And if there is anything to be said about users of the internet, it's that if you give them a way to organize and share it with others, allowing others to contribute, there will be those who disrupt the organization if they can.... rationalizing it because they can and for no other reason then to prove to themselves they can. A feeling of power, perhaps...
The same reasons there are those who create viruses, worms, malware, spam, libel, etc...
But provide goals and moderation to help stay on the goals and you get things like linux
Search engines.... not having them is not better. but they could be alot better if they just were not abused.
I have to agree that copyright holders need to have the rights over their content, whether or not it is on youtube.
Copyright holders can certainly help find content that should not be on youtube. But finding piracy of their works should not be a burden on them.
The responsibility really lies with the uploaders to obtain proper releases for works they are not fully in charge of.
On the flip side, copyright holders have to realize the marketing potential of such media as youtube. From what I have seen, the video is either downgraded in its capture and/or the connection speed, so its not like you are getting purchase quality, though audio is not so bad.
I've seen numerious videos where credit is given and even where to get purchase quality. But as a marketing tool, the work is findable in the search engine with taging.
I'd hate to see alot of the content vanish. but there is alot of duplication too. Perhaps what is needed is some assurance from youtube that the quality will always be under what you can purchase, unless there is some formal release is on hand.
in the mean time, and I probably shouldn't do this as slashdotting a resource won't help me use it, but there is a firefox plugin for capturing such video to your local hard drive, but it goes thru another url to do so and sometimes its overloaded. Get your favorite videos that may vanish, while you can.
As a consumer, a computer user, I don't think a lack of an answer is an answer, but a continuation of a mystery.
As a consumer I want the honest truth and I think it is wrong that any company is allowed to pursue the use of consumer deception.
Any such company using consumer deception should be exposed and punished.
Microsoft has been busted enough with antitrust that it should be required to show such evidence it claims, or fined to the benefit of the consumers and the developers it's claim is against.
Dishonesty should cost the party commiting it, not benefit them.
your comment is simply another way of saying "only a fool would think nothing can have value" r:e the zero place holder and its use in the decimal system vs. teh roman numeral accountant elites defending their vested interest.
The proof is in showing that all human abstraction creations and manipulations of, can be automated.
It's amazing the double standard that is fabricated by programmers that claim no program can be created to do what programmers do, when in fact a program is a mirror of the programmers mindset. Make me wonder if programmer even have a clue...Perhaps that is why we have such persistance of faulty and bug ridden "new" software.
Failure to establish a base and code engine that can be improved over time and hold up to the creation of new abstract manipulations code.
Programmers are still playing with primitive means of coding. Out of arrogance, ego, status, money, etc... Just as the roman numeral accountants avoided the zero place holder and the decimal system. (Note: computer today could not have been developed with roman numeral math.) Imagine what is being limited by teh current mindset.
Programming on the scale of teh science fiction of a "holodeck"??? (not the physics, just the coding at that level is considered impossible under current methods/mindsets)
It's the principle of the matter. The idea of being granted a patent on something so obviously not patentable is an indication of deeper problems. It is an obvious symptom of a disease of mental retardation, and how to propagate it.
Stop the disease from spreading, don't ignore it till it bits you in the ass.
The whole thing on the idea of software patents is mentally and completely faulty.
Its all about abstraction physics, how to manipulate the abstract communication we humans have the unique ability and natural right and duty to create and use, as a matter of advancement. But software is in essence based upon that which is fundamentally recignized as not patentable.
Asbstract ideas, physical phenomenon and natural law. A forth is often claims to be that of mathmatical algorithms but that is a subset of the first primary three.
When man goes against father physics and mother nature, we falsely limits ourselves and it's only natural and physically predictable that problems will develope due to the friction against... in this case... human ability to think in abstract terms in order to improve productivity.
Patents are written in terms and conotations that seem to support patents, but the same abstract idea can also be written in terms of that which is not patentable, not novel, etc..
The core of this ability lies in abstraction physics. The unavoidable action set, a set of actions that are "constant" in use, by not only programmers but every human capable of forming abstract thought and of course there is the influence of such that we convert to a phenomenon of physical movement and conversion.
So lest write abstracts about abstractions called patents but exposing the perfered non-patentable version that helps to expose the honesty of abstraction physics. Why Software is not patentable.
The idea of presenting prior art, prior to a lawsuit, that it may be used to strengthen a patent is an obvious example of the application of abstraction physics. As the absolute fact of the matter is, it honestly should not make a difference when the honest facts are brought forward. Unless, and only unless, dishonesty is being applied and used to make up excuses to continue a deception.
Software is not patentable, that is provable.
The real reason this hasn't come forward is because of vested interest in the lies contridiction the facts. This includes the softare industry in general and without regard for what side of the fence you claim to be on, open source or proprietary. As Programmers in general no more ant to give up the ego, status and/or pay any more than teh roman numeral accountants wanted to (resulting in the false limitation of mathmatics for some 300 years, when the hindu arabic decimal system was first developed and shown to be easier and more powerful).
Software will become as free as doing a calculation on a calculator, as nobody is charged royalities or licensing fees for using a calculator or pencil and paper to do some math. The only difference here is that the abstraction set is recognizably definable (the point of abstraction is word = definition, function name = function code, etc..and the "summing" tools are repetitive and recursive in nature (i.e. this function name = this code which is made up of function names whith their code, recursively)... the automation of abstraction usage.
If you think programming is more complex than that, it's really not, as "automation of abstraction usage" turned in on itself applies to code generation too. Autocoding (not the medical term, but the critical aerospace industry make use of it in primitive constrained ways - of which the constraints are recognized as false, limiting and caused by supporting the limits of proprietary claims of the software used.)
Google Abstraction Physics and Abstraction_physics (with and underscore).
Someone once asked for forgiveness for man, as he knows not what he does. And there are those who claim they don't understand the simplicity of abstraction physics...what they and every one does.... just like I'm doing here, applying it.
more fun can be had in using googles patent search and inputting "virtual interaction configuration". Consider re-writting the found patent "semantic user interface" #RE39,090 IIRC (referencing the mentioned V.I.C., in Abstraction Physics link) in terms that are not patentable.
And I don't give a damn about either company in the article, but rather what is a human right and honest!
When MS said 64K was all the memory anyone would ever need When programs on even other system were not blotted to be large but performed very well. When the price of ram was very high. When programs loaded much quicker.
What does all this mean?
You'll have to defrag your drive more often... as programs will grow in size. It seems the software industry will fill up any shelf space you provide it with. More spyware too...
What is actually being said is the Linus is a gnome supporter, as there are other interfaces to chose from.
And that really is the point!
I use autocad at work and the new version has "workspaces" where I can set the interface up as I like for a given type of tasks. And I can set up another workspace for a different type of task. and so forth and so on. And switch between them on the fly. Regardless of the fact that I find autocad 2007 frustrating because they failed to include the standard interface workspace in autocad mechanical 2007 that is in autocad 2007, the basic idea is wonderful. But they don't seem to have an easy way to share workspaces (or make some available on their site)
Now in MS windows you can set up accounts for different users and they can customize to some degree their interface. Not so versatile but again the idea is there of allowing users to have the interface they want without concern for interface selection of another user that would be using the same machine.
This is how it should be on GNU/Linux, and is to some extent.
Maybe its time to show the rest of the industry that the open source movement does innovate.
And I suppose this would be a Linus thing to enable in at the kernel level...
Innovate the ability of the user to easily change interfaces and even be able to load their prefered interface off a USB thumb drive.
Any complaints that this wouldn't be so easy is..... well not innovative.
Ultimately its up to Linus to support the possibility at the kernel level....
...disallow patents for software and it will make a big difference on the work load of the patent office.
Abstraction Physics is a perspective on software that shows software is in no way shape or form of a nature patentable. It actually falls into the three main things universally accepted as NOT patentable. Physical phenomenon, natural law and abstract ideas. The forth is math algorithms as many claim software is that, but math is a subset of abstractions.
As a thing to do, take any software patent and re-write the claims and such to be in terms of common, non-novel etc.. perspective. I intend on doing this to a patent that mentions my work in its "other references" semantic user interface patent number RE39,090 (IIRC)
and that its across companies instead of internal to a company, doesn't matter in this case as its foundation is that of "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit" and there obviously hasn't been a whole lot of brilliance, more like just a lot of abstraction manipulation con's....
sum total = bullying from an industry that can at times have the arrogance to think its an expert at everything and owns... well... "all you base" didn't become popular for no reason...It's a joke based on honest observation of computer industry greed.
The point of computing (programming) is to automate so to improve efficiency - and every body does it. It's part of being human, and its foundation is thinking in abstract terms.
To disallow someone the ability to be non-stressed and productive is the essence of bullying.
At what point does the court system need to be slapped for being silly and costing taxpayers for it?
Seriously! given all the absolute bull shit we all have heard from the computer industry in general, including software patents (which came about in a small court room without public knowledge or proper freedback...) this witch hunt inquision (sp?) needs to stop right now.
the stupidness and silliness has gone on way to long. If anything ut says a hell of a lot about the computer industy, and although many may argue that its only lawyers claiming to be SCO..... think about it... this which hunt situation wouldn't be allowed to exist if it weren't for the support of the clery of the computer industry, well including IBM.
Seems all the players have some bull shit they want supported that results in enabling this foolishiness to exist and continue on and on...
Consumer choice created OSS. A consumer with the know how to program, wrote a program and a license for it that got real popular with the public consumer base of those also smart enough to write programs under the same license too, and others who have become involved in many other ways.)
It's consumer choice. Somebody needs to slap the court system into realizing that, and which should inturn prove they "get it" by slapping the bull shit computer industry and dropping software patents.
...wikipedia to only allow hearsay, it only seems fitting that if there were to be a magizine based on teh same that it would be one of politics, entertainment or and in summary... gossip.
The difference here is that the policies of wikipedia are such that responsibility is taken off wikipedia, unlike other publications and encyclopedias.
Having no responsibility that could see a court room should say a lot about the trustworthyness of it.
When it comes to quantum computing thought interference shows up.
Also there is the fact that humans do act upon abstract thinking which means it obvious that thought does in fact influence physical reality. I think I'll design and build this whatever, so I draw it up, research its needs, purchase the material needed and build it... all based on thought.
When it comes to mind reading and the likes, let me tell you about the majic dumpster. All to often when I think of something I could use of find useful, it shows up set off to the side of the apartment dumpster. Most recently, on a friday at work I was thinking I coudl use a fan under my desk as the office was getting hot. At the end of the day, before leaving I go thru the warehouse and check all the that they are locked. This task takes be a good 15 minutes or more. I thought it'd be nice to have a scooter, the stand up kind, with or without a motor. The next day, saturday, the fan showed up, perfect for under the desk. Sunday a Razor e300 showed up (only needed a charger and charger connector plug, works great and now I can check teh doors in 8 minutes.
Those are the most recent. Some things are typical, like working vacume cleaners and even working computer, but When I though of a laptop, not so long after one showed up very carefully placed with it charger on the step up to the compactor. And I once needed a MAC classic keyboard and mouse to test a couple such MACs without. Another complete classic mac showed up. And there are many other things that have showed up after my thinking of them.
Perhaps the most unusual thing to show up at the Majic dumpster is a living breathing model, a good looking lady. I stopped to drop off some garbage and she was standing there and asked if I could give her a ride over to some place.
So now I've been thinking lottery ticket... we'll see...
Princeton just lacked a majic dumpster.
BTW, in the late 60's the US government researched hallucenogenics for ESP and such. It made TIME magazine cover. Maybe princeton needed some such drugs... and a quantum computer
..Anti-Trust against those sending such notices out.
As a side effect is against competition of anything that might be gotten over a bit torrent.
Just a few days ago I used it to DL several of the Ubuntu distros and I had no problem leaving it running well after I had finished, that others might benefit. I mean hey, having DSL but not currently using it myself... Helping to distribute free software... should it be a crime?
Slashdot Mirror
get the specific water marks and start putting them on every thing and anything.... Oh wait, that's copyright infringment....
Damn can't have any more fun...
well of course.
And if there is anything to be said about users of the internet, it's that if you give them a way to organize and share it with others, allowing others to contribute, there will be those who disrupt the organization if they can.... rationalizing it because they can and for no other reason then to prove to themselves they can. A feeling of power, perhaps...
The same reasons there are those who create viruses, worms, malware, spam, libel, etc...
But provide goals and moderation to help stay on the goals and you get things like linux
Search engines.... not having them is not better. but they could be alot better if they just were not abused.
I have to agree that copyright holders need to have the rights over their content, whether or not it is on youtube.
Copyright holders can certainly help find content that should not be on youtube. But finding piracy of their works should not be a burden on them.
The responsibility really lies with the uploaders to obtain proper releases for works they are not fully in charge of.
On the flip side, copyright holders have to realize the marketing potential of such media as youtube. From what I have seen, the video is either downgraded in its capture and/or the connection speed, so its not like you are getting purchase quality, though audio is not so bad.
I've seen numerious videos where credit is given and even where to get purchase quality.
But as a marketing tool, the work is findable in the search engine with taging.
I'd hate to see alot of the content vanish. but there is alot of duplication too.
Perhaps what is needed is some assurance from youtube that the quality will always be under what you can purchase, unless there is some formal release is on hand.
in the mean time, and I probably shouldn't do this as slashdotting a resource won't help me use it, but there is a firefox plugin for capturing such video to your local hard drive, but it goes thru another url to do so and sometimes its overloaded. Get your favorite videos that may vanish, while you can.
As a consumer, a computer user, I don't think a lack of an answer is an answer, but a continuation of a mystery.
As a consumer I want the honest truth and I think it is wrong that any company is allowed to pursue the use of consumer deception.
Any such company using consumer deception should be exposed and punished.
Microsoft has been busted enough with antitrust that it should be required to show such evidence it claims, or fined to the benefit of the consumers and the developers it's claim is against.
Dishonesty should cost the party commiting it, not benefit them.
your comment is simply another way of saying "only a fool would think nothing can have value" r:e the zero place holder and its use in the decimal system vs. teh roman numeral accountant elites defending their vested interest.
The proof is in showing that all human abstraction creations and manipulations of, can be automated.
It's amazing the double standard that is fabricated by programmers that claim no program can be created to do what programmers do, when in fact a program is a mirror of the programmers mindset. Make me wonder if programmer even have a clue...Perhaps that is why we have such persistance of faulty and bug ridden "new" software.
Failure to establish a base and code engine that can be improved over time and hold up to the creation of new abstract manipulations code.
Programmers are still playing with primitive means of coding. Out of arrogance, ego, status, money, etc...
Just as the roman numeral accountants avoided the zero place holder and the decimal system. (Note: computer today could not have been developed with roman numeral math.) Imagine what is being limited by teh current mindset.
Programming on the scale of teh science fiction of a "holodeck"??? (not the physics, just the coding at that level is considered impossible under current methods/mindsets)
It's the principle of the matter. The idea of being granted a patent on something so obviously not patentable is an indication of deeper problems. It is an obvious symptom of a disease of mental retardation, and how to propagate it.
... in this case... human ability to think in abstract terms in order to improve productivity.
... the automation of abstraction usage.
Stop the disease from spreading, don't ignore it till it bits you in the ass.
The whole thing on the idea of software patents is mentally and completely faulty.
Its all about abstraction physics, how to manipulate the abstract communication we humans have the unique ability and natural right and duty to create and use, as a matter of advancement. But software is in essence based upon that which is fundamentally recignized as not patentable.
Asbstract ideas, physical phenomenon and natural law. A forth is often claims to be that of mathmatical algorithms but that is a subset of the first primary three.
When man goes against father physics and mother nature, we falsely limits ourselves and it's only natural and physically predictable that problems will develope due to the friction against
Patents are written in terms and conotations that seem to support patents, but the same abstract idea can also be written in terms of that which is not patentable, not novel, etc..
The core of this ability lies in abstraction physics. The unavoidable action set, a set of actions that are "constant" in use, by not only programmers but every human capable of forming abstract thought and of course there is the influence of such that we convert to a phenomenon of physical movement and conversion.
So lest write abstracts about abstractions called patents but exposing the perfered non-patentable version that helps to expose the honesty of abstraction physics. Why Software is not patentable.
The idea of presenting prior art, prior to a lawsuit, that it may be used to strengthen a patent is an obvious example of the application of abstraction physics. As the absolute fact of the matter is, it honestly should not make a difference when the honest facts are brought forward. Unless, and only unless, dishonesty is being applied and used to make up excuses to continue a deception.
Software is not patentable, that is provable.
The real reason this hasn't come forward is because of vested interest in the lies contridiction the facts. This includes the softare industry in general and without regard for what side of the fence you claim to be on, open source or proprietary. As Programmers in general no more ant to give up the ego, status and/or pay any more than teh roman numeral accountants wanted to (resulting in the false limitation of mathmatics for some 300 years, when the hindu arabic decimal system was first developed and shown to be easier and more powerful).
Software will become as free as doing a calculation on a calculator, as nobody is charged royalities or licensing fees for using a calculator or pencil and paper to do some math. The only difference here is that the abstraction set is recognizably definable (the point of abstraction is word = definition, function name = function code, etc..and the "summing" tools are repetitive and recursive in nature (i.e. this function name = this code which is made up of function names whith their code, recursively)
If you think programming is more complex than that, it's really not, as "automation of abstraction usage" turned in on itself applies to code generation too. Autocoding (not the medical term, but the critical aerospace industry make use of it in primitive constrained ways - of which the constraints are recognized as false, limiting and caused by supporting the limits of proprietary claims of the software used.)
Google Abstraction Physics and Abstraction_physics (with and underscore).
Someone once asked for forgiveness for man, as he knows not what he does.
And there are those who claim they don't understand the simplicity of abstraction physics...what they and every one does.... just like I'm doing here, applying it.
Do a google for "abstraction physics" and look here for Abstraction_Physics
more fun can be had in using googles patent search and inputting "virtual interaction configuration".
Consider re-writting the found patent "semantic user interface" #RE39,090 IIRC (referencing the mentioned V.I.C., in Abstraction Physics link) in terms that are not patentable.
And I don't give a damn about either company in the article, but rather what is a human right and honest!
When MS said 64K was all the memory anyone would ever need
When programs on even other system were not blotted to be large but performed very well.
When the price of ram was very high.
When programs loaded much quicker.
What does all this mean?
You'll have to defrag your drive more often... as programs will grow in size.
It seems the software industry will fill up any shelf space you provide it with.
More spyware too...
... the question is who is doing the monitoring?
People are people and in any field of occupation there are good, bad and somewhere in between.
Information is power, but who is getting the information and how will they use it?
With this in mind, does monitoring improve society or just provide more opportunity to do others wrong?
... is to expand the content of what is in existance, as that is the onky way the conscious sum of all things knows its alive..
it comes down to the basic instinct of survival
in a word: INNOVATE!
What is actually being said is the Linus is a gnome supporter, as there are other interfaces to chose from.
And that really is the point!
I use autocad at work and the new version has "workspaces" where I can set the interface up as I like for a given type of tasks. And I can set up another workspace for a different type of task. and so forth and so on. And switch between them on the fly. Regardless of the fact that I find autocad 2007 frustrating because they failed to include the standard interface workspace in autocad mechanical 2007 that is in autocad 2007, the basic idea is wonderful. But they don't seem to have an easy way to share workspaces (or make some available on their site)
Now in MS windows you can set up accounts for different users and they can customize to some degree their interface. Not so versatile but again the idea is there of allowing users to have the interface they want without concern for interface selection of another user that would be using the same machine.
This is how it should be on GNU/Linux, and is to some extent.
Maybe its time to show the rest of the industry that the open source movement does innovate.
And I suppose this would be a Linus thing to enable in at the kernel level...
Innovate the ability of the user to easily change interfaces and even be able to load their prefered interface off a USB thumb drive.
Any complaints that this wouldn't be so easy is..... well not innovative.
Ultimately its up to Linus to support the possibility at the kernel level....
...disallow patents for software and it will make a big difference on the work load of the patent office.
Abstraction Physics is a perspective on software that shows software is in no way shape or form of a nature patentable. It actually falls into the three main things universally accepted as NOT patentable. Physical phenomenon, natural law and abstract ideas. The forth is math algorithms as many claim software is that, but math is a subset of abstractions.
As a thing to do, take any software patent and re-write the claims and such to be in terms of common, non-novel etc.. perspective.
I intend on doing this to a patent that mentions my work in its "other references" semantic user interface patent number RE39,090 (IIRC)
If I know which one maybe I can tune it to make music and really stump the scientist.
(re: my user handle)
other evidence of the wide spread scam of the computer industry comes in the form of MS charging licensing fees for linux.
... well... "all you base" didn't become popular for no reason...It's a joke based on honest observation of computer industry greed.
We all know bullying is common in the computer industry and it needs to stop.
it's illegal in some countries...
http://www.bullyinginstitute.org/
and that its across companies instead of internal to a company, doesn't matter in this case as its foundation is that of "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit" and there obviously hasn't been a whole lot of brilliance, more like just a lot of abstraction manipulation con's....
sum total = bullying from an industry that can at times have the arrogance to think its an expert at everything and owns
The point of computing (programming) is to automate so to improve efficiency - and every body does it. It's part of being human, and its foundation is thinking in abstract terms.
To disallow someone the ability to be non-stressed and productive is the essence of bullying.
The top soap opera on tv today.
At what point does the court system need to be slapped for being silly and costing taxpayers for it?
Seriously! given all the absolute bull shit we all have heard from the computer industry in general, including software patents (which came about in a small court room without public knowledge or proper freedback...) this witch hunt inquision (sp?) needs to stop right now.
the stupidness and silliness has gone on way to long. If anything ut says a hell of a lot about the computer industy, and although many may argue that its only lawyers claiming to be SCO..... think about it... this which hunt situation wouldn't be allowed to exist if it weren't for the support of the clery of the computer industry, well including IBM.
Seems all the players have some bull shit they want supported that results in enabling this foolishiness to exist and continue on and on...
Consumer choice created OSS. A consumer with the know how to program, wrote a program and a license for it that got real popular with the public consumer base of those also smart enough to write programs under the same license too, and others who have become involved in many other ways.)
It's consumer choice. Somebody needs to slap the court system into realizing that, and which should inturn prove they "get it" by slapping the bull shit computer industry and dropping software patents.
A: depends on what country you are talkin about.
In some third world countries its far less expensive to develope the wireless route then to lay cable.
... the consumers who have been communicating it to the music industry.
Give credit where it is genuinely due.
If MS did it they wouldn't be credited any where near as much as they credit themselves with.
....besides human stupidity, but much better yet, posttramatic stress disorder effects.
Imagine having an artificial cortex kick in when the real cortex is shutdown by PTSD stimuli.
....archive.org
...wikipedia to only allow hearsay, it only seems fitting that if there were to be a magizine based on teh same that it would be one of politics, entertainment or and in summary... gossip.
The difference here is that the policies of wikipedia are such that responsibility is taken off wikipedia, unlike other publications and encyclopedias.
Having no responsibility that could see a court room should say a lot about the trustworthyness of it.
...google earth will show at the white painted stuff as.... well a white nothingness.
Great for military and secure locations...
As for the rest of us, I'd imagine there are numerous things we can do and so long as we don't over do it on any one thing I'me sure it'll help.
But I do wonder if we are to far past the state of no return to make it matter.
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/0 8/1355255
When it comes to quantum computing thought interference shows up.
Also there is the fact that humans do act upon abstract thinking which means it obvious that thought does in fact influence physical reality. I think I'll design and build this whatever, so I draw it up, research its needs, purchase the material needed and build it... all based on thought.
When it comes to mind reading and the likes, let me tell you about the majic dumpster.
All to often when I think of something I could use of find useful, it shows up set off to the side of the apartment dumpster. Most recently, on a friday at work I was thinking I coudl use a fan under my desk as the office was getting hot. At the end of the day, before leaving I go thru the warehouse and check all the that they are locked. This task takes be a good 15 minutes or more. I thought it'd be nice to have a scooter, the stand up kind, with or without a motor. The next day, saturday, the fan showed up, perfect for under the desk. Sunday a Razor e300 showed up (only needed a charger and charger connector plug, works great and now I can check teh doors in 8 minutes.
Those are the most recent. Some things are typical, like working vacume cleaners and even working computer, but When I though of a laptop, not so long after one showed up very carefully placed with it charger on the step up to the compactor. And I once needed a MAC classic keyboard and mouse to test a couple such MACs without. Another complete classic mac showed up. And there are many other things that have showed up after my thinking of them.
Perhaps the most unusual thing to show up at the Majic dumpster is a living breathing model, a good looking lady. I stopped to drop off some garbage and she was standing there and asked if I could give her a ride over to some place.
So now I've been thinking lottery ticket... we'll see...
Princeton just lacked a majic dumpster.
BTW, in the late 60's the US government researched hallucenogenics for ESP and such. It made TIME magazine cover.
Maybe princeton needed some such drugs... and a quantum computer
..Anti-Trust against those sending such notices out.
As a side effect is against competition of anything that might be gotten over a bit torrent.
Just a few days ago I used it to DL several of the Ubuntu distros and I had no problem leaving it running well after I had finished, that others might benefit. I mean hey, having DSL but not currently using it myself... Helping to distribute free software... should it be a crime?
how much is human waist? Can you spot it in teh pictures?