No, the third world needs a source of clean drinking water, democratic governments instead of tinpot dictators and warlords, education on how to grow crops instead of remaining nomadic herders, better housing, and public schools to name a few things. Computers don't even rate on any list of things the third world needs.
I never said the kid crackd the game himself, I merely suggested he got a copy from his friend or off a P2P app. Unless parents actively snoop around on theiir kids computers (which has been found to be illegal in some states - privacy rights and all) they aren't going to catch this one. If, on the other hand, they install this v-chip software, they have a reaonable expectation that certain rated games are likely not going to run on the computer. With limited monitoring of the kid's computer they can catch any alterations to the v-chip software.
I've read a lot of comments suggesting parents simply don't buy, or allow their kids to buy, games with particular ratings. However this overlooks one very glaring issue, pirated games. What's to stop a kid from downloading or getting a copy of a game from his friends with an M rating and playing it without the parents knowing?
While this is not a replacement for parenting, it does help some. Personally I've always liked solutions like this because they keep the government out of the censorship business. Just because some parents don't want their kids to play mature games doesn't mean I don't want to mature games.
Tell you what, I'll take that chance thanks. Richard Stallman can go hide beneath his rock again and leave me, and those who agree with me, alone and quit trying to preserve his rights under the guise of fighting for freedom for all.
Actually I've never seen an ATM or in-flight display BSOD. The only NT based system I've seen needing rebooting was a BestBuy cash register and then only once.
The Dock and the Taskbar serve very similar functions and Windows has had the taskbar since Windows 95, ergo Apple copied Windows and did not do a very good job of it. From a UI standpoint the Dock is a mess. Tog and ArsTechnica have covered the blunder that is the Dock in full detail, reference them at your leisure. And yes, I have used OSX, I like it a lot, I just refuse to be affected by the Reality Distortion Field Jobs eminates.
...was the innovative fast user switching. Apple was so far ahead of the game with this one. What's that you say? Windows had this one first and OSX copied that? Surely you jest. What about alt-tab application switching with the display of the application icon middle of the screen? Apple may have had that one first. No? My god, what's this world coming to. Now, I know Spotlight is original and no one has been able to implement desktop search capabilities in real-time. Hold on a second, you're telling me MSN has an integrated tool which indexes and searches my entire desktop, including e-mail and file contents?
Sure, these tools may not have the polish Apple puts on them but the tools are there none the less and have been there for quite some time. I'm sure if you look deeper you'll notice other things like core video behaving very much like Microsoft's GDI+, albeit a bit more advanced since it's a lot newer. Apple's Dock was a similar nod to the popularity of the taskbar in Windows though Apple failed to develop a better solution her (it did look purty though didn't it with its genie effects and poofs; sort of a slight of hand, "we know the dock doesn't work but look at the cool effects we can make to divert your attention away from this").
There is still no correlation between the entertainment industry and the links you posted. In fact, the entertainment industry, nor any of its member corporations, made the top 20 list. Given that I thik you should rethink your argument that this law was bought and paid for. Lobbied for perhaps, but I don't think very much money passed hands to get this one through.
Perhaps research centers could be granted exemptions though the rules woudl work slightly different for them. They still need to offer working proof of their software. However, since they are not required to utilize their patents in software or services they would be required to offer their patents in an undiscriminatory fashion. This is mostly left up to the research center to facilitate but by undiscriminatory I mean if they offer the patent to small businesses at x value, they must offer it to all small businesses at this value and cannot negotiate for lower fees. They cannot offer the license for an astronomically high fee either as this woudl discriminate against its use, regardless of business size. This is just a first pass, rough idea, please do not read too much into it and try to pick apart the details.
One could easily ask this of many inventions. There are going to be some obvious and some not so obvious violations in both areas but this does not mean you scrap the entire idea of software patents. As for "how do you know", you do the research. Granted the USPTO, and patent offices of other countries you wish to distribute your software, should provide better search capabilities for their listings but that's all part of solving this greater problem.
...and it's not killing off patents either, software or otherwise. Patent holders should be required to demonstrate their patent, especially if it's software, AND the patent holder must utilize the patent in one or more of their software applications or services built on software applications. Amazon is welcome to patent the one-click web shopping cart but they must utilize this on their website, for instance. However, companies like Eolas which exist solely to collect patents cannot enforce them because they offer no software or service which utilizes the plug-in patent. Only when you do this will marking be a useful tool to identify what is patented. if submarine patents are allowed to exist, and companies are allowed to exist solely to collect patents, marking is going to be of no use to anyone.
Bullshit. Photoshop is still VERY relevant to the post-processing of an image once it's been converted from RAW. I'm not talking about applying cheesy filter effects either, rather adjusting the tonal range or the image, etc. Adobe is trying to eliminate the need for third parties to develop their own RAW format by creating the Adobe DNG (digital negative) format. They have asked for input form the photography industry, including camera manufacturers.
And the photographer stillhas access to the RAW data, they just can't use Photoshop to read it. Nikon provides a RAW processing application which can export to file formats Photoshop can then import.
"Mann sported his signature camera eyewear, while some of the other participants wore CFP conference bags around their necks. The bags had a dark plastic dome stitched on one side -- modeled after store surveillance domes -- which they pointed randomly at passersby, unnerving them."
No kidding this was unnerving. Whenever anybody displays behavior ooutside the norm and tries forcing themselves upon passerbys it's always unnerving, Mann et al are not special in this case. I'm guessing the large group of pale, nerdy looking people would be unnerving enough, the plastic bubbles were merely icing on the cake.
IBM is getting development from the open source community but I really don't see much research happening. I'm guessing IBM would have to provide that half of the equation.
pay for music is not P2P. I never said online music distribution would fail, I merely said distribution solely through P2P and falling back on services (concernts and merchandise) would fail. Nice try though.
Ford didn't grab the horse buggies from the horse buggy manufacturers, slap engines in them and sell them to horse buggy customers. You are welcome to start your own label and distribute music however you choose. Why is this concept so difficult to understand? The RIAA does not automatically own all music the instant it's recorded. Make your own music and prove the business model of P2P works then the world will follow. When you fail at your endeavor, and I'll give you 1,000,000 to 1 odds because you will fail, explain to me why you think the world should follow your footsteps and fail too?
This really shows how little your average slashbot understands about the music industry in general and the RIAA specifically. The RIAA does not choose how music is distributed though they were responsible for getting the industry to agree on certain standards like the CD. If Sony wants to release their entire catalog on P2P they are more than welcome to and the RIAA can do nothing, short of kicking them out of the industry trade organization though I doubt they would do that.
What really annoys me is this "embrace change" mantra so many slashbots keep chanting. If you believe touring and concerts are the way for musicians to make money you have never been on tour or worked on the road for any length of time. Also, how long do you think it will be before bootleg concert recordings make the P2P rounds? The entire world does not need to follow a service based economy and in fact this would be a very bad thing to happen. Services are a very hard thing to compete on and the turnover rate for these companies providing services would be astronomical, screwing customers in the end. Look at the recent Voom No More to see what happens to service based companies in this day and age.
Same ol' slashbot mentality, "small company good, ugghhh, monolithic corporation bad, ugghhh". Then the slashbots go off and pick the lice from one another. Troll? You betcha, but the truth hurts sometimes. That and I think some heeks are still pissed off about the g4/techtv fiasco. Get over it.
...Michael Bay for the pitiful excuse of a movie Pearl Harbor turned out to be. I blame Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett for sucking so bad at acting. For this one need only look to the casting director. Michael Bay is good at directing pure adrenaline fueled action sequences and he'd done three that in my opinion are tough to top; 1) the attack sequence of Pearl Harbor in Pearl Harbor, 2) the car chase between the H1 and teh Ferrari in The Rock, and 3) the F-18 approach/ bombing of Alcatraz in The Rock. Keeping in mind that The Rock never aspired to be the next Citizen Kane, I'd even go as far as to say that it was a pretty decent action movie.
Garbage collection and street repair is often subconracted. I have no problem with cities providing free wi-fi if hey subcontract the work out. However, I do have a problem with government running or becoming a business entity, especially when tax dollars are used.
But the city is spending $5000 a year for the wi-fi services, so yes, the city is in fact funding the project. Jesus, you'd think you could have atleast read the summary before commenting, but for your viewing here's the relevant parts:
"The city will pay about $5,000 a year for it, but most of the cost is paid for by the advertisers."
Slashdot Mirror
What happens when people start losing? And they will lose, big time. How about you step up to the plate though and show us all how it's done.
No, the third world needs a source of clean drinking water, democratic governments instead of tinpot dictators and warlords, education on how to grow crops instead of remaining nomadic herders, better housing, and public schools to name a few things. Computers don't even rate on any list of things the third world needs.
I never said the kid crackd the game himself, I merely suggested he got a copy from his friend or off a P2P app. Unless parents actively snoop around on theiir kids computers (which has been found to be illegal in some states - privacy rights and all) they aren't going to catch this one. If, on the other hand, they install this v-chip software, they have a reaonable expectation that certain rated games are likely not going to run on the computer. With limited monitoring of the kid's computer they can catch any alterations to the v-chip software.
I've read a lot of comments suggesting parents simply don't buy, or allow their kids to buy, games with particular ratings. However this overlooks one very glaring issue, pirated games. What's to stop a kid from downloading or getting a copy of a game from his friends with an M rating and playing it without the parents knowing?
While this is not a replacement for parenting, it does help some. Personally I've always liked solutions like this because they keep the government out of the censorship business. Just because some parents don't want their kids to play mature games doesn't mean I don't want to mature games.
Tell you what, I'll take that chance thanks. Richard Stallman can go hide beneath his rock again and leave me, and those who agree with me, alone and quit trying to preserve his rights under the guise of fighting for freedom for all.
Actually I've never seen an ATM or in-flight display BSOD. The only NT based system I've seen needing rebooting was a BestBuy cash register and then only once.
The Dock and the Taskbar serve very similar functions and Windows has had the taskbar since Windows 95, ergo Apple copied Windows and did not do a very good job of it. From a UI standpoint the Dock is a mess. Tog and ArsTechnica have covered the blunder that is the Dock in full detail, reference them at your leisure. And yes, I have used OSX, I like it a lot, I just refuse to be affected by the Reality Distortion Field Jobs eminates.
...was the innovative fast user switching. Apple was so far ahead of the game with this one. What's that you say? Windows had this one first and OSX copied that? Surely you jest. What about alt-tab application switching with the display of the application icon middle of the screen? Apple may have had that one first. No? My god, what's this world coming to. Now, I know Spotlight is original and no one has been able to implement desktop search capabilities in real-time. Hold on a second, you're telling me MSN has an integrated tool which indexes and searches my entire desktop, including e-mail and file contents?
Sure, these tools may not have the polish Apple puts on them but the tools are there none the less and have been there for quite some time. I'm sure if you look deeper you'll notice other things like core video behaving very much like Microsoft's GDI+, albeit a bit more advanced since it's a lot newer. Apple's Dock was a similar nod to the popularity of the taskbar in Windows though Apple failed to develop a better solution her (it did look purty though didn't it with its genie effects and poofs; sort of a slight of hand, "we know the dock doesn't work but look at the cool effects we can make to divert your attention away from this").
There is still no correlation between the entertainment industry and the links you posted. In fact, the entertainment industry, nor any of its member corporations, made the top 20 list. Given that I thik you should rethink your argument that this law was bought and paid for. Lobbied for perhaps, but I don't think very much money passed hands to get this one through.
Perhaps research centers could be granted exemptions though the rules woudl work slightly different for them. They still need to offer working proof of their software. However, since they are not required to utilize their patents in software or services they would be required to offer their patents in an undiscriminatory fashion. This is mostly left up to the research center to facilitate but by undiscriminatory I mean if they offer the patent to small businesses at x value, they must offer it to all small businesses at this value and cannot negotiate for lower fees. They cannot offer the license for an astronomically high fee either as this woudl discriminate against its use, regardless of business size. This is just a first pass, rough idea, please do not read too much into it and try to pick apart the details.
One could easily ask this of many inventions. There are going to be some obvious and some not so obvious violations in both areas but this does not mean you scrap the entire idea of software patents. As for "how do you know", you do the research. Granted the USPTO, and patent offices of other countries you wish to distribute your software, should provide better search capabilities for their listings but that's all part of solving this greater problem.
...and it's not killing off patents either, software or otherwise. Patent holders should be required to demonstrate their patent, especially if it's software, AND the patent holder must utilize the patent in one or more of their software applications or services built on software applications. Amazon is welcome to patent the one-click web shopping cart but they must utilize this on their website, for instance. However, companies like Eolas which exist solely to collect patents cannot enforce them because they offer no software or service which utilizes the plug-in patent. Only when you do this will marking be a useful tool to identify what is patented. if submarine patents are allowed to exist, and companies are allowed to exist solely to collect patents, marking is going to be of no use to anyone.
Bullshit. Photoshop is still VERY relevant to the post-processing of an image once it's been converted from RAW. I'm not talking about applying cheesy filter effects either, rather adjusting the tonal range or the image, etc. Adobe is trying to eliminate the need for third parties to develop their own RAW format by creating the Adobe DNG (digital negative) format. They have asked for input form the photography industry, including camera manufacturers.
And the photographer stillhas access to the RAW data, they just can't use Photoshop to read it. Nikon provides a RAW processing application which can export to file formats Photoshop can then import.
"Mann sported his signature camera eyewear, while some of the other participants wore CFP conference bags around their necks. The bags had a dark plastic dome stitched on one side -- modeled after store surveillance domes -- which they pointed randomly at passersby, unnerving them."
No kidding this was unnerving. Whenever anybody displays behavior ooutside the norm and tries forcing themselves upon passerbys it's always unnerving, Mann et al are not special in this case. I'm guessing the large group of pale, nerdy looking people would be unnerving enough, the plastic bubbles were merely icing on the cake.
IBM is getting development from the open source community but I really don't see much research happening. I'm guessing IBM would have to provide that half of the equation.
pay for music is not P2P. I never said online music distribution would fail, I merely said distribution solely through P2P and falling back on services (concernts and merchandise) would fail. Nice try though.
Ford didn't grab the horse buggies from the horse buggy manufacturers, slap engines in them and sell them to horse buggy customers. You are welcome to start your own label and distribute music however you choose. Why is this concept so difficult to understand? The RIAA does not automatically own all music the instant it's recorded. Make your own music and prove the business model of P2P works then the world will follow. When you fail at your endeavor, and I'll give you 1,000,000 to 1 odds because you will fail, explain to me why you think the world should follow your footsteps and fail too?
This really shows how little your average slashbot understands about the music industry in general and the RIAA specifically. The RIAA does not choose how music is distributed though they were responsible for getting the industry to agree on certain standards like the CD. If Sony wants to release their entire catalog on P2P they are more than welcome to and the RIAA can do nothing, short of kicking them out of the industry trade organization though I doubt they would do that.
What really annoys me is this "embrace change" mantra so many slashbots keep chanting. If you believe touring and concerts are the way for musicians to make money you have never been on tour or worked on the road for any length of time. Also, how long do you think it will be before bootleg concert recordings make the P2P rounds? The entire world does not need to follow a service based economy and in fact this would be a very bad thing to happen. Services are a very hard thing to compete on and the turnover rate for these companies providing services would be astronomical, screwing customers in the end. Look at the recent Voom No More to see what happens to service based companies in this day and age.
"Number 5 is alive, Number 5 is alive".
Same ol' slashbot mentality, "small company good, ugghhh, monolithic corporation bad, ugghhh". Then the slashbots go off and pick the lice from one another. Troll? You betcha, but the truth hurts sometimes. That and I think some heeks are still pissed off about the g4/techtv fiasco. Get over it.
Spam is often commercial speech and commercial speech is not fully protected by the First Amendment.
...Michael Bay for the pitiful excuse of a movie Pearl Harbor turned out to be. I blame Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett for sucking so bad at acting. For this one need only look to the casting director. Michael Bay is good at directing pure adrenaline fueled action sequences and he'd done three that in my opinion are tough to top; 1) the attack sequence of Pearl Harbor in Pearl Harbor, 2) the car chase between the H1 and teh Ferrari in The Rock, and 3) the F-18 approach/ bombing of Alcatraz in The Rock. Keeping in mind that The Rock never aspired to be the next Citizen Kane, I'd even go as far as to say that it was a pretty decent action movie.
Garbage collection and street repair is often subconracted. I have no problem with cities providing free wi-fi if hey subcontract the work out. However, I do have a problem with government running or becoming a business entity, especially when tax dollars are used.
But the city is spending $5000 a year for the wi-fi services, so yes, the city is in fact funding the project. Jesus, you'd think you could have atleast read the summary before commenting, but for your viewing here's the relevant parts:
"The city will pay about $5,000 a year for it, but most of the cost is paid for by the advertisers."