my name is BobHoward and my password is 'Alpha Niner Tango Five'" and "Give me document 12345."
Ok, but here's the problem. What happens when 'offensive speech' is things like 'I don't agree with our political leadership' or 'women should have equal rights' or 'maybe we shouldn't enslave people' or 'I have this theory that the Earth orbits the Sun?'
Altered Carbon the Netflix Series was great as a standalone series, terrible as an adaptation. All of the major character changes were utterly unnecessary. The only one that made sense from a 'production' standpoint was rewriting The Hendrix into The Poe.
Ok, but now you have this logical fallacy:
it's some how worse ten people to be shot in a single mass killing than for a hundred people to be individually stabbed during a given day.
Your assumption is that if guns magically disappeared from the US of A, the murder rate would drop about 5 times. My assumption is that if guns magically disappeared from the US of A, the murder rate would stay about the same, but the tools used would change.
Ok, but you know how many mass *killings* the UK has has since Dunblane? And how many before Dunblane in which firearms were used? Lets see. 1972 - Bomb - 12 dead. 1974 - bomb - 5 dead. 1974 - bomb - 21 dead. 1980 - arson - 37 dead. 1987 - Shooting - 16 dead. 1988 - bomb - 270 dead. 1996 - shooting - 18 dead. 2005 - bomb - 52 dead. 2010 - shooting - 12 dead. 2017 - vehicle and knife - 6 dead. 2017 - bomb - 23 dead. 2017 - vehicle and knife - 8 dead.
So, what we see in the UK is that mass killings a) generally aren't via gun, b) guns aren't particularly extra efficient.
Now, I'm all for increased firearm licensing and regulation, but it has to be a) effective, b) not trampling on the rights of lawful gun owners, and c) not bullshit security theater.
On the other hand, people have to stop worrying about 'gun violence' and address the root causes of, well, 'violence.' Shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, blowed up, shouldn't matter. But for some reason, it does. And one reason is human psychology and mass media.
Put a report on prime time CNN each and every time somebody dies to a drunk driver, and see what happens.
Depends on your definition of 'reasonable and prudent.' If 'reasonable and prudent' involves 'and you never know if a pedestrian might jump out in front of you from behind an obstruction, ten feet away from you,' then no human or robot should ever be driving above, oh, five feet per second?
And trucks sitting in a warehouse for 16 hours a day aren't making anybody any money. And who cares if they're burning extra fuel in exchange for not paying wage and upkeep for a driver, no longer having to worry about overtime, rest requirements, etc etc.
Hmmm, I'd replace the word 'faith' with 'trust,' then agree with you.
If he was relying on faith, evidence to the contrary wouldn't bother him. If he was relying on trust, on the other hand, and that trust was betrayed, well, that can, and does, shatter people all the time.
So, you're saying that the site that bills itself as 'the encyclopedia that anybody can edit' will be made worse by having more people edit it?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I've known that for years, but I'm glad more people are coming to the realization that Wikipedia's basic concept is flawed on it's face.
1) Doesn't matter. He was downloading somebody else's work, and selling it, including using their trademarked logos to confuse matters. 2) Doesn't matter. Intent does, as do 'substantial steps' towards the crime. They were seized being imported to the US on the way to his 'Sales partner.' 3) Doesn't matter. If his business was that massive, both Dell and Microsoft would have happily worked with him to provide the appropriate discs.
That's the thing. This wasn't 'I've got a DVD-R drive, I'll download and burn you the disc you need for reinstalling it.' It wasn't even 'I'll charge you 20 cents for the cost of a blank DVD-R.' Nor was it 'Every time I dumpster dive a computer, I burn the appropriate cd, scrawl 'recovery CD downloaded from [oem]' on it, and tape it to the chassis.'
No, it was 'I'll commission a fucking factory in China to crank out a production run, with somebody else's trademarked logos, and sell them for a profit.' Despite the fact that the OEMs will already quite happily sell you those discs, or let you download them for free.
If he'd given them away, he'd probably have been fine. He didn't. He attempted to sell other people's work for a profit.
If copying software which has already been paid for and is specifically attached to hardware isn't "fair use," what is?
That's a great argument, but it doesn't apply to this case. The guy wasn't 'copying software which has already been paid for,' he was 'selling somebody else's software and keeping the money.'
He thought that producing and selling restore discs to computer refurbishers
Emphasis mine, and I think that's the problem; it may be one thing if he were just downloading and including the discs that in theory would have come with the machine originally (though Dell's TOS may preclude that) but downloading and selling somebody else's work without permission is clearly not kosher.
OpenGL wasn't appropriate for gaming, to a large extent still isn't, and DirectX was also about making the rest of the toolset for games available; sound, input, networking. And don't forget that even using OpenGL at all for games was a backlash against needing a custom version for 3dfx, RivaTNT, Matrox, S3, Rendition, Trident, etc etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, even there, I would argue that yes, there's a difference between "Give me document 12345, my name is BobHoward and my password is 'Alpha Niner Tango Five'" and "Give me document 12345."
Ok, but here's the problem. What happens when 'offensive speech' is things like 'I don't agree with our political leadership' or 'women should have equal rights' or 'maybe we shouldn't enslave people' or 'I have this theory that the Earth orbits the Sun?'
Be unable to show them on Netflix? Or be unable to show them on Netflix France?
Altered Carbon the Netflix Series was great as a standalone series, terrible as an adaptation. All of the major character changes were utterly unnecessary. The only one that made sense from a 'production' standpoint was rewriting The Hendrix into The Poe.
Ok, but now you have this logical fallacy: it's some how worse ten people to be shot in a single mass killing than for a hundred people to be individually stabbed during a given day.
Your assumption is that if guns magically disappeared from the US of A, the murder rate would drop about 5 times. My assumption is that if guns magically disappeared from the US of A, the murder rate would stay about the same, but the tools used would change.
Ok, but you know how many mass *killings* the UK has has since Dunblane? And how many before Dunblane in which firearms were used?
Lets see.
1972 - Bomb - 12 dead.
1974 - bomb - 5 dead.
1974 - bomb - 21 dead.
1980 - arson - 37 dead.
1987 - Shooting - 16 dead.
1988 - bomb - 270 dead.
1996 - shooting - 18 dead.
2005 - bomb - 52 dead.
2010 - shooting - 12 dead.
2017 - vehicle and knife - 6 dead.
2017 - bomb - 23 dead.
2017 - vehicle and knife - 8 dead.
So, what we see in the UK is that mass killings a) generally aren't via gun, b) guns aren't particularly extra efficient.
Now, I'm all for increased firearm licensing and regulation, but it has to be a) effective, b) not trampling on the rights of lawful gun owners, and c) not bullshit security theater.
On the other hand, people have to stop worrying about 'gun violence' and address the root causes of, well, 'violence.' Shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, blowed up, shouldn't matter. But for some reason, it does. And one reason is human psychology and mass media.
Put a report on prime time CNN each and every time somebody dies to a drunk driver, and see what happens.
Depends on your definition of 'reasonable and prudent.' If 'reasonable and prudent' involves 'and you never know if a pedestrian might jump out in front of you from behind an obstruction, ten feet away from you,' then no human or robot should ever be driving above, oh, five feet per second?
How is 'moving more paid freight' 'no reason?'
That's not faith. That's confidence.
Faith is 'belief without evidence.' Blind faith, what 'faith' often turns into for religious folk, is 'belief despite evidence.'
And trucks sitting in a warehouse for 16 hours a day aren't making anybody any money. And who cares if they're burning extra fuel in exchange for not paying wage and upkeep for a driver, no longer having to worry about overtime, rest requirements, etc etc.
Or, potentially tripling the number of trucks on the road.
Hmmm, I'd replace the word 'faith' with 'trust,' then agree with you.
If he was relying on faith, evidence to the contrary wouldn't bother him. If he was relying on trust, on the other hand, and that trust was betrayed, well, that can, and does, shatter people all the time.
So, you're saying that the site that bills itself as 'the encyclopedia that anybody can edit' will be made worse by having more people edit it?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I've known that for years, but I'm glad more people are coming to the realization that Wikipedia's basic concept is flawed on it's face.
Or maybe, just maybe, the two services are aimed at different end goals?
Will the Microsoft retail ISO install with an OEM product key?
1) Doesn't matter. He was downloading somebody else's work, and selling it, including using their trademarked logos to confuse matters.
2) Doesn't matter. Intent does, as do 'substantial steps' towards the crime. They were seized being imported to the US on the way to his 'Sales partner.'
3) Doesn't matter. If his business was that massive, both Dell and Microsoft would have happily worked with him to provide the appropriate discs.
That's the thing. This wasn't 'I've got a DVD-R drive, I'll download and burn you the disc you need for reinstalling it.' It wasn't even 'I'll charge you 20 cents for the cost of a blank DVD-R.' Nor was it 'Every time I dumpster dive a computer, I burn the appropriate cd, scrawl 'recovery CD downloaded from [oem]' on it, and tape it to the chassis.'
No, it was 'I'll commission a fucking factory in China to crank out a production run, with somebody else's trademarked logos, and sell them for a profit.' Despite the fact that the OEMs will already quite happily sell you those discs, or let you download them for free.
If he'd given them away, he'd probably have been fine. He didn't. He attempted to sell other people's work for a profit.
That's a great argument, but it doesn't apply to this case. The guy wasn't 'copying software which has already been paid for,' he was 'selling somebody else's software and keeping the money.'
Emphasis mine, and I think that's the problem; it may be one thing if he were just downloading and including the discs that in theory would have come with the machine originally (though Dell's TOS may preclude that) but downloading and selling somebody else's work without permission is clearly not kosher.
Power Word: Crash?
Exactly. Romans conquered the world using plywood shields.
Would you like a deck in your backyard made out of a) aluminum honeycomb, or b) 2x4s made by plywood-like construction of this new stuff?
OpenGL wasn't appropriate for gaming, to a large extent still isn't, and DirectX was also about making the rest of the toolset for games available; sound, input, networking. And don't forget that even using OpenGL at all for games was a backlash against needing a custom version for 3dfx, RivaTNT, Matrox, S3, Rendition, Trident, etc etc.
Lets not revise history too much, here.
Not even negative feedback; he got a polite decline. Then he went full neckbeard, like Razer was the prom queen who didn't want to date him.