However, because the nature of the alert does not contain any information about what work was supposedly infringed upon, I'm uncertain how an accused person who might not have had *ANY* infringing content being downloaded through their IP can sensibly respond.
I'm sure that's by design. A feature, not a bug. They don't want millions of people trying to appeal their bogus claims, that would quickly become unmanageable. They nipped that problem in the bud by addressing it before it can become a serious problem.
They'd also like to suppress the video as it is dynamite in the hands of a good prosecuting attorney. Think of all the upcoming lawsuits that the injured will soon file. Certainly with actual video of car parts breaching the safety fence a compelling case for negligence can be made.
If you read the actual article you'll find that his findings "involved a simulated model of the web that he created to better understand its structure. "
So this article has nothing to do with the actual internet, but a simulation of it. It's not a noteworthy study, and I'm wondering why I wasted my time reading about it.
I wish we could kill off this whole "illegal download" meme, especially on Slashdot where people should know better. Downloading isn't illegal.
If you are talking about copyright infringement, then go ahead and use the term "copyright infringement". It is more precise, more accurate, and less ignorant.
There are a couple of reasons. The first is that programmers value code correctness, maintainability, and ease of development over performance. They are taught not to optimize for speed unless a bottleneck has been determined by actual measurements.
It's the end users who value performance, not the developers. Programmers code to please their bosses, and concerns of the end user rarely make it back to the actual developers. Therefore performance issues often don't have any impact on the resulting code.
Thanks for the info. Next step is to send their marketing department a link to this Slashdot article so they can see what wonderful publicity they are getting in return for being douches.
I admire your optimism, sir. Sure, the updates brick his controllers, but at least they come often. It's that glass-is-half-full spirit we don't see enough of these days.
Crimes that occur on the World Wide Web are by definition international crimes. They cannot, then, be properly investigated or prosecuted by any national entity. A new global authority is needed for that.
Seeing how our previous attempts (NATO) of international collaboration have worked out I'm not exactly sanguine that this will occur in my lifetime, but it will have to be addressed eventually. Alternatively, we could just drop some bombs on China. I don't really care.
I tried to take a software development tool (along with some video games) that I had developed (and was earning a good living from) and migrate them to the GPL with continued development funded via donations. The results were...disastrous.
Well what did you think was going to happen? It doesn't take much business acumen to foresee your income going down when you stop selling a product and give it away for free. Did you think donations would exceed your sales? I don't get it.
The problem is in the "avant cellist" music industry, supply far exceeds demand. The supply is one, demand is significantly lower than that.. If she played some sort of identifiable music, say classical or jazz, or had a modicum of talent perhaps her prospects would pick up.
Perhaps I didn't state my objection to the OPs comments accurately, then, because our differences are not just semantic.
I do not believe any crime occurred. I think he was falsely accused of committing crimes that he in fact did not commit. I believe his actions were entirely legal.
The question of "Why should we feel sorry for him?" is to me crystal clear: We should feel sorry for him because he was the victim of a grave injustice.
Why should we feel sorry for a criminal who chose to commit suicide rather than accept a a six month plea bargain for breaking and entering and accessing systems he shouldn't be accessing?
Your question has nothing to do with this discussion, as Aaron Swartz wasn't a criminal. A criminal is someone who's been convicted of a crime. He wasn't.
He was accused under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of "stealing" documents he had legal access to. Had this gone to court, I have no doubt that he would have been found not guilty.
Get your facts straight, turn in your geek card, and get off of slashdot, moron.
As for motive, the only thing I can think of is that Kim Jong-un wants desperately to be taken seriously as a world leader. Which is hard to do, seeing as he is basically his own caricature. I'm not entirely convinced he's not the same guy that does that "Gangnam Style" video.
Clearly having a nuclear weapon would further one's goal of being taken seriously. The problem is their current business plan seems to be
1). Threaten to develop nuclear weapons
2). Demonstrate ability to attack the United States with nuclear weapons
3). ???
4). Profit
Not sure if they've thought out what would happen if the US actually took them seriously.
If the goal is for everyone in the world to use unified standards, then we should also all switch to speaking Esperanto.
It's a small world and we function in a global economy, certainly a strong case can be made that we ought to use the same units of measure and the same language.
While I understand the impulse to "do something" in response to the Sandy Hook shootings, I'm bewildered that this is the issue they've decided to pursue. It's quite simply a misdirected effort that will have absolutely no effect to curtail further mass shootings.
Even if it is just a statement that changes nothing, I still signed the petition. No reason not too. What was interesting is they asked for a confirmation email so I signed it with my throw-away hotmail account. Lo and behold, the hotmail filters put my confirmation email from the EFF right in the Junk folder.
I really haven't used a desktop client for email in years. Where's the gain for the user?
It's my data, it's up to me to archive it. The "gain" for me is that I have access to my data independent from any other individual or corporation. Let's face it, tech companies come and go.
The free market doesn't solve all problems, but any company that could deliver this would make hundreds of billions of dollars. Why aren't they doing it? Because nobody knows how!
This is why basic research is needed. The best way to get research done is to fund it. Which is what they're doing.
I see no problem in setting the bar high, either. It simply signals that incremental improvements to current* techniques won't cut it.
Slashdot Mirror
However, because the nature of the alert does not contain any information about what work was supposedly infringed upon, I'm uncertain how an accused person who might not have had *ANY* infringing content being downloaded through their IP can sensibly respond.
I'm sure that's by design. A feature, not a bug. They don't want millions of people trying to appeal their bogus claims, that would quickly become unmanageable. They nipped that problem in the bud by addressing it before it can become a serious problem.
They'd also like to suppress the video as it is dynamite in the hands of a good prosecuting attorney. Think of all the upcoming lawsuits that the injured will soon file. Certainly with actual video of car parts breaching the safety fence a compelling case for negligence can be made.
Google doesn't have legal standing to file suit, that would be up to the owner of the video. He would also need to prove damages.
I'm still trying to find signs of intelligent life here on earth.
If you read the actual article you'll find that his findings "involved a simulated model of the web that he created to better understand its structure. " So this article has nothing to do with the actual internet, but a simulation of it. It's not a noteworthy study, and I'm wondering why I wasted my time reading about it.
I wish we could kill off this whole "illegal download" meme, especially on Slashdot where people should know better. Downloading isn't illegal.
If you are talking about copyright infringement, then go ahead and use the term "copyright infringement". It is more precise, more accurate, and less ignorant.
I so want to hear the rest of this story. What's your IP Address?
There are a couple of reasons. The first is that programmers value code correctness, maintainability, and ease of development over performance. They are taught not to optimize for speed unless a bottleneck has been determined by actual measurements.
It's the end users who value performance, not the developers. Programmers code to please their bosses, and concerns of the end user rarely make it back to the actual developers. Therefore performance issues often don't have any impact on the resulting code.
Thanks for the info. Next step is to send their marketing department a link to this Slashdot article so they can see what wonderful publicity they are getting in return for being douches.
LSI at least does keep updating things
I admire your optimism, sir. Sure, the updates brick his controllers, but at least they come often. It's that glass-is-half-full spirit we don't see enough of these days.
Crimes that occur on the World Wide Web are by definition international crimes. They cannot, then, be properly investigated or prosecuted by any national entity. A new global authority is needed for that.
Seeing how our previous attempts (NATO) of international collaboration have worked out I'm not exactly sanguine that this will occur in my lifetime, but it will have to be addressed eventually. Alternatively, we could just drop some bombs on China. I don't really care.
It just means you need to amend your state motto to reflect current conditions.
"We will sometimes complain when our consistutional rights are taken away."
You're free to use that one. You're welcome.
I tried to take a software development tool (along with some video games) that I had developed (and was earning a good living from) and migrate them to the GPL with continued development funded via donations. The results were...disastrous.
Well what did you think was going to happen? It doesn't take much business acumen to foresee your income going down when you stop selling a product and give it away for free. Did you think donations would exceed your sales? I don't get it.
The problem is in the "avant cellist" music industry, supply far exceeds demand. The supply is one, demand is significantly lower than that.. If she played some sort of identifiable music, say classical or jazz, or had a modicum of talent perhaps her prospects would pick up.
She played one song one time and made a couple thousand dollars for it. Here's a thought: if she wants to make more money, play the song again.
Perhaps I didn't state my objection to the OPs comments accurately, then, because our differences are not just semantic.
I do not believe any crime occurred. I think he was falsely accused of committing crimes that he in fact did not commit. I believe his actions were entirely legal.
The question of "Why should we feel sorry for him?" is to me crystal clear: We should feel sorry for him because he was the victim of a grave injustice.
Why should we feel sorry for a criminal who chose to commit suicide rather than accept a a six month plea bargain for breaking and entering and accessing systems he shouldn't be accessing?
Your question has nothing to do with this discussion, as Aaron Swartz wasn't a criminal. A criminal is someone who's been convicted of a crime. He wasn't.
He was accused under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of "stealing" documents he had legal access to. Had this gone to court, I have no doubt that he would have been found not guilty.
Get your facts straight, turn in your geek card, and get off of slashdot, moron.
As for motive, the only thing I can think of is that Kim Jong-un wants desperately to be taken seriously as a world leader. Which is hard to do, seeing as he is basically his own caricature. I'm not entirely convinced he's not the same guy that does that "Gangnam Style" video. Clearly having a nuclear weapon would further one's goal of being taken seriously. The problem is their current business plan seems to be
Not sure if they've thought out what would happen if the US actually took them seriously.
If the goal is for everyone in the world to use unified standards, then we should also all switch to speaking Esperanto.
It's a small world and we function in a global economy, certainly a strong case can be made that we ought to use the same units of measure and the same language.
While I understand the impulse to "do something" in response to the Sandy Hook shootings, I'm bewildered that this is the issue they've decided to pursue. It's quite simply a misdirected effort that will have absolutely no effect to curtail further mass shootings.
Even if it is just a statement that changes nothing, I still signed the petition. No reason not too. What was interesting is they asked for a confirmation email so I signed it with my throw-away hotmail account. Lo and behold, the hotmail filters put my confirmation email from the EFF right in the Junk folder.
Well played, Microsoft, well played.
I really haven't used a desktop client for email in years. Where's the gain for the user?
It's my data, it's up to me to archive it. The "gain" for me is that I have access to my data independent from any other individual or corporation. Let's face it, tech companies come and go.
The free market doesn't solve all problems, but any company that could deliver this would make hundreds of billions of dollars. Why aren't they doing it? Because nobody knows how!
This is why basic research is needed. The best way to get research done is to fund it. Which is what they're doing.
I see no problem in setting the bar high, either. It simply signals that incremental improvements to current* techniques won't cut it.
* Yes, pun intended. I couldn't resist.
Why is it illegal to wager on a prediction?
Beats me. That pretty much sums up what happens on Wall Street every day.
lots of cars will give you an error light if a light is out...
Unless, of course, it's the error light that's out.