Let me put it this way. In general, Democrats are owned by the MAFIAA. In general, Republicans will support anything that gives corporations more power, so you'll get bipartisan support when the Democrats do their master's bidding. Add to this one specific Republican, Howard Coble, also owned by the MAFIAA, who can steer the other Republicans into agreeing to be bipartisan.
Copyright in the US is based on the idea that ideas can't be owned. However, to promote the arts and sciences, incentive is given to creators in the form of a limited-time monopoly on thier works. Originally, this was 14 years with a 14-year extension, and you had to register you work if you wanted protection.
So with this scheme a person has to show he cares about his work, and the time of creation and owner is registered so that 1) we can be sure when it expires so others can use it and 2) if someone wants to use it before expiration, he knows who the owner is. The relatively short term ensures a good flow of works into the public domain to further spur creativity. This creates a good system. This staffer was proposing a return to a system like this.
But Europeans had a concept of natural rights where you own your ideas just as much as a piece of furniture you made. Our expansion into absurdly long terms happened as we tried to harmonize our copyright with foreign countries, complying with treaties we made. This really kicked off with the French-backed Berne Convention of 1887, which was based on their concept of droit d'auteur (natural ownership). It also required the abolishment of mandatory registration.
And it's still happening. We never recognized "seat of the brow" copyright, that is you own it because you put work into it even if it isn't a creative work (think a database, a list of facts). Europeans recognize this, and it will likely come here eventually. The only thing stopping it is the Feist decision.
But now that we have this completely warped, unconstitutional copyright, influenced by foreign views of ownership, you are right in that we do push it throughout the world.
When it comes to copyright, it's mainly a D problem. For the most part, they're the ones bought and paid for by the entertainment industry. Think of it logically, who does Hollywood support? Who do you see musicians and actors supporting? Who do you see entertainment industry doing fundraisers for? Democrats, almost all the time. And the Democrats pay them back.
There are a few Republicans that are also hard-core entertainment industry reporters. Coble comes to mind. I'd bet he's behind this firing. Few others probably wanted to do this, but they weren't willing to risk their positions defending a mere staffer, so Coble's will happened.
Copyright reform should be the conservative position since our current state of copyright is so far out of line with the original constitutional text and intent. Conservatives rightly complain when we use foreign law to influence interpretation of the Constitution, yet our copyright has been warped to follow the copyright schemes of most foreign countries, not ours, and that's somehow considered constitutional.
Abandoning their principles, the basic reason the Republicans lost, and will keep losing. All the Democrats have to do is not screw up too badly.
We're not looking for the aerial version of bus drivers to fly these things, we're looking for race car drivers, drifters, stunt drivers, people who can and will push the envelope. We want people who will fly in at 100mph at treetop level in a twisty valley at night under fire to exfil pinned-down troops. Unfortunately, as the article notes, this ability and willingness naturally increases the probability of hot-dogging incidents regardless of how otherwise professional the pilots are.
The difference between hot-dogging and training is mainly whether the pilot was ordered to do it. What would be "watch this trick" in civilian life is done daily by these guys. What kind of idiot dips the back-end of his helicopter in the ocean and holds it there? They do it all the time for Spec Ops boat launch and recovery.
Those pilots with the conservative airline mentality can fly the C-17s. They're useless for combat helicopters.
That's how it works sometimes. One of the world's lowest slimeballs, Larry Flynt, established the precedent of parody and satire being protected under freedom of speech in the US (a protection missing in many countries).
I like that it works this way. If the precedent of rights and protection is established for even the slimeballs, then the rest of us should be good.
GPS, FLIR, radar, night vision, space rockets, jet engines, all brought to practical reality for military use then later transitioned to benefit civilian life.
This is history. Even the Roman roads were built for the troops, not civilian commerce.
This works better when the enemy, real or imagined, can't attack your country or your ships or your bases.
How is this a bad thing? War pretty much consists of killing the other guys while keeping your guys from getting killed. The more you can protect your guys, the more you are likely to win.
Or sometimes last-minute changes to production are made that completely invalidate the tests.
Take the M-16, great in final tests, but soldiers were dropping like flies in Vietnam because their rifles were jamming. Turns out the Army chose a different powder manufacturer for production cartridges, and this caused fouling and corrosion of the chamber and barrel, and increased the rate of fire beyond design specs.
By the time the government does something, the market's already moved beyond it. Even the original grandaddy of antitrust, the Standard Oil monopoly, was only a shadow of its former self by the time the government took action. Its marketshare had been slashed in its strongest East and Midwest markets, and it was a minority in the Gulf and Western markets.
Is it just me, or did that actually cycle after failure? I haven't broken down an AR in a while, but that looks like the back of the BCG in about the right position. Another pull of the trigger would have been very painful.
This was seriouly the geek version of "Hold muh beer an' watch this!" They got lucky. I hope they use a benchrest next time.
A hood may not be part of the structural rigidity of the car, but it is often used to absorb energy in a crash. Metal hoods buckle, fibreglass ones explode into a million tiny (non-lethal) pieces. I had a friend who got into an accident in a fiberglass car, and he was still finding fiberglass bits months later.
The American car manufacturers said they couldn't comply with new pollution standards for years, and along comes Mr. Honda with his CVCC engine that already does, and without a catalytic converter.
The British Sten submachine gun was designed so that it could be made with the metalworking skills and tooling of a good bicycle shop in something like five hours. Small shops all over the country were making them for the war effort.
1) You want to use a standard AR15 barrel 2) You want lower chamber pressure and less recoil since this is your first try with plastic and are afraid it might blow apart
It's not that high-velocity, actually less than most 5.56x45 ammo. What it is, is higher velocity than handgun rounds in the submachinegun market for which it was intended.
But the real cool reason is based on a basic fact of ammunition: The caliber stated is often incorrect. Both the 5.56 and the 5.7 have an exact bullet diameter of 5.7mm, so they can use a regular barrel with lower-powered ammunition.
It was designed to have a light personal defense round that is capable of piercing body armor, and that can be fired full-auto controllably.
Enter the gun designed for it, the FN P90. It's small (10" shorter than an M4 carbine, but the barrel is only 4" shorter), holds a lot of ammo (with 50 rounds it weighs five ounces less than an M4 with 30), and the whole magazine can be emptied at once on full-auto while staying in a 10" group at 50 meters. And you get a companion pistol that holds 20 rounds in a standard grip, and is still armor-piercing.
That's a pretty awesome deal for personal defense. Note personal defense, not assault. The average soldier whose regular job is not fighting (truck driving, tank driving, etc), or bodyguard, can have this with 200 rounds total and still be under ten pounds of gear.
But the transition to civilian life didn't work too well. We don't get full auto, and the armor-piercing rounds are illegal. It is a superb round, but the two main reasons for this its existence just don't apply in the civilian world.
He says the question he was asked was limited to the last 10 years. It's easily verified by the court, so he'd have to be pretty dumb to lie about that.
I had noticed iTunes getting worse and worse, working more and more slowly, over the versions. Indeed, it looked as you described. But the new one, looks like they replaced major internals. I think the logs are finally gone.
No it's not. It does exactly what you would want a media-playing subsystem to do - just helps playing media.
For OS X, it depends on what you mean by Quicktime. If you mean the player, then yes it's just a player. But Quicktime is also the name of the major subsystem in OS X responsible for audio and video handling. It's a good bet that all of the audio and video playback and encoding functions of iTunes Mac consists of calls to QTKit.
And while iTunes isn't such a core part of the system, it is a widely used one. Deleting it will mess with the App Store, kill interoperability with an iDevice or Apple TV, and who knows what else. It would be best to leave it on the system and just not use it to manage your music.
Have you been involved in relevant litigation IN THE LAST TEN YEARS. The suit was more than ten years ago. If he's on the jury wrongfully, it's because they didn't ask the right questions.
He would have looked at it, said "It's crap!" and fired the guy on the spot for even thinking of presenting that to the public.
I think the quality control at the highest levels of management got caught in the management changeover, hadn't appointed a new "It's crap, you're fired" guy.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me put it this way. In general, Democrats are owned by the MAFIAA. In general, Republicans will support anything that gives corporations more power, so you'll get bipartisan support when the Democrats do their master's bidding. Add to this one specific Republican, Howard Coble, also owned by the MAFIAA, who can steer the other Republicans into agreeing to be bipartisan.
Copyright in the US is based on the idea that ideas can't be owned. However, to promote the arts and sciences, incentive is given to creators in the form of a limited-time monopoly on thier works. Originally, this was 14 years with a 14-year extension, and you had to register you work if you wanted protection.
So with this scheme a person has to show he cares about his work, and the time of creation and owner is registered so that 1) we can be sure when it expires so others can use it and 2) if someone wants to use it before expiration, he knows who the owner is. The relatively short term ensures a good flow of works into the public domain to further spur creativity. This creates a good system. This staffer was proposing a return to a system like this.
But Europeans had a concept of natural rights where you own your ideas just as much as a piece of furniture you made. Our expansion into absurdly long terms happened as we tried to harmonize our copyright with foreign countries, complying with treaties we made. This really kicked off with the French-backed Berne Convention of 1887, which was based on their concept of droit d'auteur (natural ownership). It also required the abolishment of mandatory registration.
And it's still happening. We never recognized "seat of the brow" copyright, that is you own it because you put work into it even if it isn't a creative work (think a database, a list of facts). Europeans recognize this, and it will likely come here eventually. The only thing stopping it is the Feist decision.
But now that we have this completely warped, unconstitutional copyright, influenced by foreign views of ownership, you are right in that we do push it throughout the world.
When it comes to copyright, it's mainly a D problem. For the most part, they're the ones bought and paid for by the entertainment industry. Think of it logically, who does Hollywood support? Who do you see musicians and actors supporting? Who do you see entertainment industry doing fundraisers for? Democrats, almost all the time. And the Democrats pay them back.
There are a few Republicans that are also hard-core entertainment industry reporters. Coble comes to mind. I'd bet he's behind this firing. Few others probably wanted to do this, but they weren't willing to risk their positions defending a mere staffer, so Coble's will happened.
I have no idea how to hook up my old Atari plotter and 300 baud modem.
Copyright reform should be the conservative position since our current state of copyright is so far out of line with the original constitutional text and intent. Conservatives rightly complain when we use foreign law to influence interpretation of the Constitution, yet our copyright has been warped to follow the copyright schemes of most foreign countries, not ours, and that's somehow considered constitutional.
Abandoning their principles, the basic reason the Republicans lost, and will keep losing. All the Democrats have to do is not screw up too badly.
We're not looking for the aerial version of bus drivers to fly these things, we're looking for race car drivers, drifters, stunt drivers, people who can and will push the envelope. We want people who will fly in at 100mph at treetop level in a twisty valley at night under fire to exfil pinned-down troops. Unfortunately, as the article notes, this ability and willingness naturally increases the probability of hot-dogging incidents regardless of how otherwise professional the pilots are.
The difference between hot-dogging and training is mainly whether the pilot was ordered to do it. What would be "watch this trick" in civilian life is done daily by these guys. What kind of idiot dips the back-end of his helicopter in the ocean and holds it there? They do it all the time for Spec Ops boat launch and recovery.
Those pilots with the conservative airline mentality can fly the C-17s. They're useless for combat helicopters.
That's how it works sometimes. One of the world's lowest slimeballs, Larry Flynt, established the precedent of parody and satire being protected under freedom of speech in the US (a protection missing in many countries).
I like that it works this way. If the precedent of rights and protection is established for even the slimeballs, then the rest of us should be good.
GPS, FLIR, radar, night vision, space rockets, jet engines, all brought to practical reality for military use then later transitioned to benefit civilian life.
This is history. Even the Roman roads were built for the troops, not civilian commerce.
How is this a bad thing? War pretty much consists of killing the other guys while keeping your guys from getting killed. The more you can protect your guys, the more you are likely to win.
Or sometimes last-minute changes to production are made that completely invalidate the tests.
Take the M-16, great in final tests, but soldiers were dropping like flies in Vietnam because their rifles were jamming. Turns out the Army chose a different powder manufacturer for production cartridges, and this caused fouling and corrosion of the chamber and barrel, and increased the rate of fire beyond design specs.
I'm thinking high-altitude ski lift poles. Right now they use heavy cargo helicopters that are rather expensive to run.
By the time the government does something, the market's already moved beyond it. Even the original grandaddy of antitrust, the Standard Oil monopoly, was only a shadow of its former self by the time the government took action. Its marketshare had been slashed in its strongest East and Midwest markets, and it was a minority in the Gulf and Western markets.
Is it just me, or did that actually cycle after failure? I haven't broken down an AR in a while, but that looks like the back of the BCG in about the right position. Another pull of the trigger would have been very painful.
This was seriouly the geek version of "Hold muh beer an' watch this!" They got lucky. I hope they use a benchrest next time.
A hood may not be part of the structural rigidity of the car, but it is often used to absorb energy in a crash. Metal hoods buckle, fibreglass ones explode into a million tiny (non-lethal) pieces. I had a friend who got into an accident in a fiberglass car, and he was still finding fiberglass bits months later.
And Roku, and Apple TV, and iOS iDevices, and Android, and PS3, XBox 360, Wii, etc... Even many TVs have it built-in.
The American car manufacturers said they couldn't comply with new pollution standards for years, and along comes Mr. Honda with his CVCC engine that already does, and without a catalytic converter.
A lot of people do worthless things just to see if they can do it, especially us geeks.
Cost of a 3D printer, $$$$
Cost of 3D material, probably $$$
Cost of a polymer AR-15, $50
The British Sten submachine gun was designed so that it could be made with the metalworking skills and tooling of a good bicycle shop in something like five hours. Small shops all over the country were making them for the war effort.
And that's with 1930s machining technology.
It's a great round for this test if
1) You want to use a standard AR15 barrel
2) You want lower chamber pressure and less recoil since this is your first try with plastic and are afraid it might blow apart
It's not that high-velocity, actually less than most 5.56x45 ammo. What it is, is higher velocity than handgun rounds in the submachinegun market for which it was intended.
But the real cool reason is based on a basic fact of ammunition: The caliber stated is often incorrect. Both the 5.56 and the 5.7 have an exact bullet diameter of 5.7mm, so they can use a regular barrel with lower-powered ammunition.
It was designed to have a light personal defense round that is capable of piercing body armor, and that can be fired full-auto controllably.
Enter the gun designed for it, the FN P90. It's small (10" shorter than an M4 carbine, but the barrel is only 4" shorter), holds a lot of ammo (with 50 rounds it weighs five ounces less than an M4 with 30), and the whole magazine can be emptied at once on full-auto while staying in a 10" group at 50 meters. And you get a companion pistol that holds 20 rounds in a standard grip, and is still armor-piercing.
That's a pretty awesome deal for personal defense. Note personal defense, not assault. The average soldier whose regular job is not fighting (truck driving, tank driving, etc), or bodyguard, can have this with 200 rounds total and still be under ten pounds of gear.
But the transition to civilian life didn't work too well. We don't get full auto, and the armor-piercing rounds are illegal. It is a superb round, but the two main reasons for this its existence just don't apply in the civilian world.
He says the question he was asked was limited to the last 10 years. It's easily verified by the court, so he'd have to be pretty dumb to lie about that.
I had noticed iTunes getting worse and worse, working more and more slowly, over the versions. Indeed, it looked as you described. But the new one, looks like they replaced major internals. I think the logs are finally gone.
For OS X, it depends on what you mean by Quicktime. If you mean the player, then yes it's just a player. But Quicktime is also the name of the major subsystem in OS X responsible for audio and video handling. It's a good bet that all of the audio and video playback and encoding functions of iTunes Mac consists of calls to QTKit.
And while iTunes isn't such a core part of the system, it is a widely used one. Deleting it will mess with the App Store, kill interoperability with an iDevice or Apple TV, and who knows what else. It would be best to leave it on the system and just not use it to manage your music.
Have you been involved in relevant litigation IN THE LAST TEN YEARS. The suit was more than ten years ago. If he's on the jury wrongfully, it's because they didn't ask the right questions.
He would have looked at it, said "It's crap!" and fired the guy on the spot for even thinking of presenting that to the public.
I think the quality control at the highest levels of management got caught in the management changeover, hadn't appointed a new "It's crap, you're fired" guy.