His issue is that he never heard anything about being yanked off the air for indecency until he started criticizing Dubya.
And, more than that, he was a convenient target at a time when broadcasters in general (Clear Channel being one of the slowest-moving targets) were under fire for indecency thanks to Janet's tit. The one thing all of these companies fear more than anything is increased government regulation, and removing Stern was a good way to say "we're dealing with this internally." The current administration has been very good for Clear Channel, but there's no telling what Congress will do if told to "do it for the children."
One of the nominees for best novel, Ilium, I highly recommend. It's by the same author that did the Hyperion novels.
I'm worried that it's going to have the exact same problem as both pairs of the Hyperion novels. Simmons writes great first halves and shitty second halves. Hyperion is a masterpiece, and the follow-up was incredibly weak. To be fair, the second set of novels wasn't as bad in this respect, but the incoherencies of the first sequel were carried over (and the characters simply weren't as compelling). And I'm still not sure what the Shrike was.
Ilium introduced so many different threads that don't fit together that there's good reason to fear that the conclusion will depend on some weird metaphysical explanation that only makes sense to the author. In fact, there was a brief half-explanation towards the end that already seemed to be headed in this direction. ..
Still, a very well-written and exciting book, worth it just for the riffs on the Iliad.
I made the mistake of buying it for my boyfriend and was subjected to it three times in a weekend.
Just curious - what would I have to do to get a girlfriend who would buy me sci-fi movies and read Slashdot? If some sort of contract with the Devil is involved, let me know how I can get in touch with him.
It's amazingly hard to get funding for something that has no monetary return on the investment.
Actually, it's not. The NIH and NSF dwarf anything the rest of the world has to offer, and virtually every project they fund has no forseeable return on investment. The rules have been changed to encourage grant recipients to turn research into usable products, but the government never sees an ROI. All the government expects its money to do is increase the size and scope of human knowledge.
when a woman celebrates her fiftieth birthday by buying the toy she's wanted all her life and can finally afford, you don't hear a bloody thing about midlife crises.
No, you hear about "aging ungracefully". Besides, middle-aged women aren't usually as ostentatious in their sudden lifestyle changes; I don't know many lawyer's wives who decided to become biker chicks. Similarly, why do you think Demi-Ashton was such a big deal? Guys her age do the same thing (or try to, at least) all the time.
I agree with this. However, I really think the best solution is just to crack down harder on people who leave their ringers on (or, worse, answer the fucking thing as well). I'm a grad student, and almost all of my classmates have cell phones, myself included. I turn mine to vibrate whenever I'm in a class or meeting; others are not so polite or careful. If I were a professor, and a student's phone went off in my class, they'd be writing me a five-page review on membrane biophysics, due within a week. Nobody would make the same mistake twice.
Goddamnit, I clicked on the link expecting photos of some sorority girl in a halter top and cutoffs, probably in the middle of an all-night coding session. Or, better yet, a group of them wearing pajamas and playing LAN games. Admit it, you've all had the same fantasy.
But if you think as I, that it's axiomatic that you must be ready, willing, and able to soundly defeat aggressors and then be willing to help them change for the better,
Ahhh, you see, that thinking is out of vogue now. People here prefer nuance, not Manichean worldviews; there is no "evil" - or if there is, it's really our fault. See, what'd really happen in today's world is that after the bugs smashed Buenos Aires, we'd be holding symposiums examining the effects of pseudoarachnophobia and human bigotry, lamenting the human-inflected poverty on Klandathu, and theorizing how the UN let it happen, and Anglo college students would be wearing chitin plates on their chest to show solidarity. Meanwhile, the bugs would continue their efforts to cause the Moon to smash into the Earth.
Of course Heinlein didn't take into account the possibility that the government might also be more interested in cutting taxes and investigating pornographers than paying for all those mobile suits.
Heinlein, while respectful of the military, was consistently suspicious of government, so it's very difficult for me to see any Fascism in his works.
Three additional points:
- Heinlein is very consistently libertarian throughout most of his works, and there isn't really anything in this book that contradicts that.
- He also made it very clear (elsewhere) that he considered the draft immoral, and while he thought military service was morally proper, he was strongly against it being forced upon anybody.
- In a certain sense, the "citizenship for veterans" ethic of Starship Troopers isn't that much different from TANSTAAFL.
A movie that would have been awesome if it had been titled anything other than "Starship Troopers".
I'm ashamed to admit that I actually enjoy this movie and find it strangely compelling. The CGI holds up remarkably well for a 1997 release; the bugs in particular look as good as anything I've seen since. And Verhoeven is so over-the-top trashy that it's hypnotic. I just have to choke back the vomit whenever I think of what they did to my favorite sci-fi novel.
What's worst, I've decided, is that in the book the characters are explicitly a very diverse assortment of nationalities and races (the main character is a native Filipino!) - although Heinlein doesn't really make a big deal of it - but since this would interfere with Verhoeven's goal of making the characters seem like Nazis, they mostly end up looking and sounding pretty white in the movie. Despite being from Buenos Aires (a misreading of the book). (And, of course, the black dude dies.)
This is only partly funny. There's a company marketing a "virtual orchestra" that's supposed to emulate a real orchestra using very high quality samplings. (To which every real musician who's heard about it has said "BULLSHIT.") The technology has been used in some opera/musical productions in NYC; the unions seem to have killed it there for now.
By the time the orchestra is on stage performing the piece, anyone could stand up there and wave their arms and the music would be pretty good.
Well, you're partly right about that. In theory, the concertmaster should be able to lead the orchestra. Once in high school (we had a REALLY FUCKING GOOD orchestra and jazz band; the school itself sucked) the conductor got called down to the main office during rehearsal. He just told us to hold tight. After about a minute of uncomfortable boredom, the concertmistress got up and told us to start where we left off, and we played the rest of the movement with her directing from her chair, while playing. Didn't have any problems whatsoever.
I saw an all-state orchestra one year where they actually had the first stand violinists conduct an entire Wagner overture, playing from the podium. (This is after only two and a half days of rehearsal as an actual ensemble.) In both orchestras, nobody was out of high school- but they were all experienced enough to know what to do.
The real mark of a good conductor is how he prepares the orchestra in rehersal. That is where the artistic vision comes across. Once he demonstrates his idea of how the piece should sound, he can conduct with subtle nuances that are easily understood by the orchestra. But only with good preparation is that possible.
That's a little idealistic. One teacher of mine who played in the Seattle Symphony joked about having to play a concert with a guest conductor that night - "Wonder what he'll be like. Too bad he can't speak English." I saw that performance, and couldn't tell that they'd never seen him before. (Apparently they were also sight-reading some stuff.)
Anyway, orchestras do get shaped by their music directors, no doubt about it. If the guy absolutely loves trombone, the orchestra will become known as the one with the really loud trombones. But a professional orchestra - or a gifted student/amateur orchestra, even - should be able to adapt to any good conductor effortlessly. The pros are expected to know the repertoire already or sight-read well enough that no one will notice the difference; very little time is spent on rehearsal. That's what makes them pros; I've gotten away a couple of times with sight reading or just coming to dress rehearsal, but not for anything particularly difficult, and I can't say that I felt entirely comfortable. (It does wonders for reducing nerves, though.)
One should note, though, that while the South oppressed about a third of its population, the Yankees oppressed all of its population.
Hmm, I must have been sleeping in history class when they told us about white Virginians having their daughters raped by Massachusetts plantation owners or sold to some racist Pennsylvanian. Sorry, but the issue of federalism was ultimately over whether the free states could tell the slave states what to do. So, let's be totally honest: in your ideal federalist system, should the slave states have continued to have the right to decide whether slavery would be legal within their borders, regardless of whether this was right or wrong? If no war had occurred, the 13th amendment had been passed with the votes of new free states west of the Mississippi, and South Carolina didn't like it, should SC have been allowed to secede?
People like you never fail to amuse me; you're like the Randians who believe they're oppressed because they pay income tax. You're so caught up in your narrow-minded, idealistic philosophy that any misery that others suffer as a result isn't worth your attention. And you side with human filth like the slaveholders rather than betray an abstract principle like "federalism."
I dunno. . . do you think there's anything wrong with the enslavement of millions, and children being born into servitude? I may be a snooty West Coast liberal, but I just find these things, y'know, "wrong." And yet millions of my fellow citizens think it's cool to fly CSA flags. . . honoring a country that went to war to fight for the right to rape, murder, and enslave black people.
I do not believe in the concept of collective guilt; I am not responsible for the misdeeds of Columbus, the slaveholders, the killers of Indians, the KKK, etc. (I also oppose affirmative action and reparations, for similar reasons.) But I do not go out of my way to honor the memory or defend the actions of those who committed these atrocities.
Re:Forbes is optimistic
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Dan Lyons (the author of the linked column) is also the same guy who wrote a rambling, incoherent article describing Linux users as naive, idealistic hippies, constantly referring to them as "Linux crunchies." And the crack editing team at Forbes saw fit to publish it. How does a publication that purports to cover the business world manage to be so out of touch with it?
there was enough crap going on back then so that you can find a decent argument for just about any cause of the Civil War.
and it still seems to me like "slavery" is the best explanation. although, on a certain level, it was a dispute over whether the Union was inviolable or whether states could exit from the "contract" that they'd entered into. but this wouldn't have ever been an issue without slavery.
I have yet to see an explanation that doesn't involve slavery that doesn't also reek of Southern apologia.
I'm sure it would be better if they were guaranteed jobs for life regardless of how much they were needed. They had that system in, where was it? Oh yeah, the USSR.
hell, i've heard that in some parts of western europe they'll still guarantee you a paycheck, regardless of whether or not you actually have a job. not that western europe is comparable to the USSR, but they don't seem to care if people ever stop being on welfare.
there are actually a lot of people here who think that the US government really should guarantee them a job at all costs, and both parties are more than happy to oblige. even W. signed a $200 billion agriculture subsidies (gotta keep those ethanol producers in business!) and instituted a massive steel tariff to keep an obsolete industry happy, thereby giving the finger to the rest of the world. (as usual.)
on the other hand, I view my tax dollars being spent on these people as insurance against them stealing my laptop and musical instruments, something that the ayn rand fanboys here can't quite comprehend.
Way to go, Soviet Union! Another triumph for communism! Long after their last sub crewman has died of lymphoma, we'll continue to reap the rewards of their technological prowess. As if spreading Cs137 all over the Ukraine wasn't enough. . .
Jesus, with people like the IP lawyer they quote at the end, it's a wonder there's any innovation left at all.
"Industries, especially in the information technology space, often develop more quickly than the applicable patents come to light."
Well, don't you think that this means it's a good time to reform the system? Doesn't the fact that innovation occurs so rapidly negate the value of a first-come-first-serve approach to granting patents?
"This can be a rude awakening for companies that have not already factored into their business plans the likelihood that someone will come knocking with a patent they may infringe."
IT companies should not have to operate in fear of frivolous lawsuits from greedy do-nothings. Quoth Bill Gates:
"If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today."
Forgive me if I'm taking this personally, but I'm starting my PhD in molecular biology (and doing significant amounts of software development at the same time), and at the rate the lawyers are moving in on my field, by the time I graduate I'll probably have to take out a patent license to publish my research.
The window of opportunity for hijacking a jetliner and ramming it into a building closed before the fourth plane reached its target in 11.9.2001.
Yeah, I actually sort of feel safer flying now; the only useful thing left that terrorists can do with airplanes (in the US at least) is blow them up, and there are many easier ways to make your point than blowing up an airplane. If anybody tried to hijack a plane now, I suspect they wouldn't last five minutes. Which probably isn't so much patriotism at work, but rather that anyone on the plane would assume they weren't going to be landing, ever. (Unless the plane came from my part of the country, in which case half the passengers would probably try to sway the hijackers by talking about the evils of global capitolism and US policy towards Israel, and the other half would be too busy with their laptops to notice what was going on.)
I worked for another large (private) university, and their policy was very similar. The head of IT told us very explicitly that the university viewed file sharing abuses as a strictly internal matter. They eventually did adopt blocking and traffic shaping methods because the strain on the network was too high, but as far as I know their treatment of offenders hasn't changed.
The Metropolitan art museum also "owns" (or at least is the only place where you can go to see) several pieces of American culture (and others), yet they get to charge admission.
Which pays for the building, the custodians, the security, the art staff, the care of the paintings, and the acquisition of more works from private collections. And I'm fucking thrilled that it costs so little for me to see it, or that it's publically viewable at all. In fact, I'd say that the Met is a perfect example of private custodianship of culture. My only complaint is that they're in New York, and I'm now on the west coast.
The real reason your comparison doesn't hold up, of course, is that the Met is a NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION.
you can even pay $0.99 to download "Flight of the Valkyries" on iTunes if you really want to -- though why you would is beyond me.
Because I like classical music - what's wrong with that? (And God knows that most classicial musicians need all the help they can get.) In fact, I listen almost exclusively to classical, and I buy every bit of it.
"access[ing] a computer without authorization or exceed[ing] authorized access."
I don't think this applies to anything the RIAA is doing. At least in Limewire, I can browse the entire shared directory of a remote computer; does Kazaa work the same way? They're just doing all this in an automated fashion.
Although past experience indicates that many people mistakenly enable sharing (or, rather, don't realize it's on to begin with and never turn it off) and get caught this way, other than that I'd say that running P2P software and sharing files with it is giving explicit consent for people to browse your shared files. . .
No civilized person has any need to respect these copywrite laws. And you should pay attention to them only to the extent that you keep yourself from being imprisoned by them.
I'm curious. How does the RIAA's "lobbying" to get copyright terms extended invalidate, say, the copyright on the latest Eminem album? Nobody here is getting busted for sharing 1920s ragtime music. (Besides which, the only way that'd be legal anyway is if you ripped it off 78rpm records, not the CD reissue.)
Now if the RIAA, or anyone else, tries writing a bot to search the network, they either get encrypted data, or they break the encryption... DMCA ALERT
That's a great idea there, stud. Let's use a crappy law we all hate to enable copyright abuse. The real problem with the RIAA is their heavy-handed tactics and meddling with our government, not their desire to enforce their copyrights. If you think their copyrights are inherently wrong, then you can't back use of the DMCA - unless you're a complete hypocrite. But hey, this is Slashdot.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone sharing files on a P2P network has no reason to expect that these files remain "private". To extend the tired old hacking analogy, it's like putting a sign in front of your house that says "FREE DRUGS INSIDE", leaving the door open, going shopping, and then being shocked that the cops have raided you.
I'm not happy about the subpoena, however, because I used to work for a university IT department and self-enforcement worked just fine, and I'm worried about the constant bullying of service providers.
Slashdot Mirror
His issue is that he never heard anything about being yanked off the air for indecency until he started criticizing Dubya.
And, more than that, he was a convenient target at a time when broadcasters in general (Clear Channel being one of the slowest-moving targets) were under fire for indecency thanks to Janet's tit. The one thing all of these companies fear more than anything is increased government regulation, and removing Stern was a good way to say "we're dealing with this internally." The current administration has been very good for Clear Channel, but there's no telling what Congress will do if told to "do it for the children."
One of the nominees for best novel, Ilium, I highly recommend. It's by the same author that did the Hyperion novels.
.
I'm worried that it's going to have the exact same problem as both pairs of the Hyperion novels. Simmons writes great first halves and shitty second halves. Hyperion is a masterpiece, and the follow-up was incredibly weak. To be fair, the second set of novels wasn't as bad in this respect, but the incoherencies of the first sequel were carried over (and the characters simply weren't as compelling). And I'm still not sure what the Shrike was.
Ilium introduced so many different threads that don't fit together that there's good reason to fear that the conclusion will depend on some weird metaphysical explanation that only makes sense to the author. In fact, there was a brief half-explanation towards the end that already seemed to be headed in this direction. .
Still, a very well-written and exciting book, worth it just for the riffs on the Iliad.
I made the mistake of buying it for my boyfriend and was subjected to it three times in a weekend.
Just curious - what would I have to do to get a girlfriend who would buy me sci-fi movies and read Slashdot? If some sort of contract with the Devil is involved, let me know how I can get in touch with him.
It's amazingly hard to get funding for something that has no monetary return on the investment.
Actually, it's not. The NIH and NSF dwarf anything the rest of the world has to offer, and virtually every project they fund has no forseeable return on investment. The rules have been changed to encourage grant recipients to turn research into usable products, but the government never sees an ROI. All the government expects its money to do is increase the size and scope of human knowledge.
when a woman celebrates her fiftieth birthday by buying the toy she's wanted all her life and can finally afford, you don't hear a bloody thing about midlife crises.
No, you hear about "aging ungracefully". Besides, middle-aged women aren't usually as ostentatious in their sudden lifestyle changes; I don't know many lawyer's wives who decided to become biker chicks. Similarly, why do you think Demi-Ashton was such a big deal? Guys her age do the same thing (or try to, at least) all the time.
I agree with this. However, I really think the best solution is just to crack down harder on people who leave their ringers on (or, worse, answer the fucking thing as well). I'm a grad student, and almost all of my classmates have cell phones, myself included. I turn mine to vibrate whenever I'm in a class or meeting; others are not so polite or careful. If I were a professor, and a student's phone went off in my class, they'd be writing me a five-page review on membrane biophysics, due within a week. Nobody would make the same mistake twice.
Goddamnit, I clicked on the link expecting photos of some sorority girl in a halter top and cutoffs, probably in the middle of an all-night coding session. Or, better yet, a group of them wearing pajamas and playing LAN games. Admit it, you've all had the same fantasy.
But if you think as I, that it's axiomatic that you must be ready, willing, and able to soundly defeat aggressors and then be willing to help them change for the better,
Ahhh, you see, that thinking is out of vogue now. People here prefer nuance, not Manichean worldviews; there is no "evil" - or if there is, it's really our fault. See, what'd really happen in today's world is that after the bugs smashed Buenos Aires, we'd be holding symposiums examining the effects of pseudoarachnophobia and human bigotry, lamenting the human-inflected poverty on Klandathu, and theorizing how the UN let it happen, and Anglo college students would be wearing chitin plates on their chest to show solidarity. Meanwhile, the bugs would continue their efforts to cause the Moon to smash into the Earth.
Of course Heinlein didn't take into account the possibility that the government might also be more interested in cutting taxes and investigating pornographers than paying for all those mobile suits.
Heinlein, while respectful of the military, was consistently suspicious of government, so it's very difficult for me to see any Fascism in his works.
Three additional points:
- Heinlein is very consistently libertarian throughout most of his works, and there isn't really anything in this book that contradicts that.
- He also made it very clear (elsewhere) that he considered the draft immoral, and while he thought military service was morally proper, he was strongly against it being forced upon anybody.
- In a certain sense, the "citizenship for veterans" ethic of Starship Troopers isn't that much different from TANSTAAFL.
A movie that would have been awesome if it had been titled anything other than "Starship Troopers".
I'm ashamed to admit that I actually enjoy this movie and find it strangely compelling. The CGI holds up remarkably well for a 1997 release; the bugs in particular look as good as anything I've seen since. And Verhoeven is so over-the-top trashy that it's hypnotic. I just have to choke back the vomit whenever I think of what they did to my favorite sci-fi novel.
What's worst, I've decided, is that in the book the characters are explicitly a very diverse assortment of nationalities and races (the main character is a native Filipino!) - although Heinlein doesn't really make a big deal of it - but since this would interfere with Verhoeven's goal of making the characters seem like Nazis, they mostly end up looking and sounding pretty white in the movie. Despite being from Buenos Aires (a misreading of the book). (And, of course, the black dude dies.)
This is only partly funny. There's a company marketing a "virtual orchestra" that's supposed to emulate a real orchestra using very high quality samplings. (To which every real musician who's heard about it has said "BULLSHIT.") The technology has been used in some opera/musical productions in NYC; the unions seem to have killed it there for now.
By the time the orchestra is on stage performing the piece, anyone could stand up there and wave their arms and the music would be pretty good.
Well, you're partly right about that. In theory, the concertmaster should be able to lead the orchestra. Once in high school (we had a REALLY FUCKING GOOD orchestra and jazz band; the school itself sucked) the conductor got called down to the main office during rehearsal. He just told us to hold tight. After about a minute of uncomfortable boredom, the concertmistress got up and told us to start where we left off, and we played the rest of the movement with her directing from her chair, while playing. Didn't have any problems whatsoever.
I saw an all-state orchestra one year where they actually had the first stand violinists conduct an entire Wagner overture, playing from the podium. (This is after only two and a half days of rehearsal as an actual ensemble.) In both orchestras, nobody was out of high school- but they were all experienced enough to know what to do.
The real mark of a good conductor is how he prepares the orchestra in rehersal. That is where the artistic vision comes across. Once he demonstrates his idea of how the piece should sound, he can conduct with subtle nuances that are easily understood by the orchestra. But only with good preparation is that possible.
That's a little idealistic. One teacher of mine who played in the Seattle Symphony joked about having to play a concert with a guest conductor that night - "Wonder what he'll be like. Too bad he can't speak English." I saw that performance, and couldn't tell that they'd never seen him before. (Apparently they were also sight-reading some stuff.)
Anyway, orchestras do get shaped by their music directors, no doubt about it. If the guy absolutely loves trombone, the orchestra will become known as the one with the really loud trombones. But a professional orchestra - or a gifted student/amateur orchestra, even - should be able to adapt to any good conductor effortlessly. The pros are expected to know the repertoire already or sight-read well enough that no one will notice the difference; very little time is spent on rehearsal. That's what makes them pros; I've gotten away a couple of times with sight reading or just coming to dress rehearsal, but not for anything particularly difficult, and I can't say that I felt entirely comfortable. (It does wonders for reducing nerves, though.)
One should note, though, that while the South oppressed about a third of its population, the Yankees oppressed all of its population.
Hmm, I must have been sleeping in history class when they told us about white Virginians having their daughters raped by Massachusetts plantation owners or sold to some racist Pennsylvanian. Sorry, but the issue of federalism was ultimately over whether the free states could tell the slave states what to do. So, let's be totally honest: in your ideal federalist system, should the slave states have continued to have the right to decide whether slavery would be legal within their borders, regardless of whether this was right or wrong? If no war had occurred, the 13th amendment had been passed with the votes of new free states west of the Mississippi, and South Carolina didn't like it, should SC have been allowed to secede?
People like you never fail to amuse me; you're like the Randians who believe they're oppressed because they pay income tax. You're so caught up in your narrow-minded, idealistic philosophy that any misery that others suffer as a result isn't worth your attention. And you side with human filth like the slaveholders rather than betray an abstract principle like "federalism."
What's wrong with that?
I dunno. . . do you think there's anything wrong with the enslavement of millions, and children being born into servitude? I may be a snooty West Coast liberal, but I just find these things, y'know, "wrong." And yet millions of my fellow citizens think it's cool to fly CSA flags. . . honoring a country that went to war to fight for the right to rape, murder, and enslave black people.
I do not believe in the concept of collective guilt; I am not responsible for the misdeeds of Columbus, the slaveholders, the killers of Indians, the KKK, etc. (I also oppose affirmative action and reparations, for similar reasons.) But I do not go out of my way to honor the memory or defend the actions of those who committed these atrocities.
Dan Lyons (the author of the linked column) is also the same guy who wrote a rambling, incoherent article describing Linux users as naive, idealistic hippies, constantly referring to them as "Linux crunchies." And the crack editing team at Forbes saw fit to publish it. How does a publication that purports to cover the business world manage to be so out of touch with it?
there was enough crap going on back then so that you can find a decent argument for just about any cause of the Civil War.
and it still seems to me like "slavery" is the best explanation. although, on a certain level, it was a dispute over whether the Union was inviolable or whether states could exit from the "contract" that they'd entered into. but this wouldn't have ever been an issue without slavery.
I have yet to see an explanation that doesn't involve slavery that doesn't also reek of Southern apologia.
I'm sure it would be better if they were guaranteed jobs for life regardless of how much they were needed. They had that system in, where was it? Oh yeah, the USSR.
hell, i've heard that in some parts of western europe they'll still guarantee you a paycheck, regardless of whether or not you actually have a job. not that western europe is comparable to the USSR, but they don't seem to care if people ever stop being on welfare.
there are actually a lot of people here who think that the US government really should guarantee them a job at all costs, and both parties are more than happy to oblige. even W. signed a $200 billion agriculture subsidies (gotta keep those ethanol producers in business!) and instituted a massive steel tariff to keep an obsolete industry happy, thereby giving the finger to the rest of the world. (as usual.)
on the other hand, I view my tax dollars being spent on these people as insurance against them stealing my laptop and musical instruments, something that the ayn rand fanboys here can't quite comprehend.
Way to go, Soviet Union! Another triumph for communism! Long after their last sub crewman has died of lymphoma, we'll continue to reap the rewards of their technological prowess. As if spreading Cs137 all over the Ukraine wasn't enough. . .
"Industries, especially in the information technology space, often develop more quickly than the applicable patents come to light."
Well, don't you think that this means it's a good time to reform the system? Doesn't the fact that innovation occurs so rapidly negate the value of a first-come-first-serve approach to granting patents?
"This can be a rude awakening for companies that have not already factored into their business plans the likelihood that someone will come knocking with a patent they may infringe."
IT companies should not have to operate in fear of frivolous lawsuits from greedy do-nothings. Quoth Bill Gates:
Forgive me if I'm taking this personally, but I'm starting my PhD in molecular biology (and doing significant amounts of software development at the same time), and at the rate the lawyers are moving in on my field, by the time I graduate I'll probably have to take out a patent license to publish my research.
The window of opportunity for hijacking a jetliner and ramming it into a building closed before the fourth plane reached its target in 11.9.2001.
Yeah, I actually sort of feel safer flying now; the only useful thing left that terrorists can do with airplanes (in the US at least) is blow them up, and there are many easier ways to make your point than blowing up an airplane. If anybody tried to hijack a plane now, I suspect they wouldn't last five minutes. Which probably isn't so much patriotism at work, but rather that anyone on the plane would assume they weren't going to be landing, ever. (Unless the plane came from my part of the country, in which case half the passengers would probably try to sway the hijackers by talking about the evils of global capitolism and US policy towards Israel, and the other half would be too busy with their laptops to notice what was going on.)
I worked for another large (private) university, and their policy was very similar. The head of IT told us very explicitly that the university viewed file sharing abuses as a strictly internal matter. They eventually did adopt blocking and traffic shaping methods because the strain on the network was too high, but as far as I know their treatment of offenders hasn't changed.
The Metropolitan art museum also "owns" (or at least is the only place where you can go to see) several pieces of American culture (and others), yet they get to charge admission.
Which pays for the building, the custodians, the security, the art staff, the care of the paintings, and the acquisition of more works from private collections. And I'm fucking thrilled that it costs so little for me to see it, or that it's publically viewable at all. In fact, I'd say that the Met is a perfect example of private custodianship of culture. My only complaint is that they're in New York, and I'm now on the west coast.
The real reason your comparison doesn't hold up, of course, is that the Met is a NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION.
you can even pay $0.99 to download "Flight of the Valkyries" on iTunes if you really want to -- though why you would is beyond me.
Because I like classical music - what's wrong with that? (And God knows that most classicial musicians need all the help they can get.) In fact, I listen almost exclusively to classical, and I buy every bit of it.
"access[ing] a computer without authorization or exceed[ing] authorized access."
I don't think this applies to anything the RIAA is doing. At least in Limewire, I can browse the entire shared directory of a remote computer; does Kazaa work the same way? They're just doing all this in an automated fashion.
Although past experience indicates that many people mistakenly enable sharing (or, rather, don't realize it's on to begin with and never turn it off) and get caught this way, other than that I'd say that running P2P software and sharing files with it is giving explicit consent for people to browse your shared files. . .
No civilized person has any need to respect these copywrite laws. And you should pay attention to them only to the extent that you keep yourself from being imprisoned by them.
I'm curious. How does the RIAA's "lobbying" to get copyright terms extended invalidate, say, the copyright on the latest Eminem album? Nobody here is getting busted for sharing 1920s ragtime music. (Besides which, the only way that'd be legal anyway is if you ripped it off 78rpm records, not the CD reissue.)
Now if the RIAA, or anyone else, tries writing a bot to search the network, they either get encrypted data, or they break the encryption... DMCA ALERT
That's a great idea there, stud. Let's use a crappy law we all hate to enable copyright abuse. The real problem with the RIAA is their heavy-handed tactics and meddling with our government, not their desire to enforce their copyrights. If you think their copyrights are inherently wrong, then you can't back use of the DMCA - unless you're a complete hypocrite. But hey, this is Slashdot.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone sharing files on a P2P network has no reason to expect that these files remain "private". To extend the tired old hacking analogy, it's like putting a sign in front of your house that says "FREE DRUGS INSIDE", leaving the door open, going shopping, and then being shocked that the cops have raided you.
I'm not happy about the subpoena, however, because I used to work for a university IT department and self-enforcement worked just fine, and I'm worried about the constant bullying of service providers.