If I leave my doors unlocked and wide open and you walk in and start taking stuff, it's still theft and you're still trespassing. My insurance company will probably kick up a stink, but legally you're still up shit creek if you're caught.
You're treading a dangerous path there, one in which all software authors are held legally responsible for bugs in their code.
Remember the first internet worm? That was an exploit in sendmail. There are rootkits for linux.
Still think the authors should go to jail? Or is it somehow different because MS charge for Windows? My company has bought plenty of copies of RedHat...
(Oh, I'm ignoring the fact that that's the most flawed analogy I've read here in a long time - the author of the sasser worm wasn't some innocent kid idly throwing stones)
If you want to make it a valid comparison, convince Microsoft to begin a program where you can trade in your version of Windows XP for Windows XP + Service Pack 2 + Updates, etc.
If the average user can't be bothered to go to the effort of obtaining a service pack on CD (or downloading it and burning it to one themselves, for that matter), what makes you think they'd take up such an offer?
I'd also like to see how successful someone would be trying to go after him for copyright infringement in europe, particularly france where he lives and is hosted at.
I may be wrong, but I believe that France is a signatory to the Berne convention, and so broadly speaking shares common copyright laws with the US. You most certainly can go after him, if you think it's worth it.
The guy has essentially said, on national TV, "the way in which my employer makes money is wrong and should be abolished." You think that doesn't make him unsuitable to be an employee?
You have just stated that it's OK for employees to fire people for holding an opinion contrary to the opinion of the "corporation".
No I didn't. I said that it's ok (at least in some circumstances) to fire people for making public statements that go against the company's business interests. If I bad mouthed my friends, I wouldn't expect to keep them, why should my job be any different?
Does a belief in alternative communications systems really affect your ability to maintain the systems under your charge?
If I become sufficiently militant about it, yes, it might. Would you want to take that chance with your critical infrastructure?
If Mr. Hanff is required to get a security clearance to work on Government contracts, legal entanglements may become an issue.
I don't remember the exact details of the clearance process, but I would be amazed if any such things weren't looked at very hard indeed. Certainly you have to give details of your partner, immediate family, previous addresses, etc. They take that sort of thing pretty seriously, even just for SC status.
And Government cracking down on dissenting political views with tax money, isn't that a bit shady?
Where does it say that the government has anything to do with this? The company is claiming that it's afraid that ahving this guy working for them after what he's said might harm their chances of getting government work, that's all.
There are apparently laws against firing people for political and philosphoical beliefs, yes.
However, he's not been fired for something as trivial as saying "I'm a Tory" or "I think people should be free to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes as long as no-one is hurt (at least non-consentually)".
He's gone on national TV and said in effect "copyright and IPR are wrong and should be abolished", while working for a company that relies on those things to make money. That sets him as being opposed to the way in which his employer does business.
It may be a philosophical belief, but it does tend to suggest that he may not be suited to working with his current employer. It's not like his Labour boss has fired him for being a Tory, or prudish boss fired him for being permissive.
No they don't, and no it isn't, but if you start saying publicly that (for instance) your company's mode of business is wrong and unethical, I think you'd be out on your ear faster than you can say "but it's just my opinion!!"
Check your contract and/or company policy statements. Mine most certainly have a clause concerning bringing the company into disrepute or acting so as to harm its interests.
If you wnet around bad-mouthing a friend in public, would you expect them to remain your friend? Why should a company be any different?
This really has nothing to do with P2P other than that was the subject on which the guy was speaking. What got him let go was his announcement (on national TV) that he is against copyright and intellectual property. From the Gruaniad article:
Mr Hanff has declared that he is opposed to copyright and intellectual property laws. Since much of our business is based around the protection of our copyright and intellectual property, we consider our dismissal of Mr Hanff entirely justified and appropriate.
I work for a telecoms company. If I went on national TV and decried telephony, saying that everyone should communicate face to face or by writing letters, I'd expect my company to start to wonder if I was entirely suitable as an employee, too.
You know what I hate about this situation? That as you say, there's "this bizarrely large clique of users" who complain about Roland in the comments attached to every single story of his, and yet the editors do nothing.
No explanation, nothing.
That's what I hate - that our queries and rants are falling on deaf, uncaring ears. No, most of us don't subscribe, but this site would be nothing more than a curiousity without the comments; I think the readership is owed the explanation it asks for.
No, British man sacked for voicing an opinion that is in direct contravention of his employer's main mode of business on national TV.
I work for a telecoms company. If I went on Newsnight and announced that I was against telephony, and thought that everyone should communicate face to face, I'd not be too surprised if my employers started to doubt my suitability for my job...
Although I haven't played either game in question, it seems pretty clear that you can't get very far by being nice to everybody.
If you've not played Postal 2, are you really qualified to comment?
I have, and while no, you can't complete the game without killing a few people, there are definitely degrees. You can play it like a straight FPS and just shoot the bad guys, or you can run around tazering bystanders, setting them on fire, decapitating them with a shovel and/or pissing on them (alive or dead, your choice).
As you say, the game is what you make it. Yes, you have to be violent, but only really in self defence - or, you can be a sadist to everyone you encounter. It's your choice. The game doesn't reward you for killing non-combatants.
the impactor was vaporizing itself in its 10 kilometers per second (6.3 miles per second) collision with comet Tempel 1
It would seem that the speed was measured relative to Tempel 1. That's really the only measurement that makes sense in any case, as that's what determines how hard the impactor hits the comet.
All from the impact of a probe just the size of a washing machine.
Washing machines are heavy, and (with the exception of the concrete in the base) they're not especially dense. This thing would have had tremendous kinetic energy at the speed it was travelling at relative to Tempel 1, and was designed to hit it hard. That it was an impressive collision really shouldn't be surprising.
(But then, I have a degree in Physics, so I'm used to thinking about this sort of thing, I guess...)
It's not magical molecule transforming rays doing it, it's just heat.
Well, I'm not a microwave engineer, but iirc the microwave oven creates standing waves of microwaves within the "cooking cavity" (for want of a better term). These standing waves induce water molecules in the substance being heated to oscillate, thus heating it.
So yes, it is just heat, but the method of transferring the energy to the thing being heated is unique amongst cooking methods.
Incidentally, it's this that is repsonsible for uneven heating, and why you should stir things and/or leave them to stand - the wavelength of microwaves is on the order of centimetres, so the nodes of the standing waves generated are a centimetre or two apart. At the node, very little or no heating occurs, as no oscillation is induced. Thus you have to stir the thing or leave it to stand to even out the heating.
Finally, intense enough EM radiation can cause ionisation of the substances it passes through, but at microwave energies any such ionisationwill be utterly insignificant, if it occurs at all.
Now, I despise the MPAA's tactics as much as the next slashdotter, but this is *not* the same thing. At least the members of the MPAA actually produce something; you may argue that it's (mostly) crap, but it still takes skill, time, effort and money.
This guy has just plonked down a bit of cash to trademark some words. Given some money and a dictionary (or thesaurus, or similar) anyone could do the same thing. He's not producing anything, let alone anything of any real worth.
Bottom line, as I see it: sure, the MPAA are slimy, but they do have their uses. This guy's just scum, plain and simple.
Usually scientists try to achieve things that are one or two steps above where they are now. Something that has at least a bit of theory behind it.
You do realise that one of the most common reasons for creating a theory is to explain experimental observations, don't you? In other words, the experiment often comes first...
I'm not sure what "Last time I checked, the dollar was worth just over half of what the pound is worth" has to do with the question...
The OP asserted that the economies of European countries keep lagging behind that of the US. The relative strengths of the dollar and the pound (and indeed of the dollar and the euro) would seem to indicate that this is not in fact the case, hence the poster you replied to pointed it out.
Slashdot Mirror
If I leave my doors unlocked and wide open and you walk in and start taking stuff, it's still theft and you're still trespassing. My insurance company will probably kick up a stink, but legally you're still up shit creek if you're caught.
You're treading a dangerous path there, one in which all software authors are held legally responsible for bugs in their code.
Remember the first internet worm? That was an exploit in sendmail. There are rootkits for linux.
Still think the authors should go to jail? Or is it somehow different because MS charge for Windows? My company has bought plenty of copies of RedHat...
(Oh, I'm ignoring the fact that that's the most flawed analogy I've read here in a long time - the author of the sasser worm wasn't some innocent kid idly throwing stones)
If you want to make it a valid comparison, convince Microsoft to begin a program where you can trade in your version of Windows XP for Windows XP + Service Pack 2 + Updates, etc.
If the average user can't be bothered to go to the effort of obtaining a service pack on CD (or downloading it and burning it to one themselves, for that matter), what makes you think they'd take up such an offer?
The card manufacturer screwed up the driver install process for their own card, and somehow that's Windows's fault?
Also, it's been a hell of a long time since NVidia drivers would fit on a floppy - the current Win 2k/XP GeForce driver weighs in at 20MB.
I'd also like to see how successful someone would be trying to go after him for copyright infringement in europe, particularly france where he lives and is hosted at.
I may be wrong, but I believe that France is a signatory to the Berne convention, and so broadly speaking shares common copyright laws with the US. You most certainly can go after him, if you think it's worth it.
Too much of anything is bad for you. Too much water will kill you (it upsets your body's fluid balance)
The guy has essentially said, on national TV, "the way in which my employer makes money is wrong and should be abolished." You think that doesn't make him unsuitable to be an employee?
You have just stated that it's OK for employees to fire people for holding an opinion contrary to the opinion of the "corporation".
No I didn't. I said that it's ok (at least in some circumstances) to fire people for making public statements that go against the company's business interests. If I bad mouthed my friends, I wouldn't expect to keep them, why should my job be any different?
That is a ridiculus assertion.
At least that we agree on
Does a belief in alternative communications systems really affect your ability to maintain the systems under your charge?
If I become sufficiently militant about it, yes, it might. Would you want to take that chance with your critical infrastructure?
If Mr. Hanff is required to get a security clearance to work on Government contracts, legal entanglements may become an issue.
I don't remember the exact details of the clearance process, but I would be amazed if any such things weren't looked at very hard indeed. Certainly you have to give details of your partner, immediate family, previous addresses, etc. They take that sort of thing pretty seriously, even just for SC status.
And Government cracking down on dissenting political views with tax money, isn't that a bit shady?
Where does it say that the government has anything to do with this? The company is claiming that it's afraid that ahving this guy working for them after what he's said might harm their chances of getting government work, that's all.
There are apparently laws against firing people for political and philosphoical beliefs, yes.
However, he's not been fired for something as trivial as saying "I'm a Tory" or "I think people should be free to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes as long as no-one is hurt (at least non-consentually)".
He's gone on national TV and said in effect "copyright and IPR are wrong and should be abolished", while working for a company that relies on those things to make money. That sets him as being opposed to the way in which his employer does business.
It may be a philosophical belief, but it does tend to suggest that he may not be suited to working with his current employer. It's not like his Labour boss has fired him for being a Tory, or prudish boss fired him for being permissive.
No they don't, and no it isn't, but if you start saying publicly that (for instance) your company's mode of business is wrong and unethical, I think you'd be out on your ear faster than you can say "but it's just my opinion!!"
Check your contract and/or company policy statements. Mine most certainly have a clause concerning bringing the company into disrepute or acting so as to harm its interests.
If you wnet around bad-mouthing a friend in public, would you expect them to remain your friend? Why should a company be any different?
This really has nothing to do with P2P other than that was the subject on which the guy was speaking. What got him let go was his announcement (on national TV) that he is against copyright and intellectual property. From the Gruaniad article:
Mr Hanff has declared that he is opposed to copyright and intellectual property laws. Since much of our business is based around the protection of our copyright and intellectual property, we consider our dismissal of Mr Hanff entirely justified and appropriate.
I work for a telecoms company. If I went on national TV and decried telephony, saying that everyone should communicate face to face or by writing letters, I'd expect my company to start to wonder if I was entirely suitable as an employee, too.
You know what I hate about this situation? That as you say, there's "this bizarrely large clique of users" who complain about Roland in the comments attached to every single story of his, and yet the editors do nothing.
No explanation, nothing.
That's what I hate - that our queries and rants are falling on deaf, uncaring ears. No, most of us don't subscribe, but this site would be nothing more than a curiousity without the comments; I think the readership is owed the explanation it asks for.
"British man sacked for having opinion"
No, British man sacked for voicing an opinion that is in direct contravention of his employer's main mode of business on national TV.
I work for a telecoms company. If I went on Newsnight and announced that I was against telephony, and thought that everyone should communicate face to face, I'd not be too surprised if my employers started to doubt my suitability for my job...
Although I haven't played either game in question, it seems pretty clear that you can't get very far by being nice to everybody.
If you've not played Postal 2, are you really qualified to comment?
I have, and while no, you can't complete the game without killing a few people, there are definitely degrees. You can play it like a straight FPS and just shoot the bad guys, or you can run around tazering bystanders, setting them on fire, decapitating them with a shovel and/or pissing on them (alive or dead, your choice).
As you say, the game is what you make it. Yes, you have to be violent, but only really in self defence - or, you can be a sadist to everyone you encounter. It's your choice. The game doesn't reward you for killing non-combatants.
It's not an Americanism, it's an archaic usage.
From Nasa's site about the mission:
the impactor was vaporizing itself in its 10 kilometers per second (6.3 miles per second) collision with comet Tempel 1
It would seem that the speed was measured relative to Tempel 1. That's really the only measurement that makes sense in any case, as that's what determines how hard the impactor hits the comet.
All from the impact of a probe just the size of a washing machine.
Washing machines are heavy, and (with the exception of the concrete in the base) they're not especially dense. This thing would have had tremendous kinetic energy at the speed it was travelling at relative to Tempel 1, and was designed to hit it hard. That it was an impressive collision really shouldn't be surprising.
(But then, I have a degree in Physics, so I'm used to thinking about this sort of thing, I guess...)
It's not magical molecule transforming rays doing it, it's just heat.
Well, I'm not a microwave engineer, but iirc the microwave oven creates standing waves of microwaves within the "cooking cavity" (for want of a better term). These standing waves induce water molecules in the substance being heated to oscillate, thus heating it.
So yes, it is just heat, but the method of transferring the energy to the thing being heated is unique amongst cooking methods.
Incidentally, it's this that is repsonsible for uneven heating, and why you should stir things and/or leave them to stand - the wavelength of microwaves is on the order of centimetres, so the nodes of the standing waves generated are a centimetre or two apart. At the node, very little or no heating occurs, as no oscillation is induced. Thus you have to stir the thing or leave it to stand to even out the heating.
Finally, intense enough EM radiation can cause ionisation of the substances it passes through, but at microwave energies any such ionisationwill be utterly insignificant, if it occurs at all.
Now, I despise the MPAA's tactics as much as the next slashdotter, but this is *not* the same thing. At least the members of the MPAA actually produce something; you may argue that it's (mostly) crap, but it still takes skill, time, effort and money.
This guy has just plonked down a bit of cash to trademark some words. Given some money and a dictionary (or thesaurus, or similar) anyone could do the same thing. He's not producing anything, let alone anything of any real worth.
Bottom line, as I see it: sure, the MPAA are slimy, but they do have their uses. This guy's just scum, plain and simple.
That's not even true (look at the changes between NT, 2k and XP), but ignoring that, what does it have to do with third-party software being boring?
the speed of sound in a gaseous medium is dependent on the average speed of the gas molecules
That "average speed" is what we refer to as temperature - the higher the speed, the higher the temperature.
I'd think its more or less independent of density so long as the gas remains a gas...
Compress a gas (decrease its density) and you raise its temperature. Thus you can indeed change the speed of sound in a gas by changing its density.
Usually scientists try to achieve things that are one or two steps above where they are now. Something that has at least a bit of theory behind it.
You do realise that one of the most common reasons for creating a theory is to explain experimental observations, don't you? In other words, the experiment often comes first...
I'm not sure what "Last time I checked, the dollar was worth just over half of what the pound is worth" has to do with the question...
The OP asserted that the economies of European countries keep lagging behind that of the US. The relative strengths of the dollar and the pound (and indeed of the dollar and the euro) would seem to indicate that this is not in fact the case, hence the poster you replied to pointed it out.
The EU doesn't have a healthy software industry now
Bullshit. My experience and that of my friends of working in it for the last six years begs to differ.