"When I ask my other tech friends what they would do, they simply suggest changing ISPs. Nobody likes Comcast, but I don't have a choice here. I'm two years into a three-year contract. So, moving is not an option"
Moving is always an option. But you have to eat the cost of one year of Comcast. Sorry, but that's your solution.
As someone who played Elite on the BBC B in the 80s, let's look at the what made different:
i) massive, open ended universe and freedom to make one's way, within a convincing universe of varying dangerousness ii) strong element on trading, and with combat as a means to grab extra goodies and facilitate profitable acquisition of cash iii) missions, and a progression of deadliness - that unlocks cooler gear and more dangerous missions and story progression
Does that not sound like most MMORPG ever invented? Could that not be WoW, or Skyrim?
Games like Elite don't not-exist, they're practically the norm. It's just that they were groundbreaking in 1983, and now everyone's seen them 1000 times over.
Except... this judgement isn't related in any way to Ryan Giggs or superinjunctions. It's about revealing the source of very specific, possibly untrue, allegations of actual malfeasance in reference to the governance of Sunderland.
Freedom of speech does not include the right to slander or libel people you don't like, and it absolutely does not include the right to do so anonymously. You have the right to free speech - but you also must obey the libel laws, and you must be prepared to take the legal consequences of your free speech.
Objection your honour: assumes a fact not in evidence. My client would like it stated that the £50,000 cost for legal fees is press conjecture, unsupported by citations.
Seriously folks, no-one is looking at the free US Media and saying "That is the model to which we should all aspire". Would I rather have a democratic government or Rupert Murdoch controlling the media - well, I'd rather have neither - but at least I can vote out a democratic government.
Except Sydney Opera House was opened in 1973, so its completely reasonable that its design is subject to copyright. Stonehenge was completed sometime around 1500BC, so that copyright has probably lapsed by now.
That applies to things that are actually copyright already -- so if I make a NEW henge on public display somewhere, I get to restrict images of it, because its my artistic work.. But Stonehenge's design is out of copyright now.
I've noticed a 0-day vulnerability in old ladies in that I can hit them over the head with a cudgel and steal their handbags. I'm going to a black-hat muggers conference to hand out cudgels and more detailed instruction. But that doesn't make be an utter scumbag, oh no. I'm a "security researcher", that's what I am, only interested in increased security for old ladies.
Better yet, lets co-opt pretexting: How about "Today two men pretexted themselves into my grandma's house by claiming to be from the gas company, then stole all her valuables." What's the difference here?
Everyone that watched the debate last night was pretty horrified at how broken the "wash up" process was,
Really? Everyone? How terribly precise you polling must be.
Support the Open Rights Group and also support the Pirate Party UK who are currently raising money to field candidates. You can donate to the Pirate Party here if you are so inclined:
Or, alternatively, fold your ballot paper and shove it up your arse. It's cheaper, and the overall effect will be precisely the same.
Not when you consider the people who work in the media. Shock, novelty and outrage are their stock in trade. It's what they understand, so artists who provide these elements get written about. Aesthetic/decorative (for want of a better term) art is more difficult to write about -- there is a fundamental subjectivity involved that is very hard to get past -- and notions of beauty tend to be difficult to explain.
So art criticism, and music criticism, tends to focus on novelty and fashions If you're hip, it doesn't matter if your high concepts are dismally let down because you lack the talent to execute them very skillfully. So Tracy Emin and Animal Collective get on the front pages of the broadsheet culture sections, without very many people actually liking them, while high street art dealers sell local landscape watercolours in far greater quantities.
As the old saying goes: being difficult isn't difficult.
Frank Zappa had a good point. He claimed that the only thing art required was a frame -- metaphorical or literal. To make something art, all one had to do was simply put it in a frame -- i.e. declare it to be art. Anything that was created with the purpose of being art is, intrinsically, art.
Of course, as Frank was quick to point out, that doesn't make it good art, or worthwhile art, or a good idea. Just that the artists intent is all that matters as to whether something is art or not.
Because that is what "TOO MUCH" means. If you do something a lot, but its not detrimental, its not "too much". When it becomes detrimental, thats when we say its "TOO MUCH".
Fuckitty Fuck McFuck. English, motherfucking slashdot editors. Learn to fucking speak it.
Please do the calculation and tell us what the difference in transit times is for, say, 40m of cable. Clue: do actually believe that a band who's musicians use different length guitar/mic cables cannot possibly play in time?
Slashdot Mirror
"When I ask my other tech friends what they would do, they simply suggest changing ISPs. Nobody likes Comcast, but I don't have a choice here. I'm two years into a three-year contract. So, moving is not an option"
Moving is always an option. But you have to eat the cost of one year of Comcast. Sorry, but that's your solution.
But I can't really agree with it.
As someone who played Elite on the BBC B in the 80s, let's look at the what made different:
i) massive, open ended universe and freedom to make one's way, within a convincing universe of varying dangerousness
ii) strong element on trading, and with combat as a means to grab extra goodies and facilitate profitable acquisition of cash
iii) missions, and a progression of deadliness - that unlocks cooler gear and more dangerous missions and story progression
Does that not sound like most MMORPG ever invented? Could that not be WoW, or Skyrim?
Games like Elite don't not-exist, they're practically the norm. It's just that they were groundbreaking in 1983, and now everyone's seen them 1000 times over.
I'm a slashdot editor, and I can't distinguish between the concepts of "secretly" and "non-consensually".
Please give generously, so further people don't have to suffer the consequences of my stupidity.
Except ... this judgement isn't related in any way to Ryan Giggs or superinjunctions. It's about revealing the source of very specific, possibly untrue, allegations of actual malfeasance in reference to the governance of Sunderland.
Freedom of speech does not include the right to slander or libel people you don't like, and it absolutely does not include the right to do so anonymously. You have the right to free speech - but you also must obey the libel laws, and you must be prepared to take the legal consequences of your free speech.
Objection your honour: assumes a fact not in evidence. My client would like it stated that the £50,000 cost for legal fees is press conjecture, unsupported by citations.
Actually, that list goes:
ESB ... ...
SW
RotJ
Star Wars Holiday Special
Caravan of Courage: The Ewok Movie
TPM
RotS
Care Bears the Movie
Sex and the City
AotC
Kids, eh. Many of them don't know the difference between "who's" and "whose".
Seriously folks, no-one is looking at the free US Media and saying "That is the model to which we should all aspire". Would I rather have a democratic government or Rupert Murdoch controlling the media - well, I'd rather have neither - but at least I can vote out a democratic government.
Fox News or The BBC - no fucking contest....
You're left with nothing but dust...
I can't speak for Australian Law, but it most certainly does in some jurisdictions.
Except Sydney Opera House was opened in 1973, so its completely reasonable that its design is subject to copyright. Stonehenge was completed sometime around 1500BC, so that copyright has probably lapsed by now.
That applies to things that are actually copyright already -- so if I make a NEW henge on public display somewhere, I get to restrict images of it, because its my artistic work.. But Stonehenge's design is out of copyright now.
I've noticed a 0-day vulnerability in old ladies in that I can hit them over the head with a cudgel and steal their handbags. I'm going to a black-hat muggers conference to hand out cudgels and more detailed instruction. But that doesn't make be an utter scumbag, oh no. I'm a "security researcher", that's what I am, only interested in increased security for old ladies.
Better yet, lets co-opt pretexting: How about "Today two men pretexted themselves into my grandma's house by claiming to be from the gas company, then stole all her valuables." What's the difference here?
Can we have a new tag: "Rhetorical questions to which the answer is 'No'"
Oh, yeah? Then why is the first google hit for "Ja Me Yoon" a link back to this slashdot article?
Really? Everyone? How terribly precise you polling must be.
Or, alternatively, fold your ballot paper and shove it up your arse. It's cheaper, and the overall effect will be precisely the same.
Not when you consider the people who work in the media. Shock, novelty and outrage are their stock in trade. It's what they understand, so artists who provide these elements get written about. Aesthetic/decorative (for want of a better term) art is more difficult to write about -- there is a fundamental subjectivity involved that is very hard to get past -- and notions of beauty tend to be difficult to explain.
So art criticism, and music criticism, tends to focus on novelty and fashions If you're hip, it doesn't matter if your high concepts are dismally let down because you lack the talent to execute them very skillfully. So Tracy Emin and Animal Collective get on the front pages of the broadsheet culture sections, without very many people actually liking them, while high street art dealers sell local landscape watercolours in far greater quantities.
As the old saying goes: being difficult isn't difficult.
That's a very good point. Turn any object into art merely by signing it and putting it in a gallery.
Frank Zappa had a good point. He claimed that the only thing art required was a frame -- metaphorical or literal. To make something art, all one had to do was simply put it in a frame -- i.e. declare it to be art. Anything that was created with the purpose of being art is, intrinsically, art.
Of course, as Frank was quick to point out, that doesn't make it good art, or worthwhile art, or a good idea. Just that the artists intent is all that matters as to whether something is art or not.
Well of course it is.
Because that is what "TOO MUCH" means. If you do something a lot, but its not detrimental, its not "too much". When it becomes detrimental, thats when we say its "TOO MUCH".
Fuckitty Fuck McFuck. English, motherfucking slashdot editors. Learn to fucking speak it.
Please do the calculation and tell us what the difference in transit times is for, say, 40m of cable.
Clue: do actually believe that a band who's musicians use different length guitar/mic cables cannot possibly play in time?
His point totally passed you by there, didn't it.
Your country has its own equally insane legal idiocies. Go count how many people you imprison for possession of marijuana.