Yes, there are pictures if you follow the link, but I have yet to find one that looks like it was taken from a wireless cam on a train. Instead, they are just pictures of his train setup, which isn't very spectacular. The guy needs to either light his subject better, or fix the gamma correction. The only way I can see half of them is to change the gamma to something like 3 or more. Also, the extensions are.jpg, but apparently they are uncompressed BMPs (!). Compress and give us some thumbnails, dude.
Of course they are still getting it. By the time the hall is fully furnished, the first pieces that were delivered are already crumbling into little bits of particle board and glue, and need to be replaced.
1. Riker taps communicator badge and says $route which in the example is "Riker to Picard" followed by $opening, which in your example is "you should come to the bridge".
2. The computer analyzes $route and opens an appropriate channel. $route can also be a group that the computer is aware of such as "away team". There is a delay equal to the duration of the $route utterance, but after that there is no more delay.
3. The channel is open and the receiver hears $route and $opening.
4. Now a channel is established, so no further delay is required until $cutoff which is something like "Picard out". The computer just eavesdrops waiting for $(crew | group) "out" so it can free up the channel.
Of course they communicate through subspace, or maybe green space, or plaid tuti-fruti chocolate pie space so there is very little propogation delay, since the speed of light through that space is millions of times greater than the speed of light through ordinary space.
Sylvania. Precisely. Not "Edison Manufacturing Company" run by the evil Mr. Edison who has all those Evil Patents (TM) including the one on the lightbulb. Not even Microsoft can afford to just sit on its IP. It's been a while since I've heard anything about it, but there was talk of a "Microsoft Capital" forming, which would be like "GE Capital". In the long run, you have to diversify. Diversify or die. So, unless the management of MSFT are total idiots, they will diversify into a lot of other industries (already happening with XBox and their well respected peripheral biz). I predict that in 10 years Windows will be less than 10% of MSFT's revenue, and if it isn't then they will be in big trouble (like Polaroid which sat on its IP and is now an obscure pink-sheet listing, or Xerox which is struggling to survive).
They're wireless. Yeah, you doodle during commercials. You check e-mail during commercials. You pull up TV listings that are so much better than the dead tree listings or that "preview channel" that takes 3 minutes to scroll all the listings while subjecting you to a half-screen full of commercials. You check the servers at work to make sure the new night admin hasn't turned them into warez servers. You turn down the thermostat. You command your robot to get you a beer. You command the robot to get you some ice cream. You command the robot to get you your heart medication.
Hmmm... actually... you're right. TabletPC is a very bad idea.
Let's not tell them that right away though. Let's have the heart attack, sue somebody, and then tell them.
My new tablet computer (I got it 2 weeks ago) is so perfect it made me forget it is running XP
It's interesting to hear somebody say that. I've thought for quite some time that we would reach a point where most people don't care or even know what OS is running. (Quick--what kind of circuit design is in your TV?). I think our expectations of what an OS and apps can do are just beginning to converge on some common items. By the time we reach a consensus, Microsoft will be as important as, oh... a car headlight manufacturer (Quick--who made the headlights in your car?).
Oh man... now I realize the whole website is Flash. I guess the Russian rocket tech is so spartan, minimalist, and efficient that the website became an outlet for their desire to make something bloated, inefficient, and well... flashy.
This is the first time I've heard of it. Yet, you can't watch Fox 5 minutes without seeing an ad for an upcoming episode of Just Shoot Me which I can stand to watch for all of 15 seconds before experiencing spontaneous clicker spasms.
Maybe they should promote it during Futurama... oh... wait.
That, and it says something about how sucky your promotion is when you don't find out about the show until it's about to be concelled, and you find out about it on Slashdot.
Soldiers Have Been Carrying Optical Cell For Years
on
Optical Cellphones
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
From what I hear, every soldier has a mirror. On a sunny day, you can use the mirror to signal aircraft for miles.
The mirror has the advantage of not needing batteries, being resistant to shock, etc.
Of course it doesn't work in clouds or dark, and bandwidth, well... leaves something to be desired.
So if they can do this with infrared and talk through it, that seems perfectly reasonable to me. One advantage of LOS is that you have to get in the way of the thing to jam it. Of course the receiver has to be intelligent enough to ignore signals from the wrong part of town, or signals that don't carry the right code, but it's a solveable problem.
Of course, any signal, especially an IR laser, gives away your position if the enemy can see it.
Eddie Murphy did an SNL skit on face transplants that was pretty funny. IIRC, it was like a pitch to encourage people to donate their face, and they had an interview with a white woman who had received a black face. It was a riot at the time... not sure how well it would hold up.
OK, so science fiction becomes real life alot; but Eddie Murphy jokes? Too unreal.
I have no similar argument against BSD licensing. Why? Because when something is BSD licensed, you have the choice to continue in the "community" mode of development, or to forge into the "product" form of development. To make similar claims against BSD would be to make similar claims against the existance of knowledge itself.
With BSD, the community exists to the extent that it makes sense. The developer who "steals" from the BSD community can only re-sell to the extent that he adds value. Of course there is nothing to stop me from taking a BSD distro, simply closing the source, adding no value, and reselling it--but I doubt I'd fool enough people to make it worthwhile. Apple added value so they get away with using BSD components without releasing everything BSD. People buy it. It is not so much that anything is "taken" from BSD; it is more that the delicious GUI isn't given. That's their right.
If there is any argument to be made against a BSD style license, it's that the original author may have underestimated the value of his work.
All of that said; I don't see any one license as the end-all do-all. Diversity of licenses is a good thing; more licenses, more choices. I even cast aside my distaste for the GPL on occasion if something best-in-class is GPL'd. But I like to have more choices, and the "GPL PacMan" scares me (I once did a pie chart of projects on SourceForge showing GPL/LGPL looking very much like a PacMan that was about to chomp the other licenses. Unfortunately, my website is offline indefinitely).
I have often thought that it would not be a bad idea if someone created clones of various license with one restriction: no sex with the other clones. The result? Several GPL regimes, several BSD regimes, etc. We probably don't have the manpower to support it (although we could start out by simply forking existing projects). It would not make me feel any better about copyleft in general, but it would at least resolve the issue of GNU GPL becoming a defacto licensing monopoly.
OK... I digress... As you can tell, this is something that interests me a lot. The politics of all this aren't just divisive; they are also fascinating. It hasn't even really caught the attention of the Washington think-tanks yet. I really ought to write a book at some point... I probably have enough research and scattered essays laying around to make a good start... That's a whole nother subject...
The Microsoft discount is a marketing trick. They are betting on the fact a person will not look at the long term effects. Initially, the free copy of Office is enticing, but later on he will realize that he is too used to Microsoft software and resigns to start paying through his ass for licenses.
The GNU discount is a marketing trick. They are betting on the fact that a person will not look at the long term effects. Initially, the free copy of Linux is simply "what the teacher requires", but later on he will realize that he is too used to being forced to use Linux and resigns to start paying through his ass via lost time, productivity, and taxation.
Not speaking to you directly, but many of the respondants have advised me to "read the GPL". I have read the GPL. More importantly, I've read the FSF's founding documents. I advise everyone to read them before installing GPL'd software. They contain the true motives for the GPL--increased use of tax dollars to fund software development; the "locking in" of software to something like the public domain, except that it can never be recycled into useful products; the raping of business to fund a socialist ideal; the subversion of the political process because there has been no vote on the socialization of software;circumvention of the law because businesses have found a way to have unpaid volunteers perform useful work (whatever happened to minimum wage?) ; further circumvention of law because government workers maintaining such software are placing their work under GPL instead of Public Domain as they are legally required to do.
1. If MSFT giving away some software is a "marketing trick", how much more of a marketing trick is it when the Free Software advocates give away an entire OS and suite of applications? What are the FS advocates selling? None other than a public monopoly that perpetuates the production of inferior products, and binds developers to a social contract that prohibits them from choosing the way in which they monetize their work. If they have to have Free Software, let them choose BSD so the developers can have a real choice.
2. Why does the government have to standardize on one set of applications and an OS? At the school I went to, we had MS PCs, Sun clusters, Macintoshes, mainframes, and probably some research machines running obscure stuff that I've never even heard of. An educational system should expose students to what they will see in the real world. Just as these students would be poorer if the only courses were "Microsoft Windows 100, Microsoft Windows 201,.Net 202, etc..." They will also be deprived if the only courses are "Introduction to Unix, The features of Redhat, GNU development tools, etc...".
A ship in the harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are meant for.
Now, the Free Software advocates look at closed-source code like it was a ship in the harbor. So, they decide that the ship should go to sea--and never visit a port.
That also, is not what ships are meant for. Alas, the Free Software advocates simply cannot see that Mr. Glass. You are tilting at windmills.
If you're a "lazy unskilled idealist" you probably have no money.
Unless Daddy left it to you. Where do you think most "foundation money" comes from? What got RMS so much attention? Foundation money.
And while I'm at it, why should I donate money to the EFF when I don't support every cause they believe in? What's their administrative overhead anyway?
If there were a defense fund for a particular case that I thought was important, and I had the money, I'd consider donating to that particular defense fund. I have no desire to join a broad "movement" that takes in far too many ideas with which I disagree.
In other words, Larry can take his challenge and stick it. What next? The Larry Lessig 700 Club?
A better way that is known to work is serial publication in a magazine or newspaper. I am reminded of this because I was watching "History's Mysteries" the other night and they were talking about original manuscript pages from Uncle Tom's Cabin which was published serially in a newspaper. IIRC, a number of other famous American works were originally published in this manner and went on to do well.
In the 19th century it worked because newspapers were widely read, and it was unlikely that someone would go through the trouble to clip the stories and bind them to make a personal "book". Those who didn't get the paper heard word-of-mouth from people who had, and got the book when it came out.
I'm not sure how this could work on the web, because the works can be copied so readily now. Reading things on the screen is a pain, so people might not read the whole novel, and even if they did read it they'd send their friends the link, not a recommendation to buy it.
Things get more interesting when you have easy-reading screens. Combine that with exclusive distribution through one subscriber service, and you duplicate the 19th century serial publishing model.
Trouble is, the author still has to cut a deal with the publisher. So... this doesn't really compare with King's experiment which was direct to the customer. Also, King is King. Joe B. Hacker is "nobody" so even if he writes great fiction, how will he get people's attention?
Who said anything about CE? A "real PC" runs Windows, the *NIXs, and anything else that is compatable with PC hardware. PalmOS, CE, both obsolete, IMHO.
Of course, carrying around a PC isn't really efficient, even if it fits on a keychain. What really makes sense is to have the hard drive on your keychain, and an OS on the drive that doesn't care what hardware it's attached to. Then you can carry not only your data, but your choice of operating system with you wherever you go.
I give such a scenario 10 years to practicality if interface wars don't get in the way. That's a BIG "if".
So; can any of the free *NIXs automagicly reconfigure themselves when the drive is re-plugged into any of the supported hardware? Not bloody likely. Get crackin' on it. The hardware will come around, Microsoft would probably never do something like that, and such a feature would make the *NIXs very attractive.
If you can shoehorn a whole PC into a palm-sized device, who needs PalmOS? I think that's what Transmeta would like to do eventually. In the meantime, their chips run cooler so they can build laptops that won't burn your penis
To be fair, I should disclose that I own stock in Transmeta.
Yet another/. discussion on IP, yet another passionate rehash of IP as property vs. those who puke up a lung every time you suggest that it's "property".
It doesn't matter.
That's right. Let that sink in for a while. Let it fester. Let the rage build. Get it out. Scream. Hit your monitor. Done? No? Go ahead. Get it all out, I'll still be here. OK. Let's move on.
The real debate here is in deciding how much IP and its creators should be taxed. That's it. Whether there is a "social contract" or a "property right" is irrelevant. On one extreme are those who believe all IP should go immediately into the PD (Stallman, etc.). That's a 100% tax to the creator. On the other extreme are Disney lawyers who want to keep extending their ownership (zero tax). The answer is somewhere in the middle.
The founders knew the answer was in the middle. That's why they wrote things the way they did. Arguing about whether it's property or "property" is like arguing about the number of angels on the head of a pin (15,234 by the way).
Yes, I suppose there would be a *serious* conflict of interest in asking the FBI to investigate itself. OTOH, asking the FBI to make an inquiry as to whether or not the local government was justified in requesting their services might have value. Perhaps the Department of Justice is the better venue. As you might have gathered, IANAL. The basic point I was trying to get across is that there is recourse for this guy. Also, I'd like to point out to the "America is coming to an end" crowd that throughout the history of the US, things like this have happened and will continue to happen. Who knows, maybe Runner vs. Ashcroft will be a landmark Supreme Court decision right up there with Brown vs. Board of Education. Or maybe it would be Runner vs. Toledo. The point is, the guy has a long and important fight ahead of him, and may come out OK after all. Stay tuned for the obligatory EFF or ACLU backed legal battle.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, there are pictures if you follow the link, but I have yet to find one that looks like it was taken from a wireless cam on a train. Instead, they are just pictures of his train setup, which isn't very spectacular. The guy needs to either light his subject better, or fix the gamma correction. The only way I can see half of them is to change the gamma to something like 3 or more. Also, the extensions are .jpg, but apparently they are uncompressed BMPs (!). Compress and give us some thumbnails, dude.
In Soviet Russia...
...Natalie Portman pours hot grits down your pants and leaves you at the mercy of Ogg who hits you with a Beowulf cluster of Open Source CD-ROMs.
Enough said.
...picture a sugar cube the size of a server? No? OK, I'll go to sleep now.
Of course they are still getting it. By the time the hall is fully furnished, the first pieces that were delivered are already crumbling into little bits of particle board and glue, and need to be replaced.
What happens when one of them goes crazy and starts some real life carnage?
In a country with strict gun control? Probably nothing. Unless people actually break gun control laws. Naw... that wouldn't happen.
This is not too hard.
1. Riker taps communicator badge and says $route which in the example is "Riker to Picard" followed by $opening, which in your example is "you should come to the bridge".
2. The computer analyzes $route and opens an appropriate channel. $route can also be a group that the computer is aware of such as "away team". There is a delay equal to the duration of the $route utterance, but after that there is no more delay.
3. The channel is open and the receiver hears $route and $opening.
4. Now a channel is established, so no further delay is required until $cutoff which is something like "Picard out". The computer just eavesdrops waiting for $(crew | group) "out" so it can free up the channel.
Of course they communicate through subspace, or maybe green space, or plaid tuti-fruti chocolate pie space so there is very little propogation delay, since the speed of light through that space is millions of times greater than the speed of light through ordinary space.
Sylvania. Precisely. Not "Edison Manufacturing Company" run by the evil Mr. Edison who has all those Evil Patents (TM) including the one on the lightbulb. Not even Microsoft can afford to just sit on its IP. It's been a while since I've heard anything about it, but there was talk of a "Microsoft Capital" forming, which would be like "GE Capital". In the long run, you have to diversify. Diversify or die. So, unless the management of MSFT are total idiots, they will diversify into a lot of other industries (already happening with XBox and their well respected peripheral biz). I predict that in 10 years Windows will be less than 10% of MSFT's revenue, and if it isn't then they will be in big trouble (like Polaroid which sat on its IP and is now an obscure pink-sheet listing, or Xerox which is struggling to survive).
They're wireless. Yeah, you doodle during commercials. You check e-mail during commercials. You pull up TV listings that are so much better than the dead tree listings or that "preview channel" that takes 3 minutes to scroll all the listings while subjecting you to a half-screen full of commercials. You check the servers at work to make sure the new night admin hasn't turned them into warez servers. You turn down the thermostat. You command your robot to get you a beer. You command the robot to get you some ice cream. You command the robot to get you your heart medication.
Hmmm... actually... you're right. TabletPC is a very bad idea.
Let's not tell them that right away though. Let's have the heart attack, sue somebody, and then tell them.
My new tablet computer (I got it 2 weeks ago) is so perfect it made me forget it is running XP
It's interesting to hear somebody say that. I've thought for quite some time that we would reach a point where most people don't care or even know what OS is running. (Quick--what kind of circuit design is in your TV?). I think our expectations of what an OS and apps can do are just beginning to converge on some common items. By the time we reach a consensus, Microsoft will be as important as, oh... a car headlight manufacturer (Quick--who made the headlights in your car?).
Oh man... now I realize the whole website is Flash. I guess the Russian rocket tech is so spartan, minimalist, and efficient that the website became an outlet for their desire to make something bloated, inefficient, and well... flashy.
Have you ever heard of "skip intro"?
This is the first time I've heard of it. Yet, you can't watch Fox 5 minutes without seeing an ad for an upcoming episode of Just Shoot Me which I can stand to watch for all of 15 seconds before experiencing spontaneous clicker spasms.
Maybe they should promote it during Futurama... oh... wait.
That, and it says something about how sucky your promotion is when you don't find out about the show until it's about to be concelled, and you find out about it on Slashdot.
From what I hear, every soldier has a mirror. On a sunny day, you can use the mirror to signal aircraft for miles.
The mirror has the advantage of not needing batteries, being resistant to shock, etc.
Of course it doesn't work in clouds or dark, and bandwidth, well... leaves something to be desired.
So if they can do this with infrared and talk through it, that seems perfectly reasonable to me. One advantage of LOS is that you have to get in the way of the thing to jam it. Of course the receiver has to be intelligent enough to ignore signals from the wrong part of town, or signals that don't carry the right code, but it's a solveable problem.
Of course, any signal, especially an IR laser, gives away your position if the enemy can see it.
Eddie Murphy did an SNL skit on face transplants that was pretty funny. IIRC, it was like a pitch to encourage people to donate their face, and they had an interview with a white woman who had received a black face. It was a riot at the time... not sure how well it would hold up.
OK, so science fiction becomes real life alot; but Eddie Murphy jokes? Too unreal.
I have no similar argument against BSD licensing. Why? Because when something is BSD licensed, you have the choice to continue in the "community" mode of development, or to forge into the "product" form of development. To make similar claims against BSD would be to make similar claims against the existance of knowledge itself.
With BSD, the community exists to the extent that it makes sense. The developer who "steals" from the BSD community can only re-sell to the extent that he adds value. Of course there is nothing to stop me from taking a BSD distro, simply closing the source, adding no value, and reselling it--but I doubt I'd fool enough people to make it worthwhile. Apple added value so they get away with using BSD components without releasing everything BSD. People buy it. It is not so much that anything is "taken" from BSD; it is more that the delicious GUI isn't given. That's their right.
If there is any argument to be made against a BSD style license, it's that the original author may have underestimated the value of his work.
All of that said; I don't see any one license as the end-all do-all. Diversity of licenses is a good thing; more licenses, more choices. I even cast aside my distaste for the GPL on occasion if something best-in-class is GPL'd. But I like to have more choices, and the "GPL PacMan" scares me (I once did a pie chart of projects on SourceForge showing GPL/LGPL looking very much like a PacMan that was about to chomp the other licenses. Unfortunately, my website is offline indefinitely).
I have often thought that it would not be a bad idea if someone created clones of various license with one restriction: no sex with the other clones. The result? Several GPL regimes, several BSD regimes, etc. We probably don't have the manpower to support it (although we could start out by simply forking existing projects). It would not make me feel any better about copyleft in general, but it would at least resolve the issue of GNU GPL becoming a defacto licensing monopoly.
OK... I digress... As you can tell, this is something that interests me a lot. The politics of all this aren't just divisive; they are also fascinating. It hasn't even really caught the attention of the Washington think-tanks yet. I really ought to write a book at some point... I probably have enough research and scattered essays laying around to make a good start... That's a whole nother subject...
The Microsoft discount is a marketing trick. They are betting on the fact a person will not look at the long term effects. Initially, the free copy of Office is enticing, but later on he will realize that he is too used to Microsoft software and resigns to start paying through his ass for licenses.
The GNU discount is a marketing trick. They are betting on the fact that a person will not look at the long term effects. Initially, the free copy of Linux is simply "what the teacher requires", but later on he will realize that he is too used to being forced to use Linux and resigns to start paying through his ass via lost time, productivity, and taxation.
Not speaking to you directly, but many of the respondants have advised me to "read the GPL". I have read the GPL. More importantly, I've read the FSF's founding documents. I advise everyone to read them before installing GPL'd software. They contain the true motives for the GPL--increased use of tax dollars to fund software development; the "locking in" of software to something like the public domain, except that it can never be recycled into useful products; the raping of business to fund a socialist ideal; the subversion of the political process because there has been no vote on the socialization of software;circumvention of the law because businesses have found a way to have unpaid volunteers perform useful work (whatever happened to minimum wage?) ; further circumvention of law because government workers maintaining such software are placing their work under GPL instead of Public Domain as they are legally required to do.
How fair is that?
1. If MSFT giving away some software is a "marketing trick", how much more of a marketing trick is it when the Free Software advocates give away an entire OS and suite of applications? What are the FS advocates selling? None other than a public monopoly that perpetuates the production of inferior products, and binds developers to a social contract that prohibits them from choosing the way in which they monetize their work. If they have to have Free Software, let them choose BSD so the developers can have a real choice.
2. Why does the government have to standardize on one set of applications and an OS? At the school I went to, we had MS PCs, Sun clusters, Macintoshes, mainframes, and probably some research machines running obscure stuff that I've never even heard of. An educational system should expose students to what they will see in the real world. Just as these students would be poorer if the only courses were "Microsoft Windows 100, Microsoft Windows 201, .Net 202, etc..." They will also be deprived if the only courses are "Introduction to Unix, The features of Redhat, GNU development tools, etc...".
A ship in the harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are meant for.
Now, the Free Software advocates look at closed-source code like it was a ship in the harbor. So, they decide that the ship should go to sea--and never visit a port.
That also, is not what ships are meant for. Alas, the Free Software advocates simply cannot see that Mr. Glass. You are tilting at windmills.
If you're a "lazy unskilled idealist" you probably have no money.
Unless Daddy left it to you. Where do you think most "foundation money" comes from? What got RMS so much attention? Foundation money.
And while I'm at it, why should I donate money to the EFF when I don't support every cause they believe in? What's their administrative overhead anyway?
If there were a defense fund for a particular case that I thought was important, and I had the money, I'd consider donating to that particular defense fund. I have no desire to join a broad "movement" that takes in far too many ideas with which I disagree.
In other words, Larry can take his challenge and stick it. What next? The Larry Lessig 700 Club?
The microwave has to have an OS. How else will you admin it?
A better way that is known to work is serial publication in a magazine or newspaper. I am reminded of this because I was watching "History's Mysteries" the other night and they were talking about original manuscript pages from Uncle Tom's Cabin which was published serially in a newspaper. IIRC, a number of other famous American works were originally published in this manner and went on to do well.
In the 19th century it worked because newspapers were widely read, and it was unlikely that someone would go through the trouble to clip the stories and bind them to make a personal "book". Those who didn't get the paper heard word-of-mouth from people who had, and got the book when it came out.
I'm not sure how this could work on the web, because the works can be copied so readily now. Reading things on the screen is a pain, so people might not read the whole novel, and even if they did read it they'd send their friends the link, not a recommendation to buy it.
Things get more interesting when you have easy-reading screens. Combine that with exclusive distribution through one subscriber service, and you duplicate the 19th century serial publishing model.
Trouble is, the author still has to cut a deal with the publisher. So... this doesn't really compare with King's experiment which was direct to the customer. Also, King is King. Joe B. Hacker is "nobody" so even if he writes great fiction, how will he get people's attention?
Who said anything about CE? A "real PC" runs Windows, the *NIXs, and anything else that is compatable with PC hardware. PalmOS, CE, both obsolete, IMHO.
Of course, carrying around a PC isn't really efficient, even if it fits on a keychain. What really makes sense is to have the hard drive on your keychain, and an OS on the drive that doesn't care what hardware it's attached to. Then you can carry not only your data, but your choice of operating system with you wherever you go.
I give such a scenario 10 years to practicality if interface wars don't get in the way. That's a BIG "if".
So; can any of the free *NIXs automagicly reconfigure themselves when the drive is re-plugged into any of the supported hardware? Not bloody likely. Get crackin' on it. The hardware will come around, Microsoft would probably never do something like that, and such a feature would make the *NIXs very attractive.
If you can shoehorn a whole PC into a palm-sized device, who needs PalmOS? I think that's what Transmeta would like to do eventually. In the meantime, their chips run cooler so they can build laptops that won't burn your penis
To be fair, I should disclose that I own stock in Transmeta.
Yet another /. discussion on IP, yet another passionate rehash of IP as property vs. those who puke up a lung every time you suggest that it's "property".
It doesn't matter.
That's right. Let that sink in for a while. Let it fester. Let the rage build. Get it out. Scream. Hit your monitor. Done? No? Go ahead. Get it all out, I'll still be here. OK. Let's move on.
The real debate here is in deciding how much IP and its creators should be taxed. That's it. Whether there is a "social contract" or a "property right" is irrelevant. On one extreme are those who believe all IP should go immediately into the PD (Stallman, etc.). That's a 100% tax to the creator. On the other extreme are Disney lawyers who want to keep extending their ownership (zero tax). The answer is somewhere in the middle.
The founders knew the answer was in the middle. That's why they wrote things the way they did. Arguing about whether it's property or "property" is like arguing about the number of angels on the head of a pin (15,234 by the way).
Yes, I suppose there would be a *serious* conflict of interest in asking the FBI to investigate itself. OTOH, asking the FBI to make an inquiry as to whether or not the local government was justified in requesting their services might have value. Perhaps the Department of Justice is the better venue. As you might have gathered, IANAL. The basic point I was trying to get across is that there is recourse for this guy. Also, I'd like to point out to the "America is coming to an end" crowd that throughout the history of the US, things like this have happened and will continue to happen. Who knows, maybe Runner vs. Ashcroft will be a landmark Supreme Court decision right up there with Brown vs. Board of Education. Or maybe it would be Runner vs. Toledo. The point is, the guy has a long and important fight ahead of him, and may come out OK after all. Stay tuned for the obligatory EFF or ACLU backed legal battle.