Are they claiming to have invented something? If so, they are engaging in some form of fraud at least similar to plagiarism, but it would seem more likely that they are using the trade secret as a trade secret themselves. If they don't claim it's their own work, it's not plagiarism.
What 'proper news sites' are you talking about? Even significant amounts of tech press dumb things down, let alone news sources aimed at the general public.
I'd say it's a fair wager that the number of parties that are interested in this and know what Jolla/Sailfish is outweigh the number of parties that don't know but are still interested. Slashdot is not intended to be a general purpose news site, and it has no reason to spoonfeed all readers on subjects that they are quite likely to already be familiar with.
The 'current crop of terrorists' are not a huge threat in the grand scheme of things, and not terribly far from other periods in history. The big difference is the lack of a credible military threat to overshadow it. They've also managed to be largely incompetent, although often times slightly less incompetent than our intelligence agencies. It's basically keystone cops vs. storm troopers here.
Only the first generation would be irradiated. The point of this seems to be getting around Monsanto's patents and perhaps selling crops in areas where GMOs are banned.
What about the people whose rights are trampled on by this? How about we treat spying on allies as a serious crime for which heads will roll like they should.
This would probably be a far more useful application of it. Say that you have a tendency to drunkenly dial/text a certain subset of people. If your phone detects that you are drunk, it prevents you from dialing those numbers and embarrassing yourself.
How to use Windows and Office are going to fit that category but AFAIK, there are no certifications for those. But I think that you'll find more people are going to be using tools or raising kids than using sharepoint.
You pick up some degree of skills that are helpful, yes. You also pick up other skills that make it harder than to just learn from scratch. This is especially true if a company has a tendency to ignore neutral standards.
Generally speaking, a shop class will teach you skills that are useful for tools not made by Dewalt, band will be useful for playing instruments not made by Yamaha, and Home Ec will provide skills that are useful outside of Rubbermaid products.
I was talking about the intended means, not the intended purpose. The sharing of information likely wasn't anywhere near as big a factor (in theory) as the incentive for inventing in the first place.
Actually, disclosure serves more of a purpose in avoiding duplication than increasing public knowledge. France had a patent system without disclosure at one point, and it ended up making patents all but useless. If you could practice your invention and keep it secret for longer than 20 years, you'd be a moron to get a patent. The benefits of disclosure are not a theoretical increase in pubic knowledge, that's just a talking point made by patent apologists.
Will you please stop perpetuating the myth that patents protect the little guy from the big corporation? It makes no sense that a legal monopoly would be a boon to small competitors. Corporations didn't even exist in a meaningful way when patent law was brought into existence. The intent was not to protect the little guy from the big guy, but to protect the little guy from a thousand other little guys who didn't have ideas.
It's probably not a coincidence, given that Miyamoto is left-handed. And remember, the Wii also targeted people who weren't already avid gamers, and wouldn't be conditioned.
I thought they released one for giants, and then realized that humans made up the overwhelming majority of their demographic, and released a second one for humans.
Looks like they didn't make any substantial changes to it besides moving the home button and going with a different design for the D-pad, which was more or less perfected in the SNES/Genesis era.
It's not free of government interference, it is government interference. The uber-rich fucks are scared as hell of a world in which the government doesn't protect them.
Free trade would be deregulated trade. That's what 'free' means here. Uninhibited. Success and failure in such would be based upon the market. Now, this may or may not be a good thing. We are talking about the meaning of free trade, not 'good trade.' You can have a trade agreement that isn't a free trade agreement, and that sounds like what you want. That's fine. Just don't call it a free trade agreement.
BTW, TPP is pretty much the definition of crony capitalism, in which the regulations and lack thereof are based upon what best suits industries and players within with strong ties to the government.
If you want to have a complex system of protectionism trade agreement, you can have one of those. Just don't call it a free trade agreement if the reasons for restricting trade go far beyond direct physical harm upon citizens.
Yeah, because that's not going to be subject to abuse. Cops that are actually undercover would probably be exempt from this, although the number of legit operations they have is pretty limited.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but unjust laws should not be obeyed by either FOSS or proprietary code.
They do have snazzy outfits...
Right and left don't fit well with anarchist and authoritarian, which is the dichotomy you are describing.
Are they claiming to have invented something? If so, they are engaging in some form of fraud at least similar to plagiarism, but it would seem more likely that they are using the trade secret as a trade secret themselves. If they don't claim it's their own work, it's not plagiarism.
What 'proper news sites' are you talking about? Even significant amounts of tech press dumb things down, let alone news sources aimed at the general public.
I'd say it's a fair wager that the number of parties that are interested in this and know what Jolla/Sailfish is outweigh the number of parties that don't know but are still interested. Slashdot is not intended to be a general purpose news site, and it has no reason to spoonfeed all readers on subjects that they are quite likely to already be familiar with.
The 'current crop of terrorists' are not a huge threat in the grand scheme of things, and not terribly far from other periods in history. The big difference is the lack of a credible military threat to overshadow it. They've also managed to be largely incompetent, although often times slightly less incompetent than our intelligence agencies. It's basically keystone cops vs. storm troopers here.
Only the first generation would be irradiated. The point of this seems to be getting around Monsanto's patents and perhaps selling crops in areas where GMOs are banned.
What about the people whose rights are trampled on by this? How about we treat spying on allies as a serious crime for which heads will roll like they should.
This would probably be a far more useful application of it. Say that you have a tendency to drunkenly dial/text a certain subset of people. If your phone detects that you are drunk, it prevents you from dialing those numbers and embarrassing yourself.
How to use Windows and Office are going to fit that category but AFAIK, there are no certifications for those. But I think that you'll find more people are going to be using tools or raising kids than using sharepoint.
You pick up some degree of skills that are helpful, yes. You also pick up other skills that make it harder than to just learn from scratch. This is especially true if a company has a tendency to ignore neutral standards.
Generally speaking, a shop class will teach you skills that are useful for tools not made by Dewalt, band will be useful for playing instruments not made by Yamaha, and Home Ec will provide skills that are useful outside of Rubbermaid products.
Isn't the point of currency just to be a sophisticated form of barter? So, it serves the same purpose as currency.
I was talking about the intended means, not the intended purpose. The sharing of information likely wasn't anywhere near as big a factor (in theory) as the incentive for inventing in the first place.
Actually, disclosure serves more of a purpose in avoiding duplication than increasing public knowledge. France had a patent system without disclosure at one point, and it ended up making patents all but useless. If you could practice your invention and keep it secret for longer than 20 years, you'd be a moron to get a patent. The benefits of disclosure are not a theoretical increase in pubic knowledge, that's just a talking point made by patent apologists.
Will you please stop perpetuating the myth that patents protect the little guy from the big corporation? It makes no sense that a legal monopoly would be a boon to small competitors. Corporations didn't even exist in a meaningful way when patent law was brought into existence. The intent was not to protect the little guy from the big guy, but to protect the little guy from a thousand other little guys who didn't have ideas.
It has changed. 5 years is not standard for both desktop and server LTS releases.
It's probably not a coincidence, given that Miyamoto is left-handed. And remember, the Wii also targeted people who weren't already avid gamers, and wouldn't be conditioned.
I thought they released one for giants, and then realized that humans made up the overwhelming majority of their demographic, and released a second one for humans.
Looks like they didn't make any substantial changes to it besides moving the home button and going with a different design for the D-pad, which was more or less perfected in the SNES/Genesis era.
It's not free of government interference, it is government interference. The uber-rich fucks are scared as hell of a world in which the government doesn't protect them.
Free trade would be deregulated trade. That's what 'free' means here. Uninhibited. Success and failure in such would be based upon the market. Now, this may or may not be a good thing. We are talking about the meaning of free trade, not 'good trade.' You can have a trade agreement that isn't a free trade agreement, and that sounds like what you want. That's fine. Just don't call it a free trade agreement.
BTW, TPP is pretty much the definition of crony capitalism, in which the regulations and lack thereof are based upon what best suits industries and players within with strong ties to the government.
If you want to have a complex system of protectionism trade agreement, you can have one of those. Just don't call it a free trade agreement if the reasons for restricting trade go far beyond direct physical harm upon citizens.
Yeah, because that's not going to be subject to abuse. Cops that are actually undercover would probably be exempt from this, although the number of legit operations they have is pretty limited.