Which open source individuals are going to maintain that list?
Any well funded organisation that feels its morally superior I'd guess. Add a few set operators to allow people to block selections of lists (e.g. you could set it to block sites in the catholic church list and the anti pornography lobby list, apart from those sites about health issues, which would be supplied by a health organisation).
Companies that wish to use it could manage a combined list of undesirable sites. A system where the block list was supplied by anyone who wants to use it would be a lot more accurate than one produced by a single organisation.
I just think I would have been modded down if I posted "Ha Ha"
Fermat postulated the theorem and wrote "Astounding proof" in the margin. In fact he wrote a lot of stuff in out and across the margin. It was the mathematical equivalent of Mozilla source code.
perhaps the jury shouldn't even get to see them. That would prevent accusations of bias based on race or grotesque uglyness.
Reminds me of an experiment (Megalab) a few years ago. A politician was interviewed twice about what his favourite film was. In one he lied, in the other he told the truth. The readers of a the Daily Telegraph were given a transcript, people who listened to Radio 1 were given sound only, and people who saw the Tomorrow's World TV programme saw video as well.
It turned out (as predicted) that those who saw the video were most easily deceived. I think those who heard it on the radio were most likely to tell when he was lieing.
The test was quite scientific, with a sample set in the millions, and checked by statisticians. Smaller tests have shown similar results.
Crimenet isn't giving opinions on the current case. Its just an archive. You might as well say that the jurors could look up references to a criminal in newspaper back issues.
Surely in this case it would be simpler to just ensure that the Jurors had no internet access during the trial. Even thats a bit extreme. Its not like they might accidentally stumble on it like they would if the information was published in a newspaper.
It does the work of 2 employees 24/7. Of course it will probably only be needed 12 hours per day. Probably worth 4 employees over 2 years. Depends how much maintainance costs
For some totally inexplicable reason, a lot of cultures have come up with the turtle theory totally independently. Terry Pratchett just pinched the idea (but I think the elephants are original).
1. Yes. This will allow me to reach a lot of people. 2. Yes. This is more than I currently earn. 3. Of course. The more CC numbers I give the better my chances. I would of course try to find out which numbers came up recently in order to judge which are more likely in the future. 4. Well, I have a strong moral objection to that sort of thing 5. Yes. They might appreciate the chance too. 6. Of course not. I would say "me too" if I really agreed with it.
So Metallica should go after all hundred thousand users and slap them with a fine...
They only need to go after a few for the rest to get the message.
Lets face it, Napster was created to trade mp3's.
Quite right so far
Trading mp3's that you don't own, under the current law, is illegal.
Objection yer' onour. These two statements are not related. Napster is marketed as a tool for trading of legal mp3's. i.e. those whose creators have given permission for them to be exchanged. It may or may not have been produced with the knowledge that it will be used mainly for illegal trading, but thats another issue.
Yes, they should go and sue all hundred thousand users that Metallica found trading their mp3's
Yes they should. These people are pirating Metallica's songs, and breaching the terms and conditions of Napster. Napster should be obliged to assist in tracking them down. Furthermore, they should ban Metallica from using their service since they breached the terms and condidtions.
That must make for some serious philosophical issues.
You mean like the gradfather paradox? If I set up a committee to discuss for 2 days whether or not the report should be published, and 5 days before it starts, it is revealed that the recomendation of the committee is that it should not exist, will they be able to make the decision....
Something I saw in the newspaper (UK Daily Telegraph) letters page yesterday
The Act of Supremacy 1559 states unequivocally that "all usurped and foreign power and authority . . . may forever be clearly extinguished, and never used or obeyed in this realm . . . no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate . . . shall at any time after the last day of this session of Parliament, use, enjoy or exercise any manner of power, jurisdiction, superiority, authority, pre-eminence or privilege . . . within this realm."
Unless this law has been repealed, the MPAA had no right whatsoever to do the DeCSS thing. As for this article, I would have thougt that the US had a similar law since it has a legal system based on that of the UK, and it would be more important to the US after that little skirmish with England.
In the UK lawbooks, there is a specific clause that says pirates can be hanged. I'm not sure if they still can, but a few years ago this was one of the few crimes that still had the death penalty.
If the Simpsons has taught me anything (and it has), it's that anything is legal in international waters:)
Including retransmission of a major league baseball game with implied verbal rather than express written permission.
But seriously, this was a tactic used by many pirate radio stations in England in the 60's. A benefit of living on an island is that a lot of the country is close to international waters. Ping times are an issue with satelite links though. A narrow band radio connection to the shore should be possible, but that might cause legal problems again.
Slashdot Mirror
Which open source individuals are going to maintain that list?
Any well funded organisation that feels its morally superior I'd guess. Add a few set operators to allow people to block selections of lists (e.g. you could set it to block sites in the catholic church list and the anti pornography lobby list, apart from those sites about health issues, which would be supplied by a health organisation).
Companies that wish to use it could manage a combined list of undesirable sites. A system where the block list was supplied by anyone who wants to use it would be a lot more accurate than one produced by a single organisation.
Dell, when taken to court on this, will lose.
Seems a bit of an extreme reaction. Just tell them its none of their business. If they insist go to a different supplier.
I just think I would have been modded down if I posted "Ha Ha"
Fermat postulated the theorem and wrote "Astounding proof" in the margin. In fact he wrote a lot of stuff in out and across the margin. It was the mathematical equivalent of Mozilla source code.
Yes. Thats commandment 0Ah.
Of course there were actually 10h commandments, with commandments 0Ah 0Bh 0Ch 0Dh 0Eh and 0Fh being specifically related to computers.
perhaps the jury shouldn't even get to see them. That would prevent accusations of bias based on race or grotesque uglyness.
Reminds me of an experiment (Megalab) a few years ago. A politician was interviewed twice about what his favourite film was. In one he lied, in the other he told the truth. The readers of a the Daily Telegraph were given a transcript, people who listened to Radio 1 were given sound only, and people who saw the Tomorrow's World TV programme saw video as well.
It turned out (as predicted) that those who saw the video were most easily deceived. I think those who heard it on the radio were most likely to tell when he was lieing.
The test was quite scientific, with a sample set in the millions, and checked by statisticians. Smaller tests have shown similar results.
Crimenet isn't giving opinions on the current case. Its just an archive. You might as well say that the jurors could look up references to a criminal in newspaper back issues.
Surely in this case it would be simpler to just ensure that the Jurors had no internet access during the trial. Even thats a bit extreme. Its not like they might accidentally stumble on it like they would if the information was published in a newspaper.
That was how they ended up making most of their money, but not the original business plan. It was free to promote sales of their server software.
Made me think of Carrier Command. Now where can I get a fully autmoated aircraft carrier......
I wonder what it would do if Arthur Dent came along and asked for a cup of tea?
Supply a substance that tastes almost but not quite entirley, unlike tea
A serious problem, but its worse than you think. These are not fitted with a sound card, so they can't ask for money.
They'll have to start a life of crime picking pockets and shoplifting.
It does the work of 2 employees 24/7. Of course it will probably only be needed 12 hours per day. Probably worth 4 employees over 2 years. Depends how much maintainance costs
You make ONE little slipup on the job, blow away a minor executive...
Yeah. Its not like there was any major damage.
Twiki was voiced by none other than by Mel Blanc
And the fans complained when thet replaced the voice at the start of season 2. (Gotta love that huge stack of useless abstract Sci-Fi knowledge)
But it does have the advantage of letting you correct that, and modify it to make pizza as well as burgers.
Try submitting to Hotgrits.org
/. ones.
Of course, they'll ignore it too. And the Trolls just aren't as damn good as some of the
For some totally inexplicable reason, a lot of cultures have come up with the turtle theory totally independently. Terry Pratchett just pinched the idea (but I think the elephants are original).
1. Yes. This will allow me to reach a lot of people.
2. Yes. This is more than I currently earn.
3. Of course. The more CC numbers I give the better my chances. I would of course try to find out which numbers came up recently in order to judge which are more likely in the future.
4. Well, I have a strong moral objection to that sort of thing
5. Yes. They might appreciate the chance too.
6. Of course not. I would say "me too" if I really agreed with it.
So Metallica should go after all hundred thousand users and slap them with a fine...
They only need to go after a few for the rest to get the message.
Lets face it, Napster was created to trade mp3's.
Quite right so far
Trading mp3's that you don't own, under the current law, is illegal.
Objection yer' onour. These two statements are not related. Napster is marketed as a tool for trading of legal mp3's. i.e. those whose creators have given permission for them to be exchanged. It may or may not have been produced with the knowledge that it will be used mainly for illegal trading, but thats another issue.
Yes, they should go and sue all hundred thousand users that Metallica found trading their mp3's
Yes they should. These people are pirating Metallica's songs, and breaching the terms and conditions of Napster. Napster should be obliged to assist in tracking them down. Furthermore, they should ban Metallica from using their service since they breached the terms and condidtions.
Given the choice between
Penthouse saying "Don't pirate our stuff or we'll go after your ISP and cause hassles for lots of others" and
Penthouse saying "Don't pirate our stuff because we'll go after YOU! You will be the one who suffers."
I think the second would be a lot scarier. I think this is more likely to stop people ripping off their stuff in the future.
That must make for some serious philosophical issues.
You mean like the gradfather paradox? If I set up a committee to discuss for 2 days whether or not the report should be published, and 5 days before it starts, it is revealed that the recomendation of the committee is that it should not exist, will they be able to make the decision....
Unless this law has been repealed, the MPAA had no right whatsoever to do the DeCSS thing. As for this article, I would have thougt that the US had a similar law since it has a legal system based on that of the UK, and it would be more important to the US after that little skirmish with England.
I agree that this is a bit harsh.
However, I think that if you have the right to speech, the person who you are speaking against has a right to know who you are.
arson in a naval dockyard
I would have thought that this counted as treason.
In the UK lawbooks, there is a specific clause that says pirates can be hanged. I'm not sure if they still can, but a few years ago this was one of the few crimes that still had the death penalty.
If the Simpsons has taught me anything (and it has), it's that anything is legal in international waters :)
Including retransmission of a major league baseball game with implied verbal rather than express written permission.
But seriously, this was a tactic used by many pirate radio stations in England in the 60's. A benefit of living on an island is that a lot of the country is close to international waters. Ping times are an issue with satelite links though. A narrow band radio connection to the shore should be possible, but that might cause legal problems again.