But it makes more sense to pause when the story arc pauses. I do this with movies - wait till the end of the scene or the crucial line is delivered.
Especially since this behaviour has been programmed in since the beginning of TV - when a commercial comes on your brain checks things like do I need more fluid or less? And then you can do something about it.
Commercials are basically the writers' way of saying "Collect your thoughts for a few minutes".
You get tax credits for R&D - if a small percentage of a tax dodge yields useful results, I'd call that a success. There's no way they spend that much on R&D for the results, and then don't get any results.
Movie business model: 1) Make a trailer that looks cool 2) Fill the other hour and 29 minutes so the trailer seems to have had a plot 3) Hope people pile into theaters on opening night, before word gets out that it sucks 4) Buy TV advertising to tell the non-moviegoing crowd you can have it at home 5) Make sure the advert contains only those parts of the trailer that list the headline stars 6) Hope people pile into something other than a video rental store to buy before word gets out that it sucks
In other words, it's the world's only product you are expected to purchase sight-unseen with no refunds. Sure you can buy other things unseen, but this is the entire business model.
Aside being a derived work (in that it could not exist without the matrix, or a re-encoded version), the type of data in a torrent would not qualify for protection. The file itself might, in the same way that a phone book is copyrightable. But the names and addresses and numbers are a collection of data anyone can get a hold of, so the content of the phone book is not copyrightable. Not to be confused with for example google map data, which requires effort and cost to generate, even though data about public places are in the public domain.
The tricky part is, a torrent file has one way of being generated (according to the specification), and is usually a generated file, not something you made yourself.
The only part that should be considered copyrightable is the description or other comments you include. But it can still be argued that you uploaded the file and therefore intended to disseminate the content, so the only legal restriction you could enforce would be if someone reproduced the torrent file somewhere other than where you uploaded it.
Sure. It's like when your ex-girlfriend shows up in the back seat of your car and says "let's do stuff" and you look over at your African wife named 'Ubuntu' which means 'I do anal' and say "Honestly dear, I have no idea how she got in here. She wasn't even around when i bought the car, so it's not like she copied my key." And you realize you might want to touch, just a little, even though you know she got the herp from that guy who's in jail now and it will end with someone in the hospital. Still, you thought about it.
For most people it's not a concern (whether it *should be* is another question). If you're not one of those people, install a firewall.
You can change which service group a service is in, so that for example windows update runs on its own in svchost, while other apps and services go in a different group. Firewall allows updates and disallows error reporting. Or the other way around, or roll your own. Used to be "Services and controller app" or whatever it is ran everything, so that enabling auto updates left all MS communication fair game.
You're right, this is not by default. Remember, the home user is not Microsoft's audience - they want businesses, and then people will buy what they are familiar with.
You don't install software without making sure it's legit and isn't sending packets, why should you treat an OS any differently?
Cell phones, Netflix, internet/voice/tv bundling, weight watchers, gyms... the business model has been shown to work well. People like a set fee they can budget around, rather than having to save up for an initial outlay. You can rent a cable modem for $5/mo or buy your own - lots of people think $5/mo is nothing, so they go for it.
It's not just technology, and people like it this way. Go find something that doesn't have this business model, apply this model, and make a fortune.
My gf is not technically savvy - she learns quickly, but doesn't go looking up stuff. She's perfectly happy to move the mouse to something and click and wait, and click something else, and reinstall the application, and reboot, because that's what computers do. She doesn't understand why I curse at my computer, even when I show her exactly what I find annoying.
Still, she hates Vista, and doesn't understand why Microsoft made such stupid decisions. And not just for the reasons I curse about - sh actually likes some of those things. She has her very own reasons for hating Vista.
I think my point is, everyone can find something that is so ridiculously poorly thought out and hate on it severely. Like the way any single-threaded program gets a "(Not Responding)" note in the title bar when it's processing. That makes me think something's wrong with Vista, when it worked fine under XP. did Microsoft think it would help people to say that the app was not responding? Or should it keep the info to itself until either the app finishes or someone clicks on it? Little things like that, which seem to have been decided upon some hazy hung over Saturday morning two weeks before code freeze.
If someone asks me to sign, in person, a real live petition, then at least one person saw me sign it. I'm not doing it in a private location, therefore I would have no expectation of privacy. Signing in a private location in front of someone removes the expectation of privacy. Signing something expecting that it will influence politics should remove the expectation of privacy.
In this case, the process is to submit names and they are collected and verified by the Secretary of State. Unless these people are supremely ignorant, or are ashamed about what they have done, there is no reason for them to even think for a moment they qualify for privacy about this. Anyone can go look them up already, especially those with bad intentions.
In other words, this changes nothing for the people who signed. This is not a ballot, not signed in a voting machine. If the people who gathered these signatures misled the signators, THAT is the real problem.
Anyone can file a lawsuit, that's how the legal system works. Anyone can "lash out" at anyone for saying anything, that doesn't mean anyone is infringing on first amendment rights. I could reply to every one of your comments with point by point rebuttals, but you'd still be able to make your comments.
All men are created equal, and should have equal protection, and the "activists" are only fighting back against prejudice and homophobia.
First we said all men are created equal, except the black ones. Then we said all men are created equal, and that excludes women. Now we say all men are created equal, unless they fall in love with someone intolerant people find objectionable.
None of this has ever made any sense, especially when you consider that straight people are trying to make being gay illegal. Should I stop people from cross-dressing, especially those crazy women who dress like men to get an unfair advantage in the workplace? Yeah that doesn't make sense. Should I try to change your behaviour because you're not a Pastafarian? That doesn't make sense either. You wear far too much red and it makes me think you're a communist, so stop wearing red, right? I can picket abortion clinics but then still have a right to have an abortion if I think it's the right thing to do.
If you're going to say it's unnatural, then you have to admit that God made a mistake. Because most gay people face piles of intolerance and would not in most cases choose that lifestyle.
If you're going to say it's against the Bible, you better check what you're wearing and make sure your wife was a virgin when you married, because the Bible says things about both of those too.
If you're an athiest homophobe, realize that natural selection will take care of the problem so why fight it.
While I agree in general, I read a convincing article on how when you consider all costs, nuclear is the most expensive option per kilowatt.
I won't even give a link, because if you're going to refute just that one author then I have at least 3 more. Does anyone have a good analysis of nuclear costs, including construction, waste disposal, and monitoring, which puts nuclear into a reasonable cost?
Most people aren't thinking about you, they are too busy wondering what you think about them.
To think otherwise shows an incredible ego, thinking that everyone's focus is on you, what you look like or are doing. Others might find your glasses amusing for a minute, but quickly move to another subject.
I'd use it and expect people to ask me about it, but they won't cos the glasses are like sunglasses.
I rarely do this sort of thing, but fuck damn why did someone mod you insightful? Do you have an alt account for karma whoring? The whole point is to see your 3D model in 3D, which you can trick your mind into thinking you are doing. It helps when modeling a 3D object to see the relationships in 3D, as opposed to on a 3D LCD/LED/CRT.
Oh screw it, nothing I can say will help. I'd draw you a picture but you'd probably nitpick that as well. Or if I flip you the bird you'd counter that a thumb isn't a finger, so there's no "middle finger" unless I chop one off.
They understand what you mean, and also understand that you're a jargon-laden narcissist who redefines the world in their own terms and expects everyone else to conform. Personally, I'd understand what you meant and then punch you in the face. Same thing for "whack", and if you use 'Zed' for 'Z' but you're not from a country that does it that way.
I usually skip the www part, because most browsers append it if they can't find anything on the non-www site anyway, so I avoid the problem altogether. And the http: part and the slashes in question. A few sites won't work that way, but I haven't found one that I used in conversation.
I'm on a wireless keyboard - in case someone's listening, I gave it a nickname that seems like online gambling. Someone listening will think my transfers and bill payments are wagers... at least that's my intent.
After it gets past the keyboard, it should be safe with encrypted WLAN and SSL, right? (ok stop laughing).
Point is, wireless keyboards caused me to rethink some things.
For me, I write code and consume web sites and deal with large amounts of data (source code, databases, documentation, music and pictures of course). This is what I've been looking for for 15 years now. I am not a gamer, and if I were to play games I would want to use a driving wheel, light gun, glove, or USB mouse/keyboard combo, whichever is most appropriate for the game. He doesn't want to take away your options.
Multitouch is new, everyone wants to get in on the ground floor and be the one who can say "delivering multi-touch solutions since 2007." The first OS to include an easier way to deal with data will fly off the shelves.
I watch people struggle with the mouse, not realizing they can use 10 fingers on a keyboard instead of a location-dependent 1 on mouse. And then stupid applications put multiple hotkeys with the same accelerator (Borland StarTeam is my current anger target), or try to write their own windows and fail simple things like Paste with CTRL-V (Nero Essentials 7), or holy crap the entire Windows Vista interface, where Microsoft makes it MORE difficult to use with keyboard-only in my experience. Someone will figure out an easier way, and right now, multi-touch seems to be it.
I never saw a use for multi-touch until this video - it looks more promising than just moving windows around. That works fine for the weatherman, but I need to type and supplement organization with multi-touch, not use it as the primary interface.
The day we can integrate multi-touch with a keyboard and not have it frustrate and suck royally, nor impede your typing, that will be the day the first trillionaire is on the horizon.
I think his focus has been all of the bad evidence, illegal third party investigators, and continuing to prosecute when the evidence suggests they are wrong.
Beckerman's job seems to be defense, not prosecutorial. So if a client comes to him with court action in progress, I'd sure as hell prefer someone who has been watching the cases and knows what dirty tricks to expect. Also, which cases have come before and how they turned out.
Better to watch copyright cases than be an ambulance chaser, or advertise "have you or a loved one been hurt by $DRUG?" I think in some places lawyers are not allowed to specialize, but it pays to focus on something and be good at it.
In this case, it does look like he overstepped his bounds a little, but if you look at past cases, RIAA members constantly overstep in their pursuit of a headline-grabbing conviction. I don't see a problem with fighting with whatever tools are available, especially when the cost of losing is financial ruin.
I personally don't believe it's portable at all. I've been told it is, but maybe I have my environment all wrong. When I download something that uses it, I usually end up building my own makefile, having it not work, and moving on to another project.
Maybe it's running Windows that's my problem, but I've never had success without basically re-installing Cygwin from scratch before each use. Then I have hundreds of MB of stuff, just to compile a few hundred kB into a 40k app. No thanks. If I were doing Unices only, maybe it might be better.
I bought the wxWidgets book and read it, hoping to be enlightened beyond all measure to discover a wonderful new paradigm of cross-platform application writing. I have been looking at this since I read a seemingly homebrew "XP: Cross Platform Programming" or something like that, during the days of Windows 98/ME.
I was sorely disappointed. It's basically MFC ported to Linux. I can't even remember what I hated it at this point, it's been so long, but I look at that book with disappointment and derision when I sort through my library from time to time. I'd give or throw it away, but I take the risk that someone might accidentally read it, so I've taken on the burden of keeping that copy at least safe from prying eyes.
GTK was too much casting for my tastes, and Qt had licensing issues. Now that Qt is open, I see no reason not to use it.
I have been forced to use vista at work for the past month or so. Here are the things I hate, mostly from the first week. Keep in mind this is based on using 2000 and XP, and having certain expectations about how Windows in general is supposed to work. No one's going to read this, that's fine, I'm just spitting in a hurricane.
Explorer - if a heavy IO operation is in the background, explorer frequently says "not responding". I want that in the background, and regardless of IO settings, I should be able to browse the disk. What if the only way to stop the IO is a control panel, or an application I have to dig for? Like a virus scanner, which you can't run Windows without. We have a deadlock. It's the shell of the OS, not some random application.
I still can't tell what's highlighted. Which is the current active window? Which folder is highlighted in Explorer? Should this be useful out of the box, or should every user have to adjust this?
Search - I don't even know where to begin. "Search in files" only finds text in a known file type with a filter for it. Search happens only in indexed locations by default. So it won't find the program I just downloaded, but it will look for that term in my e-mail? You should at least be able to click "Advanced Search" instead of having to find the non-button-looking button. I can't tell if it's looking for a file name or in the contents of files. It's just plain unintuitive. I still have no idea where I'm searching.
"Folder Options" used to have a tab to manage file types. Vista moved this into a Defaults control panel, and you can no longer manage behaviours. Anything beyond the default "Open" action has to be done in the registry, which Microsoft says is dangerous and could cause the OS to stop working. This is reduced functionality, affecting how the OS interacts with files, which is pretty much the definition of a GUI shell.
"Add and remove programs" renamed to "Programs" or "Programs and features" for classic view, invalidating millions of documents and confusing users. Going in further to Windows components, using IIS as an example. You can turn on or off IIS options, directly from the Windows Components dialog - you can turn your web server Directory Listing on or off through the operating system control panel. Isn't that just a little too integrated? We just added more places you have to look to repair a malfunctioning application!
Search *STILL* includes shortcuts. I search for *.vsd and I get shortcuts. What purpose does this serve? If the documents exist they will be found. Otherwise the shortcut will point nowhere and be useless. You can't sort shortcuts either, they are all type "Shortcut". So you can't remove your audio file shortcuts and leave your excel file shortcuts. If I search for "xls" maybe that should return shortcuts, but *.xls is very specific.
Explorer: Very hard to select a column heading to change the width, because the completely unnecessary Sort selector is right next to it.
Drop object into command prompt to avoid retyping it. Dropped because high-security areas do not accept messages from low-security areas, design was fixed for win7
"Copy as Path" and "Open Command Prompt here" are only available when shift-clicking. Also not available on left side of explorer view
Alt-Enter doesn't work in left side of explorer pane
Not clear if the highlighted folder in left pane of explorer is the currently selected one - the selected and current highlights are nearly transparent by themselves, and only slightly different from each other. Makes it easy to accidentally delete a bunch of stuff
Mouse scroll-wheel does not work in explorer left pane, automatic scrolling is supposed to make things easier. But so does a mouse.
Explorer: Backspace is the same as CTRL+Left Arrow, making users use the different "ALT+UP" - duplicated functionality, users have to retrain their muscle memory. Makes sense, but loyal Windows users are
To expound on this: Women are typically more social, which lends itself more towards consuming technology, like Drupal as an example. I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of women generating templates and styles and things of that sort. If no one uses the output, it gets neglected in favor of something people use.
Men just go build stuff, whether someone uses it or not. Social skills are a hindrance to working on code for 8 or 16 hours a day, just go away and let me code! Especially having to explain or defend your position, that's like a slap in the face. There's a reason men buy power tools and women knit sweaters.
Naturally when the two different styles meet, there will be conflict. In person, it's easier to deal with. Online, especially from the man's view where replying takes time away from coding, the reply can be curt and misunderstood as an insult or condescension. Then you don't have the ability to take someone aside and clarify - followup is seen as nagging.
(all based on stereotypes, I don't care if you're an exception)
Next time it will be someone else's turn to make an Epic Rant on Slashdot, and nothing will be different. BSA has an audience, and you're not it. Worse, you can't convince its audience that it has no clothes. At least no one has succeeded yet.
Slashdot Mirror
But it makes more sense to pause when the story arc pauses. I do this with movies - wait till the end of the scene or the crucial line is delivered.
Especially since this behaviour has been programmed in since the beginning of TV - when a commercial comes on your brain checks things like do I need more fluid or less? And then you can do something about it.
Commercials are basically the writers' way of saying "Collect your thoughts for a few minutes".
You get tax credits for R&D - if a small percentage of a tax dodge yields useful results, I'd call that a success. There's no way they spend that much on R&D for the results, and then don't get any results.
Movie business model:
1) Make a trailer that looks cool
2) Fill the other hour and 29 minutes so the trailer seems to have had a plot
3) Hope people pile into theaters on opening night, before word gets out that it sucks
4) Buy TV advertising to tell the non-moviegoing crowd you can have it at home
5) Make sure the advert contains only those parts of the trailer that list the headline stars
6) Hope people pile into something other than a video rental store to buy before word gets out that it sucks
In other words, it's the world's only product you are expected to purchase sight-unseen with no refunds. Sure you can buy other things unseen, but this is the entire business model.
You left out tentacles. Got to have tentacles. A maid working for an octopus is what I would have expected.
Aside being a derived work (in that it could not exist without the matrix, or a re-encoded version), the type of data in a torrent would not qualify for protection. The file itself might, in the same way that a phone book is copyrightable. But the names and addresses and numbers are a collection of data anyone can get a hold of, so the content of the phone book is not copyrightable. Not to be confused with for example google map data, which requires effort and cost to generate, even though data about public places are in the public domain.
The tricky part is, a torrent file has one way of being generated (according to the specification), and is usually a generated file, not something you made yourself.
The only part that should be considered copyrightable is the description or other comments you include. But it can still be argued that you uploaded the file and therefore intended to disseminate the content, so the only legal restriction you could enforce would be if someone reproduced the torrent file somewhere other than where you uploaded it.
IANAL, and not in the good way.
Sure. It's like when your ex-girlfriend shows up in the back seat of your car and says "let's do stuff" and you look over at your African wife named 'Ubuntu' which means 'I do anal' and say "Honestly dear, I have no idea how she got in here. She wasn't even around when i bought the car, so it's not like she copied my key." And you realize you might want to touch, just a little, even though you know she got the herp from that guy who's in jail now and it will end with someone in the hospital. Still, you thought about it.
I think that's a rough go anyway.
For most people it's not a concern (whether it *should be* is another question). If you're not one of those people, install a firewall.
You can change which service group a service is in, so that for example windows update runs on its own in svchost, while other apps and services go in a different group. Firewall allows updates and disallows error reporting. Or the other way around, or roll your own. Used to be "Services and controller app" or whatever it is ran everything, so that enabling auto updates left all MS communication fair game.
You're right, this is not by default. Remember, the home user is not Microsoft's audience - they want businesses, and then people will buy what they are familiar with.
You don't install software without making sure it's legit and isn't sending packets, why should you treat an OS any differently?
There's nothing left to say, I'm going to simply link to this comment in every discussion about W7. Spot-on, and if I could buy you a pint I would.
Cell phones, Netflix, internet/voice/tv bundling, weight watchers, gyms... the business model has been shown to work well. People like a set fee they can budget around, rather than having to save up for an initial outlay. You can rent a cable modem for $5/mo or buy your own - lots of people think $5/mo is nothing, so they go for it.
It's not just technology, and people like it this way. Go find something that doesn't have this business model, apply this model, and make a fortune.
My gf is not technically savvy - she learns quickly, but doesn't go looking up stuff. She's perfectly happy to move the mouse to something and click and wait, and click something else, and reinstall the application, and reboot, because that's what computers do. She doesn't understand why I curse at my computer, even when I show her exactly what I find annoying.
Still, she hates Vista, and doesn't understand why Microsoft made such stupid decisions. And not just for the reasons I curse about - sh actually likes some of those things. She has her very own reasons for hating Vista.
I think my point is, everyone can find something that is so ridiculously poorly thought out and hate on it severely. Like the way any single-threaded program gets a "(Not Responding)" note in the title bar when it's processing. That makes me think something's wrong with Vista, when it worked fine under XP. did Microsoft think it would help people to say that the app was not responding? Or should it keep the info to itself until either the app finishes or someone clicks on it? Little things like that, which seem to have been decided upon some hazy hung over Saturday morning two weeks before code freeze.
If someone asks me to sign, in person, a real live petition, then at least one person saw me sign it. I'm not doing it in a private location, therefore I would have no expectation of privacy. Signing in a private location in front of someone removes the expectation of privacy. Signing something expecting that it will influence politics should remove the expectation of privacy.
In this case, the process is to submit names and they are collected and verified by the Secretary of State. Unless these people are supremely ignorant, or are ashamed about what they have done, there is no reason for them to even think for a moment they qualify for privacy about this. Anyone can go look them up already, especially those with bad intentions.
In other words, this changes nothing for the people who signed. This is not a ballot, not signed in a voting machine. If the people who gathered these signatures misled the signators, THAT is the real problem.
Anyone can file a lawsuit, that's how the legal system works. Anyone can "lash out" at anyone for saying anything, that doesn't mean anyone is infringing on first amendment rights. I could reply to every one of your comments with point by point rebuttals, but you'd still be able to make your comments.
All men are created equal, and should have equal protection, and the "activists" are only fighting back against prejudice and homophobia.
First we said all men are created equal, except the black ones.
Then we said all men are created equal, and that excludes women.
Now we say all men are created equal, unless they fall in love with someone intolerant people find objectionable.
None of this has ever made any sense, especially when you consider that straight people are trying to make being gay illegal. Should I stop people from cross-dressing, especially those crazy women who dress like men to get an unfair advantage in the workplace? Yeah that doesn't make sense. Should I try to change your behaviour because you're not a Pastafarian? That doesn't make sense either. You wear far too much red and it makes me think you're a communist, so stop wearing red, right? I can picket abortion clinics but then still have a right to have an abortion if I think it's the right thing to do.
If you're going to say it's unnatural, then you have to admit that God made a mistake. Because most gay people face piles of intolerance and would not in most cases choose that lifestyle.
If you're going to say it's against the Bible, you better check what you're wearing and make sure your wife was a virgin when you married, because the Bible says things about both of those too.
If you're an athiest homophobe, realize that natural selection will take care of the problem so why fight it.
Remember when you wrote "History has shown that misinformed stupid people are the most dangerous force on earth" ? Maybe you should read up a little on the other side. Or maybe you took a break from serious replies and decided to troll, but someone is going to agree with you and I thought I'd step out first.
While I agree in general, I read a convincing article on how when you consider all costs, nuclear is the most expensive option per kilowatt.
I won't even give a link, because if you're going to refute just that one author then I have at least 3 more. Does anyone have a good analysis of nuclear costs, including construction, waste disposal, and monitoring, which puts nuclear into a reasonable cost?
Most people aren't thinking about you, they are too busy wondering what you think about them.
To think otherwise shows an incredible ego, thinking that everyone's focus is on you, what you look like or are doing. Others might find your glasses amusing for a minute, but quickly move to another subject.
I'd use it and expect people to ask me about it, but they won't cos the glasses are like sunglasses.
I rarely do this sort of thing, but fuck damn why did someone mod you insightful? Do you have an alt account for karma whoring? The whole point is to see your 3D model in 3D, which you can trick your mind into thinking you are doing. It helps when modeling a 3D object to see the relationships in 3D, as opposed to on a 3D LCD/LED/CRT.
Oh screw it, nothing I can say will help. I'd draw you a picture but you'd probably nitpick that as well. Or if I flip you the bird you'd counter that a thumb isn't a finger, so there's no "middle finger" unless I chop one off.
They understand what you mean, and also understand that you're a jargon-laden narcissist who redefines the world in their own terms and expects everyone else to conform. Personally, I'd understand what you meant and then punch you in the face. Same thing for "whack", and if you use 'Zed' for 'Z' but you're not from a country that does it that way.
I usually skip the www part, because most browsers append it if they can't find anything on the non-www site anyway, so I avoid the problem altogether. And the http: part and the slashes in question. A few sites won't work that way, but I haven't found one that I used in conversation.
Write it on a post-it note.
Or if you're virtual send it in e-mail.
If asked for it, don't say it out loud, tell him you'll e-mail or write or IM with it.
Break the cycle of abuse.
I'm on a wireless keyboard - in case someone's listening, I gave it a nickname that seems like online gambling. Someone listening will think my transfers and bill payments are wagers... at least that's my intent.
After it gets past the keyboard, it should be safe with encrypted WLAN and SSL, right? (ok stop laughing).
Point is, wireless keyboards caused me to rethink some things.
For me, I write code and consume web sites and deal with large amounts of data (source code, databases, documentation, music and pictures of course). This is what I've been looking for for 15 years now. I am not a gamer, and if I were to play games I would want to use a driving wheel, light gun, glove, or USB mouse/keyboard combo, whichever is most appropriate for the game. He doesn't want to take away your options.
Multitouch is new, everyone wants to get in on the ground floor and be the one who can say "delivering multi-touch solutions since 2007." The first OS to include an easier way to deal with data will fly off the shelves.
I watch people struggle with the mouse, not realizing they can use 10 fingers on a keyboard instead of a location-dependent 1 on mouse. And then stupid applications put multiple hotkeys with the same accelerator (Borland StarTeam is my current anger target), or try to write their own windows and fail simple things like Paste with CTRL-V (Nero Essentials 7), or holy crap the entire Windows Vista interface, where Microsoft makes it MORE difficult to use with keyboard-only in my experience. Someone will figure out an easier way, and right now, multi-touch seems to be it.
I never saw a use for multi-touch until this video - it looks more promising than just moving windows around. That works fine for the weatherman, but I need to type and supplement organization with multi-touch, not use it as the primary interface.
The day we can integrate multi-touch with a keyboard and not have it frustrate and suck royally, nor impede your typing, that will be the day the first trillionaire is on the horizon.
I think his focus has been all of the bad evidence, illegal third party investigators, and continuing to prosecute when the evidence suggests they are wrong.
Beckerman's job seems to be defense, not prosecutorial. So if a client comes to him with court action in progress, I'd sure as hell prefer someone who has been watching the cases and knows what dirty tricks to expect. Also, which cases have come before and how they turned out.
Better to watch copyright cases than be an ambulance chaser, or advertise "have you or a loved one been hurt by $DRUG?" I think in some places lawyers are not allowed to specialize, but it pays to focus on something and be good at it.
In this case, it does look like he overstepped his bounds a little, but if you look at past cases, RIAA members constantly overstep in their pursuit of a headline-grabbing conviction. I don't see a problem with fighting with whatever tools are available, especially when the cost of losing is financial ruin.
I personally don't believe it's portable at all. I've been told it is, but maybe I have my environment all wrong. When I download something that uses it, I usually end up building my own makefile, having it not work, and moving on to another project.
Maybe it's running Windows that's my problem, but I've never had success without basically re-installing Cygwin from scratch before each use. Then I have hundreds of MB of stuff, just to compile a few hundred kB into a 40k app. No thanks. If I were doing Unices only, maybe it might be better.
I bought the wxWidgets book and read it, hoping to be enlightened beyond all measure to discover a wonderful new paradigm of cross-platform application writing. I have been looking at this since I read a seemingly homebrew "XP: Cross Platform Programming" or something like that, during the days of Windows 98/ME.
I was sorely disappointed. It's basically MFC ported to Linux. I can't even remember what I hated it at this point, it's been so long, but I look at that book with disappointment and derision when I sort through my library from time to time. I'd give or throw it away, but I take the risk that someone might accidentally read it, so I've taken on the burden of keeping that copy at least safe from prying eyes.
GTK was too much casting for my tastes, and Qt had licensing issues. Now that Qt is open, I see no reason not to use it.
I have been forced to use vista at work for the past month or so. Here are the things I hate, mostly from the first week. Keep in mind this is based on using 2000 and XP, and having certain expectations about how Windows in general is supposed to work. No one's going to read this, that's fine, I'm just spitting in a hurricane.
- duplicated functionality, users have to retrain their muscle memory. Makes sense, but loyal Windows users are
To expound on this: Women are typically more social, which lends itself more towards consuming technology, like Drupal as an example. I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of women generating templates and styles and things of that sort. If no one uses the output, it gets neglected in favor of something people use.
Men just go build stuff, whether someone uses it or not. Social skills are a hindrance to working on code for 8 or 16 hours a day, just go away and let me code! Especially having to explain or defend your position, that's like a slap in the face. There's a reason men buy power tools and women knit sweaters.
Naturally when the two different styles meet, there will be conflict. In person, it's easier to deal with. Online, especially from the man's view where replying takes time away from coding, the reply can be curt and misunderstood as an insult or condescension. Then you don't have the ability to take someone aside and clarify - followup is seen as nagging.
(all based on stereotypes, I don't care if you're an exception)
Next time it will be someone else's turn to make an Epic Rant on Slashdot, and nothing will be different. BSA has an audience, and you're not it. Worse, you can't convince its audience that it has no clothes. At least no one has succeeded yet.