Did you know that Obama lied about not voting for telecom immunity?
You mean like that? Or, did you mean
Did you know Obama lied about the source of a negative ad about himself and attributed it McCain instead of the third party source who actually created the ad?
How can that question be anything but partisan when it specifically mentions helping a specific party?
"What non-obvious things can nerds who are so inclined do to help the Democrats win in November?"
That is a VERY partisan question. Maybe the submitter doesn't understand the word partisan, so let me make it simple: If a question or statement singles out a particular party or candidate, then said question or statement is partisan.
An inherently non-partisan question would be "What non-obvious things can nerds do to improve voter turnout and the election process in general?"
raising the question as to whether he is a malicious 'hacker' or whether he was simply obsessed with finding info about UFOs and should be praised for finding security faults in what should be extremely secure systems.
So, I could break into the BBC and rummage about in their files and they would try to charge me with a crime and would praise me for me for finding security faults in their systems?
Sure they would. The BBC is a bunch of hypocrites.
Does it fall on the IT department for possibly having lax security procedures or using problematic software? Does it fall on management who approves or dictates the security levels and procedures, and/or may exempt themselves from the procedures? Does it fall on the software vendor who provided the software with a security hole?
If you pay someone to paint a landscape, you believe the painter should retain the copyright and say you can't make prints of the painting even though you paid for the painting and hold the copyright, yes?
And, that if you pay someone to paint a mural at your house, the painter can stop you from taking pictures of the house, painting over the mural, and possibly selling the house, yes?
And, the photographer you hired for your wedding, kid's birthday party, etc. retains the copyright to the pictures taken and so can charge you to make copies, including scanning them and putting them on the web, and can sell those pictures to anyone else.
You are saying that there should be no such thing as "Works made for hire" and thus only the creator of a work can then hold copyright.
I have news for you. The Earth is more than 5000 years old. It is more like 4 billion years old and CO2 levels have been higher than today's for most of that time.
Don't inconvenience yourself with the truth because you can't be bothered to look up the actual data.
While I agree that there are monetary considerations as you suggest, infringement of copyright does not require anything to be sold or any monetary gain on the part of the infringer.
Monetary gain (making money on something) is irrelevant in proving infringement or, conversely, proving or disproving fair use.
Your argument is bullshit. "Inflexible proprietary software" has nothing to do with "non-web network programs". Last I checked, the protocols that those "non-web network programs" use are open standards. You know: HTTP, SNMP, SMTP, IP, TCP, UDP. About the only thing that one can point to as being closed off is chat programs, but that is because there is not Simple Chat Transport Protocol. There is, however, IRC.
And, from the looks of your last line, your post is an anti-MS screed in disguise.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be silly. They will be too busy playing computer games and downloading music and porn.
I wish I had mod points. I so agree with you on this.
"We know better than our opponents so our votes should count more."
But, the "door" in this case was not open. It was just unlocked.
And, even if the door was open, in many places that is considered "breaking and entering" and, if not that, it is also considered trespassing.
You mean like that? Or, did you mean
How can that question be anything but partisan when it specifically mentions helping a specific party?
That is a VERY partisan question. Maybe the submitter doesn't understand the word partisan, so let me make it simple: If a question or statement singles out a particular party or candidate, then said question or statement is partisan.
An inherently non-partisan question would be "What non-obvious things can nerds do to improve voter turnout and the election process in general?"
Nonsense. Spent fuel plates or rods can be reprocessed into new plates or rods.
There, fixed that for you, shithead.
So, I could break into the BBC and rummage about in their files and they would try to charge me with a crime and would praise me for me for finding security faults in their systems?
Sure they would. The BBC is a bunch of hypocrites.
How is walking into your home and making myself comfortable without your permission "breaking and entering"?
Are you a programmer? A SysAdmin? PS? QA?
Are you a worker, a lead, a manger, a PHB?
Each of these generates a different answer.
Does it fall on the IT department for possibly having lax security procedures or using problematic software?
Does it fall on management who approves or dictates the security levels and procedures, and/or may exempt themselves from the procedures?
Does it fall on the software vendor who provided the software with a security hole?
Where does the blame fall?
In other words, NewsTrust can not be trusted because it will have a bias. Only unbiased information can be trusted.
The same can be said of the executive staff of Eron, ArthurAnderson, etc.
What you fail to realize is that the confinement is punishment for the convicted, not protection for society.
You are both violating the rights of someone else.
The only difference is that he got paid in cash, while you got paid in other "pirated" songs.
His gain was cash money. Yours was in money saved by not buying the songs.
If you pay someone to paint a landscape, you believe the painter should retain the copyright and say you can't make prints of the painting even though you paid for the painting and hold the copyright, yes?
And, that if you pay someone to paint a mural at your house, the painter can stop you from taking pictures of the house, painting over the mural, and possibly selling the house, yes?
And, the photographer you hired for your wedding, kid's birthday party, etc. retains the copyright to the pictures taken and so can charge you to make copies, including scanning them and putting them on the web, and can sell those pictures to anyone else.
You are saying that there should be no such thing as "Works made for hire" and thus only the creator of a work can then hold copyright.
Hi, you are an uneducated bigot.
I have news for you. The Earth is more than 5000 years old. It is more like 4 billion years old and CO2 levels have been higher than today's for most of that time.
Don't inconvenience yourself with the truth because you can't be bothered to look up the actual data.
yeah, sure. You are just another online stalker who is too much of a coward to do anything in real life.
Gee, I thought it was stalking and harrasing people because you are the troll.
While I agree that there are monetary considerations as you suggest, infringement of copyright does not require anything to be sold or any monetary gain on the part of the infringer.
Monetary gain (making money on something) is irrelevant in proving infringement or, conversely, proving or disproving fair use.
What does making money on something have to do with whether or not copyright infringement has occurred?
Apparently, you have never heard of court costs, filings fees, etc.
Oh, and do not lump a civil lawsuit in with a criminal prosecution.
Every negative you have described is the fault of bad programming and lazy programmers.
Your argument is bullshit. "Inflexible proprietary software" has nothing to do with "non-web network programs". Last I checked, the protocols that those "non-web network programs" use are open standards. You know: HTTP, SNMP, SMTP, IP, TCP, UDP. About the only thing that one can point to as being closed off is chat programs, but that is because there is not Simple Chat Transport Protocol. There is, however, IRC.
And, from the looks of your last line, your post is an anti-MS screed in disguise.
Aww, look, I have my very own stalker. This is why you don't have a significant other, at least one that is human and breathing.