It would become theft if he made those rips and then sold them to another person. If no money changes hands, then it is not theft, it is sharing.
Just like Robin Hood, steal from the rich and give to the poor?
What if I buy CD A, and you buy CD B, and we each MP3 our CDs, and exchange the files. That's a trade, no money has changed hands between us, but the end result is that the supplier has sold half of what it would have otherwise done, and you and I have both profited at their expense.
One cannot forget that the Right to Privacy is not a constitutional right. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that American citizens have a right to privacy.
Possibly because, given the technology of the time, a right to privacy made about as much sense as a right to breathe air; there was simply no need to state something so fundamental. After all, even in the most oppressive regimes, people still breathed. If you wanted to have a private conversation, just walk into the middle of a field with your friends and talk.
The fact that it does not is no reflection on the competence of the Founding Fathers, and the lack of it in the Constitution also does not mean that it should not exist.
A Bill of Rights written today, like this one does include a right to privacy. And who knows what such a Bill written 2302 will need to contain?
Tickets for journeys and services are the same as physical objects like CDs. Taking one or the other from someone who has them for sale in a shop or terminal is stealing.
Digital copying is something completely different.
Ah, but that's the crux of the matter. When you buy a ticket, you aren't buying a piece of printed cardboard, or even the data contained in the magstripe on the back. You're entering into a simple contract, you give them money and they take you places. The only verification is that you are the bearer of the ticket - in this way, it acts like a currency token. But it was sold to you, and even tho' the system in its present state is incapable of verifying that the person who bought the ticket is the one who is uses it, that doesn't change the terms and conditions.
Copying bits without charging for them removes nothing from anyone and so is not stealing,
Well, I saw a posting here yesterday (I can't be bothered to link to it) about someone who says as soon as he buys a CD, he rips it to MP3 for playing in his car. That's fair use. But if he were to give it to someone who hadn't already bought the CD then he has cost the publisher a sale. By your definition, that is theft.
Giving your day ticket to someone else once you have finished is re-selling a service you have bought a right to, which may be prohibited, but does not lose the company any more money, as you were entitled to use it anyway.
Well, it does mean that LU sold one ticket where they expected to sell two. It's not like using a copied piece of software, in which case many people possessing an illegal copy wouldn't have bought the original anyway - the second traveller would have otherwise bought a ticket.
Jumping the barrier or squeezing two through is a theft of their service, as you have avoided paying!
Indeed, this is (from the point of LU) identical to giving a ticket away.
Well, let's say you have a train ticket, good for unlimited travel for a day on the London Underground. You finish with it, but it is still valid for several hours, is it stealing or sharing if you give it away to someone? If you sell it to someone? If you enter it into a turnstile and you and a friend squeeze through? If you buy a ticket most days, but not today, and climb over the turnstile?
These are all things to consider, because contrary to the article, the act of "sharing" is subjective, and not inherently good.
Near as I can tell from the article, the "tap" was part of a military operation, involving foreign nationals. Not quite the same thing as eavesdropping on everyday telephone calls.
umm, there is a limit to what you can contribute. It is increasing every year over the next five (thank God), but for 2001 it was capped at 10,500 per year or 15% of your income, whichever is less
With an ISA, the limit is GBP 7,000 per year, but there is also an overall maximum limit of GBP 50,000.
! Most MBA's go to work fo SOMEONE ELSE, rather than starting their own company. What kind of mastery does this imply? None, IMNSHO.
What is your point? An MSc degree doesn't make you the next Einstein, an MA doesn't make you the next Vermeer. It simply means you have the baseline skills. Holding a Master's degree qualifies you to enter the game, that's all. How you play it is still down to your intangible qualities like motivation, ambition and leadership.
Re:Lets face it, Times are hard everywhere.
on
The Laid-off Techie
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I'm nearly 19, Have my MCSE, CCNA, Hell of a lot of experence
There are people who have more years of experience than you've been alive, and they are struggling to find jobs. Just trying to inject a little perspective.
then they should return home to bring up the level of IT skill in their home nations
Believe me, that's your worst nightmare if you're worried about American jobs. Would you rather have the H1Bs working in the US economy and paying US taxes and spending money on goods and services in the US, or back in India/Russia pitching wholesale offshore outsourcing to Corporate America? Rather than actively supporting the US economy and indirectly providing jobs for Americans, the result would be permanent destruction of American jobs.
How did that happen? $401k in 8 months? Am I missing something here?
I'm assuming that you're not American, a 401(K) is the mechanism used to save for retirement. In UK terms, it's a bit like a private pension, but it's also like an ISA, because you get to choose directly what goes into it. But it's not like an ISA because there is no maximum limit.
You can access the money in your 401(K) for a number of things, off the top of my head, education and buying a house, and I guess unemployment too.
do most of the people in that article seem like the same marketing wonks who should be the first people to be 86'ed from a failing organization anyway?
I find this attitude interesting - if a company is in trouble it's usually because it has cashflow problems. The "techies" will refuse to accept that there are any problems with the product, and maybe there aren't. But the people who get money into the company are the salesmen and the people who work out what you can produce that the market would be willing to buy (and at what price) are in marketing. At the end of the day, a bad product with good marketing will have a much better chance of its company surviving that a company with a good product but lousy marketing.
1. Several quotes from "www.fuckedcompany.com"
Yeah, there's a good reputable news source.
Actually, it is pretty good, often it was the best way to find out what was actually happening at your own company, someone would leak it to FC or Vault. Once employees started to realize that they simply couldn't trust their managers, and managers decided that it would be easier to lie to their employees (not that I am making any sorts of allegations against a former employer, just commenting on the zeitgeist)
"there will be no layoffs"
"this deal will save the company"
"we will be repricing stock options"
etc.
and so forth, anonymous bulletin boards suddenly became sources of fact, with real insiders dropping enough clues in to confirm that they really were employees of said company, but no more.
Why does a company whose business is done solely over the Internet need 7 offices? Typical dot-com mentality.
Lots of reasons. AD operated out of Cambridge MA because they wanted proximity to MIT graduates. Maybe you want to be near your customers, to better understand their market, or provide hands-on support. The Internet doesn't make location irrelevant, exactly the opposite, if you can do business anywhere, it only means you have a greater choice of precisely where that is. You could head out to where the rent is cheap, sure, but could you get all your employees (the most valuable part of the business) to relocate? What about travel to meet customers (and yes, you do need to do this, no-one does serious business without meeting face to face first)?.
I think many Germans who were living in Germany in the 30s and 40s would balk at the statement that "almost the entire german population" were Nazis.
OK, so the majority may not have been "hard core" Nazis, but I imagine they were all pretty pleased about what a good job those Nazis were doing in the 1930s - and to be fair, the Nazis were responsible for remarkable economic and social achievements (which they then pissed away by getting their country reduced to rubble, which is another story). Low crime, a high standard of education and trains that ran on time - if they had stuck to that, they would have had a lot to teach modern governments. It's a pity that the good things they did pale into insignificance besides the monstrous evil that they also did.
I believe his foundation (run by his dad, I think) does also contribute to other things, but the overall contributions, while large in absolute terms, are tiny in comparison to his wealth. Wasn't it Ted Turner that challenged Bill and the other Billionaires, to contribute more significant portions of their fortunes to the public good?
Remember that most of BillG's wealth is in MSFT, and he can't tap that for liquidity without the market misreading it as a sign of impending doom. Relative to his paper wealth, he's not cash-rich at all.
Still, when Mr. surprised-by-wealth ESR starts matching BillG dollar for dollar, maybe you will have a point.
This is wrong. A Java downcast is dynamically checked and cannot compromise the integrity of the virtual machine. It is not "unsafe" in any meaningful sense of the word.
The VM can be configured to allow unsafe execution or not - that's the point. There are situations in which, if you trusted the code and were airgapped from the Internet, you would be happy to permit unsafe execution. It's up to the administrator of the VM(s) to make the decision.
. Having to add a switch to keep integrety constraints is a very odd thing for a database (shouldn't the default be to *keep* integrety constraints?)
If you are certain that there are no constraint violations, because you've just exported from one database, then disabling them would make importing into a new database much faster. It's common practice, you just re-enable them before you make the new database available for transactions.
Microsoft's code is insecure because this way customers can be made more dependent on them.
No, Microsoft's code is insecure because people would rather buy a copy now than wait 6 months for a version with fewer features because it is more secure. Remember, a product only needs to be as good as the customer is willing to buy.
Talk to a PR specialist if you don't see why this is good for them.
Advertising/branding and PR aren't the same thing.
Slashdot Mirror
No, that is not theft.
It would become theft if he made those rips and then sold them to another person. If no money changes hands, then it is not theft, it is sharing.
Just like Robin Hood, steal from the rich and give to the poor?
What if I buy CD A, and you buy CD B, and we each MP3 our CDs, and exchange the files. That's a trade, no money has changed hands between us, but the end result is that the supplier has sold half of what it would have otherwise done, and you and I have both profited at their expense.
One cannot forget that the Right to Privacy is not a constitutional right. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that American citizens have a right to privacy.
Possibly because, given the technology of the time, a right to privacy made about as much sense as a right to breathe air; there was simply no need to state something so fundamental. After all, even in the most oppressive regimes, people still breathed. If you wanted to have a private conversation, just walk into the middle of a field with your friends and talk.
The fact that it does not is no reflection on the competence of the Founding Fathers, and the lack of it in the Constitution also does not mean that it should not exist.
A Bill of Rights written today, like this one does include a right to privacy. And who knows what such a Bill written 2302 will need to contain?
Tickets for journeys and services are the same as physical objects like CDs. Taking one or the other from someone who has them for sale in a shop or terminal is stealing.
Digital copying is something completely different.
Ah, but that's the crux of the matter. When you buy a ticket, you aren't buying a piece of printed cardboard, or even the data contained in the magstripe on the back. You're entering into a simple contract, you give them money and they take you places. The only verification is that you are the bearer of the ticket - in this way, it acts like a currency token. But it was sold to you, and even tho' the system in its present state is incapable of verifying that the person who bought the ticket is the one who is uses it, that doesn't change the terms and conditions.
Copying bits without charging for them removes nothing from anyone and so is not stealing,
Well, I saw a posting here yesterday (I can't be bothered to link to it) about someone who says as soon as he buys a CD, he rips it to MP3 for playing in his car. That's fair use. But if he were to give it to someone who hadn't already bought the CD then he has cost the publisher a sale. By your definition, that is theft.
Giving your day ticket to someone else once you have finished is re-selling a service you have bought a right to, which may be prohibited, but does not lose the company any more money, as you were entitled to use it anyway.
Well, it does mean that LU sold one ticket where they expected to sell two. It's not like using a copied piece of software, in which case many people possessing an illegal copy wouldn't have bought the original anyway - the second traveller would have otherwise bought a ticket.
Jumping the barrier or squeezing two through is a theft of their service, as you have avoided paying!
Indeed, this is (from the point of LU) identical to giving a ticket away.
Well, let's say you have a train ticket, good for unlimited travel for a day on the London Underground. You finish with it, but it is still valid for several hours, is it stealing or sharing if you give it away to someone? If you sell it to someone? If you enter it into a turnstile and you and a friend squeeze through? If you buy a ticket most days, but not today, and climb over the turnstile?
These are all things to consider, because contrary to the article, the act of "sharing" is subjective, and not inherently good.
The article mentions distributed backup as a possible application, but in my mind distributed backup is the killer application.
;0)
It's been done: just UUencode a tar, split it up into pieces, and post them to Usenet...
Symbolic links would help a lot but MicroSoft will not add them because that would allow Windows to be Unix-compatable.
Links are fully supported by NTFS, that's what POSIX compliance is about.
Was this tap cleared by a judge?
Near as I can tell from the article, the "tap" was part of a military operation, involving foreign nationals. Not quite the same thing as eavesdropping on everyday telephone calls.
Why not policmen , firemen , lawyers, doctors, teachers, soldiers, etc?
H1B is mostly for programmers; regular H1 is for other in-demand professions.
umm, there is a limit to what you can contribute. It is increasing every year over the next five (thank God), but for 2001 it was capped at 10,500 per year or 15% of your income, whichever is less
With an ISA, the limit is GBP 7,000 per year, but there is also an overall maximum limit of GBP 50,000.
! Most MBA's go to work fo SOMEONE ELSE, rather than starting their own company. What kind of mastery does this imply? None, IMNSHO.
What is your point? An MSc degree doesn't make you the next Einstein, an MA doesn't make you the next Vermeer. It simply means you have the baseline skills. Holding a Master's degree qualifies you to enter the game, that's all. How you play it is still down to your intangible qualities like motivation, ambition and leadership.
I'm nearly 19, Have my MCSE, CCNA, Hell of a lot of experence
There are people who have more years of experience than you've been alive, and they are struggling to find jobs. Just trying to inject a little perspective.
then they should return home to bring up the level of IT skill in their home nations
Believe me, that's your worst nightmare if you're worried about American jobs. Would you rather have the H1Bs working in the US economy and paying US taxes and spending money on goods and services in the US, or back in India/Russia pitching wholesale offshore outsourcing to Corporate America? Rather than actively supporting the US economy and indirectly providing jobs for Americans, the result would be permanent destruction of American jobs.
How did that happen? $401k in 8 months? Am I missing something here?
I'm assuming that you're not American, a 401(K) is the mechanism used to save for retirement. In UK terms, it's a bit like a private pension, but it's also like an ISA, because you get to choose directly what goes into it. But it's not like an ISA because there is no maximum limit.
You can access the money in your 401(K) for a number of things, off the top of my head, education and buying a house, and I guess unemployment too.
do most of the people in that article seem like the same marketing wonks who should be the first people to be 86'ed from a failing organization anyway?
I find this attitude interesting - if a company is in trouble it's usually because it has cashflow problems. The "techies" will refuse to accept that there are any problems with the product, and maybe there aren't. But the people who get money into the company are the salesmen and the people who work out what you can produce that the market would be willing to buy (and at what price) are in marketing. At the end of the day, a bad product with good marketing will have a much better chance of its company surviving that a company with a good product but lousy marketing.
"Here I am throwing mail with an MBA"
His first degree was in Engineering, so I presume he simply mentioned the MBA because it's a graduate degree and world emphasize his point.
"sharpening her resume as a marketing manager "
From the article: She is versed in programming, account management, and customer
"quality assurance (QA) job "
At many software companies, new hires would start in QA before moving to bug fixing, then adding features, then real new coding...
"product manager for software development "
... and then to product/project management or system architect.
They are all just fairly unskilled jobs that happen to be in a technical company. This article is very misleading.
There is a great deal more to the production of software than just typing funny words into a text editor.
Yeah, there's a good reputable news source.
Actually, it is pretty good, often it was the best way to find out what was actually happening at your own company, someone would leak it to FC or Vault. Once employees started to realize that they simply couldn't trust their managers, and managers decided that it would be easier to lie to their employees (not that I am making any sorts of allegations against a former employer, just commenting on the zeitgeist)
and so forth, anonymous bulletin boards suddenly became sources of fact, with real insiders dropping enough clues in to confirm that they really were employees of said company, but no more.
Why does a company whose business is done solely over the Internet need 7 offices? Typical dot-com mentality.
Lots of reasons. AD operated out of Cambridge MA because they wanted proximity to MIT graduates. Maybe you want to be near your customers, to better understand their market, or provide hands-on support. The Internet doesn't make location irrelevant, exactly the opposite, if you can do business anywhere, it only means you have a greater choice of precisely where that is. You could head out to where the rent is cheap, sure, but could you get all your employees (the most valuable part of the business) to relocate? What about travel to meet customers (and yes, you do need to do this, no-one does serious business without meeting face to face first)?.
I think many Germans who were living in Germany in the 30s and 40s would balk at the statement that "almost the entire german population" were Nazis.
OK, so the majority may not have been "hard core" Nazis, but I imagine they were all pretty pleased about what a good job those Nazis were doing in the 1930s - and to be fair, the Nazis were responsible for remarkable economic and social achievements (which they then pissed away by getting their country reduced to rubble, which is another story). Low crime, a high standard of education and trains that ran on time - if they had stuck to that, they would have had a lot to teach modern governments. It's a pity that the good things they did pale into insignificance besides the monstrous evil that they also did.
I believe his foundation (run by his dad, I think) does also contribute to other things, but the overall contributions, while large in absolute terms, are tiny in comparison to his wealth. Wasn't it Ted Turner that challenged Bill and the other Billionaires, to contribute more significant portions of their fortunes to the public good?
Remember that most of BillG's wealth is in MSFT, and he can't tap that for liquidity without the market misreading it as a sign of impending doom. Relative to his paper wealth, he's not cash-rich at all.
Still, when Mr. surprised-by-wealth ESR starts matching BillG dollar for dollar, maybe you will have a point.
This is wrong. A Java downcast is dynamically checked and cannot compromise the integrity of the virtual machine. It is not "unsafe" in any meaningful sense of the word.
The VM can be configured to allow unsafe execution or not - that's the point. There are situations in which, if you trusted the code and were airgapped from the Internet, you would be happy to permit unsafe execution. It's up to the administrator of the VM(s) to make the decision.
I do not think Alan Turing had surfing for pr0n in mind when he thought of logic gates.
He might have. Did you ever read Cryptonomicon?
. Having to add a switch to keep integrety constraints is a very odd thing for a database (shouldn't the default be to *keep* integrety constraints?)
If you are certain that there are no constraint violations, because you've just exported from one database, then disabling them would make importing into a new database much faster. It's common practice, you just re-enable them before you make the new database available for transactions.
I'm tired of hearing this stuff about running NASA like a company. If a company could do the stuff NASA does, it would be.
If it could or not, that would be irrelevant. The Government would never let it.
The Russians would get mighty pissed if the US space angency tries to tell them what they can do with their property...
No vodka for you, Komrade!
Microsoft's code is insecure because this way customers can be made more dependent on them.
No, Microsoft's code is insecure because people would rather buy a copy now than wait 6 months for a version with fewer features because it is more secure. Remember, a product only needs to be as good as the customer is willing to buy.
Talk to a PR specialist if you don't see why this is good for them.
Advertising/branding and PR aren't the same thing.