I agree with the general idea that there are lots of exaggerated claims and promises. I view that as most likely coming from people looking for grants or venture capitalists to fund their projects.
However I would not keep an eye to the shipping products to judge feasibility, I would keep an eye on satellites. Break throughs like the one in this story might first appear in the environment of much higher solar intensity found in space.
A decade ago, the GIMP was one of the jewels of open source, something everyone would show off to others as an example of what open source development could accomplish. But it's been so short of manpower that it's largely stagnated for quite a while. They could really use some help. See Nordholt's latest blog entry for some related thoughts.
A decade ago there were lower expectations for open source, it was more of a by geeks for geeks environment at the time. As acceptance increases expectation rise, comparisons to commercial counterparts are more often made, etc. To a broad audience saying GIMP was considered a jewel doesn't elevate GIMP, it tarnishes open source.
That said, I don't think GIMP is a bad program. Its a useful program, certainly a vast improvement over things like MS Paint. However even for simple things I find the US$80 Photoshop Elements superior, YMMV, if one is running Windows or Mac OS X. As someone who has developed industry specific drawing programs I respect what the GIMP developers have accomplished. I just think that their good work is being incorrectly positioned and marketed.
So did "jay" delete his mp3s when he lent her the CD? Otherwise I'm seeing two copies, in two hands. Not one dude with a backup.
If he made 50 backups and lent them to his friends - is that allowed? Not that I agree with the state of copyright or anything, but lending one 'backup' or format shift is just as wrong as lending the same to many people, no? Copies were created. There are multiple people in possession of copies concurrently, with only one licence paid.
I don't think it is that cut and dry.
http://w2.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php
3. How Do You Know If It's Fair Use?
There are no clear-cut rules for deciding what's fair use and there are no "automatic" classes of fair uses. Fair use is decided by a judge, on a case by case basis, after balancing the four factors listed in section 107 of the Copyright statute. The factors to be considered include:
a. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes -- Courts are more likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes.
b. The nature of the copyrighted work -- A particular use is more likely to be fair where the copied work is factual rather than creative.
c. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole -- A court will balance this factor toward a finding of fair use where the amount taken is small or insignificant in proportion to the overall work.
d. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work -- If the court finds the newly created work is not a substitute product for the copyrighted work, it will be more likely to weigh this factor in favor of fair use.
One mix for your own use that you lend seems farther from commercial type activity than 50 backups lent out. Is lending to discover a new artists an educational act?
Loan and return seems to suggest its not a substitute for a legit CD.
The act mentioned in her twitter presumably isn't loaning a CD, but rather sharing some form of a copied mixtape.
Consider another scenario. Someone buys the songs from Apple iTunes and their license allows them to burn a CD to create a custom mix. This burned mix CD would be legal. As I said originally, its not certain there is a copyright violation in this case. Maybe there was but more info seems necessary.
To the best of my knowledge loaning a legal CD/DVD to someone is not illegal,
because the big scary MPAA writing saying "unauthorised DISTRIBUTION, copying or selling of copyright protected material is prohibited". so yes, it is illegal. it isn't, however, persecuted very often (ever?).
Keep reading. Somewhere after the above, and probably in small print, you will most likely find something like: except as allowed by law in your jurisdiction. Loaning a CD/DVD to a friend probably falls under fair use and is probably not considered "distribution" in a legal sense. MPAA bluffs and unenforceable terms do not make things illegal.
If one person who legally posses a CD/DVD with copyrighted material loans it to another person that is quite different than some other person who makes an entire library of music available to everyone over an internet connection. The three strikes law seems to apply to file sharing sharing only, not copyright violation in general. Its not even certain there is a copyright violation in this case.
No, actually it's copyright infringement in both cases. They are exactly the same. The only difference is in the number of infringements.
To the best of my knowledge loaning a legal CD/DVD to someone is not illegal, and if it were a violation it is quite different than setting up a server to share music on a large scale. An important element of a crime is intent. When intent is combined with the severity of the offense you often have the difference between an infraction (small fine), misdemeanor and felony.
What you're saying is that murdering one person is very different from murdering 5 or 6 people.
... after tweeting how she was enjoying a compilation of music put together for her by a friend. Does that count as her first strike?"
Doubtful given the article also includes:
"Now, to be fair, in her speech, she does say she gets that sharing a DVD or a CD can be sensible."
If one person who legally posses a CD/DVD with copyrighted material loans it to another person that is quite different than some other person who makes an entire library of music available to everyone over an internet connection. The three strikes law seems to apply to file sharing sharing only, not copyright violation in general. Its not even certain there is a copyright violation in this case.
As far as I could tell, there was one thing and one thing only that the Flash Player for Android 3.0 accomplished successfully
Actually there seems to be two things. Besides getting advertisements working again it seems to also suggest that Apple may have had a point that Flash performance was disappointing.
Well they probably spent the first 5 days assuming he was playing a joke on the TV network or the network was playing a joke on the viewers. From the article:
""Carl" was arrested on April 7 in Paris, 6 days after the program was aired."
So April 1 was the broadcast date? Do the French "celebrate" April Fools day?
Honestly is that how people read the summary? I didn't even begin to think the summary was being paranoid or anti-microsoft. I thought it was just using descriptions for exactly what it does.
That's how the tin foil hat crowd will read it. I was helping them to see a different interpretation.:-)
Compelling an entity in one state to comply with the law in another state that it is doing business in, but does not have a physical presence in, seems to be a valid issue of interstate commerce.
Absolutely not. Not without a physical presence in the state.
I'm sorry but where in the commerce clause does it state a physical presence is required? Physical presence is merely a limitation of State jurisdiction. The Constitution merely refers to commerce among the states.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:
"[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;"
Proof positive that marketing works! The parent can't tell the difference between wince and winnt. Wow. Just wow.
Wow, what a bad guess. CE or NT is irrelevant to whether MS has supported ARM, or as the original post put it: joined the ARM trend. They are not joining it, they are offering an additional operating system.
It's not a new tax. It's not a tax increase. It's a new attempt at the enforcement of an existing rule. I predict that we'll have just as much compliance under the new enforcement as we do under the current honor system. As long as "zero" is a valid input for taxes owed on any form, people will put it in.
You are mistaken, a new federal law could make enforcement trivial. The feds could simply say you must collect the tax and pay it to the state, or the feds could allow a state to sue a company even if the company had no physical presence in the state.
I think the Supreme Court would have something to say about such a law.
Or at least I fucking hope it would. The fact that you think this is a viable option is a testament to how fucking ignorant people are regarding the most basic separation of state and federal roles.
Regulating commerce between the states is specifically enumerated as a power of the federal government in the US Constitution. Compelling an entity in one state to comply with the law in another state that it is doing business in, but does not have a physical presence in, seems to be a valid issue of interstate commerce.
What legislation Congress should write, tax internet based transactions or not, is a different issue.
It's not a new tax. It's not a tax increase. It's a new attempt at the enforcement of an existing rule. I predict that we'll have just as much compliance under the new enforcement as we do under the current honor system. As long as "zero" is a valid input for taxes owed on any form, people will put it in.
You are mistaken, a new federal law could make enforcement trivial. The feds could simply say you must collect the tax and pay it to the state, or the feds could allow a state to sue a company even if the company had no physical presence in the state.
New York: OK, the east cost is already represented and the central regions of the country have been left out so far. However you could argue that population density suggests the north east over the north west or the center regions. That is as plausible as politics. Now consider that New York City is the most popular tourist destination in the US. Now add that the Sea, Air and Space museum is the WW2 aircraft carrier the USS Intrepid. The Intrepid once fought along side an Enterprise, now she will carry one. I think compelling non-political arguments can be made for NYC/Intrepid.
I should have mentioned that the USS Intrepid also recovered some astronauts returning from space.
I was mistaken with respect to "carrying" the shuttle. Apparently the shuttle will have its own enclosure alongside the Intrepid.
That said, I wish the central regions of the country were getting something too. I am not arguing that NYC was the best choice, just that NYC/Intrepid is a very plausible choice and that politics is not a given.
I certainly agree that political payback is an ongoing problem but lets look at the locations.
Florida, Kennedy Space Center: The launch site for all US manned missions and NASA's premier tourist attraction.
Virginia, Smithsonian: The county's premier Air and Space museum.
How could shuttles not go to these locations?
Los Angeles: At least one west coast site seems necessary and the shuttle was assembled there.
New York: OK, the east cost is already represented and the central regions of the country have been left out so far. However you could argue that population density suggests the north east over the north west or the center regions. That is as plausible as politics. Now consider that New York City is the most popular tourist destination in the US. Now add that the Sea, Air and Space museum is the WW2 aircraft carrier the USS Intrepid. The Intrepid once fought along side an Enterprise, now she will carry one. I think compelling non-political arguments can be made for NYC/Intrepid.
And of course, replacing Dr. Who's became the norm back long before most of us were even born.
I don't think that counts. The whole point there was that they wanted to continue the series, but the actor didn't. They didn't really leave the audience hanging -- the regeneration usually happened in the last episode of the series, not the first episode of the new series. Other series have replaced actors for ongoing roles; Doctor Who just came up with a fun (if cheap) excuse for it.
I think it should be stressed that the doctor was somehow regenerated, ie the same being gets a new body. That's not quite killing the character off, its more like the masked character gets a new mask. Well, at least in the newer incarnations of the series. I don't recall exactly how things worked back in the 70s.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with the general idea that there are lots of exaggerated claims and promises. I view that as most likely coming from people looking for grants or venture capitalists to fund their projects.
However I would not keep an eye to the shipping products to judge feasibility, I would keep an eye on satellites. Break throughs like the one in this story might first appear in the environment of much higher solar intensity found in space.
A decade ago, the GIMP was one of the jewels of open source, something everyone would show off to others as an example of what open source development could accomplish. But it's been so short of manpower that it's largely stagnated for quite a while. They could really use some help. See Nordholt's latest blog entry for some related thoughts.
A decade ago there were lower expectations for open source, it was more of a by geeks for geeks environment at the time. As acceptance increases expectation rise, comparisons to commercial counterparts are more often made, etc. To a broad audience saying GIMP was considered a jewel doesn't elevate GIMP, it tarnishes open source.
That said, I don't think GIMP is a bad program. Its a useful program, certainly a vast improvement over things like MS Paint. However even for simple things I find the US$80 Photoshop Elements superior, YMMV, if one is running Windows or Mac OS X. As someone who has developed industry specific drawing programs I respect what the GIMP developers have accomplished. I just think that their good work is being incorrectly positioned and marketed.
Because 2011 will be the year of Linux on the desktop!!!
When the year of the Linux desktop arrives Adobe will release a native Photoshop for Linux.
Printing is less and less important in design. Unless you are doing textile or billboard, I do not think CMYK is a good choice.
It more than billboards. Consider business cards, letter head, flyers, postcards, etc.
So did "jay" delete his mp3s when he lent her the CD? Otherwise I'm seeing two copies, in two hands. Not one dude with a backup. If he made 50 backups and lent them to his friends - is that allowed? Not that I agree with the state of copyright or anything, but lending one 'backup' or format shift is just as wrong as lending the same to many people, no? Copies were created. There are multiple people in possession of copies concurrently, with only one licence paid.
I don't think it is that cut and dry.
http://w2.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php
3. How Do You Know If It's Fair Use?
There are no clear-cut rules for deciding what's fair use and there are no "automatic" classes of fair uses. Fair use is decided by a judge, on a case by case basis, after balancing the four factors listed in section 107 of the Copyright statute. The factors to be considered include:
a. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes -- Courts are more likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes.
b. The nature of the copyrighted work -- A particular use is more likely to be fair where the copied work is factual rather than creative.
c. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole -- A court will balance this factor toward a finding of fair use where the amount taken is small or insignificant in proportion to the overall work.
d. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work -- If the court finds the newly created work is not a substitute product for the copyrighted work, it will be more likely to weigh this factor in favor of fair use.
One mix for your own use that you lend seems farther from commercial type activity than 50 backups lent out. Is lending to discover a new artists an educational act?
Loan and return seems to suggest its not a substitute for a legit CD.
The act mentioned in her twitter presumably isn't loaning a CD, but rather sharing some form of a copied mixtape.
Consider another scenario. Someone buys the songs from Apple iTunes and their license allows them to burn a CD to create a custom mix. This burned mix CD would be legal. As I said originally, its not certain there is a copyright violation in this case. Maybe there was but more info seems necessary.
To the best of my knowledge loaning a legal CD/DVD to someone is not illegal,
because the big scary MPAA writing saying "unauthorised DISTRIBUTION, copying or selling of copyright protected material is prohibited". so yes, it is illegal. it isn't, however, persecuted very often (ever?).
Keep reading. Somewhere after the above, and probably in small print, you will most likely find something like: except as allowed by law in your jurisdiction. Loaning a CD/DVD to a friend probably falls under fair use and is probably not considered "distribution" in a legal sense. MPAA bluffs and unenforceable terms do not make things illegal.
If one person who legally posses a CD/DVD with copyrighted material loans it to another person that is quite different than some other person who makes an entire library of music available to everyone over an internet connection. The three strikes law seems to apply to file sharing sharing only, not copyright violation in general. Its not even certain there is a copyright violation in this case.
No, actually it's copyright infringement in both cases. They are exactly the same. The only difference is in the number of infringements.
To the best of my knowledge loaning a legal CD/DVD to someone is not illegal, and if it were a violation it is quite different than setting up a server to share music on a large scale. An important element of a crime is intent. When intent is combined with the severity of the offense you often have the difference between an infraction (small fine), misdemeanor and felony.
What you're saying is that murdering one person is very different from murdering 5 or 6 people.
Um, no.
... after tweeting how she was enjoying a compilation of music put together for her by a friend. Does that count as her first strike?"
Doubtful given the article also includes:
"Now, to be fair, in her speech, she does say she gets that sharing a DVD or a CD can be sensible."
If one person who legally posses a CD/DVD with copyrighted material loans it to another person that is quite different than some other person who makes an entire library of music available to everyone over an internet connection. The three strikes law seems to apply to file sharing sharing only, not copyright violation in general. Its not even certain there is a copyright violation in this case.
As far as I could tell, there was one thing and one thing only that the Flash Player for Android 3.0 accomplished successfully
Actually there seems to be two things. Besides getting advertisements working again it seems to also suggest that Apple may have had a point that Flash performance was disappointing.
Stunning police work took 6 days to arrest him...
Well they probably spent the first 5 days assuming he was playing a joke on the TV network or the network was playing a joke on the viewers. From the article:
""Carl" was arrested on April 7 in Paris, 6 days after the program was aired."
So April 1 was the broadcast date? Do the French "celebrate" April Fools day?
Honestly is that how people read the summary? I didn't even begin to think the summary was being paranoid or anti-microsoft. I thought it was just using descriptions for exactly what it does.
That's how the tin foil hat crowd will read it. I was helping them to see a different interpretation. :-)
So, not only will future Kinect projects be able to track you ...
Your computer/console can respond to your gesture based commands.
... they can listen to what you say.
Your computer/console can respond to your verbal commands.
Compelling an entity in one state to comply with the law in another state that it is doing business in, but does not have a physical presence in, seems to be a valid issue of interstate commerce.
Absolutely not. Not without a physical presence in the state.
I'm sorry but where in the commerce clause does it state a physical presence is required? Physical presence is merely a limitation of State jurisdiction. The Constitution merely refers to commerce among the states.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:
"[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;"
The infrastructure that was mostly paid for by the taxpayers. So we do own it, really.
Much like the railroads were given free land and various rights in the 19th century. Have you tried getting a free ride from the rail roads?
:-)
Personally, as a taxpayer, I'd rather have a free in the F/A-18 I've paid for.
Proof positive that marketing works! The parent can't tell the difference between wince and winnt. Wow. Just wow.
Wow, what a bad guess. CE or NT is irrelevant to whether MS has supported ARM, or as the original post put it: joined the ARM trend. They are not joining it, they are offering an additional operating system.
It's about frickin' time! As usual MS take the longest to get on the trend train.
Windows CE has been running on ARM for about eight (?) years.
It's not a new tax. It's not a tax increase. It's a new attempt at the enforcement of an existing rule. I predict that we'll have just as much compliance under the new enforcement as we do under the current honor system. As long as "zero" is a valid input for taxes owed on any form, people will put it in.
You are mistaken, a new federal law could make enforcement trivial. The feds could simply say you must collect the tax and pay it to the state, or the feds could allow a state to sue a company even if the company had no physical presence in the state.
I think the Supreme Court would have something to say about such a law. Or at least I fucking hope it would. The fact that you think this is a viable option is a testament to how fucking ignorant people are regarding the most basic separation of state and federal roles.
Regulating commerce between the states is specifically enumerated as a power of the federal government in the US Constitution. Compelling an entity in one state to comply with the law in another state that it is doing business in, but does not have a physical presence in, seems to be a valid issue of interstate commerce.
What legislation Congress should write, tax internet based transactions or not, is a different issue.
It's not a new tax. It's not a tax increase. It's a new attempt at the enforcement of an existing rule. I predict that we'll have just as much compliance under the new enforcement as we do under the current honor system. As long as "zero" is a valid input for taxes owed on any form, people will put it in.
You are mistaken, a new federal law could make enforcement trivial. The feds could simply say you must collect the tax and pay it to the state, or the feds could allow a state to sue a company even if the company had no physical presence in the state.
New York: OK, the east cost is already represented and the central regions of the country have been left out so far. However you could argue that population density suggests the north east over the north west or the center regions. That is as plausible as politics. Now consider that New York City is the most popular tourist destination in the US. Now add that the Sea, Air and Space museum is the WW2 aircraft carrier the USS Intrepid. The Intrepid once fought along side an Enterprise, now she will carry one. I think compelling non-political arguments can be made for NYC/Intrepid.
I should have mentioned that the USS Intrepid also recovered some astronauts returning from space.
I was mistaken with respect to "carrying" the shuttle. Apparently the shuttle will have its own enclosure alongside the Intrepid.
That said, I wish the central regions of the country were getting something too. I am not arguing that NYC was the best choice, just that NYC/Intrepid is a very plausible choice and that politics is not a given.
Take a look: http://www.npr.org/news/specials/election2008/2008-election-map.html#/president?view=race08 Then look again at the list of cities getting a shuttle. Still surprised Houston wasn't chosen? I'm not normally one to read politics into everything, but this...
I certainly agree that political payback is an ongoing problem but lets look at the locations.
Florida, Kennedy Space Center: The launch site for all US manned missions and NASA's premier tourist attraction.
Virginia, Smithsonian: The county's premier Air and Space museum.
How could shuttles not go to these locations?
Los Angeles: At least one west coast site seems necessary and the shuttle was assembled there.
New York: OK, the east cost is already represented and the central regions of the country have been left out so far. However you could argue that population density suggests the north east over the north west or the center regions. That is as plausible as politics. Now consider that New York City is the most popular tourist destination in the US. Now add that the Sea, Air and Space museum is the WW2 aircraft carrier the USS Intrepid. The Intrepid once fought along side an Enterprise, now she will carry one. I think compelling non-political arguments can be made for NYC/Intrepid.
And of course, replacing Dr. Who's became the norm back long before most of us were even born.
I don't think that counts. The whole point there was that they wanted to continue the series, but the actor didn't. They didn't really leave the audience hanging -- the regeneration usually happened in the last episode of the series, not the first episode of the new series. Other series have replaced actors for ongoing roles; Doctor Who just came up with a fun (if cheap) excuse for it.
I think it should be stressed that the doctor was somehow regenerated, ie the same being gets a new body. That's not quite killing the character off, its more like the masked character gets a new mask. Well, at least in the newer incarnations of the series. I don't recall exactly how things worked back in the 70s.
... Forver Knight was infamous back in the early 90's for killing off characters and bringing them back (or sometimes not) ...
Wasn't that a vampire show? If so then they can't really be faulted for killing characters and bringing them back. ;-)
... at least we didn't see Greedo get up off the cantina floor.
Some things should not be said in public, they might find their way to Lucas. ;-)
To answer the question more directly. PHB -> Pointy Haired Boss. In other words Dilbert's boss and synonymous with clueless manager.
Lets not forget the similarity between the pointy hair and demonic horns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointy-Haired_Boss