Thanks. I got why I didn't get the metaphor - because it's a double-forced one:
a. likening Henson Blumenthal with a biologist and
b. likening practicing biology with practicing medicine
Can you enter into a contract just by buying something? Isn't it true that EULAs have never really been tested in court?
The way I know, in civil laws, what it is not forbidden, then it is allowed. If that's true, then the fact that EULA hasn't been tested in a court as a contract (much less ruled that it is not), it means it is allowed to act as a contract.
(If you're right, then Apple/Psystar is an example, maybe I'll have to read more about this.) Can I sell you a book with an attached EULA that says you may only read it in a blue rocking chair, and if you violate that you have to give the book back with no refund, and you agree to the contract merely by purchasing the book?
By purchasing the software (by extension, a book would fall under the same) with a shrinkwrap license that doesn't allow you to read its terms: it seems the precedents indicate it is not enforceable.
But if you have had the occasion to read the license before buying it and/or if the seller offers you the opportunity to return it and get a refund in case you don't agree with the license, the answer seems to be yes, it is enforceable.
Under some debate: EULA's that require to give away some rights (e.g. bring class actions, enter arbitration instead suing, benchmarking/criticizing the products), the things are still evolving.
EULA is a contract. It draws its legals base from an agreement between the parts involved. Certainly one of the parts needs to have some rights over whatever is being used by the other (be it copyright, ownership, etc), but to break the EULA you don't need to violate these rights, which was exactly what happened in PsyStar's case. PsyStar didn't copy Apple's product, they bought every one of the licenses they used. They didn't violate any copyright from Apple, but still they didn't obey the EULA they have agreed upon when they licensed the software.
That was about customization of MacOS in non Apple Machines and Apple's abusive EULA. PsyStar bough licenses from Apple and used them in a way that broke the EULA. It had nothing to do with copyright.
IANAL... but it seems to me a EULA draws its legal basis from copyright laws (like in "I'm giving you this piece of copyrighted work - in this case MacOS - and you agree to do with it as per EULA"). Pretty much the same as BSD/Apache/GPL/whatever open source license does.
You're sure PsyStar case has nothing to do with copyright?
We chinese have many problems but we also have many achievements.Every country has its two sides of a coin.
True, but also don't forget: keeping one's eyes only on achievements and forgetting one's problems is one sure way to get busted (see the current US situation. Works the same for individuals).
(this would be the first time somebody diagnosed me as autistic. I usually do get Shakespeare's metaphors without problems, but this is beyond me, so it may be that I'm autistic and nobody knows).
So, old man, care to explain the metaphor or what?
What else was there to do ? All you can do is walk around in a space suit, do a bit of science, and come back. The science can be done much better by unmanned rovers, and we're still doing that.
That's economically sensible, indeed.
I bet the Chinese will discover what else is there to do before the US.
This would qualify as either totally dumb (the poster didn't know better) or flamebait/troll (that is: ignoring on purpose the reality for the sake of controversy).
Poe's law would offer an explanation why the mods chose the second.
We don't need to go back to the Moon. We went there, planted a flag, and left. There is no reason to go back to the Moon or to Mars. If China wants to waste a few hundred billion dollars on space, let them. That is one expensive flag planting ceremony.
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
Because we are human beings and that is what we *do*. The desire to compete with those in the same "group" as you and win are wired into our brains,...
Oh, is it? Is the FOSS movement really only motivated by "Let's compete with the closed source"?
Maybe I'd agree with you only if you would have limited the scope to "That's how politicians are wired"... but even then I'd have some doubts.
This means: while you still exhibit "volitional formations", you are bound to the "hell" of being reincarnated in this world (thus always on the negative side of the "punishment/reward" axis). The maximum you can achieve is exactly at zero (lack of punishment but also lack of reward) - in other words, there's no "heaven".
I don't believe in either concept, but It just seems illogical that there can be a significantly larger amount of people that believe in "Heaven" than believe in "Hell" or vice-versa.
But then again, people are weird.
Well, if you only deal inside the Boolean algebra, then... yes, people dealing on the axis of the real numbers would seem weird indeed.
(that's another way of putting the "black/white vs shades of grey").
You are moving fast, and the direction is correct. But you are still far, far away from a third world country.
Two more generation of "teaching the controversy" with the first generation growing in high unemployment conditions; by the second generation, they might switch to "resolving the controversy" (a.k.a "sectarian violence" or "gang violence" in today's parlance). I hear certain areas of Chicago make good progress.
Apparently, they can't even officially charge someone with a crime until they have met in person with the prosecutors.
Additionally, they must meet the prosecutors in Sweden (a Swedish embassy is no good) and it must be a face to face meeting (over teleconference is not good).
If you're working in the information technology arena, and your job doesn't involve focused application of creativity, the time to start refocusing your career objectives is now.
Somebody will still need to "flip them burgers" even in IT (e.g. in an era of algorithmic trading and fighting for milli/micro-seconds, there is still a need to maintain alive some COBOL code written 1980 or before: what's so creative in this?)
Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, Nokia and the rest of the Axis companies are raising enough lawsuits as it is.
Not nearly enough... at least not until somebody does something to fix the patent system!! (my view: the current situation requires the things to go much worse before starting to go better. Until then, I think we can survive with whatever smartphones/tablets are not yet banned on different markets).
Says an American - from a country whose moon program was built by all the best repatriated NAZI rocket scientists.
Repatriate doesn't mean what you think it means (unless you really-really mean to say that there were american scientists in diaspora, working for the NAZI rockets, which were returned to their country of origin).
Slashdot Mirror
Two options: 1 - Absorbed: It will heat the screen just as much as having it turned upside down heats the back; not much.
Almost black body - may turn unpleasantly hot in direct sun (bitumen/asphalt on pathways during a hot day? Don't walk barefoot.)
2 - Scattered: You can avoid reflection by just scattering the light in a very large angle.
My guess is that it will be a mix of both.
This do mean diffuse reflection - which is not quite "non-existent reflection"
a. likening Henson Blumenthal with a biologist and
b. likening practicing biology with practicing medicine
I might not be autistic after all.
The uneven surface means that light won't just bounce back off the screen creating a reflection
What, the film absorbs (almost) everything? If so, where the energy goes? In heating the screen?
(not to mention the "light won't just bounce back..." invites a continuation on the line of "... but also...")
Can any BT subscriber comment on weather
Sure s/he can. In UK, commenting on weather is very much like "Can I buy you a drink?" in US.
Can you enter into a contract just by buying something? Isn't it true that EULAs have never really been tested in court?
The way I know, in civil laws, what it is not forbidden, then it is allowed. If that's true, then the fact that EULA hasn't been tested in a court as a contract (much less ruled that it is not), it means it is allowed to act as a contract.
(If you're right, then Apple/Psystar is an example, maybe I'll have to read more about this.) Can I sell you a book with an attached EULA that says you may only read it in a blue rocking chair, and if you violate that you have to give the book back with no refund, and you agree to the contract merely by purchasing the book?
By purchasing the software (by extension, a book would fall under the same) with a shrinkwrap license that doesn't allow you to read its terms: it seems the precedents indicate it is not enforceable.
But if you have had the occasion to read the license before buying it and/or if the seller offers you the opportunity to return it and get a refund in case you don't agree with the license, the answer seems to be yes, it is enforceable.
Under some debate: EULA's that require to give away some rights (e.g. bring class actions, enter arbitration instead suing, benchmarking/criticizing the products), the things are still evolving.
Virtual property is problematic in many ways.
Otherwise, I agree with you: dam'd ferengies with their rules of acquisition.
EULA is a contract. It draws its legals base from an agreement between the parts involved. Certainly one of the parts needs to have some rights over whatever is being used by the other (be it copyright, ownership, etc), but to break the EULA you don't need to violate these rights, which was exactly what happened in PsyStar's case.
PsyStar didn't copy Apple's product, they bought every one of the licenses they used. They didn't violate any copyright from Apple, but still they didn't obey the EULA they have agreed upon when they licensed the software.
Thanks. +Insightful
That was about customization of MacOS in non Apple Machines and Apple's abusive EULA. PsyStar bough licenses from Apple and used them in a way that broke the EULA. It had nothing to do with copyright.
IANAL... but it seems to me a EULA draws its legal basis from copyright laws (like in "I'm giving you this piece of copyrighted work - in this case MacOS - and you agree to do with it as per EULA"). Pretty much the same as BSD/Apache/GPL/whatever open source license does.
You're sure PsyStar case has nothing to do with copyright?
We chinese have many problems but we also have many achievements.Every country has its two sides of a coin.
True, but also don't forget: keeping one's eyes only on achievements and forgetting one's problems is one sure way to get busted (see the current US situation. Works the same for individuals).
So, old man, care to explain the metaphor or what?
What else was there to do ? All you can do is walk around in a space suit, do a bit of science, and come back. The science can be done much better by unmanned rovers, and we're still doing that.
That's economically sensible, indeed.
I bet the Chinese will discover what else is there to do before the US.
Nasa is not a provider of real jobs, .
This would qualify as either totally dumb (the poster didn't know better) or flamebait/troll (that is: ignoring on purpose the reality for the sake of controversy).
Poe's law would offer an explanation why the mods chose the second.
We don't need to go back to the Moon. We went there, planted a flag, and left. There is no reason to go back to the Moon or to Mars. If China wants to waste a few hundred billion dollars on space, let them. That is one expensive flag planting ceremony.
(groan) ^This coming less than 50 years after... :
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
Because we are human beings and that is what we *do*. The desire to compete with those in the same "group" as you and win are wired into our brains, ...
Oh, is it? Is the FOSS movement really only motivated by "Let's compete with the closed source"?
Maybe I'd agree with you only if you would have limited the scope to "That's how politicians are wired"... but even then I'd have some doubts.
The United States of America objected, and barred the Chinese from ever stepping into the ISS
I was about to put a "[citation needed]".
Then, changed my mind and went after the info myself (is posting it "karma whoring"?)
If there's a Heaven then there's a Hell.
How can there be one without the other?
Here's an example. nirvana is a state of 'ultimate' peace that is achieved with the uprooting and final dissolution of the volitional formations
This means: while you still exhibit "volitional formations", you are bound to the "hell" of being reincarnated in this world (thus always on the negative side of the "punishment/reward" axis). The maximum you can achieve is exactly at zero (lack of punishment but also lack of reward) - in other words, there's no "heaven".
I don't believe in either concept, but It just seems illogical that there can be a significantly larger amount of people that believe in "Heaven" than believe in "Hell" or vice-versa.
But then again, people are weird.
Well, if you only deal inside the Boolean algebra, then... yes, people dealing on the axis of the real numbers would seem weird indeed.
(that's another way of putting the "black/white vs shades of grey").
Oh, no.
You are moving fast, and the direction is correct. But you are still far, far away from a third world country.
Two more generation of "teaching the controversy" with the first generation growing in high unemployment conditions; by the second generation, they might switch to "resolving the controversy" (a.k.a "sectarian violence" or "gang violence" in today's parlance). I hear certain areas of Chicago make good progress.
Apparently, they can't even officially charge someone with a crime until they have met in person with the prosecutors.
Additionally, they must meet the prosecutors in Sweden (a Swedish embassy is no good) and it must be a face to face meeting (over teleconference is not good).
If you're working in the information technology arena, and your job doesn't involve focused application of creativity, the time to start refocusing your career objectives is now.
Somebody will still need to "flip them burgers" even in IT (e.g. in an era of algorithmic trading and fighting for milli/micro-seconds, there is still a need to maintain alive some COBOL code written 1980 or before: what's so creative in this?)
Stop it!
Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, Nokia and the rest of the Axis companies are raising enough lawsuits as it is.
Not nearly enough... at least not until somebody does something to fix the patent system!! (my view: the current situation requires the things to go much worse before starting to go better. Until then, I think we can survive with whatever smartphones/tablets are not yet banned on different markets).
This chip is so fast
...that Japan or China will not lose the chance to show a bigger dick.
Or... will it be Australia?
They should do a deal with Microsoft. Then they could have Badabing.
Yes, and... to increase the chances for the deal, they should feature more their co-national Boom in their ads.
Have a look... continue reading until you reach Abdul-Rahman al-Awlaki was killed at the age of 16
I wonder what kind of "medical tests and experiments" a mixed-gender crew might undergo in microgravity.
You mean... testing one-child policy in zero-G?
Says an American - from a country whose moon program was built by all the best repatriated NAZI rocket scientists.
Repatriate doesn't mean what you think it means (unless you really-really mean to say that there were american scientists in diaspora, working for the NAZI rockets, which were returned to their country of origin).