authors in the 1800s frequently were destitute in their later years because their works went out of copyright.
Wah. Really. If a janitor or a teacher or a computer programmer, or 99% of people retire, they don't continue to get paid for the work they have done. Why should that 1% be any different? Why should children get paid for the work of their parents?
And this pressure should not include copyright violations. That destroys any moral credibility we may have.
Yeah, violating an unjust law never gets you anywhere. Just look at the various minority rights movements. If Susan B Anthony would have voted in that election, well that would have destroyed all her credibility, and nothing would have changed. Or that Rosa Parks chick. She knew her place.
In summary, we need to bend over and take it in the ass, it's the only way we will ever win!
Copyright law doesn't forbid or even address non-copying/non-distribution use of a copyrighted item.
You can do anything you want with the CD, as long as it doesn't involve copying or distribution it's not covered by copyright law. Public performances are covered by copyright law, however, presumably considered a form of distribution.
It wouldn't be very informative in any case. Alcohol is 7 calories per gram, carbohydrates are 4 calories per gram. Knowing that, you can pretty much figure out everything else you need to know trivially.
As I said in my other post, everything has an LD50, some are just really really high.
That one for THC is 66.6 grams for a 100 Kg person, assuming similar LD50s in humans. Since most pot is between 2-8% THC, it's about the same as consuming a pound or two (0.5-1kg) of pot. Not likely to happen with recreational use.
Linotype was a very labor intensive process. It's like comparing hand-hewn wood cabinets to assembly line prefab cabinets. Of course the former is a better quality, but an order of magnitude more work.
It sounds like a great idea, too bad it has the fatal flaw of being written in Java.
I downloaded what was labelled as a "binary that wouldn't even need the JRE", and all I got were a bunch of.jar files. Oh well, rm -rf. Seriously, it's not 1996, why waste good ideas by writing them in Java?
Ironically, it's the things that are supposed to make it easier to manage large software projects that are actually making it harder.
Take Unicode for example. Rather than coding several region specific versions of a program, just make it do Unicode. Now instead of 255 possibilities for character imput, you have thousands. This leads to things like the microsoft.com that isn't, and the many many Unicode exploits.
Another thing is OOP. My gut feeling is that things written in OOP languages are never as stable as ones written in procedural languages. I'm not sure exactly why, but I think there is probably some relationship between the complexity of the language, and the stability of the system.
C is a very simple language. It doesn't offer many fancy features, and it is easy to screw up and allow stupid things like buffer overflows. It is, however, very simple to understand. Compilers are easier to write correctly.
I think there are something about GUIs that make things much harder for the programmer too. When I look at the large body of 100% rock solid command line programs, and compare that to the weak GUI offerings across the board, it seems to speak for itself. Someone working only in a GUI world could easily get the impression that software is getting too complex to manage, but from a command line standpoint, things are better than ever.
I don't think it's only a question of code maturity either. We've had GUIs on just about everything for over 10 years now, and they are still consistantly less stable and less useful than command line programs.
Maybe it's because they introduce a temporal element, the infitnite permutations of the way events can occur in a sequence of time, but non GUI programs have dealt with this in the past, and almost always do a much better job.
Anyway, I don't know if I have one coherent point, and this is pretty much all opinion with little basis in tangible evidence, mostly just gut feelings.
It's more of seperating the content from the presentation.
The idea is you can write a document once, then you can run it through one doohicky and make a PDF that looks nice for printing, run it through another doohicky and make a website that looks nice (and isn't linear like the printed version), run it through a special doohicky and it makes a web site that works for blind people, etc...
Basically, once you write the content, you never have to worry about formatting, that's not your concern.
A side effect is that the semantic markup makes it really easy to do things like smart search engines, that know that "python" could either mean a snake or a programming language, and let you clearly specify which you mean.
It's a very nice post, it's almost entirely wrong though.
There is no license. The copyrighted work is sold "all rights reserved", just the same as if you bought a book or a movie.
This means, the only things you can do are the things allowed under copyright laws.
Fair use is often confused to mean more than it does. Fair use allows use of parts of a copyrighted work, "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research".
Fair use would rarely cover the distribution of an entire work.
The criteria used for determining whether a particular use is fair use are:
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
That's straight from the law.
The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 also plays a part. (Side note, it has a DMCA-like anti-copy-control-circumvention clause that people rarely mention these days).
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
The idea was, as long as a digital recording device implemented the "Serial copy management system", then no action could be brought against consumers that used the device for digital recordings.
Then there is First Sale. Basically, if you buy a work, you can't be prohibited from selling that same copy of that same work. This concept was used to successfully defend the importation of overseas versions of copyrighted works.
I'm not sure about all the caselaw surrounding these laws. There may be other things I am missing, but I think these are the main relevant parts.
My dad is losing his hearing. Years of shooting guns without ear protection, or maybe years of working with power tools without ear protection, or probably some of everything.
Anyway, when my parents rent a DVD, the whole house shakes. Many movies have a huge dynamic range, which means when the volume is at a reasonable level during dialog, it's unbearable during the action sequences.
I guess compression could be done at the output device, do they offer that on consumer level stereos these days?
Suppose a company provides their workers with free soft drinks, and an employee happens to win a large sweepsstakes from some sort of under-the-cap game.
You are absolutely correct. We hired a summer intern that just graduated high school this year. He is going to be very bored in college, since he already knows pretty much everything they teach you in undergrad CS. He's proficient in C, PHP, Java, C++. He's great at design too, it's not just a code mess.
I really wonder why we (as a society) encourage such people to waste their time at college, he could already outdo most college graduates I have met, and I usually ask him questions about the finer points of OOP that I could never quite grasp.
Slashdot Mirror
authors in the 1800s frequently were destitute in their later years because their works went out of copyright.
Wah. Really. If a janitor or a teacher or a computer programmer, or 99% of people retire, they don't continue to get paid for the work they have done. Why should that 1% be any different? Why should children get paid for the work of their parents?
And this pressure should not include copyright violations. That destroys any moral credibility we may have.
Yeah, violating an unjust law never gets you anywhere. Just look at the various minority rights movements. If Susan B Anthony would have voted in that election, well that would have destroyed all her credibility, and nothing would have changed. Or that Rosa Parks chick. She knew her place.
In summary, we need to bend over and take it in the ass, it's the only way we will ever win!
Because you bought the CD.
Copyright law doesn't forbid or even address non-copying/non-distribution use of a copyrighted item.
You can do anything you want with the CD, as long as it doesn't involve copying or distribution it's not covered by copyright law. Public performances are covered by copyright law, however, presumably considered a form of distribution.
Since when? Alcohol has 7 calories per gram. That's energy you can use.
It wouldn't be very informative in any case. Alcohol is 7 calories per gram, carbohydrates are 4 calories per gram. Knowing that, you can pretty much figure out everything else you need to know trivially.
From the MSDS for THC: 666 MG/KG ORAL-RAT LD50
As I said in my other post, everything has an LD50, some are just really really high.
That one for THC is 66.6 grams for a 100 Kg person, assuming similar LD50s in humans. Since most pot is between 2-8% THC, it's about the same as consuming a pound or two (0.5-1kg) of pot. Not likely to happen with recreational use.
Oh, everything has a LD50 (Lethal Dose for 50% of sample). Some of them are just really really high. Water has a LD50 if you inject enough of it.
If having a ludricrous LD50 would keep things from being regulated as drugs, then marijuana would be legal, and so would most psychedelics like LSD.
People still use baby monitors though. At 49Mhz even. I wonder how many of them realize that signal can carry for many, many miles?
With your supposed high IQ, one would think you would know the difference between copyright and patents.
If anyone did accuse copyright infringement on ancient mainframe stuff, a simple look at the code would cure any doubt.
Linotype was a very labor intensive process. It's like comparing hand-hewn wood cabinets to assembly line prefab cabinets. Of course the former is a better quality, but an order of magnitude more work.
Because you didn't buy a right to the content. You bought a CD.
It's the same as buying a book. You didn't buy a right to the book, you bought the book.
I'm not saying this is the way it should be, this is just the way it is, and always has been.
It sounds like a great idea, too bad it has the fatal flaw of being written in Java.
.jar files. Oh well, rm -rf. Seriously, it's not 1996, why waste good ideas by writing them in Java?
I downloaded what was labelled as a "binary that wouldn't even need the JRE", and all I got were a bunch of
I think the real question is, what does this really buy anyway?
I'm sure the RIAA will continue to happily sue college people running big mp3 servers. I don't see how this would change that.
Ironically, it's the things that are supposed to make it easier to manage large software projects that are actually making it harder.
Take Unicode for example. Rather than coding several region specific versions of a program, just make it do Unicode. Now instead of 255 possibilities for character imput, you have thousands. This leads to things like the microsoft.com that isn't, and the many many Unicode exploits.
Another thing is OOP. My gut feeling is that things written in OOP languages are never as stable as ones written in procedural languages. I'm not sure exactly why, but I think there is probably some relationship between the complexity of the language, and the stability of the system.
C is a very simple language. It doesn't offer many fancy features, and it is easy to screw up and allow stupid things like buffer overflows. It is, however, very simple to understand. Compilers are easier to write correctly.
I think there are something about GUIs that make things much harder for the programmer too. When I look at the large body of 100% rock solid command line programs, and compare that to the weak GUI offerings across the board, it seems to speak for itself. Someone working only in a GUI world could easily get the impression that software is getting too complex to manage, but from a command line standpoint, things are better than ever.
I don't think it's only a question of code maturity either. We've had GUIs on just about everything for over 10 years now, and they are still consistantly less stable and less useful than command line programs.
Maybe it's because they introduce a temporal element, the infitnite permutations of the way events can occur in a sequence of time, but non GUI programs have dealt with this in the past, and almost always do a much better job.
Anyway, I don't know if I have one coherent point, and this is pretty much all opinion with little basis in tangible evidence, mostly just gut feelings.
It's more of seperating the content from the presentation.
The idea is you can write a document once, then you can run it through one doohicky and make a PDF that looks nice for printing, run it through another doohicky and make a website that looks nice (and isn't linear like the printed version), run it through a special doohicky and it makes a web site that works for blind people, etc...
Basically, once you write the content, you never have to worry about formatting, that's not your concern.
A side effect is that the semantic markup makes it really easy to do things like smart search engines, that know that "python" could either mean a snake or a programming language, and let you clearly specify which you mean.
There is no license. The copyrighted work is sold "all rights reserved", just the same as if you bought a book or a movie.
This means, the only things you can do are the things allowed under copyright laws.
Fair use is often confused to mean more than it does. Fair use allows use of parts of a copyrighted work, "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research".
Fair use would rarely cover the distribution of an entire work.
The criteria used for determining whether a particular use is fair use are:
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
That's straight from the law.
The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 also plays a part. (Side note, it has a DMCA-like anti-copy-control-circumvention clause that people rarely mention these days).
The idea was, as long as a digital recording device implemented the "Serial copy management system", then no action could be brought against consumers that used the device for digital recordings.
Then there is First Sale. Basically, if you buy a work, you can't be prohibited from selling that same copy of that same work. This concept was used to successfully defend the importation of overseas versions of copyrighted works.
I'm not sure about all the caselaw surrounding these laws. There may be other things I am missing, but I think these are the main relevant parts.
I thought "digital remastering" was mostly to undo the response curve alterations that were done due to the RIAA curve for vinyl?
I'm no audio guy, but do they really play with the range too?
With a caveat though.
My dad is losing his hearing. Years of shooting guns without ear protection, or maybe years of working with power tools without ear protection, or probably some of everything.
Anyway, when my parents rent a DVD, the whole house shakes. Many movies have a huge dynamic range, which means when the volume is at a reasonable level during dialog, it's unbearable during the action sequences.
I guess compression could be done at the output device, do they offer that on consumer level stereos these days?
I still stand by my statement that dynamic range is a good thing
:)
You should meet my friend that always bitches about NPR being too low volume. I've tried to explain dynamic range to him many many times.
OK, well riddle me this.
Suppose a company provides their workers with free soft drinks, and an employee happens to win a large sweepsstakes from some sort of under-the-cap game.
Who gets the money?
You are absolutely correct. We hired a summer intern that just graduated high school this year. He is going to be very bored in college, since he already knows pretty much everything they teach you in undergrad CS. He's proficient in C, PHP, Java, C++. He's great at design too, it's not just a code mess.
I really wonder why we (as a society) encourage such people to waste their time at college, he could already outdo most college graduates I have met, and I usually ask him questions about the finer points of OOP that I could never quite grasp.
now any tinkering must be approved by the company
Any company that doesn't let you tinker with your company owned hardware sounds like a pretty shitty place to work.
The fact that they are making such a big deal about this just reinforces that.
We got that covered
It's an attempt to not be totally put out of business by digital cameras maybe?
If the truth is a troll, then I guess I am trolling.
roughly equivilant in price to a comparably equipped Dell
for some definitions of roughly, such as "My laptop roughtly cost as much as my car".
nicer looking hardware
Most people concerned with cost don't care how it looks, within reason.
doesn't require dealing with X
You could have just as easily said, "doesn't offer the benefits of X".