I'm a big fan of MediaHookup.com, a Ning network for media folks and creative types to swap tips, job postings, etc. And it's not just because I run it.
Ok, yes, it is just because I run it.
But really, I think there's a lot of value in niche-topic social networks. Twitter and Facebook are all well and good for mass contact and general socialization. That need's fairly well-filled. Other networks that fill more specific needs -- either in terms of collaboration or in terms of narrow focus -- are more interesting to me these days. Of course, that can be done as a via subsets of the larger networks too. But it's nice not to have all your eggs in one basket.
Who says that's "trouble?" That's exactly what those who release their code uder the BSD license choose to allow. The BSD code is wholly free. Its derivatives may or may not be. There's no stealing/pilfering going on -- those making the derivatives have permission to close off their versions of the work.
That's a silly, silly bet. Wine has made amazing strides, in particular when it comes to certain popular applications, but it can only run so many apps, and most of them with some glitches or incompatibilities.
Windows 7 will run virtually everything that runs properly on Vista. Most Windows software ran on Vista on Day 1. And for what didn't, or for what didn't work properly - virtually any software that's still being maintained has been updated so that it will. Compatibility bugfixes to Vista helped some software that's not under continued development too.
Vista introduced certain incompatibilities, and I'm sure Windows 7 will too -- but there's just no way Wine can hope to run as much Windows software as -any- currentish version of Windows does.
Are you reading the Kent County Daily Times? I used to be the editor (mid-2006 to mid-2007). I know the paper is continuing to struggle and has cut back some under its new ownership. It needs more people like you.
To the GP - Yes, papers that deliver real news no one else is providing are more -valuable- to the reader, but they're also more expensive to produce. Staff costs money. That's why the people in the expensive suits are making what appear from the outside to be boneheaded decisions about what to cut. They've got two options: Lay out a lot of cash and produce a quality product, hoping the readers and advertisers will reward you for your efforts; or cut costs to slow the bleeding while getting pummeled by readers' and advertisers' shift away from print, a failing auto industry (among the biggest advertisers papers have ever had), and a general economic downturn. The dirty little secret is that in most instances, both business plans will fail.
Small community newspapers have a shot of surviving, but I fear not dailies like the Kent County Daily Times. There's just too much overhead involved in producing a daily paper. But well-done community weeklies have a shot. They're cheap to produce, can pack a lot of information into an issue, can deliver an explicitly local audience to their advertisers, and aren't as vulnerable to the Internet because immediacy was never their big selling point anyway. Twice-a-weekers like the Warwick Beacon also could do well (and John Howell, the owner/editor, is a smart enough business man to keep his papers afloat for some time, even in this climate).
I can't stand Bush and think his presidency has been among the most dangerous in modern history, but there's no credible evidence he "let" 9/11" happen. There's evidence he treated the threat too lightly, but no real reason to believe he had specific knowledge of what would happen and chose to look the other way. What not-so-credible evidence has been presented by conspiracy theorists has been debunked to high heaven.
That you think you need special rights to use the software is a consequence of the EULA-happy environment corporations have been creating for a few decades now.
If you obtained the software legitimately, you can do anything you want with it, short of unauthorized redistribution (which is prevented by copyright). You can use it in any way you want. If you own a table, you can put your dinner on it, you can stand on it to reach your chandelier, you can barricade your door with it, you can chop it up for firewood -- it's yours to do with as you see fit. Same thing goes with software.
What the GPL and other similar licenses so is grant you permission to redistribute the software (which otherwise wouldn't be allowed), so long as you follow certain conditions (in the case of the GPL, making the source code available). If you reject the terms of the GPL, that's fine -- you can still use the software. But you no longer have permission to redistribute it.
I basically agree with your reading, though certainly the inclusion of the clause gives fodder to at least argue the wording is ambiguous.
I just wish some high-ranking legislative leader would have the guts to say: "Look, the Founding Fathers really fucked us with how awkwardly they worded the Second Amendment. These guys clearly could write, they made lucid presentations of what they wanted in all the other amendments. Maybe they were just dicking us around. But it doesn't matter what they intended. It matters what we intend. So let's draft a new amendment, and toss the old one out. Now, America: What sort of gun control do or don't you want?"
But no one wants to put the question of what gun control democracy would say we should have on the table - because both sides are afraid they'll lose, or be made to accept uncomfortable compromises.
The ones who are in the left lane at one mile below the limit are doing nearly the maximum the law allows anywhere on that roadway. You're the asshole who's deciding what rules apply to you and knowingly risking people's lives to try to make some sort of misguided point. Get off the road, please.
My bad. Just re-read the GP. Yeah, the GP doesn't make much sense. The expiration shouldn't depend on whether the patent was sitting in a drawer; it should happen either way.
I think the point was that it's sad evolutionary theory, which is pretty well borne out, isn't the default belief, and needs advocates to defend it against the superstitious folk.
The point isn't that you'd get a pop-up when everything's going right - you'd get a pop-up when someone's attempting the man-in-the middle attack. And if the users aren't savvy, or assume as the OP said that the certificate has just expired, they're going to click through anyway.
At A30 is oddly bad at 1080p/60 (but just fine at 1080p/24, if you've got a TV that swings it), in a way that suggests a processing screw-up. It handles 1080i just fine, and most reviews recommend setting it to that if your TV does a good job with the deinterlacing. From what I understand, 24fps film content converted properly to 1080p/60 should work out identically to 24fps film content converted first to 1080i/60 then deinterlaced.
And the creator has no less of the product than he used to. This is why "intellectual property" doesn't really cleanly fit the traditional definition of "property" at all, and why our usual mores surrounding it don't apply well.
The grandparent is right - there is no "loss." Whether that's material is a matter of great debate. You say because the kid benefited, the creator deserves compensation. The grandparent correctly notes all there has been is gain on the part of the kid, not loss on the part of the creator; it's not a materialistic system - and there was no alternative option in which the creator would have gained. There may, however, be other decent arguments that the creator has been wronged.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a big fan of MediaHookup.com, a Ning network for media folks and creative types to swap tips, job postings, etc. And it's not just because I run it.
Ok, yes, it is just because I run it.
But really, I think there's a lot of value in niche-topic social networks. Twitter and Facebook are all well and good for mass contact and general socialization. That need's fairly well-filled. Other networks that fill more specific needs -- either in terms of collaboration or in terms of narrow focus -- are more interesting to me these days. Of course, that can be done as a via subsets of the larger networks too. But it's nice not to have all your eggs in one basket.
Who says that's "trouble?" That's exactly what those who release their code uder the BSD license choose to allow. The BSD code is wholly free. Its derivatives may or may not be. There's no stealing/pilfering going on -- those making the derivatives have permission to close off their versions of the work.
There are good car analogies?
I don't think it's working.
That's a silly, silly bet. Wine has made amazing strides, in particular when it comes to certain popular applications, but it can only run so many apps, and most of them with some glitches or incompatibilities.
Windows 7 will run virtually everything that runs properly on Vista. Most Windows software ran on Vista on Day 1. And for what didn't, or for what didn't work properly - virtually any software that's still being maintained has been updated so that it will. Compatibility bugfixes to Vista helped some software that's not under continued development too.
Vista introduced certain incompatibilities, and I'm sure Windows 7 will too -- but there's just no way Wine can hope to run as much Windows software as -any- currentish version of Windows does.
Are you reading the Kent County Daily Times? I used to be the editor (mid-2006 to mid-2007). I know the paper is continuing to struggle and has cut back some under its new ownership. It needs more people like you.
To the GP - Yes, papers that deliver real news no one else is providing are more -valuable- to the reader, but they're also more expensive to produce. Staff costs money. That's why the people in the expensive suits are making what appear from the outside to be boneheaded decisions about what to cut. They've got two options: Lay out a lot of cash and produce a quality product, hoping the readers and advertisers will reward you for your efforts; or cut costs to slow the bleeding while getting pummeled by readers' and advertisers' shift away from print, a failing auto industry (among the biggest advertisers papers have ever had), and a general economic downturn. The dirty little secret is that in most instances, both business plans will fail.
Small community newspapers have a shot of surviving, but I fear not dailies like the Kent County Daily Times. There's just too much overhead involved in producing a daily paper. But well-done community weeklies have a shot. They're cheap to produce, can pack a lot of information into an issue, can deliver an explicitly local audience to their advertisers, and aren't as vulnerable to the Internet because immediacy was never their big selling point anyway. Twice-a-weekers like the Warwick Beacon also could do well (and John Howell, the owner/editor, is a smart enough business man to keep his papers afloat for some time, even in this climate).
I can't stand Bush and think his presidency has been among the most dangerous in modern history, but there's no credible evidence he "let" 9/11" happen. There's evidence he treated the threat too lightly, but no real reason to believe he had specific knowledge of what would happen and chose to look the other way. What not-so-credible evidence has been presented by conspiracy theorists has been debunked to high heaven.
Hate him on the indisputable merits. It's easier.
And I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids.
Some of us wash our opinions very carefully, and even use moisturized baby wipes when available.
We're gonna need another Timmy!
That you think you need special rights to use the software is a consequence of the EULA-happy environment corporations have been creating for a few decades now.
If you obtained the software legitimately, you can do anything you want with it, short of unauthorized redistribution (which is prevented by copyright). You can use it in any way you want. If you own a table, you can put your dinner on it, you can stand on it to reach your chandelier, you can barricade your door with it, you can chop it up for firewood -- it's yours to do with as you see fit. Same thing goes with software.
What the GPL and other similar licenses so is grant you permission to redistribute the software (which otherwise wouldn't be allowed), so long as you follow certain conditions (in the case of the GPL, making the source code available). If you reject the terms of the GPL, that's fine -- you can still use the software. But you no longer have permission to redistribute it.
I basically agree with your reading, though certainly the inclusion of the clause gives fodder to at least argue the wording is ambiguous.
I just wish some high-ranking legislative leader would have the guts to say: "Look, the Founding Fathers really fucked us with how awkwardly they worded the Second Amendment. These guys clearly could write, they made lucid presentations of what they wanted in all the other amendments. Maybe they were just dicking us around. But it doesn't matter what they intended. It matters what we intend. So let's draft a new amendment, and toss the old one out. Now, America: What sort of gun control do or don't you want?"
But no one wants to put the question of what gun control democracy would say we should have on the table - because both sides are afraid they'll lose, or be made to accept uncomfortable compromises.
The ones who are in the left lane at one mile below the limit are doing nearly the maximum the law allows anywhere on that roadway. You're the asshole who's deciding what rules apply to you and knowingly risking people's lives to try to make some sort of misguided point. Get off the road, please.
Now that's funny.
Why can't the office be well-lit? Light drivers not working yet?
My bad. Just re-read the GP. Yeah, the GP doesn't make much sense. The expiration shouldn't depend on whether the patent was sitting in a drawer; it should happen either way.
Good thing the optical chip company's patents that keep it proprietary would expire too then, huh?
Me, I'm for invalidating the whole idea of IP, but that's an argument outside of this particular portion of this thread.
You used to have that album? Riiiiiiight.
What's funny about that?
I think the point was that it's sad evolutionary theory, which is pretty well borne out, isn't the default belief, and needs advocates to defend it against the superstitious folk.
So what you're saying, is he should offload the processing from his system's one core to another core ... just on the video card.
The point isn't that you'd get a pop-up when everything's going right - you'd get a pop-up when someone's attempting the man-in-the middle attack. And if the users aren't savvy, or assume as the OP said that the certificate has just expired, they're going to click through anyway.
At A30 is oddly bad at 1080p/60 (but just fine at 1080p/24, if you've got a TV that swings it), in a way that suggests a processing screw-up. It handles 1080i just fine, and most reviews recommend setting it to that if your TV does a good job with the deinterlacing. From what I understand, 24fps film content converted properly to 1080p/60 should work out identically to 24fps film content converted first to 1080i/60 then deinterlaced.
And the creator has no less of the product than he used to. This is why "intellectual property" doesn't really cleanly fit the traditional definition of "property" at all, and why our usual mores surrounding it don't apply well.
The grandparent is right - there is no "loss." Whether that's material is a matter of great debate. You say because the kid benefited, the creator deserves compensation. The grandparent correctly notes all there has been is gain on the part of the kid, not loss on the part of the creator; it's not a materialistic system - and there was no alternative option in which the creator would have gained. There may, however, be other decent arguments that the creator has been wronged.
Don't be silly. Unichs can't have children.