No. Being "inspired" by other code is not copyright violation
Unless one party lives in the UK. Then being "inspired" by another work, and specifically creating your own new and different work to avoid infringing the first, is still a copyright violation.
Nice tech! I think I saw the same movie these guys did, Runaway with wall climbing robotic killer spiders, and self guiding bullets from handguns, and Tom Selleck!
Damn I hate wall climbing robotic killer spiders... Those must be next:/
Well as long as they don't make a self guiding robotic Tom Selleck, I think we will be OK.
Come on man, its a hobby. When a dude puts together a 1000 piece puzzle you don't pee all over it by claiming you can buy a poster of the same picture and thats a better choice because you don't have to put it together... That kind of misses the point.
You do have to admit that there would be a ton of people purchasing the kit for no other reason than to save $3, and then break it and attempt to return it for a refund or hound their support email.
Perhaps if it was legal to sell kits specifically with NO warentee at all and a no return policy, then it may work... But in many countries that isn't even an option.
To take your puzzle example, yes people who do puzzles as a hobby are fine, just as people who actually like to assemble circuits like this would be fine. But the people trying to do nothing but save a buck are the exact type who would purchase a puzzle, put most of it together, then bitch that it doesn't at all look like the poster due to the wavy lines between the pieces, and return it demanding more than a full refund at the puzzle makers expense.
I would like to believe after the first few production runs of fully built units, that later on they would put some effort into selling the specialty parts (PCB, pre-flashed chips or roms, harder to source components like odd freq crystals, etc) and put up the parts for sale individually along with the BOM and schematics. That's the only way around the warentee problem with kits, and the only way to make it too much trouble for the people trying to only save three fifty. For electronic hobbyists, working from a BOM and schematic is business as usual, and not really any extra work we weren't expecting anyway.
If you are not jailbroken, then you can only use the Apple store, and those apps are tested at the API level to verify what they do. Sure you can't block banner ads this way, but that is by design.
Jailbreak it, and you get the Cydia app, and access to multiple stores (same repo system as apt-get, which you get installed too) First thing you install with Cydia is the patch for the local exploit if you have any in your version of iOS. Most these days require locally rebooting the phone in a specific debugging mode, so not a remote exploit but a local one. Yes, if you ever lose a smart phone, assume you have no security in place.. For any brand/model/OS. Physical access and all that.
Between Firewall-iP and iBlacklist, I fully control every piece of data going into or out of my phone, be it calls, sms, or data.
For your data example, just replace 'mv' with 'cp' and all your problems disappear.
For the printers, use proximity to set the default selection, still letting you pick a printer from the list if you wish to override.
As for WAP restrictions, that's a huge stretch. Of course no one would want to do that, you choose an AP by user preference first, and if anything signal strength second.
Proximity detection is used as the trigger to initialize connections and get things ready for YOU to use them so you don't need to spend that time yourself, and to change default settings to ones more often than not will be the case based off where you are (thus 'default setting' and not 'permanent change') It's not to be used as a restrictive replace-all-user-option-dialogs thing, as your examples must assume to be valid in any way.
If you make reasonable default choices for when tracking is not available, then it just enhances things for people with traceable devices, yet at the same time does not remove functions for those with out such a device.
Another example, if the lights are out in a room that a traceable device just entered, by all means turn the lights on. But do NOT assume once the last traceable device leaves the room, that it is OK to turn the lights out! Other people might be in there now. Either leave that manual (hit the button on the way out), or use another method (aka motion detection, no movement for X hours) for that part.
I used a similar Bluetooth setup in my old house with my phone system.
My VoIP setup had multiple outside lines (up to 12, fees were for usage), and numerous internal extensions. I tossed some scripts together for my computers around the house to watch for the bluetooth signal from my cell phone, and routed the call depending on that data.
If my cell phone was in my kitchen, calls to my main # got redirected to the extension in the kitchen. If my cell was in the bedroom, calls got routed to that extension instead.
If my cell was no where to be seen in the house, calls to my main # were forwarded to my cell phone number, under the assumption I was not in the house.
This saved me from using my cell phone battery while inside, but when I was out calls routed to me none the less with no configuration changes, or having to remember to flip some switch when leaving and returning.
It was pretty neat to have the phone in the family room ring once (as I was already walking upstairs) and have the ring "follow" me from there to the kitchen extension and finally to my bedroom before answering.
Behind the scenes it was a mess of asterisk configs/scripts, shell scripts, and some wrapped TCL executable for the windows machines.
But it was fairly straight forward work, not too difficult. This should be very doable as long as one has a little bit of programming (or really even just scripting) experience to glue all the bits and pieces together.
This case focused mainly on the bad faith of the creator of the second photo, and I agree that he did act in bad faith -- first using the original photo without paying for it, and then making the second as a workaround
Specifically this statement: IMO, copyright is fundamentally a good idea, if implemented with an appropriate sense of balance.
Sorry, I've said that same thought before, so you owe me royalties now. You clearly didn't use any of the same words I've used, but you expressed the exact same idea I had, and so both broke UK law as well as admitted in writing you agree what you did should be a crime.
Just paypal me the ten thousand dollar license fee and I won't press charges:P
Thomas Babington Macaulay's speech in the House of Commons, 5 February 1841 on the obscene extension of the term of copyright protections:
I am so sensible, sir, of the kindness with which the House has listened to me, that I will not detain you longer. I will only say this, that if the measure before us should pass, and should produce one tenth part of the evil which it is calculated to produce, and which I fully expect it to produce, there will soon be a remedy, though of a very objectionable kind. Just as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by piratical booksellers.
At present, the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. Those who invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Everybody is well pleased to see them restrained by the law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. No tradesmen of good repute will have anything to do with such disgraceful transactions. Pass this law, and that feeling is at an end. Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly. Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit; and the whole nation will be in the plot.
On which side, indeed, should the public sympathy be when the question is, whether some book as popular as 'Robinson Crusoe,' or 'The Pilgrim's Progress,' shall be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great-grandson of a bookseller, who, a hundred years before, drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the author when in great distress?
Remember, too, that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop. The public seldom makes nice distinctions. The wholesome copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace and danger of the new copyright which you are about to create. And you will find, that, in attempting to impose unreasonable restraints on the reprinting of the works of the dead, you have, to a great extent, annulled those restraints which now prevent men from pillaging and defrauding the living."
PRQ is based in Sweden, and has their own ASN (read: they are their own network, connected to multiple upstream backbones) They offer all types of services in addition to VPNs: colo, dedicated hosting, and shared hosting.
Their tunnels offer a static IP and no ports blocked (for running servers if that's your thing), so you'll want to provide your own firewalling. They use straight OpenVPN too. They have a strict privacy policy and appear to follow it.
This is the same ISP that hosts the pirate bay too, which should give you an idea how they handle requests from certain other countries due to the whining of certain media cartels...
I've been a customer for awhile now and quite happy. I am even planning to colo with them in the next couple of months if all goes well. (Previous data center I've been with has changed company names like three times now in the past six months, and now plans to jack their pricing up)
If this type of service was only meant for personal backups and not illegal file sharing, this would have been the standard in the first place. Why would anyone ever have to "share" backup files with anyone else.
Well you're in luck, I have a document file here with the full answer to your question, with detailed explanations abound! It also contains the secret to life, and a pony.
Now if only I had a place to upload that file and share the link with you... Oh well, as you say no one has or ever would have a need to do such a thing. Guess you'll have to do without. It was an adorable pony too!
A gravity tractor approach can work against any type of asteroid, including the ones that are nothing more than a ball of dust so large that its own gravity is all that holds it together.
The tractor would need to fly out to the asteroid, be able to maneuver itself to stay in a relative position to it, and just keep itself there. It will slowly modify the course of the asteroid by pulling it in one direction or the other, or by speeding it up or slowing it down by being positioned in front or behind.
We pretty much have the components we need, a probe with maneuvering thrusters, and weight. If we actually had a chance of pulling it off, multiple launches to assemble the final product out of earths gravity well won't be as much of an issue.
We have sent probes to comets before, so we have the ability to both get it there and have it maneuver around it. Different flight plan of course so likely a different design than our current ones, but as we don't have to land or anything fancy, it should be less complex than our current probes designed to return something from the comet (be it touch down, bounces off, fly through the tail, etc)
A gravity tractor just needs to hold itself in a relative position to the asteroid, and keep itself there. We can already do that for short time periods right now. The most straight forward approach is to simply include more fuel. But money won't be infinite and that is far from the most efficient way we could go about working around that problem.
We have a pretty good chance of pulling off the actual design and more importantly construction of such a device. Technically even our current methods right now can do this, it would just be insanely expensive. But a proper design can fix a lot of that problem, if we get started on the design before the thing is needed.
It would be nice to have one built and sitting around on the ready, but there is no way we would waste the money needed using our current methods and designs. If it was designed properly, where the cost is made as low as possible, we would know if that is even an option or not.
I'd love to see some definition of what made classic games more 'game' than things like Battlefield, Portal or Minecraft.
Well that's simple. Elitism and snobbery!
To those people, the definition of a game is pretty straight forward: "If I don't like it, then it is not a game at all" "If I do like it, and so do others, it is a pop game" "If I do like it, and others don't even know it exists, then it is a true game"
Seems to fit perfectly with the GP comment too.
Of course the true definition of a game is "Something you do to have fun or compete at" But don't let the game snobs hear you say it, you might get mauled;}
In this case it means a $100 fine + lawyer fees, permanent loss of her career and teaching credentials, and thus the future ability to pay that fine (not to mention bills), as well as majorly restricting her future employment to that only requiring "High school graduate" level of education.
Wikipedia is once again misrepresenting the facts if that is worded to imply she was found innocent and nothing further happened to her. I'd correct it myself but odds are 99 to 1 the moderator who assigned themselves that page will just revert my change and the citations added, so it's not worth the work
But my point was to counter your statement, that one is assumed innocent and someone somewhere must prove they left the javascript page open on purpose, and simply claiming they didn't know and/or was being exploited is enough to get them off the hook. It just simply does not work that way.
Here is a case where the same situation happen: Computer was infected, it was doing things outside of her control, all she could do was turn the computer off but the students kept turning it back on (Likely to see the porn, must be pretty scarring to their fragile little minds while they were seeking it out) and the teacher faced a max of 40 years in prison.
The computer expert testimony even stated in court that the infection was a drive-by-download and so not her fault, and other than what she did (turn it off) she couldn't have been expected to do anything further that would have been required to fix it. The judge agreed and tossed out as many of the charges as he could, and hoped the prosecution would give her a new trial or let her off the hook. If you are at all familiar with Windows and its wonderful security layers, you have no doubt even seen this happen and perhaps have been asked to magically fix it up without a reformat and reinstall. I've had it happen to friends, family, and coworkers many many times. Even the ones of them that do look at porn online, I am pretty certain they only want it to show up when they go to open it, not every 30 seconds automatically covering the desktop;}
Anyways, about letting her off the hook? That didn't happen, and the prosecution still pressed onward. They blackmailed her into plea bargaining with the threat that in the new trial they would get their 40 years of prison time and forced her to pay them $100, the lawyers tens of thousands of dollars of fees, and forfeit her teaching credentials, thus to give up 4-6 years of her life as wasted (aka college) and her entire future career working as a teacher (aka all the "big bucks" that teachers make, which she trained so long to do)
SO now this poor innocent woman has lost nearly a decade of her life total over this (6 years of schooling wasted, 4 years for the trial wasted), an amount of money in the 5 digit range, and in the job market she is effectively at "high school graduate" level now, when it comes time to base her pay and judge her qualifications.
In this case, that is exactly what "vacated on appeal" means.
I just ask that anyone thinking of running this tool - think about the above case and how fair and balanced our legal system is, before doing it.
As for those claiming that nuclear is safe because even with this accident everything is fine... just read a little more about all the food and radiation scandals going on.
So basically what you are saying, is that if you were driving your 1910 Ford Model-T on the road, and had a collision with a car built in 2011, you think they will take equal damage, and so all cars are bad things. Because exactly zero progression in technology has made cars any safer...
Except in this case the Model-T got hit by a truck at 90mph, and the driver survived.
No, I'm not going to point out how factually incorrect your statement is, I just came to make a car analogy.
We just got done with a well-constructed, well-reasoned, well-executed protest against SOPA and PIPA, and we killed those bills dead as a *direct result*.
That simply has not happened.
The sponsor of SOPA has recently also pushed new anti-childpornography laws through the house and congress, in preparation for attaching SOPA as a rider.
He has already admitted the ONLY problem with the last SOPA was that he let the public know about it, giving them time to express their dislike, and has stated he learned from that mistake.
As in, the damaging effects, the destruction it will cause, and the fact people are against it, he doesn't see any of that as a problem. Only that the public had time to counter it.
This time next year, SOPA *WILL* be law.
* Note I am not arguing in favor of DDoS either. You are quite right in that such attacks have not helped anything one bit, and are not part of any functioning solution.
So basically you say being homosexual is a choice they make. Why would you think this, unless it is similar in your case?
So you admit that day in and day out you have to force yourself to choose to be sexually attracted to females, and that is not what simply comes naturally to you?
I know I don't make any choice to be attracted to the opposite sex, it just sorta IS for me. I don't have to try to do it, like you seem to do and assume everyone else does as well.
I'm guessing since you are not naturally attracted to women and have to choose that, that perhaps your problems are related to denying your own body's natural urges and forcing yourself to be attracted to the opposite sex.
Hiding your true feelings like that is not physically good for you. It causes stress, emotional pain, and other mental problems that would all simply go away if you just did what came naturally, instead of forcing this choice of being straight onto yourself.
That is how most of us live. Whatever feels right sexually is what we end up doing. You might find more happiness to try this yourself. Trust me, most people would not think any different of you. You do have to watch out for hateful bigots of course, but thankfully they are far and few between!
I never understood why people would upload a copy of a file to the Internet, manually/purposefully delete their only local copy, and proceed to complain that they no longer have a local copy. Why on earth would you delete it from your computer?!?
There is NO excuse for this problem.
This is FAR from a new issue with "the cloud" either. People used to do the exact same thing with web-hosting. They would upload their website to a web server somewhere, delete their only copy, then when the hosting company went under, had the server crash, disk failure, whatever... the user would proceed to blame the ISP for the fact the user themselves deleted their only copy from their own computer. wtf?
The standard rule for backups is, if you can't bother to have two copies (One on your computer, one backed up on another device) then it clearly wasn't important enough to warrant bitching about when you lose it. That rule implied ONE copy was not enough... Why on earth would people think ZERO copies is any better?
Hard drives die. It's a fact of life. The "if" is always a yes, only the "when" is variable. That fact alone is reason enough to already have more than one copy in your own home on your own equipment. A provider disappearing like this should be nothing worse than a minor inconvenience in finding somewhere else to host it and upload another copy, then chase down URLs pointing there and update them. Sure, that can be a bit of work and is quite annoying, but it should be nothing on the scale of data loss.
Storage is cheap. Encryption is easy (Thanks to the efforts of projects like PGP, GPG, and TrueCrypt) BackupPC is free, runs on Linux which is free, and can be as simple as an old Pentium-2 desktop sitting unused in your basement that you toss a couple extra hard drives in. You set it up once and it does everything for you! It daily grabs copies of other computers, all automated, all by itself. It can backup Linux, Windows, and even OSX via the network. You can feed it DHCP logs to watch for less frequently connected machines like laptops. It de-duplicates to save disk space, and can email you if and when a problem crops up. I only check mine twice or so a year just to make sure things are running (never had a problem yet) and as it deletes older backups only when needed to make room for new ones, with de-duplication I can go grab a file from any date between now and three years ago, at any stage of editing (Well, in 3 day increments for my servers.. but it's all configurable, and should be set based on the importance of the data!) On ubuntu and debian based systems, it is a single apt-get install away. Likely just as easy on any other distro with package management. Any true computer geek can slap together such a system with zero cost and spending less than an afternoon. Anyone else can do so for minimal cost and perhaps a day of work.
Apple has ridiculously easy backup software (Time Machine?), and Windows has the advantage of most of the software out there being written for it, so the odds that there are less than five different software packages to do this exact same thing is next to impossible.
Hell, even for non-geeks, most people have that one guy or gal in the family who supports everyones computers. Just ask them! They will likely be ecstatic to help, possibly will donate spare parts from their collection (Or find you the best prices on parts if not) - and be content in the fact they won't have to tell you things like "Sorry, your hard drive has the click-o-death, I can't recover anything from it." which no one likes to need to say.
This is worth repeating: There is NO excuse for this problem.
Personally, if it's important, I have a bare minimum of four copies. One for actually using, on my system drive. One that got a
They're not imaging the event horizon, they're trying to image the accretion disk around the central black hole, and hoping they can see the event horizon's "shadow" against it. I doubt that we're going to be directly imaging the event horizon for the central black hole anytime soon.
The telescope they are using is named "The Event Horizon Telescope" It is not being claimed anywhere that they plan to directly image the event horizon.
This might surprise you, but the Hubble telescope was not designed and launched into space with the goal of taking pictures of Edwin Hubble either:P
Now the James Webb Telescope on the other hand, that thing is run by a bunch of peeping toms for sure!
Re:Part of a money conflict within the King family
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 1
The 'work' for purposes of copyright is the *written* speech.
Are you sure?
To be honest, I wasn't at all sure either, but according to a judge it is a performance which copyright covers. Of course the trial never finished, so no legal precedent was set with that particular case... But if that's how the judge was going to rule, then there's no reason to assume a future case would be much different.
So apparently just saying something while in public with an audience is enough, such as in my original example (Despite clearly being for humors sake in that post)
Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc. (194 F.3d 1211 (11th Cir. 1999)) is a United States court case that involved a longstanding dispute about the public domain copyright status of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s famous speech, known by the key phrase I have a dream, originally delivered on the steps at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. on August 28, 1963. The court ruled that the speech was actually a performance and is, like other performances such as plays and CBS's own television shows, covered by copyright, and is not in the public domain. The case was never finally decided as the two sides ultimately settled the matter out of court.
Knowing slashdot, there will be one more dupe in a few months, about 7 days before the youtube video really is taken down, and afterward there will be no further mention of it here:/
Slashdot Mirror
No. Being "inspired" by other code is not copyright violation
Unless one party lives in the UK. Then being "inspired" by another work, and specifically creating your own new and different work to avoid infringing the first, is still a copyright violation.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/25/Imitated_Image_Copyright_Case
It might not apply to Sony or Busybox devs due to neither being in the UK, but as a blanket statement about copyright, that is no longer correct.
Nice tech! I think I saw the same movie these guys did, Runaway with wall climbing robotic killer spiders, and self guiding bullets from handguns, and Tom Selleck!
Damn I hate wall climbing robotic killer spiders... Those must be next :/
Well as long as they don't make a self guiding robotic Tom Selleck, I think we will be OK.
Maybe the killer would be lead (oh, bad pun in a SMD thread) time?
That's why I prefer 4chan for my PCBoard needs!
I can haz RoHS? *coughsolderballs*
Whatz? Iz ESD safe! I promiseses!
Come on man, its a hobby. When a dude puts together a 1000 piece puzzle you don't pee all over it by claiming you can buy a poster of the same picture and thats a better choice because you don't have to put it together... That kind of misses the point.
You do have to admit that there would be a ton of people purchasing the kit for no other reason than to save $3, and then break it and attempt to return it for a refund or hound their support email.
Perhaps if it was legal to sell kits specifically with NO warentee at all and a no return policy, then it may work... But in many countries that isn't even an option.
To take your puzzle example, yes people who do puzzles as a hobby are fine, just as people who actually like to assemble circuits like this would be fine.
But the people trying to do nothing but save a buck are the exact type who would purchase a puzzle, put most of it together, then bitch that it doesn't at all look like the poster due to the wavy lines between the pieces, and return it demanding more than a full refund at the puzzle makers expense.
I would like to believe after the first few production runs of fully built units, that later on they would put some effort into selling the specialty parts (PCB, pre-flashed chips or roms, harder to source components like odd freq crystals, etc) and put up the parts for sale individually along with the BOM and schematics.
That's the only way around the warentee problem with kits, and the only way to make it too much trouble for the people trying to only save three fifty. For electronic hobbyists, working from a BOM and schematic is business as usual, and not really any extra work we weren't expecting anyway.
Then everyone is happy!
My iPhone doesn't tell me when an app wants permission to connect to the internet or share/sell my personal information with 3rd parties :-(
Mine does. Requests per domain per app (asked once when the app tries to connect), and requests for listening sockets.
http://isource.com/2009/11/05/firewall-ip-a-firewall-app-for-the-iphone/
If you are not jailbroken, then you can only use the Apple store, and those apps are tested at the API level to verify what they do.
Sure you can't block banner ads this way, but that is by design.
Jailbreak it, and you get the Cydia app, and access to multiple stores (same repo system as apt-get, which you get installed too)
First thing you install with Cydia is the patch for the local exploit if you have any in your version of iOS. Most these days require locally rebooting the phone in a specific debugging mode, so not a remote exploit but a local one. Yes, if you ever lose a smart phone, assume you have no security in place.. For any brand/model/OS. Physical access and all that.
Between Firewall-iP and iBlacklist, I fully control every piece of data going into or out of my phone, be it calls, sms, or data.
For your data example, just replace 'mv' with 'cp' and all your problems disappear.
For the printers, use proximity to set the default selection, still letting you pick a printer from the list if you wish to override.
As for WAP restrictions, that's a huge stretch. Of course no one would want to do that, you choose an AP by user preference first, and if anything signal strength second.
Proximity detection is used as the trigger to initialize connections and get things ready for YOU to use them so you don't need to spend that time yourself, and to change default settings to ones more often than not will be the case based off where you are (thus 'default setting' and not 'permanent change')
It's not to be used as a restrictive replace-all-user-option-dialogs thing, as your examples must assume to be valid in any way.
If you make reasonable default choices for when tracking is not available, then it just enhances things for people with traceable devices, yet at the same time does not remove functions for those with out such a device.
Another example, if the lights are out in a room that a traceable device just entered, by all means turn the lights on.
But do NOT assume once the last traceable device leaves the room, that it is OK to turn the lights out! Other people might be in there now.
Either leave that manual (hit the button on the way out), or use another method (aka motion detection, no movement for X hours) for that part.
I used a similar Bluetooth setup in my old house with my phone system.
My VoIP setup had multiple outside lines (up to 12, fees were for usage), and numerous internal extensions.
I tossed some scripts together for my computers around the house to watch for the bluetooth signal from my cell phone, and routed the call depending on that data.
If my cell phone was in my kitchen, calls to my main # got redirected to the extension in the kitchen.
If my cell was in the bedroom, calls got routed to that extension instead.
If my cell was no where to be seen in the house, calls to my main # were forwarded to my cell phone number, under the assumption I was not in the house.
This saved me from using my cell phone battery while inside, but when I was out calls routed to me none the less with no configuration changes, or having to remember to flip some switch when leaving and returning.
It was pretty neat to have the phone in the family room ring once (as I was already walking upstairs) and have the ring "follow" me from there to the kitchen extension and finally to my bedroom before answering.
Behind the scenes it was a mess of asterisk configs/scripts, shell scripts, and some wrapped TCL executable for the windows machines.
But it was fairly straight forward work, not too difficult. This should be very doable as long as one has a little bit of programming (or really even just scripting) experience to glue all the bits and pieces together.
This case focused mainly on the bad faith of the creator of the second photo, and I agree that he did act in bad faith -- first using the original photo without paying for it, and then making the second as a workaround
Specifically this statement: IMO, copyright is fundamentally a good idea, if implemented with an appropriate sense of balance.
Sorry, I've said that same thought before, so you owe me royalties now.
You clearly didn't use any of the same words I've used, but you expressed the exact same idea I had, and so both broke UK law as well as admitted in writing you agree what you did should be a crime.
Just paypal me the ten thousand dollar license fee and I won't press charges :P
Thomas Babington Macaulay's speech in the House of Commons, 5 February 1841 on the obscene extension of the term of copyright protections:
I am so sensible, sir, of the kindness with which the House has listened to me, that I will not detain you longer. I will only say this, that if the measure before us should pass, and should produce one tenth part of the evil which it is calculated to produce, and which I fully expect it to produce, there will soon be a remedy, though of a very objectionable kind. Just as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by piratical booksellers.
At present, the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. Those who invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Everybody is well pleased to see them restrained by the law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. No tradesmen of good repute will have anything to do with such disgraceful transactions. Pass this law, and that feeling is at an end. Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly. Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit; and the whole nation will be in the plot.
On which side, indeed, should the public sympathy be when the question is, whether some book as popular as 'Robinson Crusoe,' or 'The Pilgrim's Progress,' shall be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great-grandson of a bookseller, who, a hundred years before, drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the author when in great distress?
Remember, too, that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop. The public seldom makes nice distinctions. The wholesome copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace and danger of the new copyright which you are about to create. And you will find, that, in attempting to impose unreasonable restraints on the reprinting of the works of the dead, you have, to a great extent, annulled those restraints which now prevent men from pillaging and defrauding the living."
http://prq.se/?p=tunnel&intl=1
PRQ is based in Sweden, and has their own ASN (read: they are their own network, connected to multiple upstream backbones)
They offer all types of services in addition to VPNs: colo, dedicated hosting, and shared hosting.
Their tunnels offer a static IP and no ports blocked (for running servers if that's your thing), so you'll want to provide your own firewalling. They use straight OpenVPN too.
They have a strict privacy policy and appear to follow it.
This is the same ISP that hosts the pirate bay too, which should give you an idea how they handle requests from certain other countries due to the whining of certain media cartels...
I've been a customer for awhile now and quite happy.
I am even planning to colo with them in the next couple of months if all goes well. (Previous data center I've been with has changed company names like three times now in the past six months, and now plans to jack their pricing up)
If this type of service was only meant for personal backups and not illegal file sharing, this would have been the standard in the first place.
Why would anyone ever have to "share" backup files with anyone else.
Well you're in luck, I have a document file here with the full answer to your question, with detailed explanations abound!
It also contains the secret to life, and a pony.
Now if only I had a place to upload that file and share the link with you...
Oh well, as you say no one has or ever would have a need to do such a thing. Guess you'll have to do without.
It was an adorable pony too!
A gravity tractor approach can work against any type of asteroid, including the ones that are nothing more than a ball of dust so large that its own gravity is all that holds it together.
The tractor would need to fly out to the asteroid, be able to maneuver itself to stay in a relative position to it, and just keep itself there. It will slowly modify the course of the asteroid by pulling it in one direction or the other, or by speeding it up or slowing it down by being positioned in front or behind.
We pretty much have the components we need, a probe with maneuvering thrusters, and weight.
If we actually had a chance of pulling it off, multiple launches to assemble the final product out of earths gravity well won't be as much of an issue.
We have sent probes to comets before, so we have the ability to both get it there and have it maneuver around it. Different flight plan of course so likely a different design than our current ones, but as we don't have to land or anything fancy, it should be less complex than our current probes designed to return something from the comet (be it touch down, bounces off, fly through the tail, etc)
A gravity tractor just needs to hold itself in a relative position to the asteroid, and keep itself there. We can already do that for short time periods right now.
The most straight forward approach is to simply include more fuel. But money won't be infinite and that is far from the most efficient way we could go about working around that problem.
We have a pretty good chance of pulling off the actual design and more importantly construction of such a device. Technically even our current methods right now can do this, it would just be insanely expensive. But a proper design can fix a lot of that problem, if we get started on the design before the thing is needed.
It would be nice to have one built and sitting around on the ready, but there is no way we would waste the money needed using our current methods and designs.
If it was designed properly, where the cost is made as low as possible, we would know if that is even an option or not.
So your solution to protecting the batteries are adding heavy Steel plates to the car. Which in turn adds more weight and gives less mileage.
Or you could just go exercise a bit and lose 3 pounds of weight to make up for the difference, if your mileage is that important to you...
I'd love to see some definition of what made classic games more 'game' than things like Battlefield, Portal or Minecraft.
Well that's simple. Elitism and snobbery!
To those people, the definition of a game is pretty straight forward:
"If I don't like it, then it is not a game at all"
"If I do like it, and so do others, it is a pop game"
"If I do like it, and others don't even know it exists, then it is a true game"
Seems to fit perfectly with the GP comment too.
Of course the true definition of a game is "Something you do to have fun or compete at" ;}
But don't let the game snobs hear you say it, you might get mauled
In this case it means a $100 fine + lawyer fees, permanent loss of her career and teaching credentials, and thus the future ability to pay that fine (not to mention bills), as well as majorly restricting her future employment to that only requiring "High school graduate" level of education.
Wikipedia is once again misrepresenting the facts if that is worded to imply she was found innocent and nothing further happened to her.
I'd correct it myself but odds are 99 to 1 the moderator who assigned themselves that page will just revert my change and the citations added, so it's not worth the work
But my point was to counter your statement, that one is assumed innocent and someone somewhere must prove they left the javascript page open on purpose, and simply claiming they didn't know and/or was being exploited is enough to get them off the hook.
It just simply does not work that way.
Here is a case where the same situation happen: Computer was infected, it was doing things outside of her control, all she could do was turn the computer off but the students kept turning it back on (Likely to see the porn, must be pretty scarring to their fragile little minds while they were seeking it out) and the teacher faced a max of 40 years in prison.
The computer expert testimony even stated in court that the infection was a drive-by-download and so not her fault, and other than what she did (turn it off) she couldn't have been expected to do anything further that would have been required to fix it. ;}
The judge agreed and tossed out as many of the charges as he could, and hoped the prosecution would give her a new trial or let her off the hook.
If you are at all familiar with Windows and its wonderful security layers, you have no doubt even seen this happen and perhaps have been asked to magically fix it up without a reformat and reinstall. I've had it happen to friends, family, and coworkers many many times. Even the ones of them that do look at porn online, I am pretty certain they only want it to show up when they go to open it, not every 30 seconds automatically covering the desktop
Anyways, about letting her off the hook? That didn't happen, and the prosecution still pressed onward. They blackmailed her into plea bargaining with the threat that in the new trial they would get their 40 years of prison time and forced her to pay them $100, the lawyers tens of thousands of dollars of fees, and forfeit her teaching credentials, thus to give up 4-6 years of her life as wasted (aka college) and her entire future career working as a teacher (aka all the "big bucks" that teachers make, which she trained so long to do)
SO now this poor innocent woman has lost nearly a decade of her life total over this (6 years of schooling wasted, 4 years for the trial wasted), an amount of money in the 5 digit range, and in the job market she is effectively at "high school graduate" level now, when it comes time to base her pay and judge her qualifications.
In this case, that is exactly what "vacated on appeal" means.
I just ask that anyone thinking of running this tool - think about the above case and how fair and balanced our legal system is, before doing it.
As for those claiming that nuclear is safe because even with this accident everything is fine... just read a little more about all the food and radiation scandals going on.
So basically what you are saying, is that if you were driving your 1910 Ford Model-T on the road, and had a collision with a car built in 2011, you think they will take equal damage, and so all cars are bad things. Because exactly zero progression in technology has made cars any safer...
Except in this case the Model-T got hit by a truck at 90mph, and the driver survived.
No, I'm not going to point out how factually incorrect your statement is, I just came to make a car analogy.
you would have to prove that the browser user was deliberately participating rather than innocently exploited while viewing a completely innocent page
Not really. A school teacher was convicted due to a classroom computer being infected before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Connecticut_v._Julie_Amero
We just got done with a well-constructed, well-reasoned, well-executed protest against SOPA and PIPA, and we killed those bills dead as a *direct result*.
That simply has not happened.
The sponsor of SOPA has recently also pushed new anti-childpornography laws through the house and congress, in preparation for attaching SOPA as a rider.
He has already admitted the ONLY problem with the last SOPA was that he let the public know about it, giving them time to express their dislike, and has stated he learned from that mistake.
As in, the damaging effects, the destruction it will cause, and the fact people are against it, he doesn't see any of that as a problem. Only that the public had time to counter it.
This time next year, SOPA *WILL* be law.
* Note I am not arguing in favor of DDoS either. You are quite right in that such attacks have not helped anything one bit, and are not part of any functioning solution.
So basically you say being homosexual is a choice they make.
Why would you think this, unless it is similar in your case?
So you admit that day in and day out you have to force yourself to choose to be sexually attracted to females, and that is not what simply comes naturally to you?
I know I don't make any choice to be attracted to the opposite sex, it just sorta IS for me. I don't have to try to do it, like you seem to do and assume everyone else does as well.
I'm guessing since you are not naturally attracted to women and have to choose that, that perhaps your problems are related to denying your own body's natural urges and forcing yourself to be attracted to the opposite sex.
Hiding your true feelings like that is not physically good for you. It causes stress, emotional pain, and other mental problems that would all simply go away if you just did what came naturally, instead of forcing this choice of being straight onto yourself.
That is how most of us live. Whatever feels right sexually is what we end up doing.
You might find more happiness to try this yourself. Trust me, most people would not think any different of you. You do have to watch out for hateful bigots of course, but thankfully they are far and few between!
All this... Over movies & music.
This coincidential yahoo news screen shot shows two facts together that really puts the whole music and movie thing into perspective...
http://i44.tinypic.com/vpwbht.jpg
The two headlines are:
- Jury awards $80,000 per download
- Air France to give $24,000 to families of crash victims
1 illegal download == 3.3 dead relatives
Your life is only worth a third of a Metallica song
I never understood why people would upload a copy of a file to the Internet, manually/purposefully delete their only local copy, and proceed to complain that they no longer have a local copy.
Why on earth would you delete it from your computer?!?
There is NO excuse for this problem.
This is FAR from a new issue with "the cloud" either.
People used to do the exact same thing with web-hosting.
They would upload their website to a web server somewhere, delete their only copy, then when the hosting company went under, had the server crash, disk failure, whatever... the user would proceed to blame the ISP for the fact the user themselves deleted their only copy from their own computer. wtf?
The standard rule for backups is, if you can't bother to have two copies (One on your computer, one backed up on another device) then it clearly wasn't important enough to warrant bitching about when you lose it. That rule implied ONE copy was not enough... Why on earth would people think ZERO copies is any better?
Hard drives die. It's a fact of life. The "if" is always a yes, only the "when" is variable.
That fact alone is reason enough to already have more than one copy in your own home on your own equipment.
A provider disappearing like this should be nothing worse than a minor inconvenience in finding somewhere else to host it and upload another copy, then chase down URLs pointing there and update them. Sure, that can be a bit of work and is quite annoying, but it should be nothing on the scale of data loss.
Storage is cheap.
Encryption is easy (Thanks to the efforts of projects like PGP, GPG, and TrueCrypt)
BackupPC is free, runs on Linux which is free, and can be as simple as an old Pentium-2 desktop sitting unused in your basement that you toss a couple extra hard drives in.
You set it up once and it does everything for you! It daily grabs copies of other computers, all automated, all by itself. It can backup Linux, Windows, and even OSX via the network. You can feed it DHCP logs to watch for less frequently connected machines like laptops. It de-duplicates to save disk space, and can email you if and when a problem crops up. I only check mine twice or so a year just to make sure things are running (never had a problem yet) and as it deletes older backups only when needed to make room for new ones, with de-duplication I can go grab a file from any date between now and three years ago, at any stage of editing (Well, in 3 day increments for my servers.. but it's all configurable, and should be set based on the importance of the data!)
On ubuntu and debian based systems, it is a single apt-get install away. Likely just as easy on any other distro with package management.
Any true computer geek can slap together such a system with zero cost and spending less than an afternoon. Anyone else can do so for minimal cost and perhaps a day of work.
Apple has ridiculously easy backup software (Time Machine?), and Windows has the advantage of most of the software out there being written for it, so the odds that there are less than five different software packages to do this exact same thing is next to impossible.
Hell, even for non-geeks, most people have that one guy or gal in the family who supports everyones computers. Just ask them! They will likely be ecstatic to help, possibly will donate spare parts from their collection (Or find you the best prices on parts if not) - and be content in the fact they won't have to tell you things like "Sorry, your hard drive has the click-o-death, I can't recover anything from it." which no one likes to need to say.
This is worth repeating: There is NO excuse for this problem.
Personally, if it's important, I have a bare minimum of four copies.
One for actually using, on my system drive.
One that got a
I maded you a relativistic equation, but I eated it.
Does that look anything like this?
They're not imaging the event horizon, they're trying to image the accretion disk around the central black hole, and hoping they can see the event horizon's "shadow" against it. I doubt that we're going to be directly imaging the event horizon for the central black hole anytime soon.
The telescope they are using is named "The Event Horizon Telescope"
It is not being claimed anywhere that they plan to directly image the event horizon.
This might surprise you, but the Hubble telescope was not designed and launched into space with the goal of taking pictures of Edwin Hubble either :P
Now the James Webb Telescope on the other hand, that thing is run by a bunch of peeping toms for sure!
The 'work' for purposes of copyright is the *written* speech.
Are you sure?
To be honest, I wasn't at all sure either, but according to a judge it is a performance which copyright covers.
Of course the trial never finished, so no legal precedent was set with that particular case... But if that's how the judge was going to rule, then there's no reason to assume a future case would be much different.
So apparently just saying something while in public with an audience is enough, such as in my original example (Despite clearly being for humors sake in that post)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_of_Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.,_Inc._v._CBS,_Inc.
Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc. (194 F.3d 1211 (11th Cir. 1999)) is a United States court case that involved a longstanding dispute about the public domain copyright status of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s famous speech, known by the key phrase I have a dream, originally delivered on the steps at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. on August 28, 1963. The court ruled that the speech was actually a performance and is, like other performances such as plays and CBS's own television shows, covered by copyright, and is not in the public domain. The case was never finally decided as the two sides ultimately settled the matter out of court.
Not only is it a dupe, but it's just as incorrect then as it is now.
Jan 20th, 2011 - MLK's speech, uploaded to youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smEqnnklfYs
Aug 29th 2011 - First slashdot article claiming the above doesn't exist,
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/08/29/1728259/The-Copyright-Nightmare-of-I-Have-a-Dream
Jan 17 2012 - Second slashdot article claiming the above doesn't exist.
http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/01/17/1955257/a-copyright-nightmare
Knowing slashdot, there will be one more dupe in a few months, about 7 days before the youtube video really is taken down, and afterward there will be no further mention of it here :/
P.S. Soulkill posted both of the stories as well