Wow, start off with a complete lie. From Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America:
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;
Note that there is nothing about allowing "society to benefit from USEFUL works". Rather, it is "to promote progress of science and useful arts".
Much of the stuff that is released by the media cartels is not useful but rather detrimental to society.
Prove that statement.
The reason why copyright infringement is so predominate is because copyright has been ABUSED
You state that copyright has been abused, but give no example of how. You state that copyright infringement exists because of copyright abuse, but which came first? I remember a time when computer software did not come with copy controls. People would make copies of software and give them to friends, post them on BBS systems, etc. As a result, companies started instituting copy controls. Looks to me like any alleged copyright abuses exist soley because of copyright infringment.
Another question one may want to ask is, "Can a person who releases his or her work so that is can be freely redistributed make money?" This is a question one may want to ask Linus Torvalds. Here is someone who has both money and fame for something he set up to be freely redistributed.
Yes, let us ask Linus how much he has made directly from the free release of Linux. Linus, how much money did you get directly from Linux, not from jobs received because you wrote the core of Linux, but just from the actual Linux code?
If a cheap subsitute for petrol is discovered or if a cheap and simple way to increase the fuel mileage of vehicles is published, then the price of petrol will decrease drastically even if there are laws put in place to ban the way of increasing fuel efficency or petrol substitute.
This is completely incorrect. If either of the two event you mention came to be, the price of petrol may decrease due to decreased demand, but it will not drop drastically until there is significant penetration of the technology. Interestingly, the price of the "cheap substitute" would increase as demand increased, especially if demand outstrips supply.
The article referenced above boils down to "the ends justifies the means and screw the people's who work that is being copied" and you comment is full of lies, half-truths. Or, perhaps you are just ignorant.
I worked as tier two support for a major cell phone manufacturer. I supported the phones as well as hardware and software for connect them to computers and using them as modems. A woman called in having a problem with one of our phones. She rattles off what she thinks is the problem:
Cust: Do I have that right?
Me: No, that is not the problem.
Cust: Ok, then I will shut the hell up and do what you say.
If one is trying to promote a product that is not geographically limited, then one would be best served putting an in the widest possible channel.
In other words, they would be better off taking that $10,000.00 and putting a small ad in the business section of U.S.A Today or the WSJ than they are buying 2 back page ads in a local paper.
You are right in that it should work like that. If only it worked that way in the real world. What I have seen is:
Many small businesses (SBs) start off using Microsoft-centric solutions because that is what comes installed on the computers they bought from (insert vendor here). It is real easy to get a turn key business computer, complete with MS Office, Project, Quickbooks, etc installed and ready to go.
"No one has ever been fired for going with Microsoft."
Most managers and SBs don't like change.
Most managers and SBs don't like things they have never heard of.
Managers and SBs believe "You get what you pay for."
Managers and SBs want a person or company behind a product. They want someone they can turn to when they have questions and need help. They don't see that in the FLOSS community.
The last one is the major stumbling block in a number of cases. After all, what do they do when you go away? In their minds, it is a custom solution and they don't have anyone to call but you. It can be a standard LAMP project that many people can work on easily, but, who do they call for Linux if it is not Redhat or Novell? What is the 800 number for Apache? How many MySQL certified DBAs are there? Who certifies PHP developers, or Perl developers, or what ever?
That is what the SB owners and managers care about. In business, it is about covering your own ass first and saving money second.
After all, what good does it do to save a company US$10,000.00 only to be fired when a problem develops?
Hi, I am here to point out inconvient facts to you.
First and foremost, many people talk about the climate as though what we are experiencing right now is a good indicator of what the Earth's climate is like. If you compare the time for which we have decent records to the time the Earth has actually had a climate, it would be the equivalent of judging your life by what you have done over the last minute and a half. Most people think in hundred or thousands of years when they should be thinking in terms of millions of years.
No one knows how fast the climate has changed in the past. The methods used to determine the average temperature in the past tends to overlook short term spikes because of the nature of the data. This includes the temperature of the ocean. The fun part is that we do know that the average temperature of the Earth has been both much warmer and much colder.
You speak of "historical photographs". The oldest photograph known is only 20 decades old. The fact is that photographs are a poor indicator of the Earth's health because we don't have photographs from far enough in the past or covering large enough time frames.
You need to add a few orders of magnitude to the time frames you are looking act before you start whining about evidence. The fact is, the last few hundered years have been relatively mild and stable. The rest of the record shows a different story.
RealClimate.org is not most scientists either. The point you are missing is that there is controversy about the whole thing. That is the whole point. Some scientist say it is, some say it isn't. Of those that say it is, some say it is natural, other say it is all Human's fault. The actual fact is that we don't know.
Personally, I find it interesting that most people who talk about global warming and climate change only look at the last few thousand years, if not only a few hundred, and claim "The climate is supposed to be like this!" when in reality over the life of the Earth, the climate has been both hotter and cooler.
Doesn't matter. Check out the UCMJ 934. ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.
Also check out Article 121, 127, and 128, under all of which he can be charged.
(Anyway, this does not have anything to do with human cloning. My question is : what if you were told that they're going to kill you because it might one day save some rich guy ? Would you say 'I'd be happy to do it ? I guess not).
What this has to do with cloning, human or otherwise, is that religious facist, such as yourself, demand that your beliefs take precedence of over science. You believe a certain way because of you religion and act accordingly. Now those who believe as you do wish force scientists and researcher to behave as though you are correct, regardless of the evidence.
Once again, the church seeks to oppress the truth and science.
Your question is a red herring. An embryo is not a person. It is a small clump of cells that has only a potential of becoming a fetus, which then has a potential to become a human. The only thing that makes an embryo in any way human is that it has 46 chromosomes. Using that standard, cancer tumors are human and we should not remove them.
Normally of course, I'd call you nuts for doing a complete rewrite unless it's a pile of crap that's falling apart at the seams and the basic architecture is shit, but it's written in VB
What about if they are moving from VB6 to VB.NET? That will require a substantive rewrite.
You are kind of forgetting the fact that the government were serving legal warrants and that in both instances the subjects opened fire on the government agents.
In the case of Waco, they opened fire with automatic weapons and machinegun fire.
To put it bluntly, criminals picked a fight with the government by shooting at law enforcement agents legally doing their job.
But, you probably don't want to hear that. You just want to stand up for a cult that allows it's leader to have sex with little girls and a bunch of violent, anti-American, tax dodgers who armed themselves with illegally modified weapons.
I suggest you quit and let him hire someone who can and will actually do his job. You know, someone who actually wants a job programming enough to program in the language the boss wants. Someone who has some experience in programming VB or wants to program in VB. Someone who knows their place as an employee and will not let their anti-MS/anti-VB bias effect their job performance.
If you don't know enough about the language to make an argument for or against it, you should quit and let him hire someone who actually does know the language.
Of course the fact that you don't know the language well begs the question, "Why do you think you are qualified to make the decision of which language to use when you can't even make an argument against the language your BOSS has decided to use?"
Of course, you could actually LEARN about the language and what it can do. Then, you will either be able to make a reasonable argument or be able to do the JOB YOU WERE HIRED TO DO.
For future reference, no one give a damn about what you prefer when it comes to punctuation. It is funny how you start off with your little punctuation comment then turn around and say "I'm going to tell you a secret: No one here cares how you feel." If that were true, the original post would not have been modded at all.
As you are posting AC, I can only assume that you one of the moderators who modded him down because you didn't like what he said and now feel the need to defend your actions.
The saddest part is, the original post has a valid point that is put forth at least as coherently as most of the other posts. The post also contains less rhetoric than both the article, the headline and teaser, and many of the other posts.
You claim that privacy extends to the public relm. You are the fool. Moreover, you can not see the foolishness of your position, which makes you an arrogant, ignorant fool.
I say you do not know the definition of privacy. You seem to think that one can do something in public and yet claim a right to privacy concerning that act. This is not the case.
You sound like the girls who go to spring break, get drunk, enter a wet t-shirt contest, get naked, and then find pictures of their escapades on the internet. They to think that what they did was "private", but it wasn't. It was public.
The same goes for the Internet in general and MySpace in particular. MySpace is public, only more so because one's words and action are not transient on the Internet. The past, and present, can come back to haunt one, especially with Google and other search engines.
Who knows, maybe someone did a search for the name of the school and found his rant on MySpace. That covers your claim of a violation of his privacy. Or, was it Google that violated his privacy?
No one has an expectation of privacy in a public space, period.
When one publishes details of one's thoughts,and actions, one gives up the privacy associated with those thoughts and actions.
To follow your logic to it's conclusion, a person could plan and execute a crime on a MySpace site, and the police would not be able to use the information that is freely available to anyone and in public view against that person.
When one places information in the public view, any right to privacy is forfeited.
First, I notice that there is information missing from the article. According to the Article, on May 1 this person posted an open letter "telling off the district, using vulgar words and saying he could put whatever he wanted on his site". Then, the next day he posted the letter which the school district felt was a threat and may get him expelled.
What prompted the first letter?
What prompted the second?
Why does he say he feels threatend and bullied?
Second, many seem to think what was posted was not a threat. Consider the following:
Bloke in Black Hat(BIBH): Hello, do you own this joint? Shopkeeper(SK):Why, yes I do. BIBH: I represent a group of concerned citizens. We are a sort of neighborhood watch. SK: Yes? BIBH: You have a nice shop here and there have been some incidents in the area. We are requesting donations for the local business to help guard against anything bad happening. SK: I don't know if I can really afford to donate at this time. BIBH: Really. You know, it would be a shame if anything were to happen to your shop. And, we can't guarrenty your shop will be safe if you can't help support us. We will spend our time making sure those that do donate are safe from vandals and the like.
That is the standard protection racket shakedown. No direct threat, barely an implied threat.
I feel threatened by you, I cant even have a public Web page with out you bullying me and telling me what has to be removed. Where is this freedom of speech that this government is sworn to uphold?... Did you ever stop to think this will start a community backlash? The kids at Columbine did what the did because they were bullied.
This sounds to me like the same strong arm tactics used by gangsters for decades. Mention an act of violence and then mention the similarities between the motives for that act of violence and how one feels at this time.
Slashdot Mirror
From Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America:
Note that there is nothing about allowing "society to benefit from USEFUL works". Rather, it is "to promote progress of science and useful arts".
Prove that statement.
You state that copyright has been abused, but give no example of how. You state that copyright infringement exists because of copyright abuse, but which came first? I remember a time when computer software did not come with copy controls. People would make copies of software and give them to friends, post them on BBS systems, etc. As a result, companies started instituting copy controls. Looks to me like any alleged copyright abuses exist soley because of copyright infringment.
Yes, let us ask Linus how much he has made directly from the free release of Linux. Linus, how much money did you get directly from Linux, not from jobs received because you wrote the core of Linux, but just from the actual Linux code?
This is completely incorrect. If either of the two event you mention came to be, the price of petrol may decrease due to decreased demand, but it will not drop drastically until there is significant penetration of the technology. Interestingly, the price of the "cheap substitute" would increase as demand increased, especially if demand outstrips supply.
The article referenced above boils down to "the ends justifies the means and screw the people's who work that is being copied" and you comment is full of lies, half-truths. Or, perhaps you are just ignorant.
I worked as tier two support for a major cell phone manufacturer. I supported the phones as well as hardware and software for connect them to computers and using them as modems. A woman called in having a problem with one of our phones. She rattles off what she thinks is the problem:
Cust: Do I have that right?
Me: No, that is not the problem.
Cust: Ok, then I will shut the hell up and do what you say.
And, she DID! My favorite call ever.
If one is trying to promote a product that is not geographically limited, then one would be best served putting an in the widest possible channel.
In other words, they would be better off taking that $10,000.00 and putting a small ad in the business section of U.S.A Today or the WSJ than they are buying 2 back page ads in a local paper.
The last one is the major stumbling block in a number of cases. After all, what do they do when you go away? In their minds, it is a custom solution and they don't have anyone to call but you. It can be a standard LAMP project that many people can work on easily, but, who do they call for Linux if it is not Redhat or Novell? What is the 800 number for Apache? How many MySQL certified DBAs are there? Who certifies PHP developers, or Perl developers, or what ever?
That is what the SB owners and managers care about. In business, it is about covering your own ass first and saving money second.
After all, what good does it do to save a company US$10,000.00 only to be fired when a problem develops?
Hi, I am here to point out inconvient facts to you.
First and foremost, many people talk about the climate as though what we are experiencing right now is a good indicator of what the Earth's climate is like. If you compare the time for which we have decent records to the time the Earth has actually had a climate, it would be the equivalent of judging your life by what you have done over the last minute and a half. Most people think in hundred or thousands of years when they should be thinking in terms of millions of years.
No one knows how fast the climate has changed in the past. The methods used to determine the average temperature in the past tends to overlook short term spikes because of the nature of the data. This includes the temperature of the ocean. The fun part is that we do know that the average temperature of the Earth has been both much warmer and much colder.
You speak of "historical photographs". The oldest photograph known is only 20 decades old. The fact is that photographs are a poor indicator of the Earth's health because we don't have photographs from far enough in the past or covering large enough time frames.
You need to add a few orders of magnitude to the time frames you are looking act before you start whining about evidence. The fact is, the last few hundered years have been relatively mild and stable. The rest of the record shows a different story.
RealClimate.org is not most scientists either. The point you are missing is that there is controversy about the whole thing. That is the whole point. Some scientist say it is, some say it isn't. Of those that say it is, some say it is natural, other say it is all Human's fault. The actual fact is that we don't know.
Personally, I find it interesting that most people who talk about global warming and climate change only look at the last few thousand years, if not only a few hundred, and claim "The climate is supposed to be like this!" when in reality over the life of the Earth, the climate has been both hotter and cooler.
No, no, not like that. Like this:
Hey, wanna go on a raid? I hear there is some good loot to be had.
Don't you recognize a publicity stunt when you see one?
As it is, I would not see RMS either. He is nothing more than a crank.
Also check out Article 121, 127, and 128, under all of which he can be charged.
(Anyway, this does not have anything to do with human cloning. My question is : what if you were told that they're going to kill you because it might one day save some rich guy ? Would you say 'I'd be happy to do it ? I guess not).
What this has to do with cloning, human or otherwise, is that religious facist, such as yourself, demand that your beliefs take precedence of over science. You believe a certain way because of you religion and act accordingly. Now those who believe as you do wish force scientists and researcher to behave as though you are correct, regardless of the evidence.
Once again, the church seeks to oppress the truth and science.
Your question is a red herring. An embryo is not a person. It is a small clump of cells that has only a potential of becoming a fetus, which then has a potential to become a human. The only thing that makes an embryo in any way human is that it has 46 chromosomes. Using that standard, cancer tumors are human and we should not remove them.
As opposed to you and your oppressive religion telling them?
When you are theofacists going to get it through you heads that you don't have the right to force me to cowtow to your false god?
Actually, you can read and write to NTFS using Captive. One can also run Adaware using WINE. I am not sure about SpyBot S&D.
In theory, one can use a thumbdrive with anti-malware and Knoppix to completely clean a Windows system
The legal argument is that the user agreement implicitly denies authorization and they gained access through fraud.
Guns weren't "a'blazin" until after the Branch Davidians opened fire.
What about if they are moving from VB6 to VB.NET? That will require a substantive rewrite.
Oh wow, major surpise. Java coder perfers Java over VB.
Who would have thunk it?
You are kind of forgetting the fact that the government were serving legal warrants and that in both instances the subjects opened fire on the government agents.
In the case of Waco, they opened fire with automatic weapons and machinegun fire.
To put it bluntly, criminals picked a fight with the government by shooting at law enforcement agents legally doing their job.
But, you probably don't want to hear that. You just want to stand up for a cult that allows it's leader to have sex with little girls and a bunch of violent, anti-American, tax dodgers who armed themselves with illegally modified weapons.
I suggest you quit and let him hire someone who can and will actually do his job. You know, someone who actually wants a job programming enough to program in the language the boss wants. Someone who has some experience in programming VB or wants to program in VB. Someone who knows their place as an employee and will not let their anti-MS/anti-VB bias effect their job performance.
If you don't know enough about the language to make an argument for or against it, you should quit and let him hire someone who actually does know the language.
Of course the fact that you don't know the language well begs the question, "Why do you think you are qualified to make the decision of which language to use when you can't even make an argument against the language your BOSS has decided to use?"
Of course, you could actually LEARN about the language and what it can do. Then, you will either be able to make a reasonable argument or be able to do the JOB YOU WERE HIRED TO DO.
For future reference, no one give a damn about what you prefer when it comes to punctuation. It is funny how you start off with your little punctuation comment then turn around and say "I'm going to tell you a secret: No one here cares how you feel." If that were true, the original post would not have been modded at all.
As you are posting AC, I can only assume that you one of the moderators who modded him down because you didn't like what he said and now feel the need to defend your actions.
The saddest part is, the original post has a valid point that is put forth at least as coherently as most of the other posts. The post also contains less rhetoric than both the article, the headline and teaser, and many of the other posts.
You claim that privacy extends to the public relm. You are the fool. Moreover, you can not see the foolishness of your position, which makes you an arrogant, ignorant fool.
I say you do not know the definition of privacy. You seem to think that one can do something in public and yet claim a right to privacy concerning that act. This is not the case.
You sound like the girls who go to spring break, get drunk, enter a wet t-shirt contest, get naked, and then find pictures of their escapades on the internet. They to think that what they did was "private", but it wasn't. It was public.
The same goes for the Internet in general and MySpace in particular. MySpace is public, only more so because one's words and action are not transient on the Internet. The past, and present, can come back to haunt one, especially with Google and other search engines.
Who knows, maybe someone did a search for the name of the school and found his rant on MySpace. That covers your claim of a violation of his privacy. Or, was it Google that violated his privacy?
No one has an expectation of privacy in a public space, period.
It is that belief that has people posting their lives on MySpace.
It is reality that has them deleting their MySpace accounts when they apply for and fail to get job after job because of what is on their MySpace.
When one publishes details of one's thoughts,and actions, one gives up the privacy associated with those thoughts and actions.
To follow your logic to it's conclusion, a person could plan and execute a crime on a MySpace site, and the police would not be able to use the information that is freely available to anyone and in public view against that person.
When one places information in the public view, any right to privacy is forfeited.
Second, many seem to think what was posted was not a threat. Consider the following:
That is the standard protection racket shakedown. No direct threat, barely an implied threat.
This sounds to me like the same strong arm tactics used by gangsters for decades. Mention an act of violence and then mention the similarities between the motives for that act of violence and how one feels at this time.