If this proposal was to be enacted, I'd be curious to see whether it hampers efforts by SOCAN to then sue or harass file swappers. By forcing royalties from the ISPs, they're effectively saying 'Yes, we know our content gets swapped on this channel, and we're taking our share', and lending it an air of legitimacy. Presumably, that's not the intent, though, and they want to extract royalties and continue to persecute the end user by other means.
Regardless, that could be an interesting development.
The warchalkers are not taking anything. Rather, they are requesting a service, and it is being granted to them incorrectly. The decision to allow access to the network is made by an entity within that company. Normally, that entity's supervisor would be responsible for correcting it. In this case, the network admin.
Imagine a waiter at a restaurant who gives extra food (or service) to those who ask. Management may not approve of this practice, but it is in no way the responsibility of the customer to not ask.
Asking for a service is not a crime. Using a service provided illegitimately is not theft, unless an attempt has been made to mislead the provider. In this case, this has not happened.
With all the recent articles about "astroturfing" (I'd link to them, but search is down right now) here on Slashdot, why is it that when a Linux group does it, it's the responsiblity of a single person who is quickly singled out, but when the group from Redmond does it, suddenly it's the entire corporation that is to blame?
Microsoft has a distinct chain of command and responsibility. Linux groups generally don't (at least not formalised).
If a single user in a Linux group (or OS, or other misc mob like geek group) does something dumb, we can all stand around and say 'We don't know him. He's nothing to do with us.'
In a large company, each person is charged with certain responsibilities. If employees make a fool of themselves while in the company's service, the company can't turn around and say that.
Since noone else seems to have explained this, I'll give it a go;
The technique used is spectroscopy. When you heat up the gaseous form of an element, it radiates electromagnetic energy. The characteristics of this energy are very specific, and relate to the atomic structure of the gas. Similarly, by heating up any other gas, a radiation of a specific spectrum is emitted. By observing the radiation from stellar bodies, and comparing the spectra with those obtained from controlled laboratory experiments on earth we can determine the makeup of gases in space.
I found some useful material that might explain this more fully as part of the notes for a course at Cornell here.
This is a simplified explanation; I've left out some stuff (like absorption), but you'll find info on how it works in most undergrad astrophysics textbooks.
The notion that books will disappear in their entirety is mildly ridiculous. While I could imagine technical books that rapidly become obsolete, newspapers, office memos, and other short life documentation might be disappear, there are some types of books that just aren't practical to replace, at least at this stage. By this I mean books whose content is largely graphical. These are impractical because it would take a fairly substantial leap from 'little rotating black and white spheres' to a technology capable of producing the resolution and range of colour needed to reproduce photographs well.
Also, books of this nature tend to be larger than usual (especially Atlases..), and while a smaller display area with some sort of scroll and zoom function might serve, it doesn't give anywhere near the same impression as a full colour spread.
That all aside, a nice portable device for reading technical books etc would be nice. I don't really want to waste the paper to print out big unwieldy.pdfs, but it'd really be nice to be able to look through them somewhere other than my desk.
Slashdot Mirror
If this proposal was to be enacted, I'd be curious to see whether it hampers efforts by SOCAN to then sue or harass file swappers. By forcing royalties from the ISPs, they're effectively saying 'Yes, we know our content gets swapped on this channel, and we're taking our share', and lending it an air of legitimacy. Presumably, that's not the intent, though, and they want to extract royalties and continue to persecute the end user by other means.
Regardless, that could be an interesting development.
No. It is not theft.
The warchalkers are not taking anything. Rather, they are requesting a service, and it is being granted to them incorrectly. The decision to allow access to the network is made by an entity within that company. Normally, that entity's supervisor would be responsible for correcting it. In this case, the network admin.
Imagine a waiter at a restaurant who gives extra food (or service) to those who ask. Management may not approve of this practice, but it is in no way the responsibility of the customer to not ask.
Asking for a service is not a crime. Using a service provided illegitimately is not theft, unless an attempt has been made to mislead the provider. In this case, this has not happened.
Well, that's interesting.
Me, while I still give due consideration to IE, I design first for Mozilla.
All the QA folk here use IE, though, so I have to be careful.
With all the recent articles about "astroturfing" (I'd link to them, but search is down right now) here on Slashdot, why is it that when a Linux group does it, it's the responsiblity of a single person who is quickly singled out, but when the group from Redmond does it, suddenly it's the entire corporation that is to blame?
Microsoft has a distinct chain of command and responsibility. Linux groups generally don't (at least not formalised).
If a single user in a Linux group (or OS, or other misc mob like geek group) does something dumb, we can all stand around and say 'We don't know him. He's nothing to do with us.'
In a large company, each person is charged with certain responsibilities. If employees make a fool of themselves while in the company's service, the company can't turn around and say that.
Since noone else seems to have explained this, I'll give it a go;
The technique used is spectroscopy. When you heat up the gaseous form of an element, it radiates electromagnetic energy. The characteristics of this energy are very specific, and relate to the atomic structure of the gas. Similarly, by heating up any other gas, a radiation of a specific spectrum is emitted. By observing the radiation from stellar bodies, and comparing the spectra with those obtained from controlled laboratory experiments on earth we can determine the makeup of gases in space.
I found some useful material that might explain this more fully as part of the notes for a course at Cornell here.
This is a simplified explanation; I've left out some stuff (like absorption), but you'll find info on how it works in most undergrad astrophysics textbooks.
Aig.
The notion that books will disappear in their entirety is mildly ridiculous. While I could imagine technical books that rapidly become obsolete, newspapers, office memos, and other short life documentation might be disappear, there are some types of books that just aren't practical to replace, at least at this stage. By this I mean books whose content is largely graphical. These are impractical because it would take a fairly substantial leap from 'little rotating black and white spheres' to a technology capable of producing the resolution and range of colour needed to reproduce photographs well.
.pdfs, but it'd really be nice to be able to look through them somewhere other than my desk.
Also, books of this nature tend to be larger than usual (especially Atlases..), and while a smaller display area with some sort of scroll and zoom function might serve, it doesn't give anywhere near the same impression as a full colour spread.
That all aside, a nice portable device for reading technical books etc would be nice. I don't really want to waste the paper to print out big unwieldy