Anybody CAN distribute their music over the internet already, they just can't get money from the RIAA to do so. Nothing stops a musician from posting their music on the web and establishing a fee-based system of their liking from which they make a living. All the RIAA is saying is you can't take the music we helped create (through funding and distribution deals). What is so fucking difficult to uderstand about this?
"Despite the hype surrounding the dotcom era, many believe that the vast potential of the net to change society and business remains largely untapped."
If this is such a wonderful idea why doesn't he get a bunch of artists, musicians and writers to donate their own work to this project and actually prove the concept works?
I'm tired of all the rhetoric about business models failing and how the web is going to transform the way society learns, works, and entertains themselves. The dotcom era should have taught these so called visionaries one thing, you actually have to have a business plan before you can transform business models.
If these business models are so full of potential he should start one, with his own intellectual property, and prove that the old economy intellectual property businesses they are extinct. If his ideas work then the dinosaurs of the MPAA and RIAA will either have to adapt to the new economy or die. Forcing them to risk their entire business on a gamble like this is wrong from any perspective.
...but MTV appears to have a relatively decent site, choose or lose (http://www.mtv.com/chooseorlose/), with information about each party, their candidates, and links to non-partisan sites like FactCheck.org. I'd rather see MTV push this website hard so people have a clue about what's going on and can make a more informed vote instead of rushing out and pulling that lever for the guy they think their favorite rapper would vote for.
Mods have been a limitation the software developers have added to console games. FarCry:Instincst, the FarCry port for the XBOX, is supposed to have an editor built in so you can design and distribute your own levels on XBOX Live! I'm sure it's relatively trivial to develop a way to have XBOX Live! connect to the PC and upload/download texture maps and models built in gmax.
Why is it so interesting that these plans exist? The US, and likely any country with half a clue and the military to back it up, have contingency plans for damn near everything you can think of and then some. These kinds of plans rarely go beyond the idea stage but they give those responsible options and direction so they can protect, or at the very least react with a better sense of the situation, instead of react blindly.
"If people kick the shrub out, the US will stand a better chance at ratifying the Kyoto accord and remove the wasteful SUVs from the roads."
Kerry voted against the Kyoto treaty. oh, I'm sorry, you actually expect either the Green or Independant party candidates to be serious contenders for the Office of President of the United states.
By the way, SUVs aren't the problem, combustion engines that burn fossil fuels are. SUVs that run off Biodeisel are every bit as eco-friendly as little "roller skates" that currently get 50+ MPG. SUVs that run off hydrogen will be every bit as eco-friendly as well.
You can cross out things in the EULA BUT you need to still get the other party to agree to the changes. They could decide not to negotiate and you'd still either have to agree to the original EULA or get a refund for the software.
In a comment to my original post, Saige points out an excellent explanation of why the Electoral College is important. It's much better explained than anything I could cobble together so I suggest you read it and see if you still believe your comment.
Innocent until proven guilty is only a legal defense for criminal trials. Civil trials have a much lower burden of proof and it's also not unheard of for the defense to prove they were not doing what they were accused of.
...but Florida proved one thing, you can't trust most voters to understand complex design dystems. You're just replacing one problem with another if you swap the electoral college for IRV.
Mr. Cobb also fails to address the issue the EC solves, that of representation for the states with smaller population centers. For all its flaws, the EC forces candidates to deal with issues in smaller states. Going to a proportional voting system or eliminating the EC altogether is going to disenfranchise these states and the people who live there.
.../. has duped people into subscribing to this crap. You'd think that now that people are willing to pay money to read this site that the editors would show them a little respect and edit a little bit. You know, spell check, look for dupes, that kind of thing. It's ironic that some/.'ers use this site to complain about corporations taking their money and screwing them, sort of like this.
Laugh all you want but they do this at Fenway Park. I got to sit in teh photographer's pit at a game one night and many of the photographers there had laptops at the ready. Between innings they would download images to the laptops and have them ready for uploading to their pudblications. Also, take a look at MLB.com or your favorite team's website during a game some time. You'll see images and stories being published as the game is going on.
I'm for small government too. I'm just saying that there need to be ways to reasonably divulge information obtained by government without giving away everythign simply because tax dollars paid for it. By the way, secretive governments are also smaller by nature, they just concentrate power in fewer organizations. The bigger they are, the more leaks they tend to spring.
No, they wouldn't have made them, they would have used other works in the public domain. The simple fact remains that the public domain will always exist and work will always be placed there. Sure, for a short while we will have fewer works wind up there but after the recent Eldred case, it is clear that Congress and the lobbyists for more copyright protection have won their last battle. SCOTUS implied that while they are not going to specify what "limited time" in the U.S. Constitution means, they do believe the current limit of life of author plus 75 years is pretty much it and any attempt to lengthen it will likely be overturned should another Eldred case be brought before them. The Public Domain is not shrinking despite what Lessig tells you. It is merely taking on fewer pieces for a short while until copyright limits normalize again and the rate of growth will once more depend upon how many artists are creating work for the public to appreciate.
The problem is, current attacks on the copyright system do not take this into account and have only been brought about because millions of people want to distribute, illegally, current works protected under ANY form of copyright protection this country has ever seen. It is unrealistic to not only think that musicians can make a living touring, it is unbelievably naive to think that what works for musicians will work for all other artists. Should painters, sculptors and photographers have to tour their work too while allowing anyone who wants to publish their work in a book and sell them without compensating the artist?
There is no way Disney, or anyone else, could Trademark these characters. I'm not concerned and anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is simply fearmongering.
I find it ironic that everyone uses Disney as the whipping boy of all that's wrong with copyright when in fact they exemplify how the system does, and should work. Many arguing for shorter copyright terms are only doing so because they simply want shit for free. Disney, on the other hand, uses what's in the public domain already and creates wonderful works of art and culture. There's nothing stopping you from doing your own animateds versions of Alice in Wonderland or the Sword in the Stone if you want except your lack of talent and motivation to actually add to the creative pool. You simply want to get your copy of the latest film o album for free so you argue that copyrights are stifling creativity and evil monopolies used by greedy corporations to hold the little guy back.
By the way, Mickey Mouse, as well as his friends Donald, Goofy, Minnie and Pluto, amongst others, are protected by Trademark law and not Copyright law. Their protection is indefinite so you'll never be able to create a Mickey Mouse movie but you'll soon be able to distribute Steamboat Willie to all your friends. I'm guessing that's not going to be a popular P2P title though.
Then why should information be classified and kept from the public? Do I have a right to see the records for the Groom Lake Facility in Nevada (aka Area 51)? I pay for the building of weapons systems used by the US military. Should I then be allowed to take an F-16 for a joyride whenever I want simply because I have a pilot's license? What about social security, tax records, and medical information for anyone who's worked for the government? Tax dollars paid for that and I'd like to know a little about the guy I'm about to hire for a job. Where does the argument for tax dollars end and reasonable regulation of government resources begin? Governments are in deed established to serve the people, this does not mean we get to treat them like the waiter at a local restaurant and that they answer to our every whim. Should they not respond to my opinion that I think information of this nature be kept locked up? Wouldn't they then be serving me and putting my tax dollars to good use? By the way, as someone who once held a TS SIOP ESI clearance in the USAF, I do indeed believe there is information that is rightly classified and kept from the public. I'm not saying that specifically GIS data should or should not be, but not all information obtained by the government should be made public.
\I think the term need should be applied more to what the citizen plans to do with the information. I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to have a form filled out by the requester in which they must explain what the information is to be used for. If they're just doing this to tweak the local government, or prove some point, then perhaps it's not going to be worth the local government's time to bother with the request and the requester can seek legal recourse if they so wish. If there is a contractor that is going to use the aerial photography for some job related purpose then perhaps it's worth the time and expense of the local government to get them the data at a reasonable fee. Not great examples but you can see the big difference of need based on "because I can" and need based on legitimate use of the information.
"The US defense budget is totally messed up, lobbiests from Lockheed and other Star Wars companies sap away funding that should be spent on improved pay and equipment for the soldiers on the ground to do their job better."
While I agree to a certain extent you fail to recognize that the US Military does not turn on a dime and change the way they conduct wars overnight. We were so busy building up a stockpile of technology that no nation on earth would dare attack us that we failed to look at other threats posed by civilian populations who have absolutely no qualms whatsoever about inflicting as much damage and harm to other civilians as they can. The US Military is not equipped, nor has it ever really, to act as a police force. Until the powers that be allow the US Military to treat to act and train as a police force, and until the UN actually lets the US Military commanders direct its actions without interference from other countries (assuming they are acting within the limits of accepted rules of war), this will not change.
That utility has yet to work for me. I tried it when 0.9.1 came out (I was using 0.9), no go. 0.9.2? nope. 0.9.3? What was I thinking? 1.0PR? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me, errr, wait a second, it looks like I've been had three times already.
"The good news is that if you have an updated version (Mozilla 1.7.3, Firefox 1.0PR, Thunderbird 0.8) you won't be affected."
And the good news is if you have the updated version of Windows (Windowws XP SP2) then you aren't affected by the similar critical flaw either but it's different when it's OSS huh?
Yet another WWII movie, but don't forget Spielberg's part in Band of Brothers. In my opinion, this is a better movie than Saving Private Ryan. Tom Hanks, also involved with Saving Private Ryan, had a hand in the making of Band of Brothers. Perhaps Spielberg has found his niche? I wish he'd remake Pearl Harbor and get a better lead cast than Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett.
Slashdot Mirror
Anybody CAN distribute their music over the internet already, they just can't get money from the RIAA to do so. Nothing stops a musician from posting their music on the web and establishing a fee-based system of their liking from which they make a living. All the RIAA is saying is you can't take the music we helped create (through funding and distribution deals). What is so fucking difficult to uderstand about this?
If this is such a wonderful idea why doesn't he get a bunch of artists, musicians and writers to donate their own work to this project and actually prove the concept works?
I'm tired of all the rhetoric about business models failing and how the web is going to transform the way society learns, works, and entertains themselves. The dotcom era should have taught these so called visionaries one thing, you actually have to have a business plan before you can transform business models.
If these business models are so full of potential he should start one, with his own intellectual property, and prove that the old economy intellectual property businesses they are extinct. If his ideas work then the dinosaurs of the MPAA and RIAA will either have to adapt to the new economy or die. Forcing them to risk their entire business on a gamble like this is wrong from any perspective.
...but MTV appears to have a relatively decent site, choose or lose (http://www.mtv.com/chooseorlose/), with information about each party, their candidates, and links to non-partisan sites like FactCheck.org. I'd rather see MTV push this website hard so people have a clue about what's going on and can make a more informed vote instead of rushing out and pulling that lever for the guy they think their favorite rapper would vote for.
Mods have been a limitation the software developers have added to console games. FarCry:Instincst, the FarCry port for the XBOX, is supposed to have an editor built in so you can design and distribute your own levels on XBOX Live! I'm sure it's relatively trivial to develop a way to have XBOX Live! connect to the PC and upload/download texture maps and models built in gmax.
Why is it so interesting that these plans exist? The US, and likely any country with half a clue and the military to back it up, have contingency plans for damn near everything you can think of and then some. These kinds of plans rarely go beyond the idea stage but they give those responsible options and direction so they can protect, or at the very least react with a better sense of the situation, instead of react blindly.
"If people kick the shrub out, the US will stand a better chance at ratifying the Kyoto accord and remove the wasteful SUVs from the roads."
Kerry voted against the Kyoto treaty. oh, I'm sorry, you actually expect either the Green or Independant party candidates to be serious contenders for the Office of President of the United states.
By the way, SUVs aren't the problem, combustion engines that burn fossil fuels are. SUVs that run off Biodeisel are every bit as eco-friendly as little "roller skates" that currently get 50+ MPG. SUVs that run off hydrogen will be every bit as eco-friendly as well.
You can cross out things in the EULA BUT you need to still get the other party to agree to the changes. They could decide not to negotiate and you'd still either have to agree to the original EULA or get a refund for the software.
In a comment to my original post, Saige points out an excellent explanation of why the Electoral College is important. It's much better explained than anything I could cobble together so I suggest you read it and see if you still believe your comment.
Innocent until proven guilty is only a legal defense for criminal trials. Civil trials have a much lower burden of proof and it's also not unheard of for the defense to prove they were not doing what they were accused of.
...but Florida proved one thing, you can't trust most voters to understand complex design dystems. You're just replacing one problem with another if you swap the electoral college for IRV.
Mr. Cobb also fails to address the issue the EC solves, that of representation for the states with smaller population centers. For all its flaws, the EC forces candidates to deal with issues in smaller states. Going to a proportional voting system or eliminating the EC altogether is going to disenfranchise these states and the people who live there.
.../. has duped people into subscribing to this crap. You'd think that now that people are willing to pay money to read this site that the editors would show them a little respect and edit a little bit. You know, spell check, look for dupes, that kind of thing. It's ironic that some /.'ers use this site to complain about corporations taking their money and screwing them, sort of like this.
Laugh all you want but they do this at Fenway Park. I got to sit in teh photographer's pit at a game one night and many of the photographers there had laptops at the ready. Between innings they would download images to the laptops and have them ready for uploading to their pudblications. Also, take a look at MLB.com or your favorite team's website during a game some time. You'll see images and stories being published as the game is going on.
I agree for the most part. I buy the CD mostly because I want to rip the CD to the format and bitrate I choose.
I had no idea Disney did this. Even more evidence that their position as the whipping boy of all that is evil with Copyright is wrong.
I'm for small government too. I'm just saying that there need to be ways to reasonably divulge information obtained by government without giving away everythign simply because tax dollars paid for it. By the way, secretive governments are also smaller by nature, they just concentrate power in fewer organizations. The bigger they are, the more leaks they tend to spring.
No, they wouldn't have made them, they would have used other works in the public domain. The simple fact remains that the public domain will always exist and work will always be placed there. Sure, for a short while we will have fewer works wind up there but after the recent Eldred case, it is clear that Congress and the lobbyists for more copyright protection have won their last battle. SCOTUS implied that while they are not going to specify what "limited time" in the U.S. Constitution means, they do believe the current limit of life of author plus 75 years is pretty much it and any attempt to lengthen it will likely be overturned should another Eldred case be brought before them. The Public Domain is not shrinking despite what Lessig tells you. It is merely taking on fewer pieces for a short while until copyright limits normalize again and the rate of growth will once more depend upon how many artists are creating work for the public to appreciate.
The problem is, current attacks on the copyright system do not take this into account and have only been brought about because millions of people want to distribute, illegally, current works protected under ANY form of copyright protection this country has ever seen. It is unrealistic to not only think that musicians can make a living touring, it is unbelievably naive to think that what works for musicians will work for all other artists. Should painters, sculptors and photographers have to tour their work too while allowing anyone who wants to publish their work in a book and sell them without compensating the artist?
There is no way Disney, or anyone else, could Trademark these characters. I'm not concerned and anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is simply fearmongering.
I find it ironic that everyone uses Disney as the whipping boy of all that's wrong with copyright when in fact they exemplify how the system does, and should work. Many arguing for shorter copyright terms are only doing so because they simply want shit for free. Disney, on the other hand, uses what's in the public domain already and creates wonderful works of art and culture. There's nothing stopping you from doing your own animateds versions of Alice in Wonderland or the Sword in the Stone if you want except your lack of talent and motivation to actually add to the creative pool. You simply want to get your copy of the latest film o album for free so you argue that copyrights are stifling creativity and evil monopolies used by greedy corporations to hold the little guy back.
By the way, Mickey Mouse, as well as his friends Donald, Goofy, Minnie and Pluto, amongst others, are protected by Trademark law and not Copyright law. Their protection is indefinite so you'll never be able to create a Mickey Mouse movie but you'll soon be able to distribute Steamboat Willie to all your friends. I'm guessing that's not going to be a popular P2P title though.
Then why should information be classified and kept from the public? Do I have a right to see the records for the Groom Lake Facility in Nevada (aka Area 51)? I pay for the building of weapons systems used by the US military. Should I then be allowed to take an F-16 for a joyride whenever I want simply because I have a pilot's license? What about social security, tax records, and medical information for anyone who's worked for the government? Tax dollars paid for that and I'd like to know a little about the guy I'm about to hire for a job. Where does the argument for tax dollars end and reasonable regulation of government resources begin? Governments are in deed established to serve the people, this does not mean we get to treat them like the waiter at a local restaurant and that they answer to our every whim. Should they not respond to my opinion that I think information of this nature be kept locked up? Wouldn't they then be serving me and putting my tax dollars to good use? By the way, as someone who once held a TS SIOP ESI clearance in the USAF, I do indeed believe there is information that is rightly classified and kept from the public. I'm not saying that specifically GIS data should or should not be, but not all information obtained by the government should be made public.
\I think the term need should be applied more to what the citizen plans to do with the information. I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to have a form filled out by the requester in which they must explain what the information is to be used for. If they're just doing this to tweak the local government, or prove some point, then perhaps it's not going to be worth the local government's time to bother with the request and the requester can seek legal recourse if they so wish. If there is a contractor that is going to use the aerial photography for some job related purpose then perhaps it's worth the time and expense of the local government to get them the data at a reasonable fee. Not great examples but you can see the big difference of need based on "because I can" and need based on legitimate use of the information.
While I agree to a certain extent you fail to recognize that the US Military does not turn on a dime and change the way they conduct wars overnight. We were so busy building up a stockpile of technology that no nation on earth would dare attack us that we failed to look at other threats posed by civilian populations who have absolutely no qualms whatsoever about inflicting as much damage and harm to other civilians as they can. The US Military is not equipped, nor has it ever really, to act as a police force. Until the powers that be allow the US Military to treat to act and train as a police force, and until the UN actually lets the US Military commanders direct its actions without interference from other countries (assuming they are acting within the limits of accepted rules of war), this will not change.
That utility has yet to work for me. I tried it when 0.9.1 came out (I was using 0.9), no go. 0.9.2? nope. 0.9.3? What was I thinking? 1.0PR? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me, errr, wait a second, it looks like I've been had three times already.
"The good news is that if you have an updated version (Mozilla 1.7.3, Firefox 1.0PR, Thunderbird 0.8) you won't be affected."
And the good news is if you have the updated version of Windows (Windowws XP SP2) then you aren't affected by the similar critical flaw either but it's different when it's OSS huh?
Yet another WWII movie, but don't forget Spielberg's part in Band of Brothers. In my opinion, this is a better movie than Saving Private Ryan. Tom Hanks, also involved with Saving Private Ryan, had a hand in the making of Band of Brothers. Perhaps Spielberg has found his niche? I wish he'd remake Pearl Harbor and get a better lead cast than Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett.