It does seem true that when you are looking for information on a product, that 9 out of every 10 results will be a page trying to sell you the item, not a page with useful information about the product (beyond the normal marketing speak you get when someone is trying to sell you something).
The problem is that without clicking on 'I Agree' you have no right to copy the software at all. The license agreement is the only thing that can give you permission to make a copy.
They should add fisheye distortion and very bright unnatural false colors to the image so that it is not as recognizable as a human figure. Such distortion would not make it difficult to spot odd items but it would pretty much make everyone look fat and ugly. That way the occasional hot chick does not look much better than a 300 pounder.
I have written an essay on ending spam. The idea is to associate a second piece of information that goes along with your e-mail address. This 'secret' can be used for anything you want, such as blocking anyone who does not get the secret right.
There is no need for a right of reply on the internet. When anyone can get a site and post their own response to anything that is said about them on the net, why do they need to use my site?
Something can only be property if, by taking it, I have deprived you of something. And that is only if we agree that copying is somehow taking (which is isn't, look it up).
Think about it. How can something be owned, if I cannot deprive you of it? Also, how can something possibly be taken unless I deprive you of it. Isn't that one definition of taking?
The problem is not you making a personal decision to create false positives for yourself. The problem is other people making decisions for you which block mail which is not spam without your knowledge.
The problem is some ISP between you and your friends/family/coworkers deciding that your friends'/family's/coworkers' mail is spam without you having any say in it.
The idea is that YOU should decide what false positives to deal with, not a government or an unaccountable entity like an ISP.
The reaction against lawsuits is born out of a perception that lawsuits are too common in the US, however, the situation is Japan is totally different for 3 reasons. Seeing a civil lawsuit like this in Japan is a rare event.
1.) It is very difficult to become a lawyer in Japan, the result is that there are not really enough of them. There are lots of people interested in becoming lawyers but the system is against them.
2.) The judicial branch of the Japanese government has been imasculated and has little real power (compare to the US where one could argue that the courts determined the outcome of the 2000 presidential election).
3.) It is very much prefered that people settle civil matters out of court. People who do not are seen as uncooperative and maybe even as troublemakers. You have to have a very strong case to go to court because the judge will be biased against even hearing your case.
This might seem like a utopia to some. Few lawyers, no liberal judges "legislating from the bench", and skeptical judges who only bother with the most pressing cases. But it is pushed way to far onto the other side of the scale, and the result is that the Japanese have little redress for greivances in their court system (or anywhere else for that matter, but I will not get into the rest now ^_^).
It has been said a million times, but something is not illegal simply because it does not fit into a companies business plan. I am not obligated to buy any number of games after I buy a console. It is not illegal to write and sell software for these consoles without paying the maker of the console. It is not illegal for someone to modify their property in order to play the game I sold them.
It is illegal for them to modify it in order to violate copyright laws.
But, it is NOT property. You cannot own an arrangment of symbols or sounds. I dare you to show me anywhere in law where it actually says 'Intellectual Property'
No such thing exists in law or in nature (by nature I mean that it is impossible to actually own something like program source code, while it is possible for me to own a car or house).
Indeed, the president can, according to the US constitution, bomb Cuba at any moment he chooses. Being the Commander and Chief means that his orders to the military are followed. His cabinet can tell him that its a bad idea, but ultimately they are responsible for implementing his orders. Point me to the law which specifies who can tell the president 'no'? Congress could have some say. Perhaps they could cut off the budget for various military operations. His cabinet is free to resign if they do not wish to carry out his orders, but someone will eventually have to. The only laws which determine that it is illegal would be international war crimes laws. You can only wage war with a good reason ("I don't like them" is not good enough). H
I believe in this example, you HAVE TO mark a pigeon with something. There is no such thing as a pigeon without a marker (or, a pigeon without a marker is one of the 100 ways to mark a pigeon). You only have 100 different types of markers, so two pigeons would share one if you had 101 pigeons. If you leave a marker off a pigeon, this would be the same as having a 101st type of marker. In other words, if you can tell two pigeons apart, then they have been marked. You could have just as easily said "well, some pigeons have different spots on them, some are big, some are small." But that its kind of beside the point.
Its just a silly way of saying that if you have fewer categories than things to put into categories then some categories have to have more than one thing in them. For instance, you could say there are 6 different races of people on Earth, and there are 6 billion people. So, obviously at least one of the categories has more than one person in it. It is a very simple principle, but can be used to as part of a proof to show less obvious things (sorry, no examples spring to mind).
He is refering to the operating system proper, not applications like IIS. According to him this is the first remote exploit of the Windows OS itself which allows an attacker to take over the computer. As far as I can remember, he is correct.
All operating system objects in Windows NT/2k/XP can have security attached to them. Every handle, thread, process, registry key, pipe, mutex, semaphore, file, etc, etc. Hell, you say it does not even have these objects! How does such a wrong comment get modded up +5?
The Java compiler that is part of the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) can compile Java into Machine Language. So why bother with a virtual machine?
Also, GCC would allow you to easily write classes in C++ which can be used by Java to access the internals of the PS2. Java by itself prevents this sort of low level access.
Re:Why is a civilian spouting off about war?
on
A New Kind of War
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
It does seem true that when you are looking for information on a product, that 9 out of every 10 results will be a page trying to sell you the item, not a page with useful information about the product (beyond the normal marketing speak you get when someone is trying to sell you something).
You might be able to hire 5 indian programmers, but never would a project succeed which required communicating to 100 foriegn workers!
The problem is that without clicking on 'I Agree' you have no right to copy the software at all. The license agreement is the only thing that can give you permission to make a copy.
They should add fisheye distortion and very bright unnatural false colors to the image so that it is not as recognizable as a human figure. Such distortion would not make it difficult to spot odd items but it would pretty much make everyone look fat and ugly. That way the occasional hot chick does not look much better than a 300 pounder.
I have written an essay on ending spam. The idea is to associate a second piece of information that goes along with your e-mail address. This 'secret' can be used for anything you want, such as blocking anyone who does not get the secret right.
There is no need for a right of reply on the internet. When anyone can get a site and post their own response to anything that is said about them on the net, why do they need to use my site?
Something can only be property if, by taking it, I have deprived you of something. And that is only if we agree that copying is somehow taking (which is isn't, look it up).
Think about it. How can something be owned, if I cannot deprive you of it? Also, how can something possibly be taken unless I deprive you of it. Isn't that one definition of taking?
You sir, are a troll.
The problem is not you making a personal decision to create false positives for yourself. The problem is other people making decisions for you which block mail which is not spam without your knowledge.
The problem is some ISP between you and your friends/family/coworkers deciding that your friends'/family's/coworkers' mail is spam without you having any say in it.
The idea is that YOU should decide what false positives to deal with, not a government or an unaccountable entity like an ISP.
The reaction against lawsuits is born out of a perception that lawsuits are too common in the US, however, the situation is Japan is totally different for 3 reasons. Seeing a civil lawsuit like this in Japan is a rare event.
1.) It is very difficult to become a lawyer in Japan, the result is that there are not really enough of them. There are lots of people interested in becoming lawyers but the system is against them.
2.) The judicial branch of the Japanese government has been imasculated and has little real power (compare to the US where one could argue that the courts determined the outcome of the 2000 presidential election).
3.) It is very much prefered that people settle civil matters out of court. People who do not are seen as uncooperative and maybe even as troublemakers. You have to have a very strong case to go to court because the judge will be biased against even hearing your case.
This might seem like a utopia to some. Few lawyers, no liberal judges "legislating from the bench", and skeptical judges who only bother with the most pressing cases. But it is pushed way to far onto the other side of the scale, and the result is that the Japanese have little redress for greivances in their court system (or anywhere else for that matter, but I will not get into the rest now ^_^).
Actually, you can create a boot floppy for Win2k as well.
Amazing that we should "run into each other" on Slashdot, this is Jason Wilkins, my e-mail is fenix AT io DOT com.
I'm still heavily into graphics and game programming...
I knew a Ryan Fenton who went to ASU when I was there around '98 - '99
You would not happen to be the same one?
It has been said a million times, but something is not illegal simply because it does not fit into a companies business plan. I am not obligated to buy any number of games after I buy a console. It is not illegal to write and sell software for these consoles without paying the maker of the console. It is not illegal for someone to modify their property in order to play the game I sold them.
It is illegal for them to modify it in order to violate copyright laws.
But, it is NOT property. You cannot own an arrangment of symbols or sounds. I dare you to show me anywhere in law where it actually says 'Intellectual Property'
No such thing exists in law or in nature (by nature I mean that it is impossible to actually own something like program source code, while it is possible for me to own a car or house).
This all ignores the fact that Free Software and Linux exist in an economy/jungle and is not a math problem.
Insects and bacteria also have exponential reproduction rates, but they do not automatically take over the world.
Simply demonstrating that a system has exponential growth is not sufficient to predict that it will succeed.
Check out the inventors home page.
Looks like a happy guy, how appropriate.
Since no one has apparently thought of it, then I guess I can patent it. I am going to apply to get a patent on selling brocolli of the phone.
While I am at it I might as well patent selling everything else no one has apparently thought of selling over the "telecommunication lines"
Indeed, the president can, according to the US constitution, bomb Cuba at any moment he chooses. Being the Commander and Chief means that his orders to the military are followed. His cabinet can tell him that its a bad idea, but ultimately they are responsible for implementing his orders. Point me to the law which specifies who can tell the president 'no'? Congress could have some say. Perhaps they could cut off the budget for various military operations. His cabinet is free to resign if they do not wish to carry out his orders, but someone will eventually have to. The only laws which determine that it is illegal would be international war crimes laws. You can only wage war with a good reason ("I don't like them" is not good enough). H
Great, a link on Slashdot. Just what DevKitAdvance needs. I hope I can afford the bandwidth ^_^
Its just a silly way of saying that if you have fewer categories than things to put into categories then some categories have to have more than one thing in them. For instance, you could say there are 6 different races of people on Earth, and there are 6 billion people. So, obviously at least one of the categories has more than one person in it. It is a very simple principle, but can be used to as part of a proof to show less obvious things (sorry, no examples spring to mind).
Don't get blinded by all this pigeon crap ^_^
DNA is apparently Douglas N. Adam's initials. But what that has to do with the story is anyone's guess.
He is refering to the operating system proper, not applications like IIS. According to him this is the first remote exploit of the Windows OS itself which allows an attacker to take over the computer. As far as I can remember, he is correct.
So, what crack pipe have you been puffing on?
All operating system objects in Windows NT/2k/XP can have security attached to them. Every handle, thread, process, registry key, pipe, mutex, semaphore, file, etc, etc. Hell, you say it does not even have these objects! How does such a wrong comment get modded up +5?
The Java compiler that is part of the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) can compile Java into Machine Language. So why bother with a virtual machine?
Also, GCC would allow you to easily write classes in C++ which can be used by Java to access the internals of the PS2. Java by itself prevents this sort of low level access.
Did you even read the article?