You cannot take the phone book, and just print up your own, copying it verbatim. The collection in it's entirety IS a copyrighted work, like a database.
Collections of otherwise uncopyrightable inforamtion constitute a new work, and are copyrightable.
You generally work around it. It's not as simple as "was this account accessed". I mean, you can track that on legitimate accounts.. you don't need fake ones.. but inserting fake addresses into the customer database, with fake credit cards and whatever so that you can tell when your database has been compromised, or otherwise, is a good idea, and has been done by many smart people for ages.
If the secretarial staff sends a message to that user, you'll know where it came from, and won't have a problem with it. If your competitor sends a message to it, you KNOW your database was stolen.
Yes, but let's say there was a rash of organized burglaries, and it was known they all used a certain type of glove, only sold at one store in town.
Investigators would find out the customer list, and use that as a starting point. Does simply having those gloves make you guilty? Of course not. IS that enough for them to take you to court? Of course not.. but it will likely lead you to the culprits, and then you can gather other evidence.
If you bought a smartcard programmer, they will not be able to convict based on only that, they would have to have other evidence.
Because they DID commit the crime, and their only real defence was not getting caught?
Because if you can get away with paying $3500 instead of getting a criminal record and paying a LOT more in damages for the various shit they can charge you with, it's actually a good idea, and probably legally binding?
Threatening to file a lawsuit against someone unless they settle out of court is not extortion, it's legal.
Now, I think this type of blanket lawsuit is rediculous.. however....
I'm willing to be that the vast majority of the devices in question, from these particular vendors, WERE used to pirate DirecTV. Does that mean you are guilty if you didn't use it for that? Certainly not.. but a great many of the poeple who got letters probably ARE guilty.
This makes me sick, it's not playing fair.. however... DirecTV may very well succeed. After all, there is pretty clear precedent in the US about stealing satellite TV programming, or cable programming. (Please, on lectures about why it's not really stealing, you are preaching to the choir. The fact is, it's considered theft of service, and you can get in deep sheep for it in the US.)
If you were using that reader for some legitimate purpose, like goofing around at home, that's all fine and dandy.. but you would be the minotiry. A lot of those who will complain about this suit are people who DID use it to help people steal TV programming.
once the air is pumped out of the tunnel, and the superconducting maglev system is in place, we should be able to get that sucker up to near orbital speeds.
Oh, so they forced their way in and drove your country to poverty? Give me a break.
This is the same shit argument used against immigrants in almost every country on earth., and by every kind of hate group out there.
They were *invited* there, and have permission to be there. They are not the enemy. IF you think policies need to change, that's one thing..but don't take it out on those who lawfully entered your country, with the proper paperwork, to take jobs lawfully given to them, and don't blame them for appreciating them, either.
Although it may be innocent, the fact is, the average person thinks javascript is a simplified version of java. So it's best not to ever mention them together.
Two languages with separate domains, separate syntax, that are totally different in basically every possible way, except for the name.. why conclusion is someone supposed to develop other than the implied relationship between them?
That is not ignorance of the law, that is ignorance of the fact.
Not knowing that something is illegal is not an excuse. Not knowing you DID something in the first place is a totally different matter.
Linus is not ignorant of the law, he knows taking someone elses stuff and putting it in his kernel without permission is illegal. The point is that, if you have no reason to suspect you don't have the rights, that should be the end of it as far as you are concerned, until someone points out otherwise. To do things the other way would be incredibly expensive, and endless... how do you prove code is totally within your rights? Full patent search and public annoncement on each function and update?
Free software is not about what you think it is about. It's about freedom for the software itself.
Free software is not about giving away software for free. If you can take free software, and bundle it in such a way that you have an edge, and can make money off it... that's great. Go for it.
Yes, Lindows did do a lot of work to make linux get out there into people's homes. They have a deal with a MAJOR outlet to sell lindows preloaded on pcs. That sounds good to me.
It's not the job of everyone who works with open source to "promote open source". Not everyone is a holy crusader.
Lindows has caused a lot of people to use linux who otherwise wouldn't, becuase of how their products are sold. They abide by the licenses of the software they are given, and found a way to profit from it. That's not something to complain about.. and frankly, all the complaining every time someone makes money off open source while still complying with licenses is what gives open source a bad name.
Do I think lindows is technically a great feat? Hell no, but I don't see anything wrong with what they are doing. If you release something under GPL, you should not be upset when someone takes it, packages it, and sells it. Your license, after all, permitted it.
If the authors did not want people to sell or use their products in this manner, the licenses would refect that fact.
If you are going to debunk the debunkers, please do it properly.
The atmosphere is responsible for "twinkling" yes.. but htat has nothing to do with stars being seen or not. The sky from the moon looks pretty much like the sky from earth, minus twinkling.
The reason you don't see starts in the photographs is because of EXPOSURE time. Lunar surface == bright, Astronaut in white moon suit == bright, remember this is directly reflect sunlight with no atmosphere to dim it at all.. therefore, the exposure time is very short, and that's why the stars don't register.
This isn't just a theory.. its' the same reason you don't take your picture indoors with a bright window or reflection behind your subject... because it casues everything else to fade to black.
Yes. So what's your point? Those people will figure it out regardless... the point of secrecy is to raise the bar and reduce the number of people who DO figure it out.
The reason for keeping security a secret is to reduce risk, not eliminate it altogether.
Those who are determined enough, yes, will learn everything. They will do so regardless of whether or not your system is secretive or not. That's why the bank vaults with foot thick steel doors with time locks and multiple keys that are needed in combination, below street level behind other locked doors.. to provide actual physical security, for the reason you just said... because someone WILL learn the details.
If everyone knows what time the bank vault is opened and closed, there will be more attempted robberies, and more time and effort will need to be spent on security. More people will potentially be hurt, and as there will be more attempts at robbery, and therefore, more successes.
When we say security through obscurity is bad, we don't mean obscurity itself is bad, in fact it's an extremely important and useful tool.. we only mean that security only through obscurity is not security at all. If anyone who knows what time to go can just walk into the bank and walk out with the money unhindered, because for a few minutes there are no guards and there is no vault, then there is no security.
That's like saying "I like web sites, not file sharing"
What happens with regards to bittorrent is exactly what would happen if bandwidth were simply higher... people would post stuff to websites, and people would download it. The only difference with bittorrent is it helps lighten the load.
I think the disk image approach is popular because, as you said, some types of metadata do not translate into all filesystems.. and now that we have OSX supporting NFS, CIFS, and a handful of other systems that could very likely be attached and in use, it's far easier to use an HFS+ disk image, if that's the kind of system that is ideal for you to install from.
For the uninitiated... mounting a disk image on a mac does not require any actual thought.. you double click it, and the disk pops up on the desktop. It's a very convenient tool. You can, of course, mount it the old fashioned unix way if using the gui violates your principles
What was great about BFS/Tracker? Can you elaborate?
We are always quick to point out that just because something CAN be used to do something illegal, it should not be illegal itslef. DeCSS, modchips, software cracks, file sharing, you know what I mean.
Well.. are we not then two faced if we sit here and complain that the government is developing something that could be used to track people in cities? We all know what happens when you block technology, right? It goes underground.
If your government wants to spy on you, you need to make sure that spying is clearly illegal, so those involved can be prosecuted... not try to keep technology out of their hands.
There is nothing fishy about this at all. Someone who wants the file connected to you, and is grabbing the pieces you do have. You are connected to others who have pieces you want, and they are slow. There is no rule that keeps it symmetric. This just happens sometimes.. I think usually when there are very few seeders and a lot of people trying to get the file.
was that if they can fork out 1.6 BILLION dollars for Overture, that probably represents 20 years of ad revenue on Yahoo mail.. so why not skip the ads and keep the billion bucks?
I experienced this after some marathon 20+ hour quake sessions.. walking through the hallway leaving my office at 3am, and seeing colored blips out of the corner of my eye, and then thinking something like "Turn, shoot, rockets!". I didn't twitch or anything... but the thoughts were definately there. When you get your brain used to a certain set of inputs, sometimes it's hard to let go.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, there is.
You cannot take the phone book, and just print up your own, copying it verbatim. The collection in it's entirety IS a copyrighted work, like a database.
Collections of otherwise uncopyrightable inforamtion constitute a new work, and are copyrightable.
You generally work around it. It's not as simple as "was this account accessed". I mean, you can track that on legitimate accounts.. you don't need fake ones..
but inserting fake addresses into the customer database, with fake credit cards and whatever so that you can tell when your database has been compromised, or otherwise, is a good idea, and has been done by many smart people for ages.
If the secretarial staff sends a message to that user, you'll know where it came from, and won't have a problem with it. If your competitor sends a message to it, you KNOW your database was stolen.
But why would apple bother. It won't yield a significant advantage over what they have now.
Yes, but let's say there was a rash of organized burglaries, and it was known they all used a certain type of glove, only sold at one store in town.
Investigators would find out the customer list, and use that as a starting point. Does simply having those gloves make you guilty? Of course not. IS that enough for them to take you to court? Of course not.. but it will likely lead you to the culprits, and then you can gather other evidence.
If you bought a smartcard programmer, they will not be able to convict based on only that, they would have to have other evidence.
Because they DID commit the crime, and their only real defence was not getting caught?
Because if you can get away with paying $3500 instead of getting a criminal record and paying a LOT more in damages for the various shit they can charge you with, it's actually a good idea, and probably legally binding?
Threatening to file a lawsuit against someone unless they settle out of court is not extortion, it's legal.
Now, I think this type of blanket lawsuit is rediculous.. however....
I'm willing to be that the vast majority of the devices in question, from these particular vendors, WERE used to pirate DirecTV. Does that mean you are guilty if you didn't use it for that? Certainly not.. but a great many of the poeple who got letters probably ARE guilty.
This makes me sick, it's not playing fair.. however... DirecTV may very well succeed. After all, there is pretty clear precedent in the US about stealing satellite TV programming, or cable programming. (Please, on lectures about why it's not really stealing, you are preaching to the choir. The fact is, it's considered theft of service, and you can get in deep sheep for it in the US.)
If you were using that reader for some legitimate purpose, like goofing around at home, that's all fine and dandy.. but you would be the minotiry. A lot of those who will complain about this suit are people who DID use it to help people steal TV programming.
once the air is pumped out of the tunnel, and the superconducting maglev system is in place, we should be able to get that sucker up to near orbital speeds.
Oh, so they forced their way in and drove your country to poverty? Give me a break.
This is the same shit argument used against immigrants in almost every country on earth., and by every kind of hate group out there.
They were *invited* there, and have permission to be there. They are not the enemy. IF you think policies need to change, that's one thing..but don't take it out on those who lawfully entered your country, with the proper paperwork, to take jobs lawfully given to them, and don't blame them for appreciating them, either.
Really? Where did you get that statistic from? Or are you just guessing?
Although it may be innocent, the fact is, the average person thinks javascript is a simplified version of java. So it's best not to ever mention them together.
Two languages with separate domains, separate syntax, that are totally different in basically every possible way, except for the name.. why conclusion is someone supposed to develop other than the implied relationship between them?
That is not ignorance of the law, that is ignorance of the fact.
Not knowing that something is illegal is not an excuse.
Not knowing you DID something in the first place is a totally different matter.
Linus is not ignorant of the law, he knows taking someone elses stuff and putting it in his kernel without permission is illegal. The point is that, if you have no reason to suspect you don't have the rights, that should be the end of it as far as you are concerned, until someone points out otherwise.
To do things the other way would be incredibly expensive, and endless... how do you prove code is totally within your rights? Full patent search and public annoncement on each function and update?
Free software is not about what you think it is about. It's about freedom for the software itself.
Free software is not about giving away software for free. If you can take free software, and bundle it in such a way that you have an edge, and can make money off it... that's great. Go for it.
Yes, Lindows did do a lot of work to make linux get out there into people's homes. They have a deal with a MAJOR outlet to sell lindows preloaded on pcs. That sounds good to me.
It's not the job of everyone who works with open source to "promote open source". Not everyone is a holy crusader.
Lindows has caused a lot of people to use linux who otherwise wouldn't, becuase of how their products are sold. They abide by the licenses of the software they are given, and found a way to profit from it. That's not something to complain about.. and frankly, all the complaining every time someone makes money off open source while still complying with licenses is what gives open source a bad name.
Do I think lindows is technically a great feat? Hell no, but I don't see anything wrong with what they are doing. If you release something under GPL, you should not be upset when someone takes it, packages it, and sells it. Your license, after all, permitted it.
If the authors did not want people to sell or use their products in this manner, the licenses would refect that fact.
funding? IT's easy to criticize an agency for failing in it's duties when you cut off it's cash supply.
What the people want NASA to do, nasa can't do with the money it's given. Plain and simple.
If you are going to debunk the debunkers, please do it properly.
The atmosphere is responsible for "twinkling" yes.. but htat has nothing to do with stars being seen or not. The sky from the moon looks pretty much like the sky from earth, minus twinkling.
The reason you don't see starts in the photographs is because of EXPOSURE time. Lunar surface == bright, Astronaut in white moon suit == bright, remember this is directly reflect sunlight with no atmosphere to dim it at all.. therefore, the exposure time is very short, and that's why the stars don't register.
This isn't just a theory.. its' the same reason you don't take your picture indoors with a bright window or reflection behind your subject... because it casues everything else to fade to black.
SOmeone making $40,000 a year with a desk top is definately comparable to a sweatshop worker sitting in front of a sewing machine.
I totally see the resemblance.
Driving a 1981 civic is a privelege. Perhaps you are unaware, but most people in the world do not have a vehicle to drive, period.
Yes. So what's your point? Those people will figure it out regardless... the point of secrecy is to raise the bar and reduce the number of people who DO figure it out.
The reason for keeping security a secret is to reduce risk, not eliminate it altogether.
Those who are determined enough, yes, will learn everything. They will do so regardless of whether or not your system is secretive or not. That's why the bank vaults with foot thick steel doors with time locks and multiple keys that are needed in combination, below street level behind other locked doors.. to provide actual physical security, for the reason you just said... because someone WILL learn the details.
If everyone knows what time the bank vault is opened and closed, there will be more attempted robberies, and more time and effort will need to be spent on security. More people will potentially be hurt, and as there will be more attempts at robbery, and therefore, more successes.
When we say security through obscurity is bad, we don't mean obscurity itself is bad, in fact it's an extremely important and useful tool.. we only mean that security only through obscurity is not security at all. If anyone who knows what time to go can just walk into the bank and walk out with the money unhindered, because for a few minutes there are no guards and there is no vault, then there is no security.
I was merely clarifying what I though the previous poster meant.
That's like saying "I like web sites, not file sharing"
What happens with regards to bittorrent is exactly what would happen if bandwidth were simply higher... people would post stuff to websites, and people would download it. The only difference with bittorrent is it helps lighten the load.
Just like unix. Oh wait, it is unix.
... /dev/disk2s2 on /Volumes/PCTools 1.1 (local, nodev, nosuid, read-only)
I click on "PCTools 1.1.dmg"
then, after finder is done with it
# mount
It quite possibly is lif... funny enough, osx tells me
% file blah.dmg
blah.dmg: VAX COFF executable not stripped - version 376
I think the disk image approach is popular because, as you said, some types of metadata do not translate into all filesystems.. and now that we have OSX supporting NFS, CIFS, and a handful of other systems that could very likely be attached and in use, it's far easier to use an HFS+ disk image, if that's the kind of system that is ideal for you to install from.
For the uninitiated... mounting a disk image on a mac does not require any actual thought.. you double click it, and the disk pops up on the desktop. It's a very convenient tool. You can, of course, mount it the old fashioned unix way if using the gui violates your principles
What was great about BFS/Tracker? Can you elaborate?
We are always quick to point out that just because something CAN be used to do something illegal, it should not be illegal itslef. DeCSS, modchips, software cracks, file sharing, you know what I mean.
Well.. are we not then two faced if we sit here and complain that the government is developing something that could be used to track people in cities? We all know what happens when you block technology, right? It goes underground.
If your government wants to spy on you, you need to make sure that spying is clearly illegal, so those involved can be prosecuted... not try to keep technology out of their hands.
There is nothing fishy about this at all. Someone who wants the file connected to you, and is grabbing the pieces you do have. You are connected to others who have pieces you want, and they are slow. There is no rule that keeps it symmetric. This just happens sometimes.. I think usually when there are very few seeders and a lot of people trying to get the file.
was that if they can fork out 1.6 BILLION dollars for Overture, that probably represents 20 years of ad revenue on Yahoo mail.. so why not skip the ads and keep the billion bucks?
I experienced this after some marathon 20+ hour quake sessions.. walking through the hallway leaving my office at 3am, and seeing colored blips out of the corner of my eye, and then thinking something like "Turn, shoot, rockets!". I didn't twitch or anything... but the thoughts were definately there.
When you get your brain used to a certain set of inputs, sometimes it's hard to let go.