You might prefer your entire system to crash'n'burn because of a dodgy webcam driver, for example (or a buggy game controller driver, or a faulty TWAIN idriver, or a bad soundcard driver, or...), but I'd be much happier for just the webcam toi cease operation but still have the rest of the system working, thank you very much.
Is that actually illegal? What is the actual law thats being broken.
In that example? No and none. HOWEVER, change prostitution to supplying hard drugs, supplying stolen goods, or any other illegal acticity, and you should get the idea.
That's like someone who says "Hey, I hear you can pick up hookers on 8 mile!" being arrested for aiding prostitution.
No, it's more akin to someone saying "You want a hooker? Here, I know exactly where to get them, just call this number, ask for Debbie (tell 'er Daddy sent ya), and then you can meet her at this address".
Although with the Dashboard / Konfabulator thing, it's hard to see what else Apple could have done?
They are adding back the nice additional things left over from old MacOS, but a 3rd party comes along and copies Apple's own stuff and releases it.
What should Apple have done? Not added their own feature back to MacOS X? Licensed their own stuff back from teh Konfabulator guy?
Apple do have a history of buying or licensing things to add to their portfolio where it makes sense (most recent one I can think of is when they bought eMagic and now develop Logic Audio themselves, porting some of the code and features to their lower-level music apps like Garage Band], but I don't think they are really to blame over Dashboard...
"They are slowly killing their business by duplicating it themselves. The Konfabulator story comes to mind"
WTF?
You mean Dashboard in OSX 10.4, which is an OS X implementation of features from OS7 and earlier, are somehow ripping off Konfabulator (which itself was nothing more than a ripoff of MacOS 7 and earlier's features anyway)?
Interesting revision of huistory there!
if you're in a public area, you're fair game ...
on
No Pictures, Thanks
·
· Score: 1
"isn't there an expectation that, if you're in a public area, you're fair game for being photographed?"
Must file this one away for next time the inevitable "CCTV is evil" posts come out when someone mentions them in connection with crime detection...
entrap Audio pronunciation of "entrapment" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-trp) tr.v. entrapped, entrapping, entraps
1. To catch in or as if in a trap.
2.
a. To lure into danger, difficulty, or a compromising situation. See Synonyms at catch.
b. To lure into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.
In what way were the defendants lured into doing what they did?
" The internet is information, and information should be free IMHO."
The information IS free, though.
Even with Opera, the information does not cost you anything.
So what's the problem?
Oh, wait. You didn't mean the information shoudl be free, you meant that the means of displaying and viewing it should ALSO be free. I see. So tell me, how much does your computer and your internet connection cost? They are free, right? No? Interesting...
BTW, you do know there is a FREE version of Opera, don't you?
" You've never been to Argos, or Waitrose, or Safeway, or Marks and Spencer (all British shops)."
I haven't.
Goodness.
That's new to me. I wonder where all my M&S food comes from each lunchtime then? I wonder how come I have several things bought from Argos over the years?
Interesting...
Of course, given I HAVE been to all 4 chains you mention, I can confirm that it is entirely possible to make your purchases without touching or using a computer at all.
So your implication that all customers at those 4 chains have no alternative but to use computers to do their shopping is erroneous, I'm afraid.
"Avoiding the internet is going to mean never using a bank, never paying for anything with any means besides cash, never using a store"
Utter nonsense.
No matter how pervasive the internet becomes, walking into a store, picking up an item, walking to the paydesk and paying for the item will not involve the customer using the internet.
Sure, the back-end may be entirly network based, but the CUSTOMER is not using that backend.
Oh, and if your shop does have all its backend processing handled via the internet, then I'd think twice about shopping there! Security, anyone?
"will there be any refund for those who has bought these overpriced memory devices?"
Well actually, given that the price-fixing was them holding the prices artificially LOW, I think the question ought to be will you be paying the extra amount (the difference between what you paid and what they should have charged) on those underpriced memory devices...
Lotus made their Lotus Excel from 1982 to 1992, making that even older than your Hyundai:-) http://fp.arcnet.f9.co.uk/excel.htm
Of course, neither the existence of the Lotus Excel nor the Hyundai Excel makes the blindest bit of difference to whether or not MS can trademark Excel the spreadsheet, because they are completely different industries - nobody is going to confuse the two...
Take your first infinite-sized set. Then take your second infinite-sized set which you claim is larger. You are saying, therefore, than infinity > infinity.
See the flaw yet? You are treating infinite as just another finite value, which is where it's all going wrong.
It is a tricky concept for some to come to grips with, but think about it.
Slashdot Mirror
You hear that woosh?
That's the sound of the point flying straight over your head...
's funny,. I coudl have sworn the poster to whom I replied supplied a link to said work...
precisely because of guys like you who want it for free
But Information Wants To Be Free.
So how come it's OK to freely trade copies of the latest Kylie track, but not your mate's paintings?
So where's the torrent with the archive of the full-size images so we can print them out ourselves, please?
No, we are not all agreed.
You might prefer your entire system to crash'n'burn because of a dodgy webcam driver, for example (or a buggy game controller driver, or a faulty TWAIN idriver, or a bad soundcard driver, or...), but I'd be much happier for just the webcam toi cease operation but still have the rest of the system working, thank you very much.
So no different from the information Google already collects about you every time you use Google to do a search, then, it seems.
In that example? No and none. HOWEVER, change prostitution to supplying hard drugs, supplying stolen goods, or any other illegal acticity, and you should get the idea.
No, it's more akin to someone saying "You want a hooker? Here, I know exactly where to get them, just call this number, ask for Debbie (tell 'er Daddy sent ya), and then you can meet her at this address".
I get what you mean.
Although with the Dashboard / Konfabulator thing, it's hard to see what else Apple could have done?
They are adding back the nice additional things left over from old MacOS, but a 3rd party comes along and copies Apple's own stuff and releases it.
What should Apple have done? Not added their own feature back to MacOS X? Licensed their own stuff back from teh Konfabulator guy?
Apple do have a history of buying or licensing things to add to their portfolio where it makes sense (most recent one I can think of is when they bought eMagic and now develop Logic Audio themselves, porting some of the code and features to their lower-level music apps like Garage Band], but I don't think they are really to blame over Dashboard...
"They are slowly killing their business by duplicating it themselves. The Konfabulator story comes to mind"
WTF?
You mean Dashboard in OSX 10.4, which is an OS X implementation of features from OS7 and earlier, are somehow ripping off Konfabulator (which itself was nothing more than a ripoff of MacOS 7 and earlier's features anyway)?
Interesting revision of huistory there!
"isn't there an expectation that, if you're in a public area, you're fair game for being photographed?"
Must file this one away for next time the inevitable "CCTV is evil" posts come out when someone mentions them in connection with crime detection...
He was a technical assistant examiner at the Swiss patent office, actually.
Not quite burger-flipping, but not the most challenging job either I guess.
" It does seem like some kind of entrapment "
How?
entrap Audio pronunciation of "entrapment" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-trp)
tr.v. entrapped, entrapping, entraps
1. To catch in or as if in a trap.
2.
a. To lure into danger, difficulty, or a compromising situation. See Synonyms at catch.
b. To lure into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.
In what way were the defendants lured into doing what they did?
Technically speaking, ANYONE can predict the future.
:-)
It's the accuracy of those predictions, however, which is harder to ensure
" The internet is information, and information should be free IMHO."
The information IS free, though.
Even with Opera, the information does not cost you anything.
So what's the problem?
Oh, wait. You didn't mean the information shoudl be free, you meant that the means of displaying and viewing it should ALSO be free. I see. So tell me, how much does your computer and your internet connection cost? They are free, right? No? Interesting...
BTW, you do know there is a FREE version of Opera, don't you?
Mother? Is that you?
" You've never been to Argos, or Waitrose, or Safeway, or Marks and Spencer (all British shops)."
I haven't.
Goodness.
That's new to me. I wonder where all my M&S food comes from each lunchtime then? I wonder how come I have several things bought from Argos over the years?
Interesting...
Of course, given I HAVE been to all 4 chains you mention, I can confirm that it is entirely possible to make your purchases without touching or using a computer at all.
So your implication that all customers at those 4 chains have no alternative but to use computers to do their shopping is erroneous, I'm afraid.
"Avoiding the internet is going to mean never using a bank, never paying for anything with any means besides cash, never using a store"
Utter nonsense.
No matter how pervasive the internet becomes, walking into a store, picking up an item, walking to the paydesk and paying for the item will not involve the customer using the internet.
Sure, the back-end may be entirly network based, but the CUSTOMER is not using that backend.
Oh, and if your shop does have all its backend processing handled via the internet, then I'd think twice about shopping there! Security, anyone?
" Seems they need to get their act together and start registerring their trademarks before they release the product"
Erm, they did.
They submitted their trademark application in October 2000. Before this guy started his site.
Hell, he even admits that himself if you read his site!
"will there be any refund for those who has bought these overpriced memory devices?"
Well actually, given that the price-fixing was them holding the prices artificially LOW, I think the question ought to be will you be paying the extra amount (the difference between what you paid and what they should have charged) on those underpriced memory devices...
Yeah, we've already established that 6 hours before you worked out how to hit reply, erm, "fathead".
I meant SUNW, but I typed SUN. Several people pointed that out, I agreed that I'd got the wrong one, and we all got on with our lives.
Then 6 hours later you come along and...
How embarassing!
Yep, you are absolutely correct, I got the wrong Sun. Bugger! I thought I'd checked it as well.
Erm.
Ah, is that the time? I really have to go now...
I think this graph probably sums up your meaning even more clearly :-)
Yeah, I did find that kinda amusing too :-)
Glad I'm not the only one who thought it.
Lotus made their Lotus Excel from 1982 to 1992, making that even older than your Hyundai :-) http://fp.arcnet.f9.co.uk/excel.htm
Of course, neither the existence of the Lotus Excel nor the Hyundai Excel makes the blindest bit of difference to whether or not MS can trademark Excel the spreadsheet, because they are completely different industries - nobody is going to confuse the two...
Take your first infinite-sized set. Then take your second infinite-sized set which you claim is larger. You are saying, therefore, than infinity > infinity.
See the flaw yet? You are treating infinite as just another finite value, which is where it's all going wrong.
It is a tricky concept for some to come to grips with, but think about it.