If it's a problem that font names may be unreadable when written in the font, then write it both ways--put the font name in the font, then followed by the font name in parentheses in a standard font. Or put the font name in a standard font and then follow it with "abcdefghij" written in the font.
It's not an excuse to use only the standard font and nothing else.
Okay, now I'm puzzled. I was aware of the 56 year issue, because of the heirs of Jerry Siegel reclaiming the copyrights to Superboy and Superman. The 56 year one has a clear justification: the copyright term was 56 years, but new laws added extra time to the copyright past that. The creator originally thought he was just selling the copyright for 56 years, so the extra time that we added could just as well go to him as to the guys he sold it to.
But where's this 35 years for works after 1978 coming from? I mean, it's there in the law, but it's not obvious where it's coming from.
I mean, at least for citizens of the United States to complain about the UN is almost hilarious. Our previous ambassador wanted nothing more than to tear the whole thing down.
Huh? That's like saying "it's hilarious that you complain about that restaurant's food, when you don't even want to eat there".
Having complaints about the UN is <i>why</i> Americans want to tear it down.
If you read the New York Times article linked to a couple of posts up, they mention that the company at freecreditreport.com started selling reports *before* the government started requiring free annual credit reports. Of course, once this started, the chance for confusion helped them, but they actually started it independently of the government requirement.
"All first party Nintendo games have very simple graphics (childish looking). Gameplay is kind-of-fun but they get old."
That isn't *quite* true. The Fire Emblem and Metroid series should be okay, though it depends on your definition of first party. They are published by Nintendo.
Several of those games are ports (and therefore don't count if someone says "I am going to get a Wii and..."): Resident Evil 4, House of the Dead, Silent Hill (a reimagining of the first game), Phantom Brave, Okami. And Wikipedia only shows Left for Dead for Xbox 360. Onechanbara is technically not a port, but it was released at the same time as an Xbox 360 game in the same series. Also, the original poster didn't want cutesy-looking games, which rules out Little King's Story, Boy and his Blob, Super Mario Galaxies, and probably Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles and Monster Hunter 3. So there really aren't all that many, especially if you need to add in upcoming games just to fill the list.
<i>It seems the goal of the new law was to discourage using the name or persona of another person to create a Web page.</i>
If she really did this, she should be punished. Now, there's a good point that a felony charge may be too strict and existing laws about libel and false light should cover it (though there could be loopholes that keep it from doing so), but the general idea that we shouldn't tolerate this behavior is pretty sensible. Contrary to popular belief, trolling isn't actually good, and the fact that you can get away with it doesn't mean you should get away with it. Harassment is wrong, and I have no problem with the law punishing it.
(And for the Slashdotter who said "she wouldn't be charged with a felony if this was done in person", exactly how do you put up a web page under someone else's name in person?)
You're not required to install it, but Wii Shop (which is online) won't work unless you do, and games that come out after the update will probably require it to run.
The reason a car loses a lot of its value when you drive it off the lot is that people preferentially sell bad cars as opposed to good cars. Recently new cars that are for sale are not a representative sample of recently new cars; they are, on the average, worse than the ones that aren't for sale. The market price for a recently new car takes into account the greater chance that there's something wrong with it.
People generally don't sell games because there's something wrong with them, so except in a few extreme cases this shouldn't affect games.
It's not going to let him buy Mega Man 9. The article (and an actual Wii) says that if you paid the 500 points for the now-free browser, you can get a 500 point NES game to make up for it. You don't get 500 points added back into your point total to use for whatever you want; you get a NES game, and only a NES game. It's like receiving a coupon instead of a refund
The second death star was completed. "Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!" They just pretended it wasn't completed.
And R2-D2 has to work with people, who don't speak bleep, all the time. Being able to talk is a necessary user interface element.
Again: the reason that you can't demand a refund for the Goodyear tires on your car is that the car doesn't come with a piece of paper saying that you can return the Goodyear tires for a refund. If the car came with a statement that you could return the Goodyear tires for a refund, then it would be completely legitimate to demand one. It says you're entitled to the refund.
The idea that games have 1.69% Asian primary characters doesn't pass the silliness test; I would guess a correct figure is at least 30%, possibly even 50%. Furthermore, Japan (and for that matter Scotland, where Grand Theft Auto comes from) has a much lower percentage of blacks, Hispanics, etc. and trying to explain why these groups are underrepresented compared to the American population makes no sense.
Dragon Quest games do not follow after each other any more than Final Fantasy games do. In almost all cases, neither do Zelda games. Each game in these series is already a reboot.
Though part of that is the fault of the original article.
In their study published in the journal Nature, scientists led by Qi Zhou of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing described how they injected reprogrammed mouse cells into an early-stage embryo to see whether the introduced cells contributed to the tissue of the eventual fetus.
In other words, they did not take a skin cell and turn it into a baby mouse. They took a skin cell and decided to see if an already existing mouse embryo would accept the stem cells created from it.
First of all, there are Wikipedia procedures that could have been used to suppress the information without abusing Wikipedia rules in the process, notably the office action. Second, there have been times in the past when the Times has released information that could endanger lives, but the lives weren't of reporters. It's more as if there was a member of Anne Frank's family who wouldn't report her to the Nazis, but would report anyone else they're not related to.
It was published by Afghanistan's leading news agency. That's a reliable source. Deleting it for not having reliable sources was an abuse of the rules, and in fact a very common one where people refuse to accept a source which can't easily be Googled in English. If they really wanted to delete the information it should have been done using the Ignore All Rules policy or the Office policy, not by abusing rules. And as a lot of people have already mentioned, newspapers constantly publish information about people who are not in the newspaper business, even when someone claims that it could endanger lives (see for instance this one from the Times, and yes, Wikipedia has an article about the guy).
The reason that used cars sell for less is economics: On the average, people preferentially sell cars that are causing problems, so a used car is more likely to have problems than an average car of that age. The market takes that into consideration. This is why an almost new car sells for so much less than a new car: the mileage isn't that different, but the fact that the used car is on the market at all indicates a greater likelihood of having problems.
Wii Sports and Wii Play may count. But Wii Fit and Mario Kart, while bundled with hardware, are clearly being bought because people want that particular game. They are not buying the hardware for other purposes and only getting the game because the hardware isn't sold any other way. So you've still got the top two games (and four of the top five games) even not counting Wii Sports and Wii Play.
Anyone who has copyright in a work cannot violate their own license. They could create a license which says "you can only distribute this if you compute pi to the last digit". Anyone who receives it wouldn't be allowed to distribute it (since the requirement is impossible), but they, being the creator could distribute it just fine. The license only restricts other people.
If ffmpeg is under a license which says, basically, "you can only distribute this if you can pass on an impossible patent license", the creator can still distribute it without a patent license. They would, of course still be violating the patent, but they wouldn't be violating the copyright. A third party *would* be violating the copyright as well as the patent, and could be sued for copyright violation (permission to distribute only under impossible conditions means no permission).
<i>So either it's creator could grant them an LGPL 2.1-compatible patent license, or the library can be distributed without a license, or it's creator couldn't have legally distributed the library to them.</i>
The creator can always legally distribute the library to them (with respect to copyrights), even if the copyright license is impossible.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's a problem that font names may be unreadable when written in the font, then write it both ways--put the font name in the font, then followed by the font name in parentheses in a standard font. Or put the font name in a standard font and then follow it with "abcdefghij" written in the font.
It's not an excuse to use only the standard font and nothing else.
Okay, now I'm puzzled. I was aware of the 56 year issue, because of the heirs of Jerry Siegel reclaiming the copyrights to Superboy and Superman. The 56 year one has a clear justification: the copyright term was 56 years, but new laws added extra time to the copyright past that. The creator originally thought he was just selling the copyright for 56 years, so the extra time that we added could just as well go to him as to the guys he sold it to.
But where's this 35 years for works after 1978 coming from? I mean, it's there in the law, but it's not obvious where it's coming from.
I mean, at least for citizens of the United States to complain about the UN is almost hilarious. Our previous ambassador wanted nothing more than to tear the whole thing down.
Huh? That's like saying "it's hilarious that you complain about that restaurant's food, when you don't even want to eat there".
Having complaints about the UN is <i>why</i> Americans want to tear it down.
If you read the New York Times article linked to a couple of posts up, they mention that the company at freecreditreport.com started selling reports *before* the government started requiring free annual credit reports. Of course, once this started, the chance for confusion helped them, but they actually started it independently of the government requirement.
The indigestion remark was invented by the usual Slashdot accuracy and isn't in the real article.
"All first party Nintendo games have very simple graphics (childish looking). Gameplay is kind-of-fun but they get old."
That isn't *quite* true. The Fire Emblem and Metroid series should be okay, though it depends on your definition of first party. They are published by Nintendo.
Several of those games are ports (and therefore don't count if someone says "I am going to get a Wii and..."): Resident Evil 4, House of the Dead, Silent Hill (a reimagining of the first game), Phantom Brave, Okami. And Wikipedia only shows Left for Dead for Xbox 360. Onechanbara is technically not a port, but it was released at the same time as an Xbox 360 game in the same series. Also, the original poster didn't want cutesy-looking games, which rules out Little King's Story, Boy and his Blob, Super Mario Galaxies, and probably Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles and Monster Hunter 3. So there really aren't all that many, especially if you need to add in upcoming games just to fill the list.
Because if we had a leader like Bush, we'd never have to worry about having him compared to Hitler or called a Nazi.
If you go to the article, the article explains:
<i>It seems the goal of the new law was to discourage using the name or persona of another person to create a Web page.</i>
If she really did this, she should be punished. Now, there's a good point that a felony charge may be too strict and existing laws about libel and false light should cover it (though there could be loopholes that keep it from doing so), but the general idea that we shouldn't tolerate this behavior is pretty sensible. Contrary to popular belief, trolling isn't actually good, and the fact that you can get away with it doesn't mean you should get away with it. Harassment is wrong, and I have no problem with the law punishing it.
(And for the Slashdotter who said "she wouldn't be charged with a felony if this was done in person", exactly how do you put up a web page under someone else's name in person?)
Nobel nominations must be made by the start of February.
In other words, Obama got the prize for <i>being in office for two weeks</u>.
You're not required to install it, but Wii Shop (which is online) won't work unless you do, and games that come out after the update will probably require it to run.
The reason a car loses a lot of its value when you drive it off the lot is that people preferentially sell bad cars as opposed to good cars. Recently new cars that are for sale are not a representative sample of recently new cars; they are, on the average, worse than the ones that aren't for sale. The market price for a recently new car takes into account the greater chance that there's something wrong with it.
People generally don't sell games because there's something wrong with them, so except in a few extreme cases this shouldn't affect games.
It's not going to let him buy Mega Man 9. The article (and an actual Wii) says that if you paid the 500 points for the now-free browser, you can get a 500 point NES game to make up for it. You don't get 500 points added back into your point total to use for whatever you want; you get a NES game, and only a NES game. It's like receiving a coupon instead of a refund
Why would you choose something that gets you persecuted?Well, people do choose their religion, and religions can get you persecuted just as badly....
The second death star was completed. "Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!" They just pretended it wasn't completed.
And R2-D2 has to work with people, who don't speak bleep, all the time. Being able to talk is a necessary user interface element.
Again: the reason that you can't demand a refund for the Goodyear tires on your car is that the car doesn't come with a piece of paper saying that you can return the Goodyear tires for a refund. If the car came with a statement that you could return the Goodyear tires for a refund, then it would be completely legitimate to demand one. It says you're entitled to the refund.
If the car came with an EULA saying that I could return the radio for a refund, I certainly would expect to be able to get a refund for the radio.
The idea that games have 1.69% Asian primary characters doesn't pass the silliness test; I would guess a correct figure is at least 30%, possibly even 50%. Furthermore, Japan (and for that matter Scotland, where Grand Theft Auto comes from) has a much lower percentage of blacks, Hispanics, etc. and trying to explain why these groups are underrepresented compared to the American population makes no sense.
Dragon Quest games do not follow after each other any more than Final Fantasy games do. In almost all cases, neither do Zelda games. Each game in these series is already a reboot.
Though part of that is the fault of the original article.
In their study published in the journal Nature, scientists led by Qi Zhou of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing described how they injected reprogrammed mouse cells into an early-stage embryo to see whether the introduced cells contributed to the tissue of the eventual fetus.
In other words, they did not take a skin cell and turn it into a baby mouse. They took a skin cell and decided to see if an already existing mouse embryo would accept the stem cells created from it.
First of all, there are Wikipedia procedures that could have been used to suppress the information without abusing Wikipedia rules in the process, notably the office action. Second, there have been times in the past when the Times has released information that could endanger lives, but the lives weren't of reporters. It's more as if there was a member of Anne Frank's family who wouldn't report her to the Nazis, but would report anyone else they're not related to.
It was published by Afghanistan's leading news agency. That's a reliable source. Deleting it for not having reliable sources was an abuse of the rules, and in fact a very common one where people refuse to accept a source which can't easily be Googled in English. If they really wanted to delete the information it should have been done using the Ignore All Rules policy or the Office policy, not by abusing rules. And as a lot of people have already mentioned, newspapers constantly publish information about people who are not in the newspaper business, even when someone claims that it could endanger lives (see for instance this one from the Times, and yes, Wikipedia has an article about the guy).
The reason that used cars sell for less is economics: On the average, people preferentially sell cars that are causing problems, so a used car is more likely to have problems than an average car of that age. The market takes that into consideration. This is why an almost new car sells for so much less than a new car: the mileage isn't that different, but the fact that the used car is on the market at all indicates a greater likelihood of having problems.
Wii Sports and Wii Play may count. But Wii Fit and Mario Kart, while bundled with hardware, are clearly being bought because people want that particular game. They are not buying the hardware for other purposes and only getting the game because the hardware isn't sold any other way. So you've still got the top two games (and four of the top five games) even not counting Wii Sports and Wii Play.
Anyone who has copyright in a work cannot violate their own license. They could create a license which says "you can only distribute this if you compute pi to the last digit". Anyone who receives it wouldn't be allowed to distribute it (since the requirement is impossible), but they, being the creator could distribute it just fine. The license only restricts other people.
If ffmpeg is under a license which says, basically, "you can only distribute this if you can pass on an impossible patent license", the creator can still distribute it without a patent license. They would, of course still be violating the patent, but they wouldn't be violating the copyright. A third party *would* be violating the copyright as well as the patent, and could be sued for copyright violation (permission to distribute only under impossible conditions means no permission).
<i>So either it's creator could grant them an LGPL 2.1-compatible patent license, or the library can be distributed without a license, or it's creator couldn't have legally distributed the library to them.</i>
The creator can always legally distribute the library to them (with respect to copyrights), even if the copyright license is impossible.