To understand the argument, you have to understand the myths of child molesters (who are often prejudicially called "pedophiles"). The child molester, says one myth, breaks into houses at nights, takes children out of their beds and away to their abuse-dungeons in their basements, and invariably subjects them to horrible sexualized violence. The child is then either killed on site, or returned home after senseless beating and threats to keep secrets.
Such a child registry would help these mythos molesters locate houses with children in them, so the registry is the molester's "ultimate dream".
Never mind that by far the most sexually molested children were molested by someone in their immediate relation, that most molesters are situational offenders and not pedophiles, and that child sexual abuse has been declining for years. The "stranger danger" is a modern myth created by extremist feminists in the 1970s, and buying into it hurts children, and hurts the grownup victims of senseless accusations.
The good thing about my site, is that once I approve an item, it doesn't get changed unless me or another editor approve the change.
No, that's the bad thing about your site, the thing that's causing you so much work. With an army of dedicated participant users, things would probably get done quicker, more precisely, and more elaborately.
If you want to control everything yourself, you can't complain about how much work it is.:)
When I first started, I didn't know what I got myself into. I spend more time approving content then I do writing code to make it better. Does anyone know of a better way to handle this?
Obvious: use a Wiki. Wikis are not "editing nightmares", as long as there are some interested contributors (and if there aren't, perhaps there isn't demand for the website).
Re:slashdot, out of touch...
on
TrollTech to IPO?
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Oh, and TrollTech doesn't really belong in the Linux category, either. They've been around since before Linus, let alone before Linux.
TrollTech was founded in 1994, while Linux was released in 1991. Linus himself was released in 1969, proving you wrong on all counts.
You can use MySQL as a database engine in proprietary projects. However, if you want to make a derivate database engine from MySQL, you have to release that part under the GPL. There is a huge difference.
you do not have a right to the information in a book any more than I have the right to take a copy of all the information on your hard drive.
The information in a book has been published, and is, therefore, public. All the information on my hard drive has not been published, and is, therefore, not public. Apples and oranges. If you want to make comparisons, say that I do not have access to unpublished books anymore than you have access to my hard drive. I agree.
In my jurisdiction (non-American though), you can make copies of everything except software, if the purpose is personal use and the source is a legal copy. The US may be different, and I didn't consider that.
It's hard for me to tolerate legal measures against things that are both easy and natural to do and that provides a benefit at the same time. I think if something is possible to do and it does not harm others ("the golden rule"), there should not be laws against it -- that's just government-sponsored oppression.
You may argue that if I keep an audiobook for three years instead of three weeks, the author is somehow harmed and I should not support it. However, I do not see this. You may as well argue against libraries in the first place; if we all used them instead of buying books, where is the money (except the rather symbolic fees paid by the government)?
Free access to books does not entail authors being forced to work for free. Plenty of people, if not most, will still pay for dead trees instead of listening to audiobooks or reading books off the screen. I'd also really like to see new possibilities explored, like micropayments and many others.
If you borrow a book from a library, you have to return it within, say, three weeks. This is because libraries have limited funds and limited physical space, so they cannot purchase a new book for everyone who wants to borrow it. In other words, the number of copies of each book is finite, and because of this, they cannot simply give books away, but you have to return them after three weeks because others may want to borrow the same title.
This is obvious and well understood. But it does not carry over to electronic media. For audiobooks, libraries can have one copy for everyone who wants to "read" a book, and they do have "unlimited" space for the "books". While for books there is a natural scarcity, this does not exist in the electronic realm. This is great news; it means there is enough capacity for everyone to read all the books they want! It is Knowledge Utopia.
Except no, in the face of no scarcity, they now create scarcity artificially by "pretending" the electronic files are actual tangible books or audio CD's. No Utopia for yoo!
Of course this will all be explained by "copyright enforcement", regardless of the fact that copying the audiobooks is perfectly legal. This is everything that is wrong with copyright. It is the horse-and-carriage of the electronic super-highway. It must die. (And in time, it will)
The problem is that most people don't patch their systems.
These days, people run expensive (in both monetarily and computationally senses) "virus" scanners instead of updating their systems. Ideally, if you have an up-to-date system, there are no holes for worms to exploit, so you don't need worm protection. Right?
Open Source does not mean you can change it. You can have a look at the source code, this doesn't mean you are allowed to make modifications or derivative work.
This is of course not correct. Take a look at the Open Source definition, section 3 in particular.
The truth is that the distinction between free software and open source is one of philosophy; it is two different ways to think about the same software. Open source guys usually look at it as a good method for developing software, while free software guys look at it as a moral issue: you should not keep software away from people, hence software must be free (as in freedom).
Recipes can get legal protection through being "trade secrets", though. This recipe doesn't have that restriction, so it's a lot freer than any other beer I can think of.
Nothing can stop you from installing malicious Firefox extensions, but you have to do it consciously -- they don't install themselves. So it becomes your job to be critical of what you install. Same as with any other program you install on your computer.
I've never come across the terms "iPod Sunday" and "iPodectomy"
In fact, the only google hit for "iPod Sunday" is BBC's own Jargon Buster. A few more for "iPodectomy", but only enough to almost fill one google hit page, and one of those are of course the Jargon Buster. One has to wonder if there isn't enough jargon already, since they have to make stuff up?
Slashdot Mirror
A friend of mine tried to download some real good lesbian porn and what did he get? No... worse than what you think....... a britney spears clip!
...?
Difference being
He makes a point out of the fact that he himself did not invent the wiki consept. I think that's good enough, no?
Not a SINGLE post about Bittorrent (which uses MD5) and the **AA's?
May be related to the fact that BitTorrent uses SHA-1, not MD5.
To understand the argument, you have to understand the myths of child molesters (who are often prejudicially called "pedophiles"). The child molester, says one myth, breaks into houses at nights, takes children out of their beds and away to their abuse-dungeons in their basements, and invariably subjects them to horrible sexualized violence. The child is then either killed on site, or returned home after senseless beating and threats to keep secrets.
Such a child registry would help these mythos molesters locate houses with children in them, so the registry is the molester's "ultimate dream".
Never mind that by far the most sexually molested children were molested by someone in their immediate relation, that most molesters are situational offenders and not pedophiles, and that child sexual abuse has been declining for years. The "stranger danger" is a modern myth created by extremist feminists in the 1970s, and buying into it hurts children, and hurts the grownup victims of senseless accusations.
The good thing about my site, is that once I approve an item, it doesn't get changed unless me or another editor approve the change.
:)
No, that's the bad thing about your site, the thing that's causing you so much work. With an army of dedicated participant users, things would probably get done quicker, more precisely, and more elaborately.
If you want to control everything yourself, you can't complain about how much work it is.
When I first started, I didn't know what I got myself into. I spend more time approving content then I do writing code to make it better. Does anyone know of a better way to handle this?
Obvious: use a Wiki. Wikis are not "editing nightmares", as long as there are some interested contributors (and if there aren't, perhaps there isn't demand for the website).
Oh, and TrollTech doesn't really belong in the Linux category, either. They've been around since before Linus, let alone before Linux.
TrollTech was founded in 1994, while Linux was released in 1991. Linus himself was released in 1969, proving you wrong on all counts.
You can use MySQL as a database engine in proprietary projects. However, if you want to make a derivate database engine from MySQL, you have to release that part under the GPL. There is a huge difference.
you do not have a right to the information in a book any more than I have the right to take a copy of all the information on your hard drive.
The information in a book has been published, and is, therefore, public. All the information on my hard drive has not been published, and is, therefore, not public. Apples and oranges. If you want to make comparisons, say that I do not have access to unpublished books anymore than you have access to my hard drive. I agree.
In my jurisdiction (non-American though), you can make copies of everything except software, if the purpose is personal use and the source is a legal copy. The US may be different, and I didn't consider that.
It's hard for me to tolerate legal measures against things that are both easy and natural to do and that provides a benefit at the same time. I think if something is possible to do and it does not harm others ("the golden rule"), there should not be laws against it -- that's just government-sponsored oppression.
You may argue that if I keep an audiobook for three years instead of three weeks, the author is somehow harmed and I should not support it. However, I do not see this. You may as well argue against libraries in the first place; if we all used them instead of buying books, where is the money (except the rather symbolic fees paid by the government)?
Free access to books does not entail authors being forced to work for free. Plenty of people, if not most, will still pay for dead trees instead of listening to audiobooks or reading books off the screen. I'd also really like to see new possibilities explored, like micropayments and many others.
If you borrow a book from a library, you have to return it within, say, three weeks. This is because libraries have limited funds and limited physical space, so they cannot purchase a new book for everyone who wants to borrow it. In other words, the number of copies of each book is finite, and because of this, they cannot simply give books away, but you have to return them after three weeks because others may want to borrow the same title.
This is obvious and well understood. But it does not carry over to electronic media. For audiobooks, libraries can have one copy for everyone who wants to "read" a book, and they do have "unlimited" space for the "books". While for books there is a natural scarcity, this does not exist in the electronic realm. This is great news; it means there is enough capacity for everyone to read all the books they want! It is Knowledge Utopia.
Except no, in the face of no scarcity, they now create scarcity artificially by "pretending" the electronic files are actual tangible books or audio CD's. No Utopia for yoo!
Of course this will all be explained by "copyright enforcement", regardless of the fact that copying the audiobooks is perfectly legal. This is everything that is wrong with copyright. It is the horse-and-carriage of the electronic super-highway. It must die. (And in time, it will)
I'm a long-time last.fm/audioscrobbler user, but I haven't heard about this player software of theirs. Are you mistaken, or can you point me to it? :)
"The virus is spreading around the world rapidly as compromised systems become bots and propagate the worm"
Make up your minds already.
The problem is that most people don't patch their systems.
These days, people run expensive (in both monetarily and computationally senses) "virus" scanners instead of updating their systems. Ideally, if you have an up-to-date system, there are no holes for worms to exploit, so you don't need worm protection. Right?
Open Source does not mean you can change it. You can have a look at the source code, this doesn't mean you are allowed to make modifications or derivative work.
This is of course not correct. Take a look at the Open Source definition, section 3 in particular.
The truth is that the distinction between free software and open source is one of philosophy; it is two different ways to think about the same software. Open source guys usually look at it as a good method for developing software, while free software guys look at it as a moral issue: you should not keep software away from people, hence software must be free (as in freedom).
Recipes can get legal protection through being "trade secrets", though. This recipe doesn't have that restriction, so it's a lot freer than any other beer I can think of.
Your comment must have prompted a million geeks to think "tea. earl grey. hot." :)
Nothing can stop you from installing malicious Firefox extensions, but you have to do it consciously -- they don't install themselves. So it becomes your job to be critical of what you install. Same as with any other program you install on your computer.
SCO doesn't own a single patent. Their lawsuits are about contractual matters with customers and partners.
This whole patent process is getting out of hand. Trying to patent a mere IDEA is not what the original creators of the copyright had in mind.
I am sure the original creators of copyright didn't have patents in mind at all. (sigh)
covers displaying "the last N digits of the credit card number, where N is an integer,"
So if N = 16, the patent actually covers displaying VISA numbers? Cool.
No, actually DRM. Just old-fashioned DRM.
Wasn't that hard: here.
Is there any other kind?
I've never come across the terms "iPod Sunday" and "iPodectomy"
In fact, the only google hit for "iPod Sunday" is BBC's own Jargon Buster. A few more for "iPodectomy", but only enough to almost fill one google hit page, and one of those are of course the Jargon Buster. One has to wonder if there isn't enough jargon already, since they have to make stuff up?