Take a close look at your legal system. Now take a look at the British legal system. Now take a look at the French legal system. Which does yours resemble most? Whose legal system do you thing the fledgling USA based their system upon? The founders of the USA may not have wanted to be ruled by a power across the water, but they were well aware that there was plenty they could learn from Britain as well.
No-one has subverted their software project. In fact, no-one has touched Blizzard's software. Inter-operatability (which is what this amounts to) is not illegal. If you have a product I can't alter your product, but if I want to write *my own* product to work with it, I am within my rights./p
If they have reverse engineered in a clean room environment then they haven't stolen any IP. Who taught you it was illegal to write a product that is compatible at the protocol level with someone elses?
Frinstance - you want to open a bookstore. 50% of the people you want to sell to can click into your store. 100% of the people can head thru the door of a meatspace store. Your call. Jeff? Jeff? Anyone? Anyone?
But, what percentage lives close enough to actually bother to head to your store? 1%? Less? What percentage of internet users is bothered about how far away the.com store is (or even if it's in the same country)?
You have a choice of automagically created passwords to enhance security. These are "password", "secret", "fred", "fido", "1234", and the ever-popular "******". So far, no senior manager has been able to hack in (to their own account).
Surely the best way would be to patent the patent application process. Then any patents that are submitted would have to be licensed, which could be refused on any patent you didn't want submitted...
Perhaps they mean "near miss" as in a miss that was near, as compared to a "far miss" which would be a miss that was far away. Who says "near miss" is the same as "nearly miss" after all?
Re:I'm with the "big deal" crowd on this one....
on
Attack of the Clones
·
· Score: 1
Except of course, George Harrison financed "Life of Brian", so he was actually involved with the making of the film.
3) You cant say XP isn't proven, and then later say XP is just NT all over again. XP has _10 years_ of OS development behind it. Not the same as 30 years of UNIX, but its still a bit of a stretch to call the guts of XP "unproven" in the same breath as saying "its really just W2k with some extra gui bits".
No it hasn't, or are you claiming that Microsoft started developing XP in 1991, back in Windows 3.x days? In which case it can't be a full 32 bit system. If it is a new kernel, then it has 18 months development. Just because Windows has 10 years development behind it doesn't mean XP has. This is typical FUD.
BZZT WRONG! Just the opposite, copyrights were created as a reward for publishers not to say bad things about the King. In order to fight this censorship, US copyrights were intentionally made available to everybody, to have an expiration date, and allow heavially for fair use. "Protection" and demands of creators have little to do with it - getting information into the public domain was the only goal. Prople who treat copyrights like property ruin this for everybody, and can only lead us to a DMCA like police state.
BZZT Wrong Too! The origins of copyright go back to the invention of the printing press - the ability to mass produce books meant that the Stationers Guild lobbied for a monopoly on printing. This was possibly offered in return for the right of the crown to squash religious dissent. Later on copyright laws established a right for the originator of a work to assign rights, treating the work as property.
Just because the story isn't up to your standards doesn't mean it's a children's book. I doubt many children would read a book so long
Just because a book was not writted for children to read does not mean that the story was not intended for children. IMHO The Hobbit is a story to be read to children, as I am doing to my daughter at the moment. Far too difficult for her to read (no pictures!), but she enjoys being read to, as well as reading.
Believe me, if there was an attack of such size and scope in any European country, they'd be struggling with the same issue of security vs. liberty that the US is doing currently. This isn't American nature, it's human nature.
Not sure how much reporting on what happens on this side of the pond you get over there, but here in the UK we are struggling with some of the issues - I believe the House of Lords has just thrown out some (all?) of the governments new terrorism bill - probably the imprisonment without trial (or as it used to be called, internment) section.
Maybe you should read my words again. The whole purpose of my statement was to (sarcastically) show up the idiocy of the statement I was replying to. Hence the "Can you see the fault in the logic?" line. And yes, I am aware of some (I won't claim all) of the previous attacks in the USA.
Probably not. Not sure what the situation is in NYC, but the vast majority of the cameras in London are owned and operated by companies for their own security. The Police can request tapes etc (which the companies are obliged to keep for a certain length of time I believe) with a warrant after a crime has been committed, and often do. Most Londoners are not bothered by the cameras because 1) they are not linked together into some spy-net 2) they are not operated by the government and 3) they are reasonably effective in reducing crime, and providing evidence in court.
It's a problem of scale. In Europe, you get bombs in supermarkets or subway stations, car bombs near the roadside, some minor politicians shot or stabbed, but nothing really serious.
Glad to see you think an attempt to blow up the Canary Wharf tower was not really serious. I also bet all those who have lost loved ones as a result of terrorism in Europe are happy that their loss is nothing serious.
In Europe, most acts of terrorism have a death toll of 1 or 2 per incident, and maybe 10 wounded. In the US, you get 4000 deaths plus a very high-profile landmark destroyed. Not really the same scale.
In Europe we have had 30 years and many many terrorist attacks, including the deaths of public figures. In the US you get one attack. Not really the same scale. Can you see the fault in the logic?
A rethink on the air network strategy to produce lighter, smaller, more efficient aircraft which possibly fly a bit slower and take shorter 'hops' would bring Fuel Cell flight closer.
That doesn't solve the problem of trans-atlantic flights. Or any long-distance flight (how many people would want to take off and land 8 times to go from the UK to Australia for example?). Also as take-off and landing are the most dangerous parts of air-travel, increasing the frequency of them would make air-travel more dangerous as well.
if the only thing that happened in the us and britan was crime, and the only difference between the crimes was one person used a gun you might have a case.
35,000 deaths per year to guns in the USA. 44 deaths per year to guns in the UK. Population in the USA, 250 million. Population in the UK, 58 million. So, in which country are you more likely to die by gun? I understand statistics as well as you I suspect.
but if Big Tobacco has been required to put warning labels on its products, that should end their liability, provided that cigarettes do not do damage beyond what is stated on the label.
Which is precisely the argument (not a counter argument) - that the Tobacco companies KNEW that their products where addictive and cancerous but didn't warn the consumers.
Slashdot Mirror
We certainly have much to thank the British for
Take a close look at your legal system. Now take a look at the British legal system. Now take a look at the French legal system. Which does yours resemble most? Whose legal system do you thing the fledgling USA based their system upon? The founders of the USA may not have wanted to be ruled by a power across the water, but they were well aware that there was plenty they could learn from Britain as well.
No-one has subverted their software project. In fact, no-one has touched Blizzard's software. Inter-operatability (which is what this amounts to) is not illegal. If you have a product I can't alter your product, but if I want to write *my own* product to work with it, I am within my rights./p
If they have reverse engineered in a clean room environment then they haven't stolen any IP. Who taught you it was illegal to write a product that is compatible at the protocol level with someone elses?
Except, of course, for the fact that BT is applying for the patent in the US and not here in the UK.
That's the beauty of hypertext and hyperlinking, you don't need to duplicate the data, you can link to it multiple times from multiple sites!
Frinstance - you want to open a bookstore. 50% of the people you want to sell to can click into your store. 100% of the people can head thru the door of a meatspace store. Your call. Jeff? Jeff? Anyone? Anyone?
But, what percentage lives close enough to actually bother to head to your store? 1%? Less? What percentage of internet users is bothered about how far away the .com store is (or even if it's in the same country)?
Better still, that classic question: "Is the internet down?"
You have a choice of automagically created passwords to enhance security. These are "password", "secret", "fred", "fido", "1234", and the ever-popular "******". So far, no senior manager has been able to hack in (to their own account).
Surely the best way would be to patent the patent application process. Then any patents that are submitted would have to be licensed, which could be refused on any patent you didn't want submitted...
Perhaps they mean "near miss" as in a miss that was near, as compared to a "far miss" which would be a miss that was far away. Who says "near miss" is the same as "nearly miss" after all?
Except of course, George Harrison financed "Life of Brian", so he was actually involved with the making of the film.
3) You cant say XP isn't proven, and then later say XP is just NT all over again. XP has _10 years_ of OS development behind it. Not the same as 30 years of UNIX, but its still a bit of a stretch to call the guts of XP "unproven" in the same breath as saying "its really just W2k with some extra gui bits".
No it hasn't, or are you claiming that Microsoft started developing XP in 1991, back in Windows 3.x days? In which case it can't be a full 32 bit system. If it is a new kernel, then it has 18 months development. Just because Windows has 10 years development behind it doesn't mean XP has. This is typical FUD.
BZZT WRONG! Just the opposite, copyrights were created as a reward for publishers not to say bad things about the King. In order to fight this censorship, US copyrights were intentionally made available to everybody, to have an expiration date, and allow heavially for fair use. "Protection" and demands of creators have little to do with it - getting information into the public domain was the only goal. Prople who treat copyrights like property ruin this for everybody, and can only lead us to a DMCA like police state.
BZZT Wrong Too! The origins of copyright go back to the invention of the printing press - the ability to mass produce books meant that the Stationers Guild lobbied for a monopoly on printing. This was possibly offered in return for the right of the crown to squash religious dissent. Later on copyright laws established a right for the originator of a work to assign rights, treating the work as property.
Just because the story isn't up to your standards doesn't mean it's a children's book. I doubt many children would read a book so long
Just because a book was not writted for children to read does not mean that the story was not intended for children. IMHO The Hobbit is a story to be read to children, as I am doing to my daughter at the moment. Far too difficult for her to read (no pictures!), but she enjoys being read to, as well as reading.
Meanwhile the U.S.A. has become the only military superpower, an industrial powerhouse and moral beacon in the world. Why?
Vast natural resources.
Believe me, if there was an attack of such size and scope in any European country, they'd be struggling with the same issue of security vs. liberty that the US is doing currently. This isn't American nature, it's human nature.
Not sure how much reporting on what happens on this side of the pond you get over there, but here in the UK we are struggling with some of the issues - I believe the House of Lords has just thrown out some (all?) of the governments new terrorism bill - probably the imprisonment without trial (or as it used to be called, internment) section.
Maybe you should read my words again. The whole purpose of my statement was to (sarcastically) show up the idiocy of the statement I was replying to. Hence the "Can you see the fault in the logic?" line. And yes, I am aware of some (I won't claim all) of the previous attacks in the USA.
About LEO
LEO Computers Society
Hope that helps. A search on "lyons bakery" should throw up more information in any decent search engine.
Probably not. Not sure what the situation is in NYC, but the vast majority of the cameras in London are owned and operated by companies for their own security. The Police can request tapes etc (which the companies are obliged to keep for a certain length of time I believe) with a warrant after a crime has been committed, and often do. Most Londoners are not bothered by the cameras because 1) they are not linked together into some spy-net 2) they are not operated by the government and 3) they are reasonably effective in reducing crime, and providing evidence in court.
It's a problem of scale. In Europe, you get bombs in supermarkets or subway stations, car bombs near the roadside, some minor politicians shot or stabbed, but nothing really serious.
Glad to see you think an attempt to blow up the Canary Wharf tower was not really serious. I also bet all those who have lost loved ones as a result of terrorism in Europe are happy that their loss is nothing serious.
In Europe, most acts of terrorism have a death toll of 1 or 2 per incident, and maybe 10 wounded. In the US, you get 4000 deaths plus a very high-profile landmark destroyed. Not really the same scale.
In Europe we have had 30 years and many many terrorist attacks, including the deaths of public figures. In the US you get one attack. Not really the same scale. Can you see the fault in the logic?
A rethink on the air network strategy to produce lighter, smaller, more efficient aircraft which possibly fly a bit slower and take shorter 'hops' would bring Fuel Cell flight closer.
That doesn't solve the problem of trans-atlantic flights. Or any long-distance flight (how many people would want to take off and land 8 times to go from the UK to Australia for example?). Also as take-off and landing are the most dangerous parts of air-travel, increasing the frequency of them would make air-travel more dangerous as well.
From the BBC's web site from August this year:
Robot world cup kicks off
Except maybe the Limeys, but they're a strange lot in the first place...
I thank you sir. We have spent many centuries developing our eccentricities. It is nice to know the effort wasn't wasted.
if the only thing that happened in the us and britan was crime, and the only difference between the crimes was one person used a gun you might have a case.
35,000 deaths per year to guns in the USA. 44 deaths per year to guns in the UK. Population in the USA, 250 million. Population in the UK, 58 million. So, in which country are you more likely to die by gun? I understand statistics as well as you I suspect.
but if Big Tobacco has been required to put warning labels on its products, that should end their liability, provided that cigarettes do not do damage beyond what is stated on the label.
Which is precisely the argument (not a counter argument) - that the Tobacco companies KNEW that their products where addictive and cancerous but didn't warn the consumers.