Here's my issue. I'm in the rightmost CAR lane, and I want to make a right turn. There is a bike lane to my right with a guy that wants to go straight.
Collision.
Bzzzt. The bicyclist is going straight and has the right of way. If you hit him, it's your fault. It's the same thing as saying "I'm in the left of 2 car lanes, and I want to make a right turn. There is another car lane to my right with a guy that wants to go straight. Collision." Obviously this is somewhat different, since an aware driver would have put himself into the right lane long before the turn, but the point remains: the vehicle/bike/whatever going straight has the right of way. Or further, what if it was a pedestrian crossing the road that you're turning right onto? Would you hit him too?
Which is why bicyclists shouldn't ride on sidewalks (I can't stand riding on a sidewalk anyway, the thump-thump, thump-thump drives me nuts, and it's such a pain to clean the blood of the pedestrians off my bike every day:-D)
Just because you can go 12 MPH, doesn't mean you have to go 12 MPH.
No, but are you going to pay several thousand dollars for the privelege of riding a segway at no more than walking pace? Walking isn't exactly a difficult thing, and given a choice between walking at 3mph and riding some expensive machine at 3mph, I'll gladly pick walking.
Since people are capable of running 12 MPH, does that mean that people should be limited to the bike lanes as well?
I rarely if ever see people running on sidewalks. Most runners run on the road. Why? So they're not dodging slow-moving pedestrians.
Third, he also made a point of running into the senior engineer a number of times. Getting hit by one of those things is no worse then getting hit by someone who weighs 75 pounds more then you do.
No worse than getting hit by someone who weighs 75 pounds more than I, THAT'S TRAVELLING AT 14 MPH??? Maybe the engineer wasn't running the thing at top speed, but at 14mph I guarantee that would hurt. If you don't think so, have a heavyset buddy of yours get up a good head of steam and plow right into you. Why do you think football players wear pads?
if you're riding a segway at it's top speed of about 14 MPH, you can stop in about 15 feet... It has a number of stopping, size, and manuvering advantages over roller skates and bicycles
I don't have any hard numbers, but being an avid bicyclist, I would imagine that a bicycle at 14mph could stop in 15 feet, and possibly less. Bicycles weigh far less than a segway, and have very effective brakes. I don't think the segway has a significant stopping advantage over a bike. Sure a segway has a size advantage in that it's significantly shorter, but does this really matter much? Width is far more important, and in that respect the two are about equal. As far as average/top speed goes, a bike has a clear advantage. An average person can easily ride ~15mph for an extended period of time, and often faster. Plus, as other posters have alluded to, the bike is a great way to stay/get in shape.
K5 ought to have good cultural coverage; after all, their tagline is "technology and culture, from the trenches." The word culture is right in there. Not so with "News for nerds. Stuff that matters." And to a lot of nerds, culture is not stuff that matters (unfortunately, perhaps).
It wouldn't surprise me if their enforcement is more lax when it comes to upper-level courses. This was an intro CS course, and I can see why they would want to crack down on cheating at that level. If you can't handle this work on your own, you shouldn't be there. I most definitely differentiate between cheating and collaboration, and I would guess that most of the "collaboration" that goes on at this level is actually cheating. After all, at least in my intro CS courses (at RIT), any collaboration would have really been cheating, since the solutions were so simple that there really wasn't any discussion that could take place without giving away the answer. At that level, we were prohibited from discussing our solution with other students, and many students were caught cheating. Now that I'm at a higher level, collaboration is encouraged.
I think the lawyers who wrote "Digital Copyright Millennium Act" unintentionally summed it all up for us: so far this has been the "copyright millennium."
Though I wonder if this mistake has any effect on the validity of the agreement.
it's not like the lack of identification makes it impossible to enforce traffic laws
A drivers license has nothing to do with identification, its purpose has just grown to include that (same as social security numbers). Drivers licenses are about having some sort of proof that you have a rudimentary understanding of how to drive. Having a license doesn't imply that someone is a good driver, and you may say that the road test is ridiculously easy to pass, but I've known plenty of people that failed it on the first try, and rightly so. And for the average person when first learning to drive, that trip around the block is a whole lot harder than it seems to you and me now.
the lack of pedestrian licences
Walking is a fairly natural thing. You've done it for that vast majority of your life. Plus, there are a far fewer regulations and things to know about walking down the street than there are about driving.
Not that anyone who owns a very expensive 747 is going to let some random shmuck fly it.
Not that anyone who owns a very expensive car is going to let some random shmuck drive it. Which is what a drivers license is for, to show that this random shmuck (who in this case may be your son or daughter) is actually capable of operating the thing without a high likelihood of smashing it into a telephone pole.
Of course all of the CA DMV sheep could not understand when I explained to them, that scanning my thumb would do nothing to stop a criminal or a terrorist from getting a fake license or from using mine when it was stolen.
What do you expect them to do? Say "oh, ok, since you're harassing me, I'll make an exception just for you"? These people aren't the ones making the laws. If you want to make a difference, talk to your representatives in the legislature or whoever it was that enacted this policy/law. You're like the person that beats up the sales clerk because the price of a stereo is too high, when the sales clerk has absolutely no control over what the store charges, and (in my experience working in retail in college) really doesn't give a shit. Quite possibly the "DMV sheep" understood exactly what you were saying, and quite possibly even agreed with you, but that still doesn't change the fact that they can't simply make an exception for you just because you're that much more enlightened than the rest of the population. This is definitely a case where the "I just work here" reasoning DOES apply.
Re:Titanium is also very flexible.
on
The Sexiest Metal
·
· Score: 1
Aluminum came along, and although lighter than steel, it made for a rigid stiff frame and a toothshattering bike ride.
I own a Cannondale road bike made out of aluminum, and I don't consider it to be a tooth-shattering ride. Of course Cannondale also uses hourglass-shaped seat stays that allegedly smooth out the ride. As for mountain bikes, I've never personally ridden an aluminum one, but suspension makes any such tooth-shattering properties irrelevant.
Fortuneatly, suspension bicycles need a high stiffness in order to keep hinges/shocks/etc. lined up straight, so aluminum is ideal for this purpose.
If that were the primary reason, aluminum would only be used in mountain bikes. The great thing about the stiffness of aluminum is that the frame doesn't flex, and therefore all your energy is transferred directly to propelling the bike, rather than flexing it. You alluded to that with your comment about Ti bikes being like a wet noodle. And in case anyone is wondering why a little bit of frame flex matters, consider that bike races are won and lost by mere seconds all the time.
I think that MS Windows and MS IE are installed on millions of PCs.
Sure windows is installed on millions of PCs, but how often does the average cl00bie run windows update? Many (most?) don't even bother running it at all, and for those that do, it's so infrequent that chances are good that the problem would be found before reaching a huge number of people. And, as another poster said, this is one case where I trust MS more than the other guy.
You walk on the paved street and yet you did not contribute a single cent to pave it... Yes we do pay taxes so that streets are paved
And you just contradicted yourself... What point are you trying to prove?
and also social security of those musicians you are protecting
I pay social security to the guy that owns the car dealership down the street from me too, does that make me entitled to take free cars off his lot? Don't give me the "digital copies are free to make" bit either, cause that doesn't apply in this situation.
The legal profession is a highly specialized profession that requires specific training.
The same could be argued for those who write specialized textbooks (of the variety discussed earlier in this thread). Not just any idiot off the street could bang out a physics textbook. Research is involved, problems and exercises need to be thought of and answered, with the solutions explained for the instructor's version, etc etc. A lot of knowledge is required, which is usually only gained through specific training (i.e. many years of college and grad school). And apparently the market bears the expense of these textbooks, just as it does with lawyers' services, so I don't exactly know how lawyers are somehow above the textbook makers.
And I am a university student. I cannot even count the number of people I personally know who photocopy their entire textbook collection from the library.
I'm a university student as well, and I've NEVER seen this done. Our library charges for copies, maybe yours doesn't. I've only ever had to buy one book that would have been cheaper to copy than to buy. But even still, my time is worth FAR more to me than to sit around a copy machine copying a few hundred pages. I'd much rather just pony up the money for the book and go outside and enjoy the time I saved.
I think the reason the publishing industry hasn't gone bankrupt is because this activity isn't all that widespread. Plus, the reason textbooks are so expensive is because they have a very limited press run. Which means that it doesn't take an incredible number of people photocopying the entire book rather than buying it to drive the prices up even higher.
If you read the article, it references a court decision that says that being able to make a perfect digital copy is not guaranteed under fair use (the statement in the decision was referring to DVDs, but the point remains the same). You can play back the CD, and hold a microphone up to the speaker and record your audio that way. Not perfect, obviously, but you still get your clip, and that's all that's guaranteed under fair use. There was also an interesting reference to museums being able to prevent people from photographing works of art, which was along the same vein. Just because you have the right to use an excerpt doesn't mean you're guaranteed the right to an excerpt of perfect quality.
part of the purpose of Fair Use is to preserve the public's First Amendment right to discuss copyrighted works.
Perhaps for being able to take a quote from a movie in a review, for example. But for the things the/. crowd is more interested (such as time- and space-shifting), the 1st amendment doesn't cover diddly squat. Not being able to copy a CD onto my computer doesn't violate my right to free speech in any way whatsoever.
Electrons have a couple orders of magnitude less mass than protons.
Which is why suddenly converting all the protons in the human body to electrons, although clearly a ridiculous notion, would be very detrimental to the immediate vicinity. e=mc^2 anyone?
Since terrorist attacks (hackers == terrorists, right?) are the largest threat to this system, it is obvious that such vital machines should not be put inside the backyard of Uncle Sam.
Yes and no. Certain places that would appear to be "public" are open to basically anyone that wants to come in. As long as you're doing what you're supposed to do, you're welcome. But if you start misbehaving you could be arrested for trespassing (the grocery store near me has signs outside to this effect, for example). I don't think it's too too much of a stretch to apply this to email.
I, as an author want the ability to sell my copyrights for money - to corporations.
Under copyright law you have certain exclusive rights. You can keep your copyright and license some of those rights, which is different from selling your copyright. From the article, the author doesn't intend to prevent corporations from owning a license to a copyright, corps just can't own a copyright outright.
Huhh? What laws in other countries does this reference? What's this "moral right"? Does the guy I paid to help build my house have a "moral right" to my house?
Software patents barely if at all fulfill that role. By the time a software patent expires, it is usually not useful at all.
I think you just proved the original poster's point. The reason they're not useful at all anymore is typically because other things were innovated that were better. Let's take LZW for instance. When that patent expires, will it be overly useful? No, not really. Why? Because gzip, which is a better compression method, was developed. PNG, also a better method, was devloped as well. Would these have been devloped if LZW wasn't patented? Who knows.
How can you be a CS GRAD student and not know how to use gcc/g++/make?!?!? Honestly!
Maybe a CS undergrad can slip by with VC++ but a grad?!?!?
Because at least where I go to school (RIT) a lot of the grad students are dumber than the undergrads. Why? Because a lot of the time they didn't get undergrad degrees in CS. Don't assume that all CS grad students have already been through four years of CS, because it's not always so.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's my issue. I'm in the rightmost CAR lane, and I want to make a right turn. There is a bike lane to my right with a guy that wants to go straight.
Collision.
Bzzzt. The bicyclist is going straight and has the right of way. If you hit him, it's your fault. It's the same thing as saying "I'm in the left of 2 car lanes, and I want to make a right turn. There is another car lane to my right with a guy that wants to go straight. Collision." Obviously this is somewhat different, since an aware driver would have put himself into the right lane long before the turn, but the point remains: the vehicle/bike/whatever going straight has the right of way. Or further, what if it was a pedestrian crossing the road that you're turning right onto? Would you hit him too?
Which is why bicyclists shouldn't ride on sidewalks (I can't stand riding on a sidewalk anyway, the thump-thump, thump-thump drives me nuts, and it's such a pain to clean the blood of the pedestrians off my bike every day :-D)
Just because you can go 12 MPH, doesn't mean you have to go 12 MPH.
No, but are you going to pay several thousand dollars for the privelege of riding a segway at no more than walking pace? Walking isn't exactly a difficult thing, and given a choice between walking at 3mph and riding some expensive machine at 3mph, I'll gladly pick walking.
Since people are capable of running 12 MPH, does that mean that people should be limited to the bike lanes as well?
I rarely if ever see people running on sidewalks. Most runners run on the road. Why? So they're not dodging slow-moving pedestrians.
Third, he also made a point of running into the senior engineer a number of times. Getting hit by one of those things is no worse then getting hit by someone who weighs 75 pounds more then you do.
... It has a number of stopping, size, and manuvering advantages over roller skates and bicycles
No worse than getting hit by someone who weighs 75 pounds more than I, THAT'S TRAVELLING AT 14 MPH??? Maybe the engineer wasn't running the thing at top speed, but at 14mph I guarantee that would hurt. If you don't think so, have a heavyset buddy of yours get up a good head of steam and plow right into you. Why do you think football players wear pads?
if you're riding a segway at it's top speed of about 14 MPH, you can stop in about 15 feet
I don't have any hard numbers, but being an avid bicyclist, I would imagine that a bicycle at 14mph could stop in 15 feet, and possibly less. Bicycles weigh far less than a segway, and have very effective brakes. I don't think the segway has a significant stopping advantage over a bike. Sure a segway has a size advantage in that it's significantly shorter, but does this really matter much? Width is far more important, and in that respect the two are about equal. As far as average/top speed goes, a bike has a clear advantage. An average person can easily ride ~15mph for an extended period of time, and often faster. Plus, as other posters have alluded to, the bike is a great way to stay/get in shape.
K5 ought to have good cultural coverage; after all, their tagline is "technology and culture, from the trenches." The word culture is right in there. Not so with "News for nerds. Stuff that matters." And to a lot of nerds, culture is not stuff that matters (unfortunately, perhaps).
It wouldn't surprise me if their enforcement is more lax when it comes to upper-level courses. This was an intro CS course, and I can see why they would want to crack down on cheating at that level. If you can't handle this work on your own, you shouldn't be there. I most definitely differentiate between cheating and collaboration, and I would guess that most of the "collaboration" that goes on at this level is actually cheating. After all, at least in my intro CS courses (at RIT), any collaboration would have really been cheating, since the solutions were so simple that there really wasn't any discussion that could take place without giving away the answer. At that level, we were prohibited from discussing our solution with other students, and many students were caught cheating. Now that I'm at a higher level, collaboration is encouraged.
I think the lawyers who wrote "Digital Copyright Millennium Act" unintentionally summed it all up for us: so far this has been the "copyright millennium."
Though I wonder if this mistake has any effect on the validity of the agreement.
it's not like the lack of identification makes it impossible to enforce traffic laws
A drivers license has nothing to do with identification, its purpose has just grown to include that (same as social security numbers). Drivers licenses are about having some sort of proof that you have a rudimentary understanding of how to drive. Having a license doesn't imply that someone is a good driver, and you may say that the road test is ridiculously easy to pass, but I've known plenty of people that failed it on the first try, and rightly so. And for the average person when first learning to drive, that trip around the block is a whole lot harder than it seems to you and me now.
the lack of pedestrian licences
Walking is a fairly natural thing. You've done it for that vast majority of your life. Plus, there are a far fewer regulations and things to know about walking down the street than there are about driving.
Not that anyone who owns a very expensive 747 is going to let some random shmuck fly it.
Not that anyone who owns a very expensive car is going to let some random shmuck drive it. Which is what a drivers license is for, to show that this random shmuck (who in this case may be your son or daughter) is actually capable of operating the thing without a high likelihood of smashing it into a telephone pole.
Of course all of the CA DMV sheep could not understand when I explained to them, that scanning my thumb would do nothing to stop a criminal or a terrorist from getting a fake license or from using mine when it was stolen.
What do you expect them to do? Say "oh, ok, since you're harassing me, I'll make an exception just for you"? These people aren't the ones making the laws. If you want to make a difference, talk to your representatives in the legislature or whoever it was that enacted this policy/law. You're like the person that beats up the sales clerk because the price of a stereo is too high, when the sales clerk has absolutely no control over what the store charges, and (in my experience working in retail in college) really doesn't give a shit. Quite possibly the "DMV sheep" understood exactly what you were saying, and quite possibly even agreed with you, but that still doesn't change the fact that they can't simply make an exception for you just because you're that much more enlightened than the rest of the population. This is definitely a case where the "I just work here" reasoning DOES apply.
I would far, far rather have my movements on public streets monitored, than my conversations anywhere.
Nobody's monitoring your conversations without a warrant. They're able to see who you're calling and who is calling you, which they can do already.
It'll still be in English dictionaries, its the American ones it'll be removed from....
Ooooh, so it will still be in British-English dictionaries, where an estimated 300,000 closed-circuit TV cameras monitor your movement on the streets?
Aluminum came along, and although lighter than steel, it made for a rigid stiff frame and a toothshattering bike ride.
I own a Cannondale road bike made out of aluminum, and I don't consider it to be a tooth-shattering ride. Of course Cannondale also uses hourglass-shaped seat stays that allegedly smooth out the ride. As for mountain bikes, I've never personally ridden an aluminum one, but suspension makes any such tooth-shattering properties irrelevant.
Fortuneatly, suspension bicycles need a high stiffness in order to keep hinges/shocks/etc. lined up straight, so aluminum is ideal for this purpose.
If that were the primary reason, aluminum would only be used in mountain bikes. The great thing about the stiffness of aluminum is that the frame doesn't flex, and therefore all your energy is transferred directly to propelling the bike, rather than flexing it. You alluded to that with your comment about Ti bikes being like a wet noodle. And in case anyone is wondering why a little bit of frame flex matters, consider that bike races are won and lost by mere seconds all the time.
I'm just saying that the cat starved to death because she either 1. neglected to feed it or 2. it was trapped inside the church and starved.
"Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day. Give a man religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish."
I think that MS Windows and MS IE are installed on millions of PCs.
Sure windows is installed on millions of PCs, but how often does the average cl00bie run windows update? Many (most?) don't even bother running it at all, and for those that do, it's so infrequent that chances are good that the problem would be found before reaching a huge number of people. And, as another poster said, this is one case where I trust MS more than the other guy.
You walk on the paved street and yet you did not contribute a single cent to pave it ... Yes we do pay taxes so that streets are paved
And you just contradicted yourself... What point are you trying to prove?
and also social security of those musicians you are protecting
I pay social security to the guy that owns the car dealership down the street from me too, does that make me entitled to take free cars off his lot? Don't give me the "digital copies are free to make" bit either, cause that doesn't apply in this situation.
The legal profession is a highly specialized profession that requires specific training.
The same could be argued for those who write specialized textbooks (of the variety discussed earlier in this thread). Not just any idiot off the street could bang out a physics textbook. Research is involved, problems and exercises need to be thought of and answered, with the solutions explained for the instructor's version, etc etc. A lot of knowledge is required, which is usually only gained through specific training (i.e. many years of college and grad school). And apparently the market bears the expense of these textbooks, just as it does with lawyers' services, so I don't exactly know how lawyers are somehow above the textbook makers.
And I am a university student. I cannot even count the number of people I personally know who photocopy their entire textbook collection from the library.
I'm a university student as well, and I've NEVER seen this done. Our library charges for copies, maybe yours doesn't. I've only ever had to buy one book that would have been cheaper to copy than to buy. But even still, my time is worth FAR more to me than to sit around a copy machine copying a few hundred pages. I'd much rather just pony up the money for the book and go outside and enjoy the time I saved.
I think the reason the publishing industry hasn't gone bankrupt is because this activity isn't all that widespread. Plus, the reason textbooks are so expensive is because they have a very limited press run. Which means that it doesn't take an incredible number of people photocopying the entire book rather than buying it to drive the prices up even higher.
If you read the article, it references a court decision that says that being able to make a perfect digital copy is not guaranteed under fair use (the statement in the decision was referring to DVDs, but the point remains the same). You can play back the CD, and hold a microphone up to the speaker and record your audio that way. Not perfect, obviously, but you still get your clip, and that's all that's guaranteed under fair use. There was also an interesting reference to museums being able to prevent people from photographing works of art, which was along the same vein. Just because you have the right to use an excerpt doesn't mean you're guaranteed the right to an excerpt of perfect quality.
part of the purpose of Fair Use is to preserve the public's First Amendment right to discuss copyrighted works.
/. crowd is more interested (such as time- and space-shifting), the 1st amendment doesn't cover diddly squat. Not being able to copy a CD onto my computer doesn't violate my right to free speech in any way whatsoever.
Perhaps for being able to take a quote from a movie in a review, for example. But for the things the
Electrons have a couple orders of magnitude less mass than protons.
Which is why suddenly converting all the protons in the human body to electrons, although clearly a ridiculous notion, would be very detrimental to the immediate vicinity. e=mc^2 anyone?
Since terrorist attacks (hackers == terrorists, right?) are the largest threat to this system, it is obvious that such vital machines should not be put inside the backyard of Uncle Sam.
;-)
Where do you propose? Israel
Yes and no. Certain places that would appear to be "public" are open to basically anyone that wants to come in. As long as you're doing what you're supposed to do, you're welcome. But if you start misbehaving you could be arrested for trespassing (the grocery store near me has signs outside to this effect, for example). I don't think it's too too much of a stretch to apply this to email.
I, as an author want the ability to sell my copyrights for money - to corporations.
Under copyright law you have certain exclusive rights. You can keep your copyright and license some of those rights, which is different from selling your copyright. From the article, the author doesn't intend to prevent corporations from owning a license to a copyright, corps just can't own a copyright outright.
Huhh? What laws in other countries does this reference? What's this "moral right"? Does the guy I paid to help build my house have a "moral right" to my house?
Read the article.
Software patents barely if at all fulfill that role. By the time a software patent expires, it is usually not useful at all.
I think you just proved the original poster's point. The reason they're not useful at all anymore is typically because other things were innovated that were better. Let's take LZW for instance. When that patent expires, will it be overly useful? No, not really. Why? Because gzip, which is a better compression method, was developed. PNG, also a better method, was devloped as well. Would these have been devloped if LZW wasn't patented? Who knows.
How can you be a CS GRAD student and not know how to use gcc/g++/make?!?!? Honestly!
Maybe a CS undergrad can slip by with VC++ but a grad?!?!?
Because at least where I go to school (RIT) a lot of the grad students are dumber than the undergrads. Why? Because a lot of the time they didn't get undergrad degrees in CS. Don't assume that all CS grad students have already been through four years of CS, because it's not always so.