Actually, not all millenials are screwed. Those who are heirs to currently rich people will remain rich themselves. And rich tend to get richer. There's not enough place anymore for new entrants with all those heirs already have taken all lucrative positions due to automatically having better access both to education and other connections. Thus entire society is becoming more clan based rather than meritocracy based. That's the reason revolutions happen. You need meritocracy to get stuff done, and if you don't get stuff done, people suffer and revolt. Currently there's no way known to prevent society from becoming clan based without violent revolutions. Even democratic elections aren't the answer, because you can't win there anymore without propaganda campaigns and support of the rich.
This doesn't make sense. Or maybe it does. Given that having access to Internet is considered basic human right nowadays it seems kinda like a powergrab, essentially they're seeking a power to disconnect any people they want from society.
Note that participating in reproductive activity requires totally different levels of commitment from female than from male. While one female would automatically hurt community as the whole if she desists from childbirth for whatever reason, a male can easily be a bachelor and focus on other activities because another one can always provide the DNA instead of him. So the way human reproduction works forces that more females participate than males thus leading to polygyny. In fact, current monogamous marriage only ended up possible due to advances in medicine and overall life quality, so top reproductive performance from women is no longer paramount.
Actually one time pads are unbreakable if you do it right, but they're rarely used in practice because they're inconvenient. But there still were some practical cryptographic systems using them.
I've merely read wikipedia article on trademark law, and certain other resources in the past. But it doesn't make sense to expect from average person to be proficient lawyer to comply with law, at least in simple cases like this one. What I really have experience with is being an open-source contributor, and I definitely wouldn't want some startup I don't know about to suddenly appear and force me to change a name of my project. Not only this would be assholish behavior, but also would make life harder for all devs in the future. There's a limited number of words in world's languages and it's only matter of time before pretty much all projects would be vulnerable to such frivolous claims. So I definitely object to this apparent change of intent of trademark law. It originally was intended to combat counterfeiting, that is making products competing with existing producer and making your product like theirs in order to deceive consumers. And it's pretty obvious that if you didn't know that name was taken you didn't mean to counterfeit! And there's even no product, really. That project's author didn't make any sales, let alone didn't steal any claimant's customers!
A tool to generate projects from templates vs IM messaging client. Totally different things. Allowing any trademark owner to remove even accidental name coincidences is going WAY too far. There going to be a lot more of those in the future which would make all such hosting services extremely unreliable. Only sane response from such a service is to refuse such a claim and defend against invalid claim in court. If they pay for server infrastructure to host projects then why wouldn't they protect projects from hostile frivolous claims too? If legal costs would get too high there is always a possibility to make a fundraiser. I'm sure devs pooling would get service of a very good legal team..
No, it is invalid, because it has no potential to cause consumer confusion. His program wasn't even a competing product, just some command line tool doing totally different thing. Trademark law doesn't apply for such cases by definition. NPM's job is to provide reliable hosting for projects. Removing projects due to invalid claims makes it less reliable. It doesn't matter if project was lost due to software bug, bad hosting hardware or invalid trademark claim. All three cases are good enough to make service unreliable.
Maybe, but NPM had no right to actually accede to this obviously invalid trademark claim. Now its users need to prove that they're more important than marauding lawyers by voting with their feet, unless they want to risk their control of libraries revoked for arbitrary reasons in the future.
That I would, but as far as terrorism is concerned so much is already done to prevent it that doing yet even more will be inefficient due to law of diminishing returns. People accept greater risks daily without complaining about it. If car crashes were considered as important to prevent as currently terrorist acts are then people would be legally forbidden to drive.
"everything" is meaningless word in this context. Our resources are limited and better spent on counteracting other sources of danger. At least two friends of my friends of my friends died to cancer in previous year. Are you next?
Number of people who die to terrorism is way lower than that of people who die to car accidents and cancer, at least in Europe. So we only can conclude that current anti-terrorist measures are more than adequate. Only proper answer to terrorists is "you won't kill us all anyway so keep trying, losers".
I see no reason to respect Konami's rights after they let original designer go. Enforcing trademarks is only useful to prevent consumer confusion, and any game called Metal Gear without Kojima's approval would lead exactly to that. Basically, Konami doesn't have any right to decide what is and what isn't Metal Gear anymore from my point of view.
What is an "original" idea anyway? The only thing that matters is solid implementation, and that's exactly what indie (just like AAA) designers keep having problems with. Ideas are cheap. If some fan wants to make a homage to past classic in new engine there's no rational reason to block it. After all if Konami itself is allowed to make Metal Gear games after Hideo Kojima is no longer with them then obviously everyone else should be allowed to make them too
Makes sense for them since google play, appstore and valve steam can be taxed by companies owning them while open platform that windows is can't. In fact, taxes from store sales could easily yield more income per user than cost of single os licence. Can as well make OS license itself de jure free.
It's not economic suicide. It could be academic suicide, but more like most of those scientists will be allowed to work once they paid appropriate bribes.
Actually, those technologies are developed and shared by entire world. One of companies that makes computer workstations happened to be based in Russia, nothing surprising about this at all. Russia, England, Germany, doesn't matter where exactly this stuff is designed. Until everyone get paranoid about hardware backdoors and the like, in no small part due to efforts of Snowden..
Government doesn't need revenue generators, because it already kinda owns everything. Rather IP is a mean of redistributing power to people who aren't government(yet).
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, not all millenials are screwed. Those who are heirs to currently rich people will remain rich themselves. And rich tend to get richer. There's not enough place anymore for new entrants with all those heirs already have taken all lucrative positions due to automatically having better access both to education and other connections. Thus entire society is becoming more clan based rather than meritocracy based. That's the reason revolutions happen. You need meritocracy to get stuff done, and if you don't get stuff done, people suffer and revolt. Currently there's no way known to prevent society from becoming clan based without violent revolutions. Even democratic elections aren't the answer, because you can't win there anymore without propaganda campaigns and support of the rich.
This doesn't make sense. Or maybe it does. Given that having access to Internet is considered basic human right nowadays it seems kinda like a powergrab, essentially they're seeking a power to disconnect any people they want from society.
Put a magnifying lens on it :P
It's more likely that you'll become a refugee yourself. But there won't be a livable country to run to..
Note that participating in reproductive activity requires totally different levels of commitment from female than from male. While one female would automatically hurt community as the whole if she desists from childbirth for whatever reason, a male can easily be a bachelor and focus on other activities because another one can always provide the DNA instead of him. So the way human reproduction works forces that more females participate than males thus leading to polygyny. In fact, current monogamous marriage only ended up possible due to advances in medicine and overall life quality, so top reproductive performance from women is no longer paramount.
How that relates to cultures favoring polygamous marriage and concubinage?
Which pretty much means that those work out to be voluntary donations and not purchases de facto. I think this should be enshrined de jure too.
Actually one time pads are unbreakable if you do it right, but they're rarely used in practice because they're inconvenient. But there still were some practical cryptographic systems using them.
Isn't harassment already illegal? Whether it happens via internet or via newspapers is irrelevant..
Well, I'm Russian, and I don't know any place that still uses koi8r. Maybe in Fidonet somewhere..
Isn't KOI-8r obsoleted by utf8 for a long time already? Even consoles should have switched to utf8 already..
I've merely read wikipedia article on trademark law, and certain other resources in the past. But it doesn't make sense to expect from average person to be proficient lawyer to comply with law, at least in simple cases like this one. What I really have experience with is being an open-source contributor, and I definitely wouldn't want some startup I don't know about to suddenly appear and force me to change a name of my project. Not only this would be assholish behavior, but also would make life harder for all devs in the future. There's a limited number of words in world's languages and it's only matter of time before pretty much all projects would be vulnerable to such frivolous claims. So I definitely object to this apparent change of intent of trademark law. It originally was intended to combat counterfeiting, that is making products competing with existing producer and making your product like theirs in order to deceive consumers. And it's pretty obvious that if you didn't know that name was taken you didn't mean to counterfeit! And there's even no product, really. That project's author didn't make any sales, let alone didn't steal any claimant's customers!
A tool to generate projects from templates vs IM messaging client. Totally different things. Allowing any trademark owner to remove even accidental name coincidences is going WAY too far. There going to be a lot more of those in the future which would make all such hosting services extremely unreliable. Only sane response from such a service is to refuse such a claim and defend against invalid claim in court. If they pay for server infrastructure to host projects then why wouldn't they protect projects from hostile frivolous claims too? If legal costs would get too high there is always a possibility to make a fundraiser. I'm sure devs pooling would get service of a very good legal team..
No, it is invalid, because it has no potential to cause consumer confusion. His program wasn't even a competing product, just some command line tool doing totally different thing. Trademark law doesn't apply for such cases by definition. NPM's job is to provide reliable hosting for projects. Removing projects due to invalid claims makes it less reliable. It doesn't matter if project was lost due to software bug, bad hosting hardware or invalid trademark claim. All three cases are good enough to make service unreliable.
Maybe, but NPM had no right to actually accede to this obviously invalid trademark claim. Now its users need to prove that they're more important than marauding lawyers by voting with their feet, unless they want to risk their control of libraries revoked for arbitrary reasons in the future.
That I would, but as far as terrorism is concerned so much is already done to prevent it that doing yet even more will be inefficient due to law of diminishing returns. People accept greater risks daily without complaining about it. If car crashes were considered as important to prevent as currently terrorist acts are then people would be legally forbidden to drive.
"everything" is meaningless word in this context. Our resources are limited and better spent on counteracting other sources of danger. At least two friends of my friends of my friends died to cancer in previous year. Are you next?
Number of people who die to terrorism is way lower than that of people who die to car accidents and cancer, at least in Europe. So we only can conclude that current anti-terrorist measures are more than adequate. Only proper answer to terrorists is "you won't kill us all anyway so keep trying, losers".
I see no reason to respect Konami's rights after they let original designer go. Enforcing trademarks is only useful to prevent consumer confusion, and any game called Metal Gear without Kojima's approval would lead exactly to that. Basically, Konami doesn't have any right to decide what is and what isn't Metal Gear anymore from my point of view.
What is an "original" idea anyway? The only thing that matters is solid implementation, and that's exactly what indie (just like AAA) designers keep having problems with. Ideas are cheap. If some fan wants to make a homage to past classic in new engine there's no rational reason to block it. After all if Konami itself is allowed to make Metal Gear games after Hideo Kojima is no longer with them then obviously everyone else should be allowed to make them too
Actually it comes from Mac, systemd is basically linux port of launchd.
Makes sense for them since google play, appstore and valve steam can be taxed by companies owning them while open platform that windows is can't. In fact, taxes from store sales could easily yield more income per user than cost of single os licence. Can as well make OS license itself de jure free.
It's not economic suicide. It could be academic suicide, but more like most of those scientists will be allowed to work once they paid appropriate bribes.
Actually, those technologies are developed and shared by entire world. One of companies that makes computer workstations happened to be based in Russia, nothing surprising about this at all. Russia, England, Germany, doesn't matter where exactly this stuff is designed. Until everyone get paranoid about hardware backdoors and the like, in no small part due to efforts of Snowden..
Government doesn't need revenue generators, because it already kinda owns everything. Rather IP is a mean of redistributing power to people who aren't government(yet).