Copyright protection on the music would not extend backwards to the thing the music was based on. Does no one bother to read the law before spewing about this stuff?
Yes, you might well have copyright to the music. (You might not; if it's purely deterministic, it's not itself a creative work, and is at most a derivative work.) However, a recording of some guy singing Shakespeare does not give you any control over the original text.
Apple won't let you search their knowledge base without "logging in" - and if your account was created before they started demanding a birthday, they now require you to add a birthday. If you submit feedback, you get a canned response - from an address you can't send any mail to.
The entire thing is built around making it impossible for users to establish any kind of communication with Apple. It's awful.
Because binary newsgroups themselves are a fundamentally stupid and bad idea, which do nothing but damage the discussion medium. Usenet isn't designed for binary distribution, and it's not good at it. A real solution would involve getting away from usenet entirely.
If mouse accuracy swamps strategy, it's not a strategy game. Warcraft would be a good game if you had the option of giving orders while it was paused.
Still, until I see an apology from Blizzard saying "we were totally wrong to invoke the DMCA, which is obviously unconstitutional", I'm not buying any of their stuff.
The lowest realistic estimate I've ever seen is $1/spam in raw cost, averaged out. (Some are vastly more expensive, some are less.) However, harassment and invasion of privacy are also big deals.
$25 seems perfectly reasonable to me. After all, faxes are set at $500 by law.
It's only in POSIX because POSIX inherits the entire standard C library, which is a "part of the language", in that the specification for C itself describes the standard library.
(Of course, malloc is free to not exist in freestanding environments, but they don't necessarily start execution at main(), and there's no requirement that they support any form at all of input or output.)
_C Programming: A Modern Approach_, by K. N. King.
http://knking.com/books/c/
What I can say is, everyone I know who's on the C standards committee and has read this book liked it, as do a number of the regulars of comp.lang.c. I read an early printing, found maybe two small errors, and one basically correct thing that isn't the way I'd have done it. I believe he said the errors would be corrected in future printings.
It's nice to be reassured, directly by Bill Gates, that he didn't say something eminently plausible, and which fits the view of the world he enforced in his OS "design", but which would now make him look bad. It would be a different matter if he or his company had a regular history of blatantly false claims, ranging from claiming to have invented symlinks to claiming that IE could not be removed from a Windows system.
Why was this bullshit even *mentioned*? Surely, slashdot has enough unsubstantiated rumors already, and doesn't need to give credence to obvious crap.
Re:Spam isn't effective - market forces don't appl
on
DoubleClick Gets Into Spam
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
What you're getting may not be spam. Other people I know get spammed by some of the big retailers. I probably got about twenty spams from MicroWarehouse before we threw them in the filters.
All the stuff you're talking about adds to the annoyance, but it's not *necessary* for spam. For it to be spam, it has to be unsolicited, bulk, and email. That's it. If I didn't ask for it, and lots of people are getting it, it's spam.
Sure, Amazon is glad to tell you how to remove yourself; at one point, it was to send mail to "no-special-offers-ever-3@amazon.com". But they don't always honor removes.
They're in our spam filters because (and yes, I called and verified this with them) they have said they will *NEVER* ask for permission before sending their promotional mailings. You know that little "Send me special offers" checkbox most places have? They've said they won't have one, and that they'll spam until told to stop.
There are lots of companies that ask first. I do business with them, and I lose only a few sites that, frankly, weren't doing anything for me to begin with.
Spamazon is "a big company". I've gotten spam from Dell, MicroWarehouse, Spamazon, Excite, Microsoft, and RealNetworks.
The key is that they're all scum.
Spam is very *cost-effective* - but that's not very effective in absolute terms. As long as backbones are willing to look the other way as long as the bills are paid, spam will be a problem.
Actually, no, most of the spam these days comes from Asia. The Korean school system is so amazingly wide open as to be painful. There's a guy I know who gets well over ten million spams a day from "btamail.net.cn". China, Korea, and Taiwan produce an amazing quantity of spam. Some of that may actually be U.S. spammers attacking open relays, but the fact is, blocking the hosts in Asia blocks a hell of a lot more spam than blocking all the spam sources in the U.S..
That's exactly the kind of "monopolistic practice" people blame MS for.
Well, it's certainly limiting applicability...
on
Could Mono Kill Gnome?
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
A foundation on.NET means no one who wants open standards will use it;.NET is another of Microsoft's attempts to control API's. This is DirectX all over again; try to keep people from using OpenGL by offering them something "more interesting", and thus, making it as hard as possible for anyone else to offer a functional system.
.NET will, in the end, be just as permanent as MFC, or any other "standard" microsoft guidelines, and about as portable.
I have heard tell of a guy who is getting more than ten million spams a day from btamail.net.cn. Wow!
Last time I got spam that wasn't getting responded to, I wrote back to the ISP saying that I shared their customer's interest in a Free Tibet, and then went on with my normal abuse complaint, and I think that one actually stopped.
I know at least 10 people who would have bought a native version, Linux or otherwise. Furthermore, as one of the 500, I was pretty pissed that the product didn't actually work, and wasn't really a Linux program.
Corel did a lot of damage to the free software community by distributing WP 2000 only as Windows binaries with a version of WINE that only worked on some Linux distros, and left all the BSD people out in the cold.
Corel totally missed the point. A native WP (similar to WP8, only not so unbeliveably buggy) would have been cool, but they didn't do it.
You're right. If Sun had wanted Microsoft to have complete control over a large and proprietary market segment of incompatible Java code, allowing them to blame Sun for incompatibilities introduced by Microsoft, they could have allowed this.
I see no advantage in allowing standards to be suborned like this.
It's a bit of a joke, perhaps, but a troll? So, everyone's quite comfortable with a leader in the free software community endorsing a closed and proprietary system developed by Microsoft?
Fascinating. There's no such thing as a thought Slashdot's reader community disagrees with; it's either agreeable, or a troll.
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright protection on the music would not extend backwards to the thing the music was based on. Does no one bother to read the law before spewing about this stuff?
Yes, you might well have copyright to the music. (You might not; if it's purely deterministic, it's not itself a creative work, and is at most a derivative work.) However, a recording of some guy singing Shakespeare does not give you any control over the original text.
Apple won't let you search their knowledge base without "logging in" - and if your account was created before they started demanding a birthday, they now require you to add a birthday. If you submit feedback, you get a canned response - from an address you can't send any mail to.
The entire thing is built around making it impossible for users to establish any kind of communication with Apple. It's awful.
You must be joking. I pause all the !@#*!@# time when I'm playing games. I pause to scroll around and look at the map. I pause to get the phone.
This is crazy.
Because binary newsgroups themselves are a fundamentally stupid and bad idea, which do nothing but damage the discussion medium. Usenet isn't designed for binary distribution, and it's not good at it. A real solution would involve getting away from usenet entirely.
If mouse accuracy swamps strategy, it's not a strategy game. Warcraft would be a good game if you had the option of giving orders while it was paused.
Still, until I see an apology from Blizzard saying "we were totally wrong to invoke the DMCA, which is obviously unconstitutional", I'm not buying any of their stuff.
The lowest realistic estimate I've ever seen is $1/spam in raw cost, averaged out. (Some are vastly more expensive, some are less.) However, harassment and invasion of privacy are also big deals.
$25 seems perfectly reasonable to me. After all, faxes are set at $500 by law.
There are actually legitimate opt-in lists, but to the best of my knowledge, you can't buy them; you can, however, pay someone to mail to them.
For an explanation of why you can't "buy" an opt-in list, ask Google about "Nadine mailing".
It's only in POSIX because POSIX inherits the entire standard C library, which is a "part of the language", in that the specification for C itself describes the standard library.
(Of course, malloc is free to not exist in freestanding environments, but they don't necessarily start execution at main(), and there's no requirement that they support any form at all of input or output.)
_C Programming: A Modern Approach_, by K. N. King.
http://knking.com/books/c/
What I can say is, everyone I know who's on the C standards committee and has read this book liked it, as do a number of the regulars of comp.lang.c. I read an early printing, found maybe two small errors, and one basically correct thing that isn't the way I'd have done it. I believe he said the errors would be corrected in future printings.
Nice book.
I see. It's a "troll" to point out that Bill Gates is lying.
It's nice to be reassured, directly by Bill Gates, that he didn't say something eminently plausible, and which fits the view of the world he enforced in his OS "design", but which would now make him look bad. It would be a different matter if he or his company had a regular history of blatantly false claims, ranging from claiming to have invented symlinks to claiming that IE could not be removed from a Windows system.
Why was this bullshit even *mentioned*? Surely, slashdot has enough unsubstantiated rumors already, and doesn't need to give credence to obvious crap.
What you're getting may not be spam. Other people I know get spammed by some of the big retailers. I probably got about twenty spams from MicroWarehouse before we threw them in the filters.
All the stuff you're talking about adds to the annoyance, but it's not *necessary* for spam. For it to be spam, it has to be unsolicited, bulk, and email. That's it. If I didn't ask for it, and lots of people are getting it, it's spam.
Sure, Amazon is glad to tell you how to remove yourself; at one point, it was to send mail to "no-special-offers-ever-3@amazon.com". But they don't always honor removes.
They're in our spam filters because (and yes, I called and verified this with them) they have said they will *NEVER* ask for permission before sending their promotional mailings. You know that little "Send me special offers" checkbox most places have? They've said they won't have one, and that they'll spam until told to stop.
There are lots of companies that ask first. I do business with them, and I lose only a few sites that, frankly, weren't doing anything for me to begin with.
Spamazon is "a big company". I've gotten spam from Dell, MicroWarehouse, Spamazon, Excite, Microsoft, and RealNetworks.
The key is that they're all scum.
Spam is very *cost-effective* - but that's not very effective in absolute terms. As long as backbones are willing to look the other way as long as the bills are paid, spam will be a problem.
Actually, no, most of the spam these days comes from Asia. The Korean school system is so amazingly wide open as to be painful. There's a guy I know who gets well over ten million spams a day from "btamail.net.cn". China, Korea, and Taiwan produce an amazing quantity of spam. Some of that may actually be U.S. spammers attacking open relays, but the fact is, blocking the hosts in Asia blocks a hell of a lot more spam than blocking all the spam sources in the U.S..
Maybe if AT&T disconnected some of the half-dozen active spammers on their network I keep complaining about, they'd get some sympathy.
That's exactly the kind of "monopolistic practice" people blame MS for.
A foundation on .NET means no one who wants open standards will use it; .NET is another of Microsoft's attempts to control API's. This is DirectX all over again; try to keep people from using OpenGL by offering them something "more interesting", and thus, making it as hard as possible for anyone else to offer a functional system.
.NET will, in the end, be just as permanent as MFC, or any other "standard" microsoft guidelines, and about as portable.
I have heard tell of a guy who is getting more than ten million spams a day from btamail.net.cn. Wow!
Last time I got spam that wasn't getting responded to, I wrote back to the ISP saying that I shared their customer's interest in a Free Tibet, and then
went on with my normal abuse complaint, and I think that one actually stopped.
I know at least 10 people who would have bought a native version, Linux or otherwise. Furthermore, as one of the 500, I was pretty pissed that the product didn't actually work, and wasn't really a Linux program.
Corel did a lot of damage to the free software community by distributing WP 2000 only as Windows binaries with a version of WINE that only worked on some Linux distros, and left all the BSD people out in the cold.
Corel totally missed the point. A native WP (similar to WP8, only not so unbeliveably buggy) would have been cool, but they didn't do it.
Well, of course; that's the whole point. Native access to *THE* OS. Windows, that is. Never anything else, not for any length of time.
You play the game nicely.
You're right. If Sun had wanted Microsoft to have complete control over a large and proprietary market segment of incompatible Java code, allowing them to blame Sun for incompatibilities introduced by Microsoft, they could have allowed this.
I see no advantage in allowing standards to be suborned like this.
Wow, the article is "interesting". Come on, at least *some* content in the Slashdot piece, like "overall about N% faster".
Wow! And once again, the Slashdot groupthink crowd moderates any criticism as a "troll". This is insane.
It's a bit of a joke, perhaps, but a troll? So, everyone's quite comfortable with a leader in the free software community endorsing a closed and proprietary system developed by Microsoft?
Fascinating. There's no such thing as a thought Slashdot's reader community disagrees with; it's either agreeable, or a troll.