Here in Chicago, we have i.c. stars, which is a not-for-profit organization that teaches computer skills to inner city young adults. My company is associated with them, and I hope to be sufficiently un-busy enough to help out some day.
But it's not like I don't know a hundred girls who had the exact same education as we did, came from the exact same socioeconomic background as us, and simply chose to do other things with their time. Because I do. They went on to become doctors, lawyers, whatever. The thing to notice here is that they were never discouraged from choosing a tech field.
What, you followed these girls around all the time, you stalker perv?
A former girlfriend was once told flat out that women couldn't do science. Of course, this was the absolute wrong way to get her to not do something (this was not always a good thing) so she went on to get her PhD in physics.
I'm not saying that it's the only reason for the disparity, but before you whip "feminazi" out of the ol' Limbaugh Lexicon, consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, it happens somewhere outside your sharp watch.
It'd be pretty stupid, though. I don't think it's much of an exaggeration to say the id would quickly cease to exist without Carmack.
Absolutely. That's not to say that Carmack's the only talent at id, but he's the sort of guy that people change companies to work with (seems like to me, anyway.)
It matters not that you are doing weapons research. It matters not that you are checking an email from you girlfriend/boyfriend. When DOE is involved, the courts hardly matter. There are very few people in this country who are going to give a flying fsck about your privacy as soon as someone mentions nukes.
Yes, but there are DOE-funded labs that do no weapons research, and indeed no secret research whatsoever. Fermi National Accelerator Lab comes to mind as an example. They have no nuclear secrets to protect.
I don't think the studios really believe it stops piracy, but they can't very well say that it allows them to gouge consumers in other countries, now, can they?
This article on slashdot, and last weeks rant about Loki/Blizard ports on LinuxGames shows that people DO pay attention when deluged in hate-mail.
People pay attention to drive-by shootings, too, but that doesn't mean they're effective at anything.
This guy didn't just get flame mail -- people wrote his boss suggesting he be fired!
Sure, he needs a clue or two (see comment about wealthy customers and schedule pressure) but *nothing* he said justifies atempting to interfere with his livelihood. For that matter, he seems reasonable enough -- why flame?
Valenti's point is that no one is keeping you from watching the DVD you just bought. That you have chosen to try and play it on a computer running an operating system with no industry-supported play back software is your fault, not the MPAA. That you are using an operating system without a commercial organization behind it to effectively lobby software manufacturers to license and implement a player for your operating system is your fault, not the MPAA's.
Actually, that's not his point, it's yours. He says that any use by which you buy the DVD content at a price is fair use. MPAA is not straying far from the piracy angle. The "sneaking in to a theater" quote makes that pretty clear.
I imagine they're hugging the safe shoals of the piracy argument because the other aspects of CSS are a little less palatable. To get back to the theater analogy, most theaters reserve the right to restrict your soft drink choices to the products of one of the two major soda companies, but most people don't consider it wrong to sneak a beer in, the theater's concession profits be damned. You would say "if you want a beer, don't go to the movies." Other people would say that as long as they're not sneaking in or stealing and breaking things, the theater should butt out, and if it refuses, subterfuge is appropriate.
Analogies with CSS, region coding, and the studios' business models should be obvious.
Basically, the models show no way for Transmeta to profit. The models are:
Support Sellers: What support? Either it works, or it doesn't, in which case Transmeta should fix it for free.
Loss Leader: This would be fine if Transmeta had other products whose market Crusoe would promote and not cannibalize, but it hasn't.
Widget Frosting: This *is* the widget.
Accessorizing: Again, I don't see how Transmeta could turn enough profit to recoup their investment.
So, in this instance, opening all aspects of Crusoe doesn't make sound business sense, and while it would be nice of them to do this, I don't think we can cast aspersions on their refusal.
Dude... the PCs in the childrens' area aren't connected to the 'net, according to last month's story. It's the other machines that are connected, and that they're trying to install blockers on.
Basically, it's done to reimburse defendants for economic harm caused by the injunction should the plaintiffs lose. The same thing applied in the 2600 injunction.
Look -- the judge is practically begging the defense to prove that the reverse engineering in Norway was legal. He essentially points out that the plaintiffs don't have a leg to stand on if it's really true. So, is it really true?
At some point, bits have to go into packets and routers need to make decisions on them. Changes at that level is what I want to hear about, not strategic company relationships.
...and many gamers will do anything to lower their latency, including switch operating systems. If the Linux version of a game consistently showed 50 ms less latency than the Windows version, there would be a lot of interest in Linux from the gaming community.
There is NOTHING illegal or immoral for eToys to go over to another company and say "hey, we can be mature about this, how about we work something out here."
But eToys is not doing that. They're holding the threat of the pending lawsuit over etoy to coerce compliance.
When someone points a gun at you and offers not to pull the trigger if you hand over your wallet, it's not a polite request -- it's robbery, no matter how politely phrased.
No, because the first thing you'd do is create a group that had access to this file and which contained only these five users. That invalidates your first condition, "all of which are in different groups."
Slashdot Mirror
Here in Chicago, we have i.c. stars, which is a not-for-profit organization that teaches computer skills to inner city young adults. My company is associated with them, and I hope to be sufficiently un-busy enough to help out some day.
See if there's something like that where you are.
But it's not like I don't know a hundred girls who had the exact same education as we did, came from the exact same socioeconomic background as us, and simply chose to do other things with their time. Because I do. They went on to become doctors, lawyers, whatever. The thing to notice here is that they were never discouraged from choosing a tech field.
What, you followed these girls around all the time, you stalker perv?
A former girlfriend was once told flat out that women couldn't do science. Of course, this was the absolute wrong way to get her to not do something (this was not always a good thing) so she went on to get her PhD in physics.
I'm not saying that it's the only reason for the disparity, but before you whip "feminazi" out of the ol' Limbaugh Lexicon, consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, it happens somewhere outside your sharp watch.
It'd be pretty stupid, though. I don't think it's much of an exaggeration to say the id would quickly cease to exist without Carmack.
Absolutely. That's not to say that Carmack's the only talent at id, but he's the sort of guy that people change companies to work with (seems like to me, anyway.)
To inject a little pedantry into the conversation, the US Government has a paid-up license to use this patent.
It matters not that you are doing weapons research. It matters not that you are checking an email from you girlfriend/boyfriend. When DOE is involved, the courts hardly matter. There are very few people in this country who are going to give a flying fsck about your privacy as soon as someone mentions nukes.
Yes, but there are DOE-funded labs that do no weapons research, and indeed no secret research whatsoever. Fermi National Accelerator Lab comes to mind as an example. They have no nuclear secrets to protect.
You post a kissin' cousin to a spelling flame, and then complain when Katz fixes the spelling?
New rope. Hanged. Gripe.
I don't think the studios really believe it stops piracy, but they can't very well say that it allows them to gouge consumers in other countries, now, can they?
This article on slashdot, and last weeks rant about Loki/Blizard ports on LinuxGames shows that people DO pay attention when deluged in hate-mail.
People pay attention to drive-by shootings, too, but that doesn't mean they're effective at anything.
This guy didn't just get flame mail -- people wrote his boss suggesting he be fired!
Sure, he needs a clue or two (see comment about wealthy customers and schedule pressure) but *nothing* he said justifies atempting to interfere with his livelihood. For that matter, he seems reasonable enough -- why flame?
Yeah, sometimes a really good one can slip through the cracks, but the times I've browsed at -1 have never convinced me I was missing much.
Use the system -- browse with threshold set to one. It really works.
I didn't even realize what you were talking about at all until I set my threshold lower.
Valenti's point is that no one is keeping you from watching the DVD you just bought. That you have chosen to try and play it on a computer running an operating system with no industry-supported play back software is your fault, not the MPAA. That you are using an operating system without a commercial organization behind it to effectively lobby software manufacturers to license and implement a player for your operating system is your fault, not the MPAA's.
Actually, that's not his point, it's yours. He says that any use by which you buy the DVD content at a price is fair use. MPAA is not straying far from the piracy angle. The "sneaking in to a theater" quote makes that pretty clear.
I imagine they're hugging the safe shoals of the piracy argument because the other aspects of CSS are a little less palatable. To get back to the theater analogy, most theaters reserve the right to restrict your soft drink choices to the products of one of the two major soda companies, but most people don't consider it wrong to sneak a beer in, the theater's concession profits be damned. You would say "if you want a beer, don't go to the movies." Other people would say that as long as they're not sneaking in or stealing and breaking things, the theater should butt out, and if it refuses, subterfuge is appropriate.
Analogies with CSS, region coding, and the studios' business models should be obvious.
Basically, the models show no way for Transmeta to profit. The models are:
Support Sellers: What support? Either it works, or it doesn't, in which case Transmeta should fix it for free.
Loss Leader: This would be fine if Transmeta had other products whose market Crusoe would promote and not cannibalize, but it hasn't.
Widget Frosting: This *is* the widget.
Accessorizing: Again, I don't see how Transmeta could turn enough profit to recoup their investment.
So, in this instance, opening all aspects of Crusoe doesn't make sound business sense, and while it would be nice of them to do this, I don't think we can cast aspersions on their refusal.
we might make a copy of that N*sync album for our friends
Hey, man, I wanna keep my friends.
Dude... the PCs in the childrens' area aren't connected to the 'net, according to last month's story. It's the other machines that are connected, and that they're trying to install blockers on.
Basically, it's done to reimburse defendants for economic harm caused by the injunction should the plaintiffs lose. The same thing applied in the 2600 injunction.
Look -- the judge is practically begging the defense to prove that the reverse engineering in Norway was legal. He essentially points out that the plaintiffs don't have a leg to stand on if it's really true. So, is it really true?
At some point, bits have to go into packets and routers need to make decisions on them. Changes at that level is what I want to hear about, not strategic company relationships.
And a thousand coders stand and cheer!
This is why so many of us like this guy.
As surely as reading the article would have ruined your rant?
There is NOTHING illegal or immoral for eToys to go over to another company and say "hey, we can be mature about this, how about we work something out here."
But eToys is not doing that. They're holding the threat of the pending lawsuit over etoy to coerce compliance.
When someone points a gun at you and offers not to pull the trigger if you hand over your wallet, it's not a polite request -- it's robbery, no matter how politely phrased.
Not very peaceful, civilized, or enlightened.
Works perfectly on Netscape on my x86 Linux. Maybe it's the chair-to-keyboard interface.
What I would want would be a rain of AKs and ammunition.
That's just me though
I'd want the AKs *and* the boxes. Have the firepower and the coordination with my neighbors.
Early 80's? Try early 70's!
No, because the first thing you'd do is create a group that had access to this file and which contained only these five users. That invalidates your first condition, "all of which are in different groups."
Huh? When was this, 1995? Red Hat and SuSE, I believe, come with a kernel that has SCSI CD-ROM enabled by default. What were you trying to use?