or a cutting edge super user friendly OS: Make the Print Screen key actually work and PRINT THE FREAKIN' SCREEN!
Uhhh, it does.... it prints the screen to the CLIPBOARD in Windows (I don't know about other OSs, never tried to use print screen in them). Open up a graphics program and click "paste" and you have...... a "printout" of your screen.
I think that's much more useful than it being sent directly to an actual printer... how often are you going to snail mail a picture of your screen to tech support?
who apparently were paying $29.95 a month for Kazaa "service", and apparently thought there were thereby legit.
Does anyone have any insight into this 29.95 service? Were they just getting ripped off by some scammer? I've never heard of a monthly fee for any file sharing sites, especially Kazaa. Who exactly were they paying? Or did they think their ISP fee was a Kazaa fee? I'm utterly confused by this. I think anyone who was even moderately computer illiterate would think that if they were paying 30 bucks a month for a service anything that that service provided would be legal (within reason, let's not flame that flagrant overstatement please). Why else would you pay?
The other neat-o factor is that you can apply filters to flag messages as Personal/Work/Whatever, and it color codes the emails!
Color-coding? Really? How do you do this? I switched from Outlook and it's the one silly little feature I actually miss - it doesn't make a big difference, really, just one of those things....
As of 4:00PM Sept. 3, 2003, there are already well over 30 bids on the I-Tune, and bidding has exceeded $20. The original price was only $0.99. Very interesting.
Well, he is donating all of the proceeds to the EFF, so most likely people are just chocking the money up to a donation and bidding out of curiosity for the outcome.
Seems like the flase positive rate would be the most important stat, and they don't have it.
Obviously it couldn't replace ANY other security measure, but if it worked 61% of the time with NO false positives, I would call that pretty damn successful, especially in such an early implementation.
Uhhh, what? So, say in the case of a terrorist. You'd rather this scenario : 40% of the terrorists get through without being recognized and possibly cause the death of thousands of people, but anyone who's NOT a terrorist doesn't get five minutes of inconvenience. The alternative scenario, of course : a couple innocents get searched unecessarily, but no terrorists get on the plane and kill people.
To me the latter sounds like a more successful implementation.
fought off 50 mph winds and battled bitter cold to reach the 6,288-foot mountain summit.
I did it on foot, up the second toughest trail on the mountain. Took 8 hours round trip. And these guys are "battling" bitter cold, riding on a machine going up a paved road. Excuse me if sympathy doesn't flow from me.
If you're going to an arena show to see a display of musicianship, expect to be disappointed.
If you just want to turn off your brain and have fun, then you will be right at home, because this is exactly what that kind of music is crafted for.
Oh? The Beatles used to play arena shows. While they were certainly "bubble gum pop" of the 60's at time, at other times they were the most creative and influencial pop group ever. And even later, Paul McCartney still does large venues. While I woudln't say all of his cheesy love songs are the most monumental things ever written, I wouldn't go so far as to call them mindless either. And they CERTAINLY don't lack musicianship.
Or bands like U2, who I'm not the biggest fan of, but you can't say they're not musicians. Play large venues all of the time. Or a hundred others that aren't quite so obvious, but would come to mind with some thought.
Just because you may not l ike the majority of new music (which I can't argue with) don't say that every concert at a large stadium is going to "lack musicianship." You're blatantly wrong.
From the pics it doesn't look like this "computer" has any computer components in it. Like, drives, a motherboard... anything? He mentions having a hard drive mounted on the bottom, and I see that picture, but other than that... Is this a case mod or a fish tank in a computer case? I'm not very impressed by the latter.
I suppose this could be better explained if I could read German.
I think this is a stupid comment, why would anybody be less likely to risk their life just because of their potential logevity? Are people in third world countries more likely to endager their lives because their life expectancy is only half that of the first world?
Uh, yeah they are. Check out Liberia, Ethiopea, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Afghanistan,...
This is Insightful? Where exactly is the insight? Of course people in third world countries are more likely to do things that endanger their lives --first because most of those things they HAVE to do to survive (you don't see any Afghani's out bungee jumping), and second because the QUALITY of life is piss poor. If you took two people, gave them both a great life, but told one he would most likely only live to 40 and the other that he would live to 80, I don't think they'd act differently...
There's just way too many other factors at play to judge people's actions in third world countries based solely on life expectancy.
I had really hoped that the US Gov was wrong for nabbing a US citizen. I had hoped that there would be a suite against the gov for violating civil rights.
Are you fukcing serious? Not supporting your government's policies is one thing, but actually rooting for them to screw up and ruin a potentially innocent guy's life just so you can feel better about yourself and your misinformed opinions is pretty low. They screw up enough every day that you shouldn't need to actually root for other mistakes. I'm sure you can find about a million violations of civil rights by ANY administration if you were looking, you don't need to ROOT for them.
There is actually a pr0n company called AVS which stands for Adult Video Systems. I wonder if they will use the format?
I supposed I shouldn't be openly admitting to knowing so much about this, but isn't AVS "Adult Verification Services" or something? I believe it's a company that verifies your age for a slew of sites.
Or I could be wrong. First thing that came to mind when I heard this though.
that if someone were going to skip over commercials, they'd just blindly skip over all of them, not pick and choose which they wanted to see. You're either in the mood to deal with commercials, or you just skip the lot of them.
And I thought the prices here weren't that good...
Where exactly is "here?" In the US, yes, you pay for incoming calls. Every plan I've ever heard of, you pay for incoming calls. Airtime is airtime. So a cellular to cellular call is costing two people money.
The only SMS spam I have gotten so far has been from my service provider, Cingular. I don't think they'd press charges against themselves, so this doesn't really help. However, it's a good step. Being charged by the message, I'd be pretty annnoyed to be spammed.
About 85 percent of the fund's revenues are split between two causes: the "e-rate" program (40 percent), which subsidizes school and library Internet connections, and rural telephone companies (45 percent)
How is this a bad thing?
So, because I want fast internet in my house in a relatively urban area, I have to pay 5 bucks a month extra so someone in the middle of nowhere can have a cheaper phone bill? Makes sense.
And yes, subsidizing school and library Internet connections sounds like a good thing, but I'm sure it can be done with some of the other wasted tax money rather than taxing some new thing even more. Pick a noble cause and tax a random 10% tax to something for it isn't always a "great idea." There are probably more causes than there are services to tax.
Sure, the amount of coins you receive back will be less on average, but I guarantee that you will spend at least twice as long at the register. Given what I perceive to be the general public's math skills, figuring out how many 18 cent coins to give wouldn't be worth having 17% less coins in my pocket. Time is money, or something. Like has been mentioned in othe rposts, people have enough trouble with quarters and adding / subtracting 25s, let alone 18s.
Sorry, this is just impractical. There's more than one variable in the equation that this guy's not looking at.
> To promote the progress of science and useful > arts, by securing for limited times to authors > and inventors the exclusive right to their > respective writings and discoveries;
The idea here is to promote "useful arts", not make people money or to create a new class of property. Also, it can be infered that if a particular federal law does NOT encourage progress in the arts then the US government has no authority making such a law.
Some days, you just want to curse the ICC...
Well I suppose my question is this. Suppose I'm an artist (I am most decidedly not). How does holding a copyright encourage my art? The only way I see this being true is because I am going to be recognized for my work, in most cases monetarily compensated. I'm encouraged to create because I know that I will be rewarded, exclusively, for my creation. The reward doesn't HAVE to be monetary, but I would say money is a great incentive to do pretty much anything for most Americans. Capitalism and all that.
If based on this we can conclude that copyright IS in fact encouraging the creation of "science and useful arts," and that therefore copyright law is at least Constitutional in theory, what change do you propose which would maintain this original purpose, but allow you to do what you wish (publish someone's lyrics without their permission) legally?
It all comes back to the original point - no, online lyrics publication is not hurting anyone. In a "fair" world it would just be ignored, I suppose. But it's near impossible, at least legally, to distinguish it from any other kind of copyright infringement which MAY be harmful. Aside from these people thinking a bit before they throw lawsuits around, I just don't see any other solution.
Copyright is a means to encourage CREATION and DISTRIBUTION of artistic works.
While it may not explicitly say "for the purposes of income," I cannot see any reason to copyright something unless you are afraid of incurring a loss from the COPY of it. It's an exclusive right for you to use your work and no one else. TECHNICALLY if someone reproduces your lyrics while they are under copyright, they are breaking copyright laws.
Unless you can show how bullying these sites will cause more lyrics to be created, they should be left alone.
That's my whole point in the original post. I don't see these sites causing any actual problem to the author of the works, so they SHOULD be left alone, but I have to concede that they are, technically, breaking the law, and the copyright holders have the RIGHT to harass them. It's stupid, and pointless, and maybe the copyright law should reflect the intent rather than blindly prohibiting all reproduction in any form, but at this point it does not. J ust because you say you "should" be able to do something, doesn't mean the law suddenly changes and you are allowed to do it. You have to make an effort to have the law changed, cease your actions, or break the law. Or move to where the law is different. Ignoring the law doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law.
Also, I don't see how copyright encourages creation and distribution in any way but monetary, hence income. Why would you care that someone stole your work, unless you were somehow being cheated out of money for it? Pride? Maybe in a few cases, but certainly not the majority. I'd love to see a compelling argument that copyright law has nothing to do with making money from your works. I can't even fathom such a thing.
Slashdot Mirror
or a cutting edge super user friendly OS: Make the Print Screen key actually work and PRINT THE FREAKIN' SCREEN!
... a "printout" of your screen.
Uhhh, it does.... it prints the screen to the CLIPBOARD in Windows (I don't know about other OSs, never tried to use print screen in them). Open up a graphics program and click "paste" and you have...
I think that's much more useful than it being sent directly to an actual printer... how often are you going to snail mail a picture of your screen to tech support?
Just don't forget your Personal Identification Number Number next time you go to the Automated Teller Machine Machine.
More proof that the real meanings of acronyms are meaningless.
He sold most of them back a few years ago. Paul McCartney owns most of them now.
who apparently were paying $29.95 a month for Kazaa "service", and apparently thought there were thereby legit.
Does anyone have any insight into this 29.95 service? Were they just getting ripped off by some scammer? I've never heard of a monthly fee for any file sharing sites, especially Kazaa. Who exactly were they paying? Or did they think their ISP fee was a Kazaa fee? I'm utterly confused by this. I think anyone who was even moderately computer illiterate would think that if they were paying 30 bucks a month for a service anything that that service provided would be legal (within reason, let's not flame that flagrant overstatement please). Why else would you pay?
The other neat-o factor is that you can apply filters to flag messages as Personal/Work/Whatever, and it color codes the emails!
Color-coding? Really? How do you do this? I switched from Outlook and it's the one silly little feature I actually miss - it doesn't make a big difference, really, just one of those things....
As of 4:00PM Sept. 3, 2003, there are already well over 30 bids on the I-Tune, and bidding has exceeded $20. The original price was only $0.99. Very interesting.
Well, he is donating all of the proceeds to the EFF, so most likely people are just chocking the money up to a donation and bidding out of curiosity for the outcome.
Seems like the flase positive rate would be the most important stat, and they don't have it.
Obviously it couldn't replace ANY other security measure, but if it worked 61% of the time with NO false positives, I would call that pretty damn successful, especially in such an early implementation.
Uhhh, what? So, say in the case of a terrorist. You'd rather this scenario : 40% of the terrorists get through without being recognized and possibly cause the death of thousands of people, but anyone who's NOT a terrorist doesn't get five minutes of inconvenience. The alternative scenario, of course : a couple innocents get searched unecessarily, but no terrorists get on the plane and kill people.
To me the latter sounds like a more successful implementation.
Look at the bright side, Bruce Willis will drill it AND he won't be coming back.
But what will Liv Tyler do now that Ben is with J-Lo?
fought off 50 mph winds and battled bitter cold to reach the 6,288-foot mountain summit.
I did it on foot, up the second toughest trail on the mountain. Took 8 hours round trip. And these guys are "battling" bitter cold, riding on a machine going up a paved road. Excuse me if sympathy doesn't flow from me.
If you're going to an arena show to see a display of musicianship, expect to be disappointed.
If you just want to turn off your brain and have fun, then you will be right at home, because this is exactly what that kind of music is crafted for.
Oh? The Beatles used to play arena shows. While they were certainly "bubble gum pop" of the 60's at time, at other times they were the most creative and influencial pop group ever. And even later, Paul McCartney still does large venues. While I woudln't say all of his cheesy love songs are the most monumental things ever written, I wouldn't go so far as to call them mindless either. And they CERTAINLY don't lack musicianship.
Or bands like U2, who I'm not the biggest fan of, but you can't say they're not musicians. Play large venues all of the time. Or a hundred others that aren't quite so obvious, but would come to mind with some thought.
Just because you may not l ike the majority of new music (which I can't argue with) don't say that every concert at a large stadium is going to "lack musicianship." You're blatantly wrong.
For instance, you would use less flower in the next batch of brownies
I make my brownies with flour. Yours must taste pretty funny. Do you use the stems too?
Apparently grammar nazis don't pay attention to such trivialities as homophones.
I can read a little german, and I'll tell you: it won't help with a danish article.
I took a stab in the dark at that one. I knew I'd end up guessing wrong! And leave it to the slashdot crowd to catch me.
From the pics it doesn't look like this "computer" has any computer components in it. Like, drives, a motherboard... anything? He mentions having a hard drive mounted on the bottom, and I see that picture, but other than that... Is this a case mod or a fish tank in a computer case? I'm not very impressed by the latter.
I suppose this could be better explained if I could read German.
I think this is a stupid comment, why would anybody be less likely to risk their life just because of their potential logevity? Are people in third world countries more likely to endager their lives because their life expectancy is only half that of the first world?
...
Uh, yeah they are. Check out Liberia, Ethiopea, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Afghanistan,
This is Insightful? Where exactly is the insight? Of course people in third world countries are more likely to do things that endanger their lives --first because most of those things they HAVE to do to survive (you don't see any Afghani's out bungee jumping), and second because the QUALITY of life is piss poor. If you took two people, gave them both a great life, but told one he would most likely only live to 40 and the other that he would live to 80, I don't think they'd act differently...
There's just way too many other factors at play to judge people's actions in third world countries based solely on life expectancy.
C'mon now. You'll be lucky if 99% of the Slashdot community reads the COMMENTS at +4, let alone the entire interview. Look who you're talking to here!
I had really hoped that the US Gov was wrong for nabbing a US citizen. I had hoped that there would be a suite against the gov for violating civil rights.
Are you fukcing serious? Not supporting your government's policies is one thing, but actually rooting for them to screw up and ruin a potentially innocent guy's life just so you can feel better about yourself and your misinformed opinions is pretty low. They screw up enough every day that you shouldn't need to actually root for other mistakes. I'm sure you can find about a million violations of civil rights by ANY administration if you were looking, you don't need to ROOT for them.
There is actually a pr0n company called AVS which stands for Adult Video Systems. I wonder if they will use the format?
I supposed I shouldn't be openly admitting to knowing so much about this, but isn't AVS "Adult Verification Services" or something? I believe it's a company that verifies your age for a slew of sites.
Or I could be wrong. First thing that came to mind when I heard this though.
that if someone were going to skip over commercials, they'd just blindly skip over all of them, not pick and choose which they wanted to see. You're either in the mood to deal with commercials, or you just skip the lot of them.
Is this not the case?
You pay for incoming calls?
And I thought the prices here weren't that good...
Where exactly is "here?" In the US, yes, you pay for incoming calls. Every plan I've ever heard of, you pay for incoming calls. Airtime is airtime. So a cellular to cellular call is costing two people money.
Great deal, huh?
Is that true? Always assumed it followed the same model as airtime, with no distinction between outgoing and incoming.
I don't use it enough to care at this point I guess.
The only SMS spam I have gotten so far has been from my service provider, Cingular. I don't think they'd press charges against themselves, so this doesn't really help. However, it's a good step. Being charged by the message, I'd be pretty annnoyed to be spammed.
About 85 percent of the fund's revenues are split between two causes: the "e-rate" program (40 percent), which subsidizes school and library Internet connections, and rural telephone companies (45 percent)
How is this a bad thing?
So, because I want fast internet in my house in a relatively urban area, I have to pay 5 bucks a month extra so someone in the middle of nowhere can have a cheaper phone bill? Makes sense.
And yes, subsidizing school and library Internet connections sounds like a good thing, but I'm sure it can be done with some of the other wasted tax money rather than taxing some new thing even more. Pick a noble cause and tax a random 10% tax to something for it isn't always a "great idea." There are probably more causes than there are services to tax.
Sure, the amount of coins you receive back will be less on average, but I guarantee that you will spend at least twice as long at the register. Given what I perceive to be the general public's math skills, figuring out how many 18 cent coins to give wouldn't be worth having 17% less coins in my pocket. Time is money, or something. Like has been mentioned in othe rposts, people have enough trouble with quarters and adding / subtracting 25s, let alone 18s.
Sorry, this is just impractical. There's more than one variable in the equation that this guy's not looking at.
> To promote the progress of science and useful
> arts, by securing for limited times to authors
> and inventors the exclusive right to their
> respective writings and discoveries;
The idea here is to promote "useful arts", not make people money or to create a new class of property. Also, it can be infered that if a particular federal law does NOT encourage progress in the arts then the US government has no authority making such a law.
Some days, you just want to curse the ICC...
Well I suppose my question is this. Suppose I'm an artist (I am most decidedly not). How does holding a copyright encourage my art? The only way I see this being true is because I am going to be recognized for my work, in most cases monetarily compensated. I'm encouraged to create because I know that I will be rewarded, exclusively, for my creation. The reward doesn't HAVE to be monetary, but I would say money is a great incentive to do pretty much anything for most Americans. Capitalism and all that.
If based on this we can conclude that copyright IS in fact encouraging the creation of "science and useful arts," and that therefore copyright law is at least Constitutional in theory, what change do you propose which would maintain this original purpose, but allow you to do what you wish (publish someone's lyrics without their permission) legally?
It all comes back to the original point - no, online lyrics publication is not hurting anyone. In a "fair" world it would just be ignored, I suppose. But it's near impossible, at least legally, to distinguish it from any other kind of copyright infringement which MAY be harmful. Aside from these people thinking a bit before they throw lawsuits around, I just don't see any other solution.
Copyright has NOTHING do to with "income".
Copyright is a means to encourage CREATION and DISTRIBUTION of artistic works.
While it may not explicitly say "for the purposes of income," I cannot see any reason to copyright something unless you are afraid of incurring a loss from the COPY of it. It's an exclusive right for you to use your work and no one else. TECHNICALLY if someone reproduces your lyrics while they are under copyright, they are breaking copyright laws.
Unless you can show how bullying these sites will cause more lyrics to be created, they should be left alone.
That's my whole point in the original post. I don't see these sites causing any actual problem to the author of the works, so they SHOULD be left alone, but I have to concede that they are, technically, breaking the law, and the copyright holders have the RIGHT to harass them. It's stupid, and pointless, and maybe the copyright law should reflect the intent rather than blindly prohibiting all reproduction in any form, but at this point it does not. J ust because you say you "should" be able to do something, doesn't mean the law suddenly changes and you are allowed to do it. You have to make an effort to have the law changed, cease your actions, or break the law. Or move to where the law is different. Ignoring the law doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law.
Also, I don't see how copyright encourages creation and distribution in any way but monetary, hence income. Why would you care that someone stole your work, unless you were somehow being cheated out of money for it? Pride? Maybe in a few cases, but certainly not the majority. I'd love to see a compelling argument that copyright law has nothing to do with making money from your works. I can't even fathom such a thing.