The exception needs to be "except for in fair-use situations."
There already is this exception. The reason the judge ruled against DeCSS (which is probably the most significant case on this issue) was that the motion picture industry convinced the judge that the main purpose of the software was to copy DVDs, and the fair use exceptions were not significant enough to counteract the harm the software would do.
Imagine ripping DVDs being illegal unless you're only going to make a mashup video for youtube? Sure that's part of fair-use, but if that's all you ask for, and that's what they grant, then we're all retarded. What the hell are these people thinking?
It may or may not be fair use. It depends on many factors. Is it fair use to make a mashup video which contains the second half of the movie followed by the first half, with a different soundtrack? What if I make a mashup of that - take the first half then the second half and use the soundtrack from the original.
Fair point, but this isn't an ambiguity issue. Muddling criminal and civil law is similar to muddling functions and macros. The difference between them is quite clear.
Assembly is definitely a language that I would encourage any programmer or computer scientist to learn, at least at a basic level. When you're at that level of abstraction, what pointers do is a lot more logical, and that seems to be considered one of the most useful features and one of the most confusing features of the language.
This is very difficult to implement, since these flags are only available immediately after an operation. You would have to store them somewhere sensible.
It's an optimisation issue. Normally the carry flag won't be used. But this is an issue for parameter passing. There's no way of knowing whether a function or a caller will need to know about the flag. Handlers are too expensive for most uses. I want to be able to write something like hibits = hibits+lowbits.carry;
I don't know of any hardware with support for 2D vectors.
I know the Sony PSP vector unit can handle register sets in groups of 16 arranged in grids of 4x4 although can't remember the details. I'm sure it's not unique in that respect. But built-in support for matrix operations would be a useful feature and doesn't need explicit support from the hardware.
I've frequently toyed with a low level C-like language (maybe a hacked version of an existing C implementation) that supports these. Integers would behave as structures so you could access my_int.carry as though carry was a boolean member. I have a problem with what to do when passing an integer as a parameter though. 1D and 2D Vectors as built in types seems like a fairly obvious extension. I'd also want to do bitwise casts and built in ability to separate the mantissa and exponent from floats. Never has got past the "wouldn't it be good if..." stage though.
I thought C had support for atomic operations. Am I wrong there?
That behavior needs to be driven by some timing and retry logic.
I don't see why. You can usually wait quite some between retries without any negative impact since the connection will still be being used to download other pieces. BT might as well just assume that any pieces it hasn't received haven't even been requested.
Also, hosts need to determine how fast they can fire these UDP packets at each other.
Do they? I'm sure a request of data will be a single packet. Why not wait for a response before requesting another. Keeping network utilisation up just requires opening enough connections.
I'm really not a networks guy so I may be missing something here.
That's all well and good. If I was your manager I'd probably be satisfied with this.
But I'm not your manager. And it's better to find a break that looks less like you're wasting time than putting yourself in a position where you actually have to justify yourself. And even if your manager is a decent guy, his boss or the customer might not be. He'll get in trouble for allowing you to waste time on this.
I had a similar problem just recently (actually quite different but loosely related). I was quite emphatic about how wrong management were but it was really quite stressful.
While it wasn't as fully featured as the latest version of Word, there wasn't a lot that I wanted to do that Works was too limited for.
Modern machines have hundreds of times more RAM and a similar increase in processing power and really don't do a whole lot more.
How do they feel about people outside their "tribe" knowing this stuff? I know a lot of people who share pretty personal stuff on LJ but locked to friends, but I wouldn't claim to know them that well.
I also wonder how his behaviour might be different if he didn't know he was being watched.
Actually I think a lot of people (myself included) may have misinterpreted his points. He's not saying Wikipedia is wrong for these reasons. Merely that there's an incompatibility between academics and Wikipedia.
Academics aren't going to write about these articles because they prefer to spend time doing original research, so he's challenging those of us who do like to research other peoples work to summarise it for Wikipedia.
(1) You're only researching published material
(2) You're only researching published material
(3) You're only researching published material
(4) Fair enough.
The remark that original research is an accusation on Wikipedia is correct but it's not really relevant. I'm sure a science fiction author wouldn't complain about not being able to make stuff up in a science journal, and I'm sure that physicists are quite happy that there are no tolerances specified in cookery books.
I think it's more about the time spent. You could spend a few hours creating an Easter egg. Alternatively you could spend that time checking obscure features and making even more sure there are no showstopper bugs.
Hydrogen required either fossil fuels or electrolysis of water. Fossil fuels will produce carbon dioxide. Electrolyisis of water requires a power plant Either that will produce pollutants or it could be better used to replace a power that produces pollutants.
Could a fuel cell be made that works with a different fuel - one that can be produced more ecologically.
Interesting points. I'm concerned about the precedent this sets though.
Can I be charged with using a computer system without authorization for downloading copyrighted materials How about exceeding a bandwidth limit? Some ISPs have terms restricting criticism of the company. Should people be charged with misdemeanors for complaining about their own ISP on a public forum?
What if she had used a service that didn't have these clauses and simply stated a catch-all that users may not use the service for illegal acts? Would you be satisifed that she was innocent?
It seems to me that it can only be argued to be a misapplication of the law if her use of MySpace was, contrary to the prosecutors contention and the jury verdict, authorized. So, how do you make that case?
The jury were told of the end result of the violation. They wanted to punish her for something. The judge should have instructed correctly them as to exactly what they were determining, and, ideally, the ultimate result of the violation should not have been revealed. The law should apply whether the girl killed herself or not so that's not valid evidence.
As for the prosecutor - he has no need to be balanced.
In the same way that a jury has the right to discard a bad law (even if the judge won't tell them they do), they should have the right to mete out a good law.
No. They really shouldn't. The law should be to protect the innocent. If a few of the guilty remain free that is an unfortunate cost of the system, but one we should accept.
This appears to be a very specific method that allows people to check the amount, decide between them how much to pay without relying on the waiter, and be reasonably confident that they are not going to be cheated (unless the POS manufacturer is involved in the fraud).
It's fast enough for the purposes I use it for. I have next to no wait for websites to load. Movies download in less time than it takes to watch them. I have plenty of bandwidth for my purposes.
Can we be sued for IP infringement, theft, or whatever?
Yes. All three. They might not succeed but be prepared for a lengthy legal battle which will cost more than losing.
Are workers allowed to imitate the product they were working on?
Yes. But only in general, there are many exceptions.
We know we have to deal with the non-compete clause in our employment contracts, but in our state this clause has been very difficult to enforce.
You're in a different situation from most other cases. Other cases have most likely been people working on broadly related but ultimately different products. You appear to be planning to directly compete with your previous employer's core product, using knowledge gained whilst working for your previous employer.
Slashdot Mirror
The exception needs to be "except for in fair-use situations."
There already is this exception. The reason the judge ruled against DeCSS (which is probably the most significant case on this issue) was that the motion picture industry convinced the judge that the main purpose of the software was to copy DVDs, and the fair use exceptions were not significant enough to counteract the harm the software would do.
Imagine ripping DVDs being illegal unless you're only going to make a mashup video for youtube? Sure that's part of fair-use, but if that's all you ask for, and that's what they grant, then we're all retarded. What the hell are these people thinking?
It may or may not be fair use. It depends on many factors. Is it fair use to make a mashup video which contains the second half of the movie followed by the first half, with a different soundtrack? What if I make a mashup of that - take the first half then the second half and use the soundtrack from the original.
Fair point, but this isn't an ambiguity issue. Muddling criminal and civil law is similar to muddling functions and macros. The difference between them is quite clear.
Hadn't thought of that one. And there are all sorts of other issues that could be thrown up if the carry flag is already set.
Still convinced there's a solution. Just don't know what.
Assembly is definitely a language that I would encourage any programmer or computer scientist to learn, at least at a basic level. When you're at that level of abstraction, what pointers do is a lot more logical, and that seems to be considered one of the most useful features and one of the most confusing features of the language.
This is very difficult to implement, since these flags are only available immediately after an operation. You would have to store them somewhere sensible.
It's an optimisation issue. Normally the carry flag won't be used. But this is an issue for parameter passing. There's no way of knowing whether a function or a caller will need to know about the flag. Handlers are too expensive for most uses. I want to be able to write something like hibits = hibits+lowbits.carry;
I don't know of any hardware with support for 2D vectors.
I know the Sony PSP vector unit can handle register sets in groups of 16 arranged in grids of 4x4 although can't remember the details. I'm sure it's not unique in that respect. But built-in support for matrix operations would be a useful feature and doesn't need explicit support from the hardware.
I've frequently toyed with a low level C-like language (maybe a hacked version of an existing C implementation) that supports these. Integers would behave as structures so you could access my_int.carry as though carry was a boolean member. I have a problem with what to do when passing an integer as a parameter though. 1D and 2D Vectors as built in types seems like a fairly obvious extension. I'd also want to do bitwise casts and built in ability to separate the mantissa and exponent from floats. Never has got past the "wouldn't it be good if..." stage though.
I thought C had support for atomic operations. Am I wrong there?
Oh woe! Not having to worry about pointers and having built in string types.
I love C. It's terse and really useful for optimising performance but it's really not a good teaching language.
That behavior needs to be driven by some timing and retry logic.
I don't see why. You can usually wait quite some between retries without any negative impact since the connection will still be being used to download other pieces. BT might as well just assume that any pieces it hasn't received haven't even been requested.
Also, hosts need to determine how fast they can fire these UDP packets at each other.
Do they? I'm sure a request of data will be a single packet. Why not wait for a response before requesting another. Keeping network utilisation up just requires opening enough connections.
I'm really not a networks guy so I may be missing something here.
I could just buy an old machine and install MS Works on it. I still have the floppies.
That's all well and good. If I was your manager I'd probably be satisfied with this.
But I'm not your manager. And it's better to find a break that looks less like you're wasting time than putting yourself in a position where you actually have to justify yourself. And even if your manager is a decent guy, his boss or the customer might not be. He'll get in trouble for allowing you to waste time on this.
I had a similar problem just recently (actually quite different but loosely related). I was quite emphatic about how wrong management were but it was really quite stressful.
While it wasn't as fully featured as the latest version of Word, there wasn't a lot that I wanted to do that Works was too limited for. Modern machines have hundreds of times more RAM and a similar increase in processing power and really don't do a whole lot more.
How do they feel about people outside their "tribe" knowing this stuff? I know a lot of people who share pretty personal stuff on LJ but locked to friends, but I wouldn't claim to know them that well.
I also wonder how his behaviour might be different if he didn't know he was being watched.
Actually I think a lot of people (myself included) may have misinterpreted his points. He's not saying Wikipedia is wrong for these reasons. Merely that there's an incompatibility between academics and Wikipedia.
Academics aren't going to write about these articles because they prefer to spend time doing original research, so he's challenging those of us who do like to research other peoples work to summarise it for Wikipedia.
My remarks on the comments:
(1) You're only researching published material
(2) You're only researching published material
(3) You're only researching published material
(4) Fair enough.
The remark that original research is an accusation on Wikipedia is correct but it's not really relevant. I'm sure a science fiction author wouldn't complain about not being able to make stuff up in a science journal, and I'm sure that physicists are quite happy that there are no tolerances specified in cookery books.
I think it's more about the time spent. You could spend a few hours creating an Easter egg. Alternatively you could spend that time checking obscure features and making even more sure there are no showstopper bugs.
Hydrogen required either fossil fuels or electrolysis of water. Fossil fuels will produce carbon dioxide. Electrolyisis of water requires a power plant Either that will produce pollutants or it could be better used to replace a power that produces pollutants.
Could a fuel cell be made that works with a different fuel - one that can be produced more ecologically.
Although the main reason I'd like to see this is because I want the media cartels to have scored an own goal.
Interesting points. I'm concerned about the precedent this sets though.
Can I be charged with using a computer system without authorization for downloading copyrighted materials How about exceeding a bandwidth limit? Some ISPs have terms restricting criticism of the company. Should people be charged with misdemeanors for complaining about their own ISP on a public forum?
What if she had used a service that didn't have these clauses and simply stated a catch-all that users may not use the service for illegal acts? Would you be satisifed that she was innocent?
It seems to me that it can only be argued to be a misapplication of the law if her use of MySpace was, contrary to the prosecutors contention and the jury verdict, authorized. So, how do you make that case?
The jury were told of the end result of the violation. They wanted to punish her for something. The judge should have instructed correctly them as to exactly what they were determining, and, ideally, the ultimate result of the violation should not have been revealed. The law should apply whether the girl killed herself or not so that's not valid evidence.
As for the prosecutor - he has no need to be balanced.
I think murder would be a tough sell. I don't think she intended to cause this girl to commit suicide. Manslaughter, perhaps. Harassment would fit.
In the same way that a jury has the right to discard a bad law (even if the judge won't tell them they do), they should have the right to mete out a good law.
No. They really shouldn't. The law should be to protect the innocent. If a few of the guilty remain free that is an unfortunate cost of the system, but one we should accept.
No. It was about the charge as written.
If she was guilty of psychological stalking (which she was) she should have been charged with stalking. This is a clear misapplication of the law.
This appears to be a very specific method that allows people to check the amount, decide between them how much to pay without relying on the waiter, and be reasonably confident that they are not going to be cheated (unless the POS manufacturer is involved in the fraud).
It's clearly an improvement over an existing device, and requires at least some design. It's not so obvious that all systems support it.
Okay. It's pretty obvious once the problem is described, but there are worse offenders.
It's fast enough for the purposes I use it for. I have next to no wait for websites to load. Movies download in less time than it takes to watch them. I have plenty of bandwidth for my purposes.
Can we be sued for IP infringement, theft, or whatever?
Yes. All three. They might not succeed but be prepared for a lengthy legal battle which will cost more than losing.
Are workers allowed to imitate the product they were working on?
Yes. But only in general, there are many exceptions.
We know we have to deal with the non-compete clause in our employment contracts, but in our state this clause has been very difficult to enforce.
You're in a different situation from most other cases. Other cases have most likely been people working on broadly related but ultimately different products. You appear to be planning to directly compete with your previous employer's core product, using knowledge gained whilst working for your previous employer.