There should be few exceptions to free speech and as far as I am concerned hate speech is not one of them. Anti-hate speech laws force a community standard on everyone but who says that's the only community standard we should follow? What happens when pornography is considered harmful to women and no pornography is allowed ANYWHERE? What about violence? How about art that is found to be offensive by the majority?
Hate speech is simply that, speech. It's words that whole hurtful, are essentially harmful. "You're a fucking fag" might not be nice and intended to hurt the recipient's feelings, it really it's obvious the speaker is the one with issues that need to be sorted out. "Kill the fucking fags" is an incitement of violence and should not be protected speech (nor is it in the U.S.). The comment is intended to cause physical injury and encroaches upon the eventual recipient's (the 'fag') rights.
The more speech you censor, the more the citizenry is silenced because it's difficult to know what will or will not run afoul of the law. Government is not our nanny or moral compass, nor should it be. By allowing hate speech laws to take hold, the government takes one more step towards controlling our lives.
Very true, and nothing I specified was necessarily exclusive to the digital world. In fact, one of the best type designers I've ever met still uses pencil and paper to design his fonts and logos (http://doyaldyoung.com/).
Apparently you've never created a font before. It's not a process where you set a few parameters and cross your fingers. A proper type face has specially styled italics characters, not just skewed ones, proper kerning, different weights and sizes for captions and headlines, etc. OpenType has opened up the type world to many new alternative possibilities with swashes, stylistic alternatives, tabular and old-style lined numerals and a whole slew of other options for designers to take advantage of in their work. I just don't see metafont making the process of font creation any easier than say FontLab.
"Honestly, if Egypt is worried about teaching its kids to use Windows,..."
Last I checked, teaching kids Linux was not the goal of this project either. Honestly, I'm getting a little tired of you OSS people whining about EVERYTHING Microsoft does. Ballmer takes a different route to work and you blame Microsoft for the Cuban Missile Crisis. Gates has a salad for lunch instead of a sandwich and all of a sudden Microsoft is to blame for worldwide food shortages.
...Copyright protects the original expression of an idea in a fixed, tangible medium, it does not protect ideas themselves. What Orson Scott Card is describing as a plot element is nothing more than an idea. The characters, setting, etc. is what expresses the idea about a boy having trouble growing up. I'd be willing to bet that if another author came along and wrote another Ender book without Card's permission he'd be rabidly foaming at the mouth. Derivative works are not using original expressions, and therefore are not allowed under current copyright law unless explicitly granted by the author.
"runs well", he specifically said "It (Windows) works well and now needs Sugar on top of it." Why do people always try to force irony where it does not exist? he was NOT being ironic, he was explicitly stating that Windows runs well on the XO laptop. i find it truly astounding how utterly stupid many in the Slashdot community are.
And since it's run by Microsoft, you know you can trust it....and the rest of the Slashdot staff for telling us how to think. I was afraid I was going to have to RTFA but that little quip at the end spared me from having to do anything other then clear away some space in front of my leg so I don't stub my toe.
Soldiers, in fully protective battle armor, can make decisions in the field that ROV operators are unable to make due to their distance and disconnection to the situation. Was that airtight enough for you or were you planning on completely panning this concept, trusting AIs to make decisions better then humans?
Windows does 99% of what OSX does but does that mean everyone is going to be dropping their new shiny Leopard systems and running Vista? No. Linux may do much of what Windows does but it if does it poorly (and by this I mean as in a poorly conceived, as well as designed, UI). For instance, Linux may have MythTV but IMHO it's utter crap. Front Row/AppleTV/iTunes is better and these apps from Apple pale in comparison to Windows Media Center in Vista. It's not just poorly designed graphics, it's the clunky way that MythTV handles things. The poorly designed UI doesn't help matters any either, it's merely flies on the pile-o-crap. I don't mind switching between my Mac Mini w/ Leopard and my Dell with Vista Ultimate, I do mind using Linux, and I've tried many different versions since the early days of RedHat, each time I've been underwhelmed and wondering why I'd leave the comfortable confines of Vista and Leopard?
"GIMP is going to be as good as Photoshop one day" is the same as "Is this the year of desktop Linux"? Geeks keep asking these questions but pan the answers they get from professionals, thinking they know more abut what the industry needs.
By the time GIMP catches up with Photoshop, Adobe will have added new improvements for GIMP to ape and the cycle will start all over. GIMP will NEVER be as good as Photoshop for professional use.
Yes it does matter. ABC derives revenue through ads on their site and in some cases ads in the videos. YouTube does not pay for the right to distribute the material despite their deriving revenue through the same means (ads on the site). YouTube is making money off the illegal distribution of content, depriving ABC of this revenue. Most people will click on a link to watch a video regardless of whether it is on ABC or YouTube and it is no more difficult for a blogger to copy/paste the ABC link then it is to copy/paste the YouTube link.
The market is supplying a product the consumer wants, they are not distributing it in the way the consumer might prefer. There is a HUGE difference between the two. Pirates don't spend a dime creating the content, they are just a means to distribute it and people will take this avenue, not necessarily due to a preferred distribution method but because it's free. NO ONE can compete with that and it's why illegal distribution must be eliminated. There are numerous legal ways to sample and discover without the need. The argument, for instance, that YouTube should be allowed to distribute content created by ABC falls apart when ABC is distributing the content freely on their own site in a way that ANYONE can consume it. The web is a series of links and if you want to show your friends the new episode of Lost, link to the ABC site not some third party who illegally distributes the show.
Oh, you are so witty. I want to grow up to be just like you. Where ever did you get the idea to combine the "blue screen of death" and "computer crashes" with automotive computer systems?
Oh, please. Do you honestly think that if Windows were to vanish off the face of the earth tomorrow all these virus authors and botnet operators would suddenly throw their hands up and say "oh well, guess we'll have to find something else to do?" No, they start working on all the exploits in Linux and OSX. Since important financial data is stored in a user's account on the system there's little to stop someone from grabbing this data once they're in. Destroying the user's system is no longer the goal of an attack you know.
They must not have been very good graphic designers given their lack of attention to detail. Given your logic, Apple should go after Applebee's as well.
Laugh all you want but go to an Apple store and buy a big ticket item and take a look at the handhelds they use to "order" the product. I bought a Mac Mini a few months ago and the sales guy pulled out a symbol handheld running Windows CE (try as they might with a custom OSX like UI for the app, the little keyboard icon in the lower right gave it away) to have someone in the back room grab one and bring it out. Why weren't they using the iPod touch or iPhone with a custom app on top of it to do this?
I'm all for discussion but if people aren't going to RTFA then why bother having a link to an article? Why not just have topics and people can then place their ignorant, mindless rants in those? The second you attach a story to the discussion you've put some form of context that the discussion should follow. Beyond that, if you don't understand the topic you're commenting on then how are you furthering the discussion any? I'm a graphic designer with a fair amount of experience in trademark and copyright issues. I wouldn't presume to argue the finer points of CPU design were a story to appear on Slashdot. Why then must people who clearly haven't read the basics of copyright and trademark bother to comment their uninformed, often completely wrong comments (I would say opinions but it's clear people are trying to pass their BS off as fact, i.e. if you don't protect your copyright you lose it).
As to your Cadbury example, if I were to create a chocolate bar and design my wrapper to be a dark brown with large bold letters in silvery gray across the front you can bet your ass that I'd be expecting Hershey's to be knocking on my door. I've invaded their space and promoted my product with similar colors, thus infringing on an established trademark in candy bars. If I were to crete a wireless network device and design the packaging the same way (god only knows why I'd do this, this is merely an hypothetical) then I'd be well within my rights to tell Hershey's what they could do with themselves. This is all about protecting the brand and trust surrounding successful brands as much as it is about minimizing consumer confusion.
"...he is certainly wrong to assume that having a trademark built around a color make the trademark's owner the owner of that color as well. Colors are simply too generic for that. "
That is for a judge and a court of law to decide, not random people on the internet.
...fucking idiots. The site says nothing about a law suit, they merely received a request from the T-Mobile legal department to stop using the color magenta in association with the Endgadget MOBILE section of their site. First of all, READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE BEFORE COMMENTING. How hard is that? Quit this knee-jerk response to something that didn't actually happen. Second, if you are going to comment, KNOW THE FUCKING TOPIC. Trademarks MUST be protected and T-Mobile has a strong brand in the cellular/mobile space built around the color magenta. Asking Endgadget to stop using the color magenta on their MOBILE section is not unreasonable as it does encroach on their trademark. If Endgadget says no (an their response seems to say this in spades) then T-Mobile will need to bring this before a court to actually decide the matter. Shocking as this may be to hear, it really doesn't matter what a bunch of geeks with no experience in the law, intellectual property, or branding and identity think on the matter either.
Slashdot Mirror
There should be few exceptions to free speech and as far as I am concerned hate speech is not one of them. Anti-hate speech laws force a community standard on everyone but who says that's the only community standard we should follow? What happens when pornography is considered harmful to women and no pornography is allowed ANYWHERE? What about violence? How about art that is found to be offensive by the majority?
Hate speech is simply that, speech. It's words that whole hurtful, are essentially harmful. "You're a fucking fag" might not be nice and intended to hurt the recipient's feelings, it really it's obvious the speaker is the one with issues that need to be sorted out. "Kill the fucking fags" is an incitement of violence and should not be protected speech (nor is it in the U.S.). The comment is intended to cause physical injury and encroaches upon the eventual recipient's (the 'fag') rights.
The more speech you censor, the more the citizenry is silenced because it's difficult to know what will or will not run afoul of the law. Government is not our nanny or moral compass, nor should it be. By allowing hate speech laws to take hold, the government takes one more step towards controlling our lives.
Very true, and nothing I specified was necessarily exclusive to the digital world. In fact, one of the best type designers I've ever met still uses pencil and paper to design his fonts and logos (http://doyaldyoung.com/).
Apparently you've never created a font before. It's not a process where you set a few parameters and cross your fingers. A proper type face has specially styled italics characters, not just skewed ones, proper kerning, different weights and sizes for captions and headlines, etc. OpenType has opened up the type world to many new alternative possibilities with swashes, stylistic alternatives, tabular and old-style lined numerals and a whole slew of other options for designers to take advantage of in their work. I just don't see metafont making the process of font creation any easier than say FontLab.
..."claiming that it is too expensive and uncertain to be competitive with non-coal alternatives like wind and solar."
Why can't we do both? Damn environmentalists meddling again. Never wanting to compromise or find some benefits in alternatives.
"Honestly, if Egypt is worried about teaching its kids to use Windows,..."
Last I checked, teaching kids Linux was not the goal of this project either. Honestly, I'm getting a little tired of you OSS people whining about EVERYTHING Microsoft does. Ballmer takes a different route to work and you blame Microsoft for the Cuban Missile Crisis. Gates has a salad for lunch instead of a sandwich and all of a sudden Microsoft is to blame for worldwide food shortages.
"English mother fucker. Do you speak it?!?!?"
scry |skr|
verb ( skries, skried) [ intrans. ]
foretell the future using a crystal ball or other reflective object or surface.
Can you put 2+2 together on your own now or do you need more help?
...Copyright protects the original expression of an idea in a fixed, tangible medium, it does not protect ideas themselves. What Orson Scott Card is describing as a plot element is nothing more than an idea. The characters, setting, etc. is what expresses the idea about a boy having trouble growing up. I'd be willing to bet that if another author came along and wrote another Ender book without Card's permission he'd be rabidly foaming at the mouth. Derivative works are not using original expressions, and therefore are not allowed under current copyright law unless explicitly granted by the author.
Why would astronauts be writing web applications? Don't they have more important experiments to be conducting to waste time playing on the internet?
"runs well", he specifically said "It (Windows) works well and now needs Sugar on top of it." Why do people always try to force irony where it does not exist? he was NOT being ironic, he was explicitly stating that Windows runs well on the XO laptop. i find it truly astounding how utterly stupid many in the Slashdot community are.
And since it's run by Microsoft, you know you can trust it. ...and the rest of the Slashdot staff for telling us how to think. I was afraid I was going to have to RTFA but that little quip at the end spared me from having to do anything other then clear away some space in front of my leg so I don't stub my toe.
Soldiers, in fully protective battle armor, can make decisions in the field that ROV operators are unable to make due to their distance and disconnection to the situation. Was that airtight enough for you or were you planning on completely panning this concept, trusting AIs to make decisions better then humans?
Windows does 99% of what OSX does but does that mean everyone is going to be dropping their new shiny Leopard systems and running Vista? No. Linux may do much of what Windows does but it if does it poorly (and by this I mean as in a poorly conceived, as well as designed, UI). For instance, Linux may have MythTV but IMHO it's utter crap. Front Row/AppleTV/iTunes is better and these apps from Apple pale in comparison to Windows Media Center in Vista. It's not just poorly designed graphics, it's the clunky way that MythTV handles things. The poorly designed UI doesn't help matters any either, it's merely flies on the pile-o-crap. I don't mind switching between my Mac Mini w/ Leopard and my Dell with Vista Ultimate, I do mind using Linux, and I've tried many different versions since the early days of RedHat, each time I've been underwhelmed and wondering why I'd leave the comfortable confines of Vista and Leopard?
"GIMP is going to be as good as Photoshop one day" is the same as "Is this the year of desktop Linux"? Geeks keep asking these questions but pan the answers they get from professionals, thinking they know more abut what the industry needs.
By the time GIMP catches up with Photoshop, Adobe will have added new improvements for GIMP to ape and the cycle will start all over. GIMP will NEVER be as good as Photoshop for professional use.
They did do this from the start, they just didn't force developers to follow good coding practises when writing apps for the NT platform.
Yes it does matter. ABC derives revenue through ads on their site and in some cases ads in the videos. YouTube does not pay for the right to distribute the material despite their deriving revenue through the same means (ads on the site). YouTube is making money off the illegal distribution of content, depriving ABC of this revenue. Most people will click on a link to watch a video regardless of whether it is on ABC or YouTube and it is no more difficult for a blogger to copy/paste the ABC link then it is to copy/paste the YouTube link.
The market is supplying a product the consumer wants, they are not distributing it in the way the consumer might prefer. There is a HUGE difference between the two. Pirates don't spend a dime creating the content, they are just a means to distribute it and people will take this avenue, not necessarily due to a preferred distribution method but because it's free. NO ONE can compete with that and it's why illegal distribution must be eliminated. There are numerous legal ways to sample and discover without the need. The argument, for instance, that YouTube should be allowed to distribute content created by ABC falls apart when ABC is distributing the content freely on their own site in a way that ANYONE can consume it. The web is a series of links and if you want to show your friends the new episode of Lost, link to the ABC site not some third party who illegally distributes the show.
Oh, you are so witty. I want to grow up to be just like you. Where ever did you get the idea to combine the "blue screen of death" and "computer crashes" with automotive computer systems?
And many users will run as root in Linux to keep from being bothered by the sudo prompts. The problem lies with the user, not the system.
Oh, please. Do you honestly think that if Windows were to vanish off the face of the earth tomorrow all these virus authors and botnet operators would suddenly throw their hands up and say "oh well, guess we'll have to find something else to do?" No, they start working on all the exploits in Linux and OSX. Since important financial data is stored in a user's account on the system there's little to stop someone from grabbing this data once they're in. Destroying the user's system is no longer the goal of an attack you know.
They must not have been very good graphic designers given their lack of attention to detail. Given your logic, Apple should go after Applebee's as well.
Laugh all you want but go to an Apple store and buy a big ticket item and take a look at the handhelds they use to "order" the product. I bought a Mac Mini a few months ago and the sales guy pulled out a symbol handheld running Windows CE (try as they might with a custom OSX like UI for the app, the little keyboard icon in the lower right gave it away) to have someone in the back room grab one and bring it out. Why weren't they using the iPod touch or iPhone with a custom app on top of it to do this?
I'm all for discussion but if people aren't going to RTFA then why bother having a link to an article? Why not just have topics and people can then place their ignorant, mindless rants in those? The second you attach a story to the discussion you've put some form of context that the discussion should follow. Beyond that, if you don't understand the topic you're commenting on then how are you furthering the discussion any? I'm a graphic designer with a fair amount of experience in trademark and copyright issues. I wouldn't presume to argue the finer points of CPU design were a story to appear on Slashdot. Why then must people who clearly haven't read the basics of copyright and trademark bother to comment their uninformed, often completely wrong comments (I would say opinions but it's clear people are trying to pass their BS off as fact, i.e. if you don't protect your copyright you lose it).
As to your Cadbury example, if I were to create a chocolate bar and design my wrapper to be a dark brown with large bold letters in silvery gray across the front you can bet your ass that I'd be expecting Hershey's to be knocking on my door. I've invaded their space and promoted my product with similar colors, thus infringing on an established trademark in candy bars. If I were to crete a wireless network device and design the packaging the same way (god only knows why I'd do this, this is merely an hypothetical) then I'd be well within my rights to tell Hershey's what they could do with themselves. This is all about protecting the brand and trust surrounding successful brands as much as it is about minimizing consumer confusion.
"...he is certainly wrong to assume that having a trademark built around a color make the trademark's owner the owner of that color as well. Colors are simply too generic for that. "
That is for a judge and a court of law to decide, not random people on the internet.
...fucking idiots. The site says nothing about a law suit, they merely received a request from the T-Mobile legal department to stop using the color magenta in association with the Endgadget MOBILE section of their site. First of all, READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE BEFORE COMMENTING. How hard is that? Quit this knee-jerk response to something that didn't actually happen. Second, if you are going to comment, KNOW THE FUCKING TOPIC. Trademarks MUST be protected and T-Mobile has a strong brand in the cellular/mobile space built around the color magenta. Asking Endgadget to stop using the color magenta on their MOBILE section is not unreasonable as it does encroach on their trademark. If Endgadget says no (an their response seems to say this in spades) then T-Mobile will need to bring this before a court to actually decide the matter. Shocking as this may be to hear, it really doesn't matter what a bunch of geeks with no experience in the law, intellectual property, or branding and identity think on the matter either.