I had the reverse, it selected Ookla for me, and my download speed was dead on, but my upload speed at 10-25% of what it should be.
I told it to switch to MLabs, and then it returned the correct rates (20/20) for my FiOS connection. I guess that's why they have two hosts - more than likely, one on each coast.
I'm on FiOS... 20 mbit up and down. And sure enough each speed test I've done, both the FCC one there (though using 'alternate' (MLABS), because their default one didn't show accurate upload speeds), and independent ones like speedtest.net have consistently shown me actually GETTING 20mbit both ways. Nothing wrong with my FiOS. But then, I expect that, because it's a dedicated line unlike cable, so I don't have to share my bandwidth with my neighbors.
I don't 'touch type' properly, or use all 10 fingers - and don't even talk to me about the home row.
In fact, most of my typing is done with my index and fore fingers (the two closest to the thumb) plus my thumb - occasionally with some help from the others.
I don't hunt and peck though - I type by memory - I align my hands over the keyboard and my mind keeps track of where they are and where the keys are. I have tested myself and I know I get 100 wpm.
So it IS possible to get speeds like that without touch typing. But like the author, I would love to fix my technique because I think it could be better. I'm not specifically WORRIED about it, but it is still something I would love to fix at some point.
Try learning more about what goes on behind the scenes. The syntax is one thing, making useful code is another. Making EFFICIENT useful code is yet another.
I've never been a huge fan of Java because it does so much for you, and you never really understand what's going on behind the curtain. Worse, unless forced to, you never have to deal with or think about resource allocation/deallocation, I/O access & caching, and the other things the JVM is doing for you or hiding the real details of.
The amount of time I've seen Java coders, who never coded in anything but java, spend DAYS trying to figure out why their program keeps having 'spikey' peroformance only to eventually realize it's the garbage collector, and then spending weeks more trying to figure out how to minimize the 'damage' without having their application's resource usage go through the roof by either disabling it or reducing it's frequency to unacceptably long times.
Of course, if you don't care about efficient coding, then none of this matters as much, but the point is - if you understand what is going on behind the scenes, you can either avoid or mitigate these problems ahead of time rather than spending weeks trying to figure them out, then weeks more trying to figure out how to minimize them without having to re-write large portions of your code.
A rotten company will be a rotten company, no matter how many times it changes it's name.
You get customers back, and customers to like you by actually DOING something for your customers, even if it hurts your bottom line. Companies like Verizon know this better than anyone - Verizon was more or less a 'last resort' until they brought out FiOS, improved their customer service, and basically focused more on what their customers were demanding. That's not to say they're perfect, but a LOT better than before, and have the rep to back it up. And they didn't even need to spend millions of dollars changing their name to do it.
Telstra (in Australia) by contrast, spent all the money changing from Telecom to Telstra, but didn't improve a damn thing with customer service or the services they were offering. So the stink followed them through the new name.
When will companies learn, it's the customers, stupid!
The big difference between American and the rest of the first world is twofold actually. First, that american corporations and industries have an unprecedented amount of influence over government policy. Second, that in general, american corporations care more about return to shareholders than anything else, including the treatment of their employees and corporate citizenship. The only time the latter two get any funding is usually for PR reasons, not altruism.
Don't believe me? Americans tend to work longer hours, get less vacation time, maternity/paternity leave, worse working conditions, and as a consequence, have higher stress levels than any other first world nation. Why? Because most corporations will only do what the government REQUIRES them to do, and given the corporations sway over the government here, it is less and less likely that initiatives to improve working conditions would ever be made law, because it would hurt the bottom lines of companies (which would mean less lobbying dollars going to Washington!)
How does this affect health care? Well, most people in positions to make any difference to policy (either politicians, or the corporations backing them) can already afford health care. They really don't care about those who can't afford it. The only reason it is actually gaining traction now is because finally there are people in enough key positions (like the presidency) who don't just care about themselves and their financial backers to actually try and get something that benefits ALL Americans passed into the law - even if it means taking on a very powerful lobbying group (the insurance companies).
America may have many proud traditions. Hell, it was probably founded on the best and most LIBERAL ideals (for the time) ever attempted at governmental level since the Romans (pre-emperor). But those ideals and principles have been slowly eroded with the rise of corporate power, and America just isn't the shining beacon of a government 'for the people' that it once was. So why not look at how other countries who ARE looking after their people for inspiration? To ignore good ideas because they are foreign is both arrogant and just plain stupid.
Having met some of the Adobe guys involved in the above rift between Adobe and Apple, I heard the Adobe side of the story.
Basically Apple came to adobe and say they were only going to support Objective C, and Adobe had to re-write all their products in Objective C to support the Apple platform, and Adobe more or less said "I don't think so."
There was more to it than that, and the rift went to the highest levels (big egos involved), an interesting tale. But basically Adobe was one company big enough with popular enough products to teach Apple a bit about eating humble pie. This of course was before OSX, the iPod, and basically the recent rise of Apple again, who is once again on a firmer footing to dictate any terms they like (thus ITMS).
For the record, I don't boycott books that are higher than $9.99. I boycott books that have DRM on them. Because I have several different platforms (my desktop PC, my laptop, other portable reader, etc) - and most DRM stops me copying the stuff freely between them. The reason I buy an ebook is for convenience - and if it's no more convenient than a regular paperback or hardback (ie. I am REQUIRED to carry around the one and only container it works in - even if it's lighter than the paperback and can hold many more books) then I don't see the point in it, after all, I still find paper much easier to read from.
Not to mention, after the debacle a little while back with the publishers being able to force amazon to hit the kill switch on purchased content, I just don't trust DRM, especially when it is in the hands of publishers to decide the fate of any content that has already been sold!
My biggest problem with IE is not speed, resource usage, the tabs system, or anything like that.
I use firefox for one reason and one reason only. It has some excellent addons for it because there is a very well-defined place to GET addons, and anyone can submit one easily.
Not to mention that FireFox isn't worrying about trying to ensure people don't compete with them on their other products.
My five essential addons for FireFox are: - AdBlock Plus (of which the more important part is the filters that are auto-updated) - NoScript - FoxyProxy (specifically for selecting a proxy by the URL automatically) - User Agent Switcher - Download Helper
I've not personally seen a nice central site like FF's addons page to manage addons - and without something like this, upgrading has to be done manually for each, and you are responsible for checking for updates and such. A pain in the arse.
The problem with all this is you need a good piping and plumbing system in place, complete with quick release valves to ensure you can disconnect or connect hardware without having to do a whole bunch piping and water routing in the process. Part of the beauty of racks is you just slide in the computer, screw it in, and plug in the plugs at the back and you're done.
I'm not saying it's impossible, but just building a new case, or blade, or whatever isn't going to do it - you need a new rack system with built in pipes and pumps, and probably a data center with even more plumbing with outlets at the appropriate places to supply each rack with water. This is no small task for trying to retrofit an existing data center.
Not to mention that you have to make sure you have enough pressure to ensure each server is supplied water from the 'source', you cannot just daisy chain computers because the water would get hotter and hotter the further down the chain you go. This means a dual piping system (one for 'cool or room temperature' water and one for 'hot' water). And it means adjusting the pressure to each rack depending on how many computers are in it and such.
The issues of water cooling a data center go WAY beyond the case, which is why nobody has really done it yet - sure, the cost savings are potentially huge, but it's a LOT more complicated that sticking a bunch of servers with fans in racks that can move around and such, and then turning on the A/C. And there is a lot less room for error (as someone else mentioned, what if a leak occurs? or a plumbing joint fails, or whatever. Hell, if a pump fails you could be out a whole rack!).
They do - why do you think big companies use their patent portfolios as a THREAT rather than use them? If the examiner had done their job I am betting nowhere NEAR as many software patents would be granted as have been.
They already glow with the batteries they have now! But at least that is a pink/red glow, I'm pretty sure an iPod glowing green would be a Bad Thing (tm).
That said, having the black/white iPod commercials change to black/green would be interesting. Kind of bring back the black/green monochrome monitor nostalga.
Funnily enough, 50 years is half a century in... you know, the ENGLISH LANGUAGE (and I'm sure it's also half of the foreign equivalents to the word century. Except in Russia, of course).
This is typical protectionist crap. Sorry, but you may be right about businesses thinking short term, but if America starts banning foreign nationals from its schools, and slapping tariffs on foreign imports, how does that make America any better than China?
And for the record, America DOES still slap tariffs on foreign imports into this country. Usually at the behest of the powerful lobbies. Ever look at things like sugar and wheat imports? Both have either rather large tariffs, or just subsidies for the domestic industry. Why? Because the industry lobbies for those products demanded it. And it has caused a lot of friction with America's trading partners.
Hell, I remember a 'free trade' agreement a few years ago with Australia where not only did America put tariffs on Australian wheat imports (because of pressure from the US wheat lobby), they also insisted as part of their free trade deal that Australia adopt something similar to the DMCA as part of the deal - at the behest of the RIAA/MPAA. So if you really believe America has been doing other countries a favor in it's trading practices (Food for Oil anyone? Or how about withholding aid money, which is supposed to be completely unrelated to trade), then you're deluded.
In short, protectionism is bad no matter what. Now whether China is banning these exports because it truly doesn't have enough to satisfy domestic demand, and thus can't afford to supply foreign demand, or they're trying to use this threat to gain more concessions from the international community is irrelevant. Instituting protectionist policies won't help Sino-American relations, and considering, as you have said, America relies so heavily on China for it's manufacturing of almost everything we buy, America just can't afford to ruin it's relationship with yet another country, especially one it relies so heavily on.
America used to be able to take the high moral ground, and used to be viewed in a generally favorable light in the world. It's America's own greed and arrogance (not to mention going around the world like a bull in a china shop sticking it's nose in everyone else's business) that has tarnished this reputation. The election of Obama has actually started to repair this a little, but only when America starts playing fair with the rest of the world again (ie. treating other countries as equals, as opposed to approaching each trade deal as a "we want this, give it to us or else you're not our friend anymore!" deal) will it actually gain respect again. You seem quick to cry 'foul!' when another country starts using the same tactics America has been using for decades against America. You (ie. America) wrote these new trading rules, don't be surprised when someone else plays by them.
Even that's wrong. Quite a number of fortune 500 companies rely on Linux heavily. Almost every investment bank certainly, but I'd wager a number of others too. Maybe not on the desktops of the employees, but still, Linux is certainly a viable and well-used platform in fortune 500s.
You forget, Apathy/Procrastination is a virtue. Just look at some common idioms such as "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it" and "Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow". Or my personal favorite... "Fuck it!"
Tell me, how did you fix your shift of caps lock key for a single word? Or are you just making a statement against the imperialistic capital.. uhh.. letters.
There is a difference. Your photograph was still within it's copyright period.
Copyright extends to 70 years past the author's death (in the UK). Since you are still alive, any photograph you take is obviously still within it's copyright - with one caveat.
The caveat is exactly what is at issue. You cannot claim copyright on a direct copy of someone else's work. You CAN claim copyright on a DERIVATIVE work. So the question here is was the photograph of the painting a derivative work?
The goal of the photograph was to reproduce the painting in digital form exactly as it was meant to be viewed in the gallery. No changes were made, and the painting was not used as the basis for a new work (even a person standing next to it within the shot is a 'derivative' work). Which would mean the photographs in question were NOT derivative works, but merely digital copies of the original, and not copyrightable in and of themselves (they would piggy back on the original copyright).
Which means any digital image of a painting that is in the public domain, is also public domain - as it is not a derivative artwork. And you cannot steal something that is public domain.
In your case, yes, someone stole your art work, because it IS within it's copyright. And regardless of whether they stole a print, the digital image, or any other faithful reproduction of your photograph, it would still be counted as illegally copying of your work. But 70 years after you die, anyone and their dog can take your image with impunity. They can even take the image of someone else's photograph of your image on a screen (as long as it's not altered in any way).
So as someone else said, yes, it might take a lot of technical expertise to faithfully capture these images to do them justice, but that does not suddenly give the person taking them copyright on what is, essentially, a faithful reproduction of the original artwork not a derivative.
By way of example, how about we take the works of Shakespear. Originally released in manuscript form. Someone took that manuscript and typed it into computer text files. Does that mean that person now has copyright on the resulting text file? It certainly took a lot of effort to transcribe the text - but it doesn't matter. Just because it took a lot of effort to do something (it takes a lot of effort to paint a forgery, too) does not infer copyright - if the text is identical to the original shakespear, then it is just a faithful reproduction on another medium and still int he public domain.
To be honest, I think this is exactly the way he would want to be remembered. He had a larger than life personality/persona - he would not want people moping around 'boo hoo, Billy Mays is dead.'
Billy was not above poking fun at himself either, and it was an image he cultivated. The fact that he, and his pitch style was so recognizable speaks volumes. So no, I don't think it's too soon, I see the above as a celebration of Billy, not a satire of him.
The big problem with being an exit node is a legal one. Specifically the Cease and Desist notices from the RIAA/MPAA.
I had an exit node with 2mbps bandwidth DEDICATED to TOR. Not too long later, my service provider started getting the copyright infringement emails. Even though I handled them all myself, and sent replies, called people, showed my service provider the TOR page about legal threats, and even promised to cover any legal costs *IF* it did ever get that that, eventually my service provider just got sick of receiving and forwarding the emails.
Now I don't specifically blame my service provider for this - it IS a potential legal exposure/battle they just don't need. Now you could blame the people using TOR for P2P, but they're doing it for exactly the reason TOR was created - to avoid detection of who they really are. Now you can't tell people TOR cannot be used for illegal activity, because the very reason TOR was CREATED was to facilitate illegal activity (eg. dissident speech in China). So what is illegal or not is a judgement call.
Therefore the blame ends up being on the RIAA/MPAA - but even there, they are legitimately trying to protect their rights. As unpopular as it sounds, and annoying and ineffective as it may be, there IS a reason they are sending out emails of the like. It's cheap for them to do it, and the threat of legal action is usually enough for ISP's to yank someone's pipe.
So my TOR node was, in the end, turned into a non-exit node. Until this kind of problem is solved (for which I don't know what the solution would be), then exit nodes on TOR will be a rare commodity, and as such, bandwidth on the TOR network will be limited because it is being constrained to very few eligible pipes.
Slashdot Mirror
I had the reverse, it selected Ookla for me, and my download speed was dead on, but my upload speed at 10-25% of what it should be.
I told it to switch to MLabs, and then it returned the correct rates (20/20) for my FiOS connection. I guess that's why they have two hosts - more than likely, one on each coast.
I'm on FiOS ... 20 mbit up and down. And sure enough each speed test I've done, both the FCC one there (though using 'alternate' (MLABS), because their default one didn't show accurate upload speeds), and independent ones like speedtest.net have consistently shown me actually GETTING 20mbit both ways. Nothing wrong with my FiOS. But then, I expect that, because it's a dedicated line unlike cable, so I don't have to share my bandwidth with my neighbors.
This would work best on assless chaps.
I don't 'touch type' properly, or use all 10 fingers - and don't even talk to me about the home row.
In fact, most of my typing is done with my index and fore fingers (the two closest to the thumb) plus my thumb - occasionally with some help from the others.
I don't hunt and peck though - I type by memory - I align my hands over the keyboard and my mind keeps track of where they are and where the keys are. I have tested myself and I know I get 100 wpm.
So it IS possible to get speeds like that without touch typing. But like the author, I would love to fix my technique because I think it could be better. I'm not specifically WORRIED about it, but it is still something I would love to fix at some point.
ahhhh ....
Thanks, I needed a geekgasm.
Try learning more about what goes on behind the scenes. The syntax is one thing, making useful code is another. Making EFFICIENT useful code is yet another.
I've never been a huge fan of Java because it does so much for you, and you never really understand what's going on behind the curtain. Worse, unless forced to, you never have to deal with or think about resource allocation/deallocation, I/O access & caching, and the other things the JVM is doing for you or hiding the real details of.
The amount of time I've seen Java coders, who never coded in anything but java, spend DAYS trying to figure out why their program keeps having 'spikey' peroformance only to eventually realize it's the garbage collector, and then spending weeks more trying to figure out how to minimize the 'damage' without having their application's resource usage go through the roof by either disabling it or reducing it's frequency to unacceptably long times.
Of course, if you don't care about efficient coding, then none of this matters as much, but the point is - if you understand what is going on behind the scenes, you can either avoid or mitigate these problems ahead of time rather than spending weeks trying to figure them out, then weeks more trying to figure out how to minimize them without having to re-write large portions of your code.
A rotten company will be a rotten company, no matter how many times it changes it's name.
You get customers back, and customers to like you by actually DOING something for your customers, even if it hurts your bottom line. Companies like Verizon know this better than anyone - Verizon was more or less a 'last resort' until they brought out FiOS, improved their customer service, and basically focused more on what their customers were demanding. That's not to say they're perfect, but a LOT better than before, and have the rep to back it up. And they didn't even need to spend millions of dollars changing their name to do it.
Telstra (in Australia) by contrast, spent all the money changing from Telecom to Telstra, but didn't improve a damn thing with customer service or the services they were offering. So the stink followed them through the new name.
When will companies learn, it's the customers, stupid!
Filling in the community organization is optional (not a required field).
The big difference between American and the rest of the first world is twofold actually. First, that american corporations and industries have an unprecedented amount of influence over government policy. Second, that in general, american corporations care more about return to shareholders than anything else, including the treatment of their employees and corporate citizenship. The only time the latter two get any funding is usually for PR reasons, not altruism.
Don't believe me? Americans tend to work longer hours, get less vacation time, maternity/paternity leave, worse working conditions, and as a consequence, have higher stress levels than any other first world nation. Why? Because most corporations will only do what the government REQUIRES them to do, and given the corporations sway over the government here, it is less and less likely that initiatives to improve working conditions would ever be made law, because it would hurt the bottom lines of companies (which would mean less lobbying dollars going to Washington!)
How does this affect health care? Well, most people in positions to make any difference to policy (either politicians, or the corporations backing them) can already afford health care. They really don't care about those who can't afford it. The only reason it is actually gaining traction now is because finally there are people in enough key positions (like the presidency) who don't just care about themselves and their financial backers to actually try and get something that benefits ALL Americans passed into the law - even if it means taking on a very powerful lobbying group (the insurance companies).
America may have many proud traditions. Hell, it was probably founded on the best and most LIBERAL ideals (for the time) ever attempted at governmental level since the Romans (pre-emperor). But those ideals and principles have been slowly eroded with the rise of corporate power, and America just isn't the shining beacon of a government 'for the people' that it once was. So why not look at how other countries who ARE looking after their people for inspiration? To ignore good ideas because they are foreign is both arrogant and just plain stupid.
Having met some of the Adobe guys involved in the above rift between Adobe and Apple, I heard the Adobe side of the story.
Basically Apple came to adobe and say they were only going to support Objective C, and Adobe had to re-write all their products in Objective C to support the Apple platform, and Adobe more or less said "I don't think so."
There was more to it than that, and the rift went to the highest levels (big egos involved), an interesting tale. But basically Adobe was one company big enough with popular enough products to teach Apple a bit about eating humble pie. This of course was before OSX, the iPod, and basically the recent rise of Apple again, who is once again on a firmer footing to dictate any terms they like (thus ITMS).
For the record, I don't boycott books that are higher than $9.99. I boycott books that have DRM on them. Because I have several different platforms (my desktop PC, my laptop, other portable reader, etc) - and most DRM stops me copying the stuff freely between them. The reason I buy an ebook is for convenience - and if it's no more convenient than a regular paperback or hardback (ie. I am REQUIRED to carry around the one and only container it works in - even if it's lighter than the paperback and can hold many more books) then I don't see the point in it, after all, I still find paper much easier to read from.
Not to mention, after the debacle a little while back with the publishers being able to force amazon to hit the kill switch on purchased content, I just don't trust DRM, especially when it is in the hands of publishers to decide the fate of any content that has already been sold!
My biggest problem with IE is not speed, resource usage, the tabs system, or anything like that.
I use firefox for one reason and one reason only. It has some excellent addons for it because there is a very well-defined place to GET addons, and anyone can submit one easily.
Not to mention that FireFox isn't worrying about trying to ensure people don't compete with them on their other products.
My five essential addons for FireFox are:
- AdBlock Plus (of which the more important part is the filters that are auto-updated)
- NoScript
- FoxyProxy (specifically for selecting a proxy by the URL automatically)
- User Agent Switcher
- Download Helper
I've not personally seen a nice central site like FF's addons page to manage addons - and without something like this, upgrading has to be done manually for each, and you are responsible for checking for updates and such. A pain in the arse.
The problem with all this is you need a good piping and plumbing system in place, complete with quick release valves to ensure you can disconnect or connect hardware without having to do a whole bunch piping and water routing in the process. Part of the beauty of racks is you just slide in the computer, screw it in, and plug in the plugs at the back and you're done.
I'm not saying it's impossible, but just building a new case, or blade, or whatever isn't going to do it - you need a new rack system with built in pipes and pumps, and probably a data center with even more plumbing with outlets at the appropriate places to supply each rack with water. This is no small task for trying to retrofit an existing data center.
Not to mention that you have to make sure you have enough pressure to ensure each server is supplied water from the 'source', you cannot just daisy chain computers because the water would get hotter and hotter the further down the chain you go. This means a dual piping system (one for 'cool or room temperature' water and one for 'hot' water). And it means adjusting the pressure to each rack depending on how many computers are in it and such.
The issues of water cooling a data center go WAY beyond the case, which is why nobody has really done it yet - sure, the cost savings are potentially huge, but it's a LOT more complicated that sticking a bunch of servers with fans in racks that can move around and such, and then turning on the A/C. And there is a lot less room for error (as someone else mentioned, what if a leak occurs? or a plumbing joint fails, or whatever. Hell, if a pump fails you could be out a whole rack!).
They do - why do you think big companies use their patent portfolios as a THREAT rather than use them? If the examiner had done their job I am betting nowhere NEAR as many software patents would be granted as have been.
ala. http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/11/2055226
I don't know, but I know who to ask. Darl? where are you? What were we supposed to get for our $699 again?
Why bother when they just need 1 mod. TO change the faces on all zombies to those of the members of the ratings board.
They already glow with the batteries they have now! But at least that is a pink/red glow, I'm pretty sure an iPod glowing green would be a Bad Thing (tm).
That said, having the black/white iPod commercials change to black/green would be interesting. Kind of bring back the black/green monochrome monitor nostalga.
Funnily enough, 50 years is half a century in ... you know, the ENGLISH LANGUAGE (and I'm sure it's also half of the foreign equivalents to the word century. Except in Russia, of course).
This is typical protectionist crap. Sorry, but you may be right about businesses thinking short term, but if America starts banning foreign nationals from its schools, and slapping tariffs on foreign imports, how does that make America any better than China?
And for the record, America DOES still slap tariffs on foreign imports into this country. Usually at the behest of the powerful lobbies. Ever look at things like sugar and wheat imports? Both have either rather large tariffs, or just subsidies for the domestic industry. Why? Because the industry lobbies for those products demanded it. And it has caused a lot of friction with America's trading partners.
Hell, I remember a 'free trade' agreement a few years ago with Australia where not only did America put tariffs on Australian wheat imports (because of pressure from the US wheat lobby), they also insisted as part of their free trade deal that Australia adopt something similar to the DMCA as part of the deal - at the behest of the RIAA/MPAA. So if you really believe America has been doing other countries a favor in it's trading practices (Food for Oil anyone? Or how about withholding aid money, which is supposed to be completely unrelated to trade), then you're deluded.
In short, protectionism is bad no matter what. Now whether China is banning these exports because it truly doesn't have enough to satisfy domestic demand, and thus can't afford to supply foreign demand, or they're trying to use this threat to gain more concessions from the international community is irrelevant. Instituting protectionist policies won't help Sino-American relations, and considering, as you have said, America relies so heavily on China for it's manufacturing of almost everything we buy, America just can't afford to ruin it's relationship with yet another country, especially one it relies so heavily on.
America used to be able to take the high moral ground, and used to be viewed in a generally favorable light in the world. It's America's own greed and arrogance (not to mention going around the world like a bull in a china shop sticking it's nose in everyone else's business) that has tarnished this reputation. The election of Obama has actually started to repair this a little, but only when America starts playing fair with the rest of the world again (ie. treating other countries as equals, as opposed to approaching each trade deal as a "we want this, give it to us or else you're not our friend anymore!" deal) will it actually gain respect again. You seem quick to cry 'foul!' when another country starts using the same tactics America has been using for decades against America. You (ie. America) wrote these new trading rules, don't be surprised when someone else plays by them.
Even that's wrong. Quite a number of fortune 500 companies rely on Linux heavily. Almost every investment bank certainly, but I'd wager a number of others too. Maybe not on the desktops of the employees, but still, Linux is certainly a viable and well-used platform in fortune 500s.
You forget, Apathy/Procrastination is a virtue. Just look at some common idioms such as "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it" and "Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow". Or my personal favorite ... "Fuck it!"
Tell me, how did you fix your shift of caps lock key for a single word? Or are you just making a statement against the imperialistic capital .. uhh .. letters.
There is a difference. Your photograph was still within it's copyright period.
Copyright extends to 70 years past the author's death (in the UK). Since you are still alive, any photograph you take is obviously still within it's copyright - with one caveat.
The caveat is exactly what is at issue. You cannot claim copyright on a direct copy of someone else's work. You CAN claim copyright on a DERIVATIVE work. So the question here is was the photograph of the painting a derivative work?
The goal of the photograph was to reproduce the painting in digital form exactly as it was meant to be viewed in the gallery. No changes were made, and the painting was not used as the basis for a new work (even a person standing next to it within the shot is a 'derivative' work). Which would mean the photographs in question were NOT derivative works, but merely digital copies of the original, and not copyrightable in and of themselves (they would piggy back on the original copyright).
Which means any digital image of a painting that is in the public domain, is also public domain - as it is not a derivative artwork. And you cannot steal something that is public domain.
In your case, yes, someone stole your art work, because it IS within it's copyright. And regardless of whether they stole a print, the digital image, or any other faithful reproduction of your photograph, it would still be counted as illegally copying of your work. But 70 years after you die, anyone and their dog can take your image with impunity. They can even take the image of someone else's photograph of your image on a screen (as long as it's not altered in any way).
So as someone else said, yes, it might take a lot of technical expertise to faithfully capture these images to do them justice, but that does not suddenly give the person taking them copyright on what is, essentially, a faithful reproduction of the original artwork not a derivative.
By way of example, how about we take the works of Shakespear. Originally released in manuscript form. Someone took that manuscript and typed it into computer text files. Does that mean that person now has copyright on the resulting text file? It certainly took a lot of effort to transcribe the text - but it doesn't matter. Just because it took a lot of effort to do something (it takes a lot of effort to paint a forgery, too) does not infer copyright - if the text is identical to the original shakespear, then it is just a faithful reproduction on another medium and still int he public domain.
To be honest, I think this is exactly the way he would want to be remembered. He had a larger than life personality/persona - he would not want people moping around 'boo hoo, Billy Mays is dead.'
Billy was not above poking fun at himself either, and it was an image he cultivated. The fact that he, and his pitch style was so recognizable speaks volumes. So no, I don't think it's too soon, I see the above as a celebration of Billy, not a satire of him.
The big problem with being an exit node is a legal one. Specifically the Cease and Desist notices from the RIAA/MPAA.
I had an exit node with 2mbps bandwidth DEDICATED to TOR. Not too long later, my service provider started getting the copyright infringement emails. Even though I handled them all myself, and sent replies, called people, showed my service provider the TOR page about legal threats, and even promised to cover any legal costs *IF* it did ever get that that, eventually my service provider just got sick of receiving and forwarding the emails.
Now I don't specifically blame my service provider for this - it IS a potential legal exposure/battle they just don't need. Now you could blame the people using TOR for P2P, but they're doing it for exactly the reason TOR was created - to avoid detection of who they really are. Now you can't tell people TOR cannot be used for illegal activity, because the very reason TOR was CREATED was to facilitate illegal activity (eg. dissident speech in China). So what is illegal or not is a judgement call.
Therefore the blame ends up being on the RIAA/MPAA - but even there, they are legitimately trying to protect their rights. As unpopular as it sounds, and annoying and ineffective as it may be, there IS a reason they are sending out emails of the like. It's cheap for them to do it, and the threat of legal action is usually enough for ISP's to yank someone's pipe.
So my TOR node was, in the end, turned into a non-exit node. Until this kind of problem is solved (for which I don't know what the solution would be), then exit nodes on TOR will be a rare commodity, and as such, bandwidth on the TOR network will be limited because it is being constrained to very few eligible pipes.