It's been years since I posted, but thank you very, very kindly for your hard work. I've been reading this site since I was in high school, and now have two kids, a job, and a life. Hard to believe things move so quickly... Of the entire internet, Slashdot has consumed the largest share of my time and attention over the last 15 years. Kudos.
Re:Libraries are terrible, terrible institutions.
on
Reining in Google
·
· Score: 1
Great link, but you didn't read it.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title and notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement of copyright for a library or archives, or any of its employees acting within the scope of their employment, to reproduce no more than one copy or phonorecord of a work, except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), or to distribute such copy or phonorecord, under the conditions specified by this section, if --
(1) the reproduction or distribution is made without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage;
(c)
(2) any such copy or phonorecord that is reproduced in digital format is not made available to the public in that format outside the premises of the library or archives in lawful possession of such copy.
Seems hard to argue that what goog is doing is legal by those standards.
Re:To the rag that is the Wash. Times: Let them sc
on
Reining in Google
·
· Score: 1
From the OED:
3. a. A popular newspaper which presents its news and
features in a concentrated, easily assimilable, and often sensational
form, esp. one with smaller pages than those of a regular newspaper.
if you're going to be obnoxious enough to correct the usage of a term with a widely understood popular meaning, at least be correct.
I suppose I agree with your points, but isn't it important to ensure our long term survival as a nation? Sure, I most certainly agree that the money we're spending fighting terrorism is probably pissing in the wind and does little to solve that problem. It also seems clear that investing in technologies such as monster artillery units is fighting a war long obsolete. But it seems hard to see how moving towards next generation capabilities such as this satellite, which would surely be critical in a _major_ war were one to ever happen, is a bad idea. I'm much more concerned about our overall national safety with regards to another war with a major superpower than I am about the terrorists taking apart the fabric of our society. Even unlikely risks need to be discounted. -Jack
Gee, how can the average person who wants to drive a ferrari afford $300,000 for the car? Your stealing. Just because it's easy doesn't make it right. Oh, and people do actually buy the software. Adobe makes a pretty nice living, no thanks to idiots like you.
Your proposal couldn't be less realistic. Instead of a game company trying to make allowances for lag within the game, you think that they should simply try to improve networking? Is this a joke? Game companies couldn't dream of making even a small improvement with the budget they have. Kludgy or not, the little in-game hacks that they use are the best method available to them.
Also, it's algorithm, not algorythm. We're not talking about music.
Finally, someone else on Slashdot said it. The Slashdot crowd prides itself on being worldly, educated, and compassionate, yet Microsoft is constantly berated as the world's greatest evil. Wake up, people, they're *good* guys compared to some of the other assholes out there. In addition to lobbying for "techie" rights and causes, you might also want to take a look at some of the true atrocities out there.
Well...I agree with you to an extent. But by the 7th or 8th grade, the kids should definitely be taught how to search the internet and use it as a reasearch tool. This, however, should not be a major activity, and (i think) should be thrown in for an hour or two - much like how kids are taught to use the library.
Are you joking? Have you no ability to step outside your fanaticism?
Explain to me the relationship between "Let's kill all the Jews and take over Europe," and "Information with no redeeming value other than helping evil men kill innocents should not be publically accessable." Oh, and thanks for changing the essential meaning of Caplan's statement. I've taken the liberty of correcting it. In the real world, things aren't black and white. Filtering obviously harmful information with no redeeming value does not lead to a universal lockdown on information. See the grey area. It's called compromise, learn about it and joined us in the real world.
You've taken Caplan completely out of context. He was referring to things such as how-to guides for bombs and detailed blueprints for airports and major buildings, all of which would be very helpful for a terrorist in this day and age. Even the most fanatical free-speechers choke on their tongues in arguing that this type of information sserves the public good to a greater extent than it harms it.
Oh, and before you call someone a Luddite, you might want to take 10 seconds and check the quote out for yourself. It always amazes me how often freedom of information advocates fail to use the information that they've fought so hard for.
If you read the article, you'd know that the lawsuit is concerning a business installing mod chips, not the end user. Your statement may or may not be true, but it completely misses the point.
But isn't this precisely why we have peer review? While one, two, or even ten scientists might delude themselves into seeing something that's not here, eventually someone is going to come around and see things for what they really are. That's the great thing about science, unlike bible *cough* theory, is that it keeps evolving;-).
No, this has nothing to do with firmware updates. All of DirecTV's updates were made through the satellite, not the smartcards. The smartcard problem involved service theft.
Wow. I didn't realize that people were actually dumb enough to still think like this.
Why is it that people simply make the assumption, based solely on science fiction, that when we create true artificial intelligence it will immediately want to destroy us? This is a question that completely baffles me.
Do you honestly think that they brought that many people on this kid to show off or to punish him in some way? Give me a break. The point is to shock this guy into immediate submission under the threat of overwhelming force. It's a tactic that has been used successfully in the past and will continue to be used in the future. The point is to use far more force than is necessary. Far more force than is necessary is way, way more force than anyone could ever hope to fight against, which protects the officers rushing in there.
These people are professionals, not show offs. Whatever they do, they do for their own safety.
Law enforcement agencies will always bring an incredible excess of force down on a potentially hostile target in order to apprehend him. This is done to ensure the safety of both the target and the officers involved. If the target thinks that he has no chance to defend himself, then he will usually give up without a fight. Personally, I think that this, and anything else that protects our officers, is a damn good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
It's been years since I posted, but thank you very, very kindly for your hard work. I've been reading this site since I was in high school, and now have two kids, a job, and a life. Hard to believe things move so quickly... Of the entire internet, Slashdot has consumed the largest share of my time and attention over the last 15 years. Kudos.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title and notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement of copyright for a library or archives, or any of its employees acting within the scope of their employment, to reproduce no more than one copy or phonorecord of a work, except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), or to distribute such copy or phonorecord, under the conditions specified by this section, if --
(1) the reproduction or distribution is made without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage;
(c)
(2) any such copy or phonorecord that is reproduced in digital format is not made available to the public in that format outside the premises of the library or archives in lawful possession of such copy.
Seems hard to argue that what goog is doing is legal by those standards.
From the OED: 3. a. A popular newspaper which presents its news and features in a concentrated, easily assimilable, and often sensational form, esp. one with smaller pages than those of a regular newspaper. if you're going to be obnoxious enough to correct the usage of a term with a widely understood popular meaning, at least be correct.
I suppose I agree with your points, but isn't it important to ensure our long term survival as a nation? Sure, I most certainly agree that the money we're spending fighting terrorism is probably pissing in the wind and does little to solve that problem. It also seems clear that investing in technologies such as monster artillery units is fighting a war long obsolete. But it seems hard to see how moving towards next generation capabilities such as this satellite, which would surely be critical in a _major_ war were one to ever happen, is a bad idea. I'm much more concerned about our overall national safety with regards to another war with a major superpower than I am about the terrorists taking apart the fabric of our society. Even unlikely risks need to be discounted. -Jack
d) Most people using a computer to surf the net and having an inclination to open cnn.com are probably much smarter than the norm.
Uh, no, not really...
NPR has been way left for years - decades - now. Right wingers yell a lot about this every time its budget is up for reapproval.
Gee, how can the average person who wants to drive a ferrari afford $300,000 for the car? Your stealing. Just because it's easy doesn't make it right. Oh, and people do actually buy the software. Adobe makes a pretty nice living, no thanks to idiots like you.
Also, it's algorithm, not algorythm. We're not talking about music.
Hehe, asking him that question is sort of like handing out reading instruction manuals to the illiterate.
boy, these jokes just never get old... *cough*
Finally, someone else on Slashdot said it. The Slashdot crowd prides itself on being worldly, educated, and compassionate, yet Microsoft is constantly berated as the world's greatest evil. Wake up, people, they're *good* guys compared to some of the other assholes out there. In addition to lobbying for "techie" rights and causes, you might also want to take a look at some of the true atrocities out there.
yeah....
Well...I agree with you to an extent. But by the 7th or 8th grade, the kids should definitely be taught how to search the internet and use it as a reasearch tool. This, however, should not be a major activity, and (i think) should be thrown in for an hour or two - much like how kids are taught to use the library.
Explain to me the relationship between "Let's kill all the Jews and take over Europe," and "Information with no redeeming value other than helping evil men kill innocents should not be publically accessable." Oh, and thanks for changing the essential meaning of Caplan's statement. I've taken the liberty of correcting it. In the real world, things aren't black and white. Filtering obviously harmful information with no redeeming value does not lead to a universal lockdown on information. See the grey area. It's called compromise, learn about it and joined us in the real world.
Oh, and before you call someone a Luddite, you might want to take 10 seconds and check the quote out for yourself. It always amazes me how often freedom of information advocates fail to use the information that they've fought so hard for.
hehe, just what I was going to say. nice. :-)
If you read the article, you'd know that the lawsuit is concerning a business installing mod chips, not the end user. Your statement may or may not be true, but it completely misses the point.
Yeah, it was a joke...
But isn't this precisely why we have peer review? While one, two, or even ten scientists might delude themselves into seeing something that's not here, eventually someone is going to come around and see things for what they really are. That's the great thing about science, unlike bible *cough* theory, is that it keeps evolving ;-).
Yeah, Counter-Strike is more dangerous than crack. It has sucked away any social life that I may have had since I discovered it.
No, this has nothing to do with firmware updates. All of DirecTV's updates were made through the satellite, not the smartcards. The smartcard problem involved service theft.
Why is it that people simply make the assumption, based solely on science fiction, that when we create true artificial intelligence it will immediately want to destroy us? This is a question that completely baffles me.
Check out the picture of that wierd dude's head at the top. Japanese culture scares me...
Do you honestly think that they brought that many people on this kid to show off or to punish him in some way? Give me a break. The point is to shock this guy into immediate submission under the threat of overwhelming force. It's a tactic that has been used successfully in the past and will continue to be used in the future. The point is to use far more force than is necessary. Far more force than is necessary is way, way more force than anyone could ever hope to fight against, which protects the officers rushing in there.
These people are professionals, not show offs. Whatever they do, they do for their own safety.
Law enforcement agencies will always bring an incredible excess of force down on a potentially hostile target in order to apprehend him. This is done to ensure the safety of both the target and the officers involved. If the target thinks that he has no chance to defend himself, then he will usually give up without a fight. Personally, I think that this, and anything else that protects our officers, is a damn good idea.