The work produced/done should stand on its own - not be judged by the "qualifications" of who did it. Ones qualifications should be based on what he's done, not who his employer was while doing it.
I was recently reading the history of the Barringer Crater in Arizona. The official website claims that Barringer was "not a scientist."
Then it goes on to describe how Barringer used the scientific method, both empirically and theoretically, to convice the scientific world that the crater had an impact origin.
That, my dear friends, is the actual definition of a scientist, not what it says on one's degree (assuming one even has one).
They are the future of unaccountable editorializing.
Which has always existed, and for which there is a place, in it's place.
Not that I blog, mind you. Seems like a vaguely silly idea to me. I post to Slashdot.
For that matter, what the hell does "blog" even mean anymore. I thought I used to have some vague functional definition in my head, but now the term seems to be applied to nearly anything online.
Please note that I did not anywhere claim that copying was theft. It is not. It is illegal copying, which is very different from theft, but still illegal.
If a company is not selling the product anymore, then how can copying a program deny them a sale?
It cannot, but, as per my original post, copyright protects copying and distributing, not sales.
Very simply, copyright deals with whether the material is owned, not with whether it is distributed or not.
The car in my garage that I haven't driven in 10 years is still mine, and you can't take it just because you need a car and I'm not using it.
I have the legal right not drive my car, and I have the legal right not to distribute my software. My availing myself of these rights does not in any way confer rights to my things upon you.
Thus, you cannot distribute my copyright protected material over the internet, even though I am not doing so myself.
The terms "amateur" and "professional" are in no way synonymous with "expertise," and the phrase "professional standard," if it has any real meaning at all, has meaning only within the realm of a particular workplace, not the lab/workshop.
I find that I write code quickly and then spend an hour researching some module or other. It sure slows down the process.
This is a problem inherent in OOP. It is often quicker to write your own classes (which you then understand innately), at least if you actually understand the mathematics of the problem you're working on, than it is to find and research an existing one.
This degrades the value of the public investment in reusable code.
If Java seems more "intuitive" to you that is a result of the capital investment you've already made in research. In Java too you have to know something is there before you can use it.
Well, we can apply Slashdot's perennial test for difficulty, the mom test.
Ok, well, my mom's been to the South Pole research station, so it can't be that hard. In fact, the process must be downright intuitive. I don't know that she ran around naked while she was there, but come to think of it, I never asked either.
How does tracking an IE exploit to Microsoft help you track down the person that used it? Catching the person responsible for the incursion is the order of business. In what way is Microsoft's posited 'accountability' an aid to security in the first place, and what role does it play after an incursion?
One does not want to "catch" the people responsible for an exploit. One wants to close it. Accountability is an economic issue (who do we sue), or a scapegoat issue (who's head can we put on the block to protect our own), not a security issue.
Ironically it is only with closed source software that who created the exploit is really relevant after the fact, since they are the only ones that can close it, and you can never be sure that really have unless you have the complete source to audit (and in a real secure system you always, always, always build from personally audited source).
Nor does running open source code have anything to do with whether or not you know where the code came from. There's no logical connect between the two issues and Red Hat can tell you where every line of code in their kernel came from just as well as Microsoft can tell you where code in their kernel came from.
My previous post was a joke. It was clear from your original post that your point of view is that of someone from a business enviroment. Government security has an entirely different intent, view point and priority matrix than business security (except among some of the 'new generation', who almost all come to government security from business security backgrounds).
Yeah, did that just once on the way BosCon, but it was a hoot, and dodging traffic on the Mass Pike while DMing certainly adds another dimension to the game.
Not bad really. Of course Bradbury suffers from being able to put so much atmosphere into his writing that film versions always seem to suffer, even when they were originally scripts to begin with, but this one at least comes off decently, despite being made for TV.
For that matter the original little booklets still work for me. Just because they print 'em doesn't mean you have to buy and use 'em, unless, of course, you're hung up on being "official."
In which case I'm not sure that a game like D&D is for you in the first place. It's about creativity.
Many projects already are quite good at the documentation but a lot lack usablility in terms of "I'm coming from windows and I want at least a bit comfort by configuring the system via a GUI".
Not all projects need, or even should, have this variety of "usability."
Not every project is for everybody, and that's "OK."
Slashdot Mirror
That issue is properly addressed when setting the term of copyright, i.e. putting a limit on how long you can bury it, not whether you can bury it.
. . . but why do you have a moral right to restrict people from making copies when no harm is done to you?
Once the term of copyright is given, which is the case regarding the current question, this is a non issue legally.
I have not brought up issues of morality, only attempted to answer the question as posed, which is a strictly legal one.
And, of course, strictly legal issues are all that the courts can address. Congress sets the term.
KFG
I also did not address the ethical or moral implications of the current law.
KFG
The work produced/done should stand on its own - not be judged by the "qualifications" of who did it. Ones qualifications should be based on what he's done, not who his employer was while doing it.
I was recently reading the history of the Barringer Crater in Arizona. The official website claims that Barringer was "not a scientist."
Then it goes on to describe how Barringer used the scientific method, both empirically and theoretically, to convice the scientific world that the crater had an impact origin.
That, my dear friends, is the actual definition of a scientist, not what it says on one's degree (assuming one even has one).
KFG
They are the future of unaccountable editorializing.
Which has always existed, and for which there is a place, in it's place.
Not that I blog, mind you. Seems like a vaguely silly idea to me. I post to Slashdot.
For that matter, what the hell does "blog" even mean anymore. I thought I used to have some vague functional definition in my head, but now the term seems to be applied to nearly anything online.
KFG
Please note that I did not anywhere claim that copying was theft. It is not. It is illegal copying, which is very different from theft, but still illegal.
If a company is not selling the product anymore, then how can copying a program deny them a sale?
It cannot, but, as per my original post, copyright protects copying and distributing, not sales.
KFG
What's that got to do with copyright?
Very simply, copyright deals with whether the material is owned, not with whether it is distributed or not.
The car in my garage that I haven't driven in 10 years is still mine, and you can't take it just because you need a car and I'm not using it.
I have the legal right not drive my car, and I have the legal right not to distribute my software. My availing myself of these rights does not in any way confer rights to my things upon you.
Thus, you cannot distribute my copyright protected material over the internet, even though I am not doing so myself.
KFG
Did you mean to put emphasis on feel?
Yes.
KFG
The emphasis was on the word feel.
KFG
". . .pressure from some customers who want to feel they are making an environmentally sensitive purchase."
The emphasis is mine.
KFG
. . .rather than understand many languages poorly.
Or even worse, one language poorly, which seems to be the norm these days.
KFG
. . .how the heck do you get to market without the basics that you'd have expected from an MP3 player five years ago?
Balls.
KFG
The terms "amateur" and "professional" are in no way synonymous with "expertise," and the phrase "professional standard," if it has any real meaning at all, has meaning only within the realm of a particular workplace, not the lab/workshop.
KFG
I find that I write code quickly and then spend an hour researching some module or other. It sure slows down the process.
This is a problem inherent in OOP. It is often quicker to write your own classes (which you then understand innately), at least if you actually understand the mathematics of the problem you're working on, than it is to find and research an existing one.
This degrades the value of the public investment in reusable code.
If Java seems more "intuitive" to you that is a result of the capital investment you've already made in research. In Java too you have to know something is there before you can use it.
KFG
Well, we can apply Slashdot's perennial test for difficulty, the mom test.
Ok, well, my mom's been to the South Pole research station, so it can't be that hard. In fact, the process must be downright intuitive. I don't know that she ran around naked while she was there, but come to think of it, I never asked either.
KFG
In Korea, door handles do not break.
KFG
. . .what do they think of those who use the "physical" postal service...
What's that, Gramps?
KFG
How does tracking an IE exploit to Microsoft help you track down the person that used it? Catching the person responsible for the incursion is the order of business. In what way is Microsoft's posited 'accountability' an aid to security in the first place, and what role does it play after an incursion?
One does not want to "catch" the people responsible for an exploit. One wants to close it. Accountability is an economic issue (who do we sue), or a scapegoat issue (who's head can we put on the block to protect our own), not a security issue.
Ironically it is only with closed source software that who created the exploit is really relevant after the fact, since they are the only ones that can close it, and you can never be sure that really have unless you have the complete source to audit (and in a real secure system you always, always, always build from personally audited source).
Nor does running open source code have anything to do with whether or not you know where the code came from. There's no logical connect between the two issues and Red Hat can tell you where every line of code in their kernel came from just as well as Microsoft can tell you where code in their kernel came from.
My previous post was a joke. It was clear from your original post that your point of view is that of someone from a business enviroment. Government security has an entirely different intent, view point and priority matrix than business security (except among some of the 'new generation', who almost all come to government security from business security backgrounds).
KFG
If they find a backdoor in the kernal and someone has stolen sensitive stuff through it, who's to blame?
Stuff so sensitive that it threatens national security has been stolen and your only concern is your scapegoat.
You work for the government, don't you?
KFG
If we're all going in that direction, shouldn't we just get it over with and have a "server closet" in every home?
.
Yes, but some people are just all hep to have a computer in their fridge, and toaster, and microwave oven, and sock drawer, and. .
KFG
Yeah, did that just once on the way BosCon, but it was a hoot, and dodging traffic on the Mass Pike while DMing certainly adds another dimension to the game.
KFG
Is it based on I Sing the Body Electric?
Yes.
Is it any good?
Not bad really. Of course Bradbury suffers from being able to put so much atmosphere into his writing that film versions always seem to suffer, even when they were originally scripts to begin with, but this one at least comes off decently, despite being made for TV.
KFG
I have absolutely no idea why I remember that...
Because it's Ray Bradbury.
KFG
Its amazing how theraputic hammering hot metal is after a day dealing with computers and their users.
I just get hot and hammer on the users, but hey, whatever works for you.
KFG
For that matter the original little booklets still work for me. Just because they print 'em doesn't mean you have to buy and use 'em, unless, of course, you're hung up on being "official."
In which case I'm not sure that a game like D&D is for you in the first place. It's about creativity.
KFG
Many projects already are quite good at the documentation but a lot lack usablility in terms of "I'm coming from windows and I want at least a bit comfort by configuring the system via a GUI".
Not all projects need, or even should, have this variety of "usability."
Not every project is for everybody, and that's "OK."
KFG