Another benefit of drug legalization: black-market drug dealers go out of business, because the profit margin isn't there anymore. That makes everyone safer, even people who never have anything to do with (illicit) drugs.
They even had "preview" before cameras existed! You set up the subject, adjusted it until it looked right (real-time preview), and then had the artist start depicting it.
It even states in TFA that "some conspiracy theories, under [their] definition, have turned out to be true." So why spend time and energy arguing potentially the wrong side?
The right side is always that of the government, citizen!
Since the average content copied is between 200 and 300 words, even a site with only 100,000 page views would have up to 3 million words leave the site via copy each month (not to mention all the images!). That's also a lot.
Man, if people took that many words from my website a month, my pages would all be empty in no time! I better go check to be sure nothing's left my site. Fortunately I have local backup copies I can replenish the words from.
No - since I own a Mac....you insensitive bork........
Then you have the Programmer's Key, though it was removed from Mac designs around 1995, replaced with the Command-Power combination, or on later Macs with USB keyboards, Command-Eject.
Yeah, thanks for your patient reply. I kept going into the wrong mode of argument for some reason. As you say, if the law says that a copyright violation is making a copy without authorization of the copyright holder, then making even a single copy is a copyright violation (aside from fair use, but let's assume that didn't apply here).
Yes but you'll stare at the text box when you start typing the first character into it, to be sure the cursor is blinking there. Once you're typing, it could suspend gaze-initiated focus changes until you stop typing for a bit.
"Clicking" could be done by blinking twice, or blinking slowly.
Calibration could be fine-tuned on-the-fly by assuming the user is looking at the center of buttons or links he's "clicking" (for ones with large hit areas, it could skip adjustment). I wouldn't be surprised if this idea were patented already, given that it's obvious.
So, once a day they bundle a bunch of emails into a single.OST file and upload it to the shuttle. The astronauts then open that.OST file in their local copy of Outlook. And they have to shut down Outlook while the upload is in progress because of Outlook file locking.
I can't help but think of all the inflexible systems I've used like this. "Do it our way, or do an end-run and have to do everything in a roundabout, manual way". It leads to solutions that have huge piles of crap wrapped in a simplifying interface, possibly repeated a few levels deep. It always seems to come from an original design that left no room for other approaches, instead acting like the only problems are those it acknowledges.
If you would be so kind as to go soak your head in a large reservoir of liquid nitrogen for a few hours, you'll have your opportunity. Your head will be radiating light/heat at a blackbody temperature around 77K, which is (a) invisible and (b) cold.
My head would be absorbing heat. It may be radiating some EM (but not light, I don't think).
Hmmm, I forgot the one reason I still prefer CRTs for some things: truely variable resolution. Horizontally, it's continuous by nature. Vertically, the scanline spacing is continuously adjustable. But you know that this will probably have a fixed resolution, with other input resolutions resampled in the digital domain, thus looking like crap.
Phosphor burn a horrible weakness of CRTs?!? Maybe for projection CRTs, but those run at insane brightness. I've never had burned phosphors on any of my CRTs.
I'm wondering about focus and geometry issues, the main problems I have with CRTs. Please, let's not go back to any kind of scan-the-dot-across-the-screen systems that can become misaligned.
So you're saying that it wasn't the software that was stolen, it was his right to choose how it's copied? But that's not exactly correct either, because he can still make (or not make) copies as he pleases. He just didn't get to stop me from making that one copy. Why would he have wanted to do such a thing? So he could get payment in return. So he lost the ability to get payment from me, short of suing me. There are of course other ways he might also not get payment, like if I got a competing program, or decided I didn't need the program in the first place. It's slippery (not that you were arguing the validity of copyright, just the technicalities).
Your software was stolen? Are you sure you didn't just misplace it? Scan your drives again to make sure it's really gone.
Once I found some stolen software and downloaded it so I could burn it on a CD and return it to its owner. He wasn't interested, for some reason. I even offered to mail it to him. I don't think he had bought new software, either, so I guess he just didn't need it anymore. People are confusing when it comes to stolen software.
Domain Name Service Server is perfectly acceptable usage
Not sure about that. A server is something that serves. A service is something served. In other words, what does Domain Name Server leave out that Domain Name Service Server doesn't? It's sort of like saying that a waiter in a restaurant will now wait on you. Well, by definition someone who waits on me is a waiter.
Yes, I assumed this was an article about a firm dropping support for a database and webserver without any notice (perhaps a DRM-supplying company or something). Just below this headline is another misleading one, "CES Vendors Kicked Out of Hotels For Showcasing Wares in Room", which suggests they were showing pirated software.
Slashdot Mirror
And before someone yells "broken window fallacy", remember that pirating an app doesn't destroy anything (in fact, it creates something new: a copy).
Another benefit of drug legalization: black-market drug dealers go out of business, because the profit margin isn't there anymore. That makes everyone safer, even people who never have anything to do with (illicit) drugs.
They even had "preview" before cameras existed! You set up the subject, adjusted it until it looked right (real-time preview), and then had the artist start depicting it.
The right side is always that of the government, citizen!
Man, if people took that many words from my website a month, my pages would all be empty in no time! I better go check to be sure nothing's left my site. Fortunately I have local backup copies I can replenish the words from.
...watching ur copies
just like 9/11, this was actually organized by the US Government to foster dislike of China to facilitate favorable actions by the US military. !!!!
Sorry, I don't think it's likely Google will switch to Microsoft IIS anytime soon.
Then you have the Programmer's Key, though it was removed from Mac designs around 1995, replaced with the Command-Power combination, or on later Macs with USB keyboards, Command-Eject.
Yeah, thanks for your patient reply. I kept going into the wrong mode of argument for some reason. As you say, if the law says that a copyright violation is making a copy without authorization of the copyright holder, then making even a single copy is a copyright violation (aside from fair use, but let's assume that didn't apply here).
Maybe they take a cue from the Internet and start with braille porn to help fund growth?
Yes but you'll stare at the text box when you start typing the first character into it, to be sure the cursor is blinking there. Once you're typing, it could suspend gaze-initiated focus changes until you stop typing for a bit.
"Clicking" could be done by blinking twice, or blinking slowly.
Calibration could be fine-tuned on-the-fly by assuming the user is looking at the center of buttons or links he's "clicking" (for ones with large hit areas, it could skip adjustment). I wouldn't be surprised if this idea were patented already, given that it's obvious.
I can't help but think of all the inflexible systems I've used like this. "Do it our way, or do an end-run and have to do everything in a roundabout, manual way". It leads to solutions that have huge piles of crap wrapped in a simplifying interface, possibly repeated a few levels deep. It always seems to come from an original design that left no room for other approaches, instead acting like the only problems are those it acknowledges.
My head would be absorbing heat. It may be radiating some EM (but not light, I don't think).
I want to be able to radiate invisible light, perhaps also radiate cold heat and dry water.
Hmmm, I forgot the one reason I still prefer CRTs for some things: truely variable resolution. Horizontally, it's continuous by nature. Vertically, the scanline spacing is continuously adjustable. But you know that this will probably have a fixed resolution, with other input resolutions resampled in the digital domain, thus looking like crap.
Phosphor burn a horrible weakness of CRTs?!? Maybe for projection CRTs, but those run at insane brightness. I've never had burned phosphors on any of my CRTs.
I'm wondering about focus and geometry issues, the main problems I have with CRTs. Please, let's not go back to any kind of scan-the-dot-across-the-screen systems that can become misaligned.
So you're saying that it wasn't the software that was stolen, it was his right to choose how it's copied? But that's not exactly correct either, because he can still make (or not make) copies as he pleases. He just didn't get to stop me from making that one copy. Why would he have wanted to do such a thing? So he could get payment in return. So he lost the ability to get payment from me, short of suing me. There are of course other ways he might also not get payment, like if I got a competing program, or decided I didn't need the program in the first place. It's slippery (not that you were arguing the validity of copyright, just the technicalities).
Once I found some stolen software and downloaded it so I could burn it on a CD and return it to its owner. He wasn't interested, for some reason. I even offered to mail it to him. I don't think he had bought new software, either, so I guess he just didn't need it anymore. People are confusing when it comes to stolen software.
They cost money because it costs money to share data. Or did you think bandwidth, servers, and storage were free?
"Someone will wait on you shortly." or even just "You will be waited on shortly."
Not sure about that. A server is something that serves. A service is something served. In other words, what does Domain Name Server leave out that Domain Name Service Server doesn't? It's sort of like saying that a waiter in a restaurant will now wait on you. Well, by definition someone who waits on me is a waiter.
Drinking water has even lower concentrations, so if he's a homeopath, the resulting greater toxicity has probably already killed him.
Yes, I assumed this was an article about a firm dropping support for a database and webserver without any notice (perhaps a DRM-supplying company or something). Just below this headline is another misleading one, "CES Vendors Kicked Out of Hotels For Showcasing Wares in Room", which suggests they were showing pirated software.