That would be great if it worked that way in the US. The Copyright Alert System that's going into place in the US even lets you see the inside of a courtroom. They shut you down up front, without a hearing of any sort, and you have to pay them in order to get an appeal in front of their mediator.
Unfortunately, the entire cause of that decrease in population growth is modernization, which is the entire cause for the rapid increase in energy usage. It doesn't help much if we lose 1% of the world's population a year, only to have another 1% of the world's population move into the middle class where they use 10 times the energy. I guess long term, it puts an upper limit on energy usage, but we won't hit that limit until most of the world is middle class.
I didn't come out of a CS program, and I don't think I misunderstand the halting problem. I simply didn't add "or are shaders not turing complete?" What sort of trade offs are there in disallowing shaders that are too complex to prove that they halt?
And that would be entirely the fault of Congressional Republicans. Indefinite detention is simply not an option for any country that claims to respect the rule of law.
This works both ways. If it cost $250,000 to prosecute in NZ, it will probably cost $250,000 to defend against in the US. Any interaction with the justice system in the US is likely to ruin one, financially if not emotionally.
No, this is a classic example of someone glossing over an assumption to make their point stronger. The question of whether it's possible to meet our current energy needs is irrelevant. It's completely useless to know that because our energy usage will continue to grow. By the time we develop technology that will meet our current needs, it will be insufficient to meet our needs at that time in the future. The authors of the WWF study were dishonest in not factoring in the inevitable growth.
Going downhill on a regular unicycle is harder than going uphill too. Up hill you just apply brute strength to climb as hard as you can. Down hill you have to brake with your legs keeping the unicycle at just the right speed so it stays under you.
That you aren't permitted to freely copy them doesn't change that
Yes, it does. There's nothing that requires free speech to be unique.
The alternative is for the creator to not publish at all (which is what no small number of people did before copyright, when they feared their works would simply be blatantly copied).
No, the alternative is for the creator to charge for his time which is scarce instead of copies which are not scarce. Basic laws of economics dictate that a good in infinite supply has zero marginal cost. Not only is copyright a violation of our free speech and property rights, it flies in the face of basic economic reasoning.
Then get up and protest. Write letters. Start campaigns. Be loud. You are the freaking Land of the Free and Brave, the inventors of Democracy, yes? Then act like it, get a few million citizens together, rally the media, and in 12 months that crap is over.
My institution uses userids, which are a string of letters followed by a string of numbers, and an alias to real.name. I always use the userid, because it's actually easier to spell, with fewer ambiguous characters than my real name.
Congress never said he couldn't close Guantanamo. Congress only said he couldn't transfer prisoners to the US. If you can't try them, you have to let them go. Unlock the doors at Guantanamo. Shut off the lights. And walk away. It's not hard.
Being made whole again is a concept from civil law. No, you can't undo what is done, but you can compensate for it. And that compensation serves as a deterrent from further mistreatment in the future. Every criminal defendent deserves to be made whole again if found not guilty.
Yes, they exactly lie. They exactly lie all the time. Obama lied when he said he would put an end to the abuses of the Bush administration. He lied when he said he would close Guantanamo. He lied when he said he would have the most transparent administration in history. He lied when he swore an oath to defend the Constitution.
an audio chip I work with, these days, needs to have a special sequence of turn-on done (power supply bring-up and reset, plus errata sent to the chip) and if you don't manage that, you DO fry the chip.
That chip is badly designed. There is absolutely no reason it has to be that way, except shitty design. That is 100% the manufacturers fault.
Copyright itself is censorship. The alternative to copyright is to sell commodities that are scarce, like time, not those in infinite supply, like copies of works.
Slashdot Mirror
If the government won't respect the law, why should I?
statutory damages are easily fought off by asking for a trial.
Unless you are Jammie Thomas.
Because copyright itself is unjust and should be abolished.
That would be great if it worked that way in the US. The Copyright Alert System that's going into place in the US even lets you see the inside of a courtroom. They shut you down up front, without a hearing of any sort, and you have to pay them in order to get an appeal in front of their mediator.
The problem is, it's worth $250K to MAFIAA
Is it actually worth $250K? Does each prosecution convince 10,000 people to spend $25 on music?
Unfortunately, the entire cause of that decrease in population growth is modernization, which is the entire cause for the rapid increase in energy usage. It doesn't help much if we lose 1% of the world's population a year, only to have another 1% of the world's population move into the middle class where they use 10 times the energy. I guess long term, it puts an upper limit on energy usage, but we won't hit that limit until most of the world is middle class.
I didn't come out of a CS program, and I don't think I misunderstand the halting problem. I simply didn't add "or are shaders not turing complete?" What sort of trade offs are there in disallowing shaders that are too complex to prove that they halt?
And that would be entirely the fault of Congressional Republicans. Indefinite detention is simply not an option for any country that claims to respect the rule of law.
This works both ways. If it cost $250,000 to prosecute in NZ, it will probably cost $250,000 to defend against in the US. Any interaction with the justice system in the US is likely to ruin one, financially if not emotionally.
The big problem with OpenGL is that the shaders are not guaranteed to run in bounded time. DirectX doesn't have that problem
Has Microsoft solved the halting problem?
much of the planet is already experiencing negative growth.
Negative growth of what? Population? Perhaps. Energy usage? I would really like to see the numbers on that.
No, this is a classic example of someone glossing over an assumption to make their point stronger. The question of whether it's possible to meet our current energy needs is irrelevant. It's completely useless to know that because our energy usage will continue to grow. By the time we develop technology that will meet our current needs, it will be insufficient to meet our needs at that time in the future. The authors of the WWF study were dishonest in not factoring in the inevitable growth.
Going downhill on a regular unicycle is harder than going uphill too. Up hill you just apply brute strength to climb as hard as you can. Down hill you have to brake with your legs keeping the unicycle at just the right speed so it stays under you.
that are copyrighted are being actually published
All works are copyrighted by default.
That you aren't permitted to freely copy them doesn't change that
Yes, it does. There's nothing that requires free speech to be unique.
The alternative is for the creator to not publish at all (which is what no small number of people did before copyright, when they feared their works would simply be blatantly copied).
No, the alternative is for the creator to charge for his time which is scarce instead of copies which are not scarce. Basic laws of economics dictate that a good in infinite supply has zero marginal cost. Not only is copyright a violation of our free speech and property rights, it flies in the face of basic economic reasoning.
Then get up and protest. Write letters. Start campaigns. Be loud. You are the freaking Land of the Free and Brave, the inventors of Democracy, yes? Then act like it, get a few million citizens together, rally the media, and in 12 months that crap is over.
We tried that in 2011. We were roundly dismissed.
My institution uses userids, which are a string of letters followed by a string of numbers, and an alias to real.name. I always use the userid, because it's actually easier to spell, with fewer ambiguous characters than my real name.
Congress never said he couldn't close Guantanamo. Congress only said he couldn't transfer prisoners to the US. If you can't try them, you have to let them go. Unlock the doors at Guantanamo. Shut off the lights. And walk away. It's not hard.
Being made whole again is a concept from civil law. No, you can't undo what is done, but you can compensate for it. And that compensation serves as a deterrent from further mistreatment in the future. Every criminal defendent deserves to be made whole again if found not guilty.
It's the same with every president. They are all based on nothing but lies.
they don't exactly lie
Yes, they exactly lie. They exactly lie all the time. Obama lied when he said he would put an end to the abuses of the Bush administration. He lied when he said he would close Guantanamo. He lied when he said he would have the most transparent administration in history. He lied when he swore an oath to defend the Constitution.
And that was supposed to be our hope for change.
I'd rather gouge my ears out.
an audio chip I work with, these days, needs to have a special sequence of turn-on done (power supply bring-up and reset, plus errata sent to the chip) and if you don't manage that, you DO fry the chip.
That chip is badly designed. There is absolutely no reason it has to be that way, except shitty design. That is 100% the manufacturers fault.
Copyright itself is censorship. The alternative to copyright is to sell commodities that are scarce, like time, not those in infinite supply, like copies of works.
Getting involved in a court case--even successfully--is a nightmare timesink, and I won't risk it.
This is a fundamental flaw with our justice system. Someone falsely accused of a crime and exonerated should be made whole again. No exceptions.
"three british men", traders and brokers. In other words, no executive level officers have received any criminal charges. This is not justice.