This seems to be valuable in situations where you are developing an application that will be accessing a database behind a dsl firewall. It would be nice to be able to profile the performance on your local network, instead of having it run too slowly to be used in the field. This happened to me once, and I fixed the problem by using a subselect, instead of multiple sql commands, but this wasn't readily obvious as the library was hiding the details of the process, and the speed of the local network compensated for the ineffiency(sp) of the code.
It means that anyone can copy any work and sell it. For example: Walmart can make their own copies of music and sell it. It means any guy on the street can burn CDs full of movies and software, and then sell it for a a few bucks. It means that if you give your screenplay to a movie company in hopes of selling it to them, they can turn around and make a movie from your screenplay without paying you anything. And that same movie company can use music in their soundtrack that they never paid for. It means advertisers can use music in their commercials that they never paid for. It means movie theaters can charge movie-goers for movies that they never paid for. It means Barnes and Noble can print up their own copies of books, paying the original authors nothing.
You don't have a choice in the U.S. to not copyright your works. It is automatic.
This is not exactly true. While you can be granted an automatic copyright since the requirement for registering it no longer applies, you can still choose to have your works not protected by copyright and release them into the public domain.
You feel that something is your "right", ok, but who is the person that must give it to you?
I don't understand why you feel that someone must give you the right to ask this question? Do you not feel empowered to ask this question yourself, or did you have to ask somebody's permission for you to ask this question. Is it not self-evident that you have the inherent right to ask the question? Also, if you have to ask permission, or depend on somebody giving it to you, is it really a right? You may be confusing rights with privileges. I marked a slashdot user as a friend the other day precisely because he took the time to explain this difference to other people.
If it your right to be safe, whose responsibility is it to save you from a danger?
This is rather hard to answer, as it's too abstract for me to answer reasonably. In the case of Man living in the Natural World, where there is no government, or in remote places where others can't be contacted in time to help secure your safety, it would be self-responsibility. In other places, such as communities, towns, and cities there are people who have sworn an oath and have assumed this responsibility, and in these cases that responsibility is still limited as they're restricted by that oath, and it's still ultimately self-responsibility.
If we talked about responsibilities it would be more honest.
Since none of us are alone in the Universe, it is our responsibility to recognize our rights so that we don't infringe upon the rights of others. Your right to swing your hands stops when it gets too close to my nose. You are responsible for recognizing this, just as much as you have the right to swing your hands.
On the same note, I fail to see how I've been dishonest in my previous comment. Maybe you mean "more accurate", rather than "more honest".
Since the article pertains to The Pirate Bay, it may be especially relevant to provide a link to a series of seminars that help explain these ideas in greater detail.
I'm not familiar with that case, so I'll have to read up on it.
Judging by your comment, it seems that they made a bad interpretation of the power to regulate interstate commerce by ignoring the "interstate" adjective. I'd wager to guess that there is a vested interest by major interstate (even multinational) corporations to keep this decision as valid by aggressively countering any action that would lead to this decision from being overturned, like the "separate but equal" decision was.
While it may be more difficult today to wind up with this type of injustice on the basis of race, there are other circumstances that can lead to a similar situation with prejudiced juries and contempt for a person's rights (or if not contempt for those rights, ignorance of what they actually are leading to the inability to recognize that they are being infringed).
The fact that a right to privacy isn't explicit in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, cannot be evidence prima facie that a right to privacy does not exist. It takes a particular type of right-wing nuttery to get to that assumption.
This is especially true since the Bill of Rights makes it explicit that the Bill of Rights is not meant to be an enumeration of your rights (9th), and that the powers not delegated by the Constitution or prohibited by it are reserved to either the States or the People (10th).
Your natural rights are self-evident, and they exist as much as the number 1 or the number 0 exists. These rights are inalienable, and I can prove it. You can't take my rights from me, although you can possibly deny me the ability to exercise those rights. When you use a model that allows those rights to be "capable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred", you will be left in the situation where you have little to no rights left. When you feel that rights don't exists, then you won't have to worry about infringing on other people's rights (since they have none) and you won't have any property (since you don't have the right to have it in the first place).
Re:looks like it still loses history
on
BASH 4.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
I use HISTCONTROL=ignoredups:ignorespace for typing in sensitive commands. The important part is "ignorespace", although I combine that with ignoredups. When this is set, any command that starts with a space will not be written to history (both memory and ~/.bash_history).
You forget that anybody who breaks the law in the United States does so willingly. There is no such thing as "accidentally" breaking the law. All people living in the United States have the responsibility to know and understand the law.
And a user name that usually isn't taken by others. Interesting that I am umeboshi3 at gmail and was umeboshi2 at yahoo. You happen to be one of the only people I have come across who actually took the time to learn its meaning (or you are already fluent in Japanese). You brought a smile to my face today! That's a good gift to give somebody on a Monday. For some odd reason, I used to get a whole lot of Japanese spam in my mailbox.;)
1 Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
-- my neighbors covet my property (immoral)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
-- I dunno, is it immoral to levy "heavy" taxes?
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
-- abolition of inheritance is seriously immoral.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
-- If you can't take it with you, you can't have it back. Also, no mention of due process here.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
-- no comment
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
-- no slashdot for the commies
-- your means of travel is totally in the hands of the State
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
-- Strictly against freedom of assembly
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c., &c.[3]
-- this means no private schools and no choice of how to educate your child.
There does happen to be a reason why the people of the United States abhor communism. There are a lot of learned people who feel that it is immoral. That being said, there are also learned people who actually believe this to be proper.
Because, in that case, possession of such a file could be used to prove you had either gotten it from an illegal source or, at minimum, are behaving in a suspicious manner. It is not illegal to possess a file obtained from any source, with the sole exception of trespass (in which case the trespass must be proven before the file could be considered illegally obtained).
I've never understood the problem with removing the serials from guns. It helps to keep them untraceable. Untraceable guns are more difficult to round up. Untraceable guns are necessary for protection from those who can easily track and seize them.
"Why do you have content that has been altered so one CAN'T trace it back to the original purchase?" Do your clothes still have the tags on them? If not, why have you altered them so one can't trace it back to the original purchase?
How is a discussion of monopolies even vaguely relevant to a debate on piracy? Show me the monopoly. Here it is... (from the US Constitution)
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; Notice how this compares to the second definition here...
Slashdot Mirror
This seems to be valuable in situations where you are developing an application that will be accessing a database behind a dsl firewall. It would be nice to be able to profile the performance on your local network, instead of having it run too slowly to be used in the field. This happened to me once, and I fixed the problem by using a subselect, instead of multiple sql commands, but this wasn't readily obvious as the library was hiding the details of the process, and the speed of the local network compensated for the ineffiency(sp) of the code.
However, Data may have an easier time showing off his breakdancing skills in the holosuites.
That idea leads you to a very bad place.
It means that anyone can copy any work and sell it. For example: Walmart can make their own copies of music and sell it. It means any guy on the street can burn CDs full of movies and software, and then sell it for a a few bucks. It means that if you give your screenplay to a movie company in hopes of selling it to them, they can turn around and make a movie from your screenplay without paying you anything. And that same movie company can use music in their soundtrack that they never paid for. It means advertisers can use music in their commercials that they never paid for. It means movie theaters can charge movie-goers for movies that they never paid for. It means Barnes and Noble can print up their own copies of books, paying the original authors nothing.
And this is supposed to be bad?
I don't know's on third
... so you don't miss the part about the 14 year old girl in New Jersey who has been charged with possesion of pictures of herself.
switching from x11 to console may cause lockups
Is this something that "just works" in windows?
You don't have a choice in the U.S. to not copyright your works. It is automatic.
This is not exactly true. While you can be granted an automatic copyright since the requirement for registering it no longer applies, you can still choose to have your works not protected by copyright and release them into the public domain.
You feel that something is your "right", ok, but who is the person that must give it to you?
I don't understand why you feel that someone must give you the right to ask this question? Do you not feel empowered to ask this question yourself, or did you have to ask somebody's permission for you to ask this question. Is it not self-evident that you have the inherent right to ask the question? Also, if you have to ask permission, or depend on somebody giving it to you, is it really a right? You may be confusing rights with privileges. I marked a slashdot user as a friend the other day precisely because he took the time to explain this difference to other people.
If it your right to be safe, whose responsibility is it to save you from a danger?
This is rather hard to answer, as it's too abstract for me to answer reasonably. In the case of Man living in the Natural World, where there is no government, or in remote places where others can't be contacted in time to help secure your safety, it would be self-responsibility. In other places, such as communities, towns, and cities there are people who have sworn an oath and have assumed this responsibility, and in these cases that responsibility is still limited as they're restricted by that oath, and it's still ultimately self-responsibility.
If we talked about responsibilities it would be more honest.
Since none of us are alone in the Universe, it is our responsibility to recognize our rights so that we don't infringe upon the rights of others. Your right to swing your hands stops when it gets too close to my nose. You are responsible for recognizing this, just as much as you have the right to swing your hands.
On the same note, I fail to see how I've been dishonest in my previous comment. Maybe you mean "more accurate", rather than "more honest".
Since the article pertains to The Pirate Bay, it may be especially relevant to provide a link to a series of seminars that help explain these ideas in greater detail.
here's the link :)
I'm not familiar with that case, so I'll have to read up on it.
Judging by your comment, it seems that they made a bad interpretation of the power to regulate interstate commerce by ignoring the "interstate" adjective. I'd wager to guess that there is a vested interest by major interstate (even multinational) corporations to keep this decision as valid by aggressively countering any action that would lead to this decision from being overturned, like the "separate but equal" decision was.
It might be harder, but it's happened before...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medgar_Evers#Assassination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_De_La_Beckwith#Evers_murder
While it may be more difficult today to wind up with this type of injustice on the basis of race, there are other circumstances that can lead to a similar situation with prejudiced juries and contempt for a person's rights (or if not contempt for those rights, ignorance of what they actually are leading to the inability to recognize that they are being infringed).
The fact that a right to privacy isn't explicit in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, cannot be evidence prima facie that a right to privacy does not exist. It takes a particular type of right-wing nuttery to get to that assumption.
This is especially true since the Bill of Rights makes it explicit that the Bill of Rights is not meant to be an enumeration of your rights (9th), and that the powers not delegated by the Constitution or prohibited by it are reserved to either the States or the People (10th).
Your natural rights are self-evident, and they exist as much as the number 1 or the number 0 exists. These rights are inalienable, and I can prove it. You can't take my rights from me, although you can possibly deny me the ability to exercise those rights. When you use a model that allows those rights to be "capable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred", you will be left in the situation where you have little to no rights left. When you feel that rights don't exists, then you won't have to worry about infringing on other people's rights (since they have none) and you won't have any property (since you don't have the right to have it in the first place).
I use HISTCONTROL=ignoredups:ignorespace for typing in sensitive commands. The important part is "ignorespace", although I combine that with ignoredups. When this is set, any command that starts with a space will not be written to history (both memory and ~/.bash_history).
Your post reminds me of this:
www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/show.php?content=78924
Not much glowing in this wallpaper, however.
You forget that anybody who breaks the law in the United States does so willingly. There is no such thing as "accidentally" breaking the law. All people living in the United States have the responsibility to know and understand the law.
I just thought that he was your average conspiracy theorist.
svn co http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/src/chrome
Google is looking more and more like the NSA in Enemy of the State. Where the hell did this company come from?!
Probably from the NSA.
and for the really, really impatient
svn co http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/src/chrome
And a user name that usually isn't taken by others. Interesting that I am umeboshi3 at gmail and was umeboshi2 at yahoo. ;)
You happen to be one of the only people I have come across who actually took the time to learn its meaning (or you are already fluent in Japanese). You brought a smile to my face today! That's a good gift to give somebody on a Monday.
For some odd reason, I used to get a whole lot of Japanese spam in my mailbox.
udp beats the hell out of tcp for tunnelling tcp.
from wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifes to
10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto
1 Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
-- my neighbors covet my property (immoral)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
-- I dunno, is it immoral to levy "heavy" taxes?
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
-- abolition of inheritance is seriously immoral.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
-- If you can't take it with you, you can't have it back. Also, no mention of due process here.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
-- no comment
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
-- no slashdot for the commies
-- your means of travel is totally in the hands of the State
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
-- Strictly against freedom of assembly
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c., &c.[3]
-- this means no private schools and no choice of how to educate your child.
There does happen to be a reason why the people of the United States abhor communism. There are a lot of learned people who feel that it is immoral. That being said, there are also learned people who actually believe this to be proper.
I've never understood the problem with removing the serials from guns. It helps to keep them untraceable. Untraceable guns are more difficult to round up. Untraceable guns are necessary for protection from those who can easily track and seize them. "Why do you have content that has been altered so one CAN'T trace it back to the original purchase?" Do your clothes still have the tags on them? If not, why have you altered them so one can't trace it back to the original purchase?
I could ask for an AMD cpu. This is the primary reason I passed system76 up on my last laptop purchase.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/monopoly