simple, they just make their own root servers. and ignore the US's everyone in europe and the rest of of the world then use the new "free" (as in free from US control) root servers.
exactly, i shut off all the eyecandy. the gui should respond as fast as possible and anything that slows it down just to look pretty is in the way and thus hampering productivity (not that posting on slashdot helps it...)
No, Firefox has been downloaded a number of times equal to 8-9% of the browsing population. That's wildly different than saying 8-9% of people on the internet browse exclusively with Firefox and have no access to any other tool.
indeed i downloaded firefox one time, burned it onto a cd and then installed it on my computer and 5 other computers of friends and family.
number of dl's means nothing, but actual usage could just as easily be higher than the number of dl's than lower.
the ultimate way of seeing the lines of code merge is by running the program. in order to see this you don't really need any particular knowledge of how the program was written, you merely need to be capable of operating a computer.
the true painting is watching the program run. the lines of code are merely the brushstrokes. if you are only looking at the individual brush strokes, then maybe you need to take a few more steps back so you can see the actual painting, because you aren't going to see anything in the brushstrokes.
maybe on some paintings the brushstrokes (or lines of code) themselves are a marvel. but in order to really appreciate them that is when you need an understanding of how the painting was made. however you do not need to undesrtand them in order to step back and admire the painting as a whole.
but not impossible. theoretically how congress is treating current copyrights by continually extending them retroactively and never letting them expire is the same as putting and infinate term on them, however sadly apparently the supreme court failed to notice that and ruled it as being ok.
Have you done the math? You're giving away the barn. Trademarks have 10 year renewals (basically) and cost hundreds of dollars each go.
fine, then start the fee at $200, then using my method a publishing company holding say 1000 copyrighted works for 98 years would cost about $3mil granted $3mil is still pocket change to a lot of companies
but renewing again at the 98 year mark would cost an additional 3.2mil to keep all of those works copyrighted, then 14 years later $6.4mil 14 years later another $12.8mil, then $25.6 mil and so on
this would allow companies to keep their already long copyrights for a reasonable fee, but if they want to keep a lot of copyrighted works then eventually this will add up and they will have to start releasing some works into the public domain.
the idea is to stop large companies from ammassing a giant copyright portfolio and never releasing them to the public...sort of like the big publishing houses were doing at the time the constitution was written, which spawned the original copyright law. and now because of the constant retroactive extensions from congress we are quickly returning to the time before the original copyright law was written.
copyright law as it is currently written is broken. many times things were supposed to start entering the public domain but were saved at the last minute by congress. because of this i no longer have any reasonable expectation that any of these works will ever enter the public domain. the next time copyrights start getting close to expire i very well expect congress will pass the "mickey mouse protection act" which will once again retroactively extend copyrights another thousand years. i believe my idea to be a possible solution, it allows a company to keep their copyright as long as they want, but the longer they keep it the more they have to pay. as well as it doesn't significantly punish an artist(or the artists family) or a company that is only holding onto one or two copyrights.
anyway, what i think they should do is allow for indefinate copyright renewal, but at a cost.
for example shorten copyright to 14 years. allow one free renewel. after that we should start charging copyright holders money to allow them to keep their monopoly on the copyrighted work at the publics expense. if the copyright holder views they can still make money on the copyright, then it would definately be worth some money for them to keep their copyright. but by keeping that copyright they are harming the public domain, and so the copyright holder should have to pay to renew the copyright after the first free renewal.
it should start at a low price, say 25 cents and will extend the copyright an additional 14 years. this would bring abandoned works into the public domain, because the copyright holder would not buy an extension.
and then every 14 years the copyright holder would have to buy a new extension for each copyrighted work, but the price for this extension should be doubled. so the next extension would be $.50 then $1 then $2 and so on. i believe this to be a simple solution to many problems.
it allows a copyright holder to keep their copyright as long as they want, however it punishes them for not releasing it into the public domain and thus enriching all of society.
eventually a large publishing house with many copyrights would not be able to afford renewals on all of their copyrights, so they would eventually be forced to release the non-profitable ones into the public domain
if a copyright holder isn't willing to pay $1 to keep their copyright, then maybe they should have that copyright anymore.
they shouldn't have to worry about losing the copyright, because the mouse is trademarked. trademarks never expire for as long as they are enforced. even if disney loses the copyright on mickey, no one can use his image anyway without violating the trademark.
i believe what disney is doing is simply trying to get added insurance by making sure copyrights never expire.
this is exactly what copyrights were meant to do, but thanks to the *AA and congress the copyright system is now broken and so nothing enters the public domain anymore.
the patent system also works in a similar way, and even with all of its flaws at least patents still expire.
they get 14 channels all of them of reasonable clarity. and 5 of them are crystal clear. and most of them would probably be crystal clear if they had an antena on the roof of the house. they live in the middle of nowhwere 45 miles from any real cities, and so they can't get cable even if they wanted.
my parents are in the 12% of people that would care.
the lawyer is just saying what he was paid to say.
i assume this lawyer is on new lines payroll, of course he isn't going to say "hahaha, we screwed peter jackson good". he is going to try to paint a picture of how peter jackson is being greedy and trying to take all of the poor movie studio's money. he is trying to turn public opinion against peter jackson, so the movie studio will be viewed as the victem
yeah much like powered flight was just out of reach a bit over 100 years ago
and electricity once was
and combustion engines...and the transister
a lot of things at one time were just out of reach at the fringes of technology for a long time. give them a dozen or so years, and someone might be able to figure out a way to improve or use these technologies.
give them a 100 more years, and by then maybe we will have the jumbo jet as compared to the wright brother flier equivalents of these technologies.
in other news google has anounced a new project called gclock google's CEO was quoted as saying "now not only shall we control the internet, but we shall also control time also! MUAHAHAHAHA!!!*choke* *cough*...err...i mean 'don't be evil' yeah that's it!"
trademarks never expire as long as they are enforced by the owner. if the owner stops enforcing it and it becomes a household word then the owner can lose the trademark.
there is a vast difference, an ICBM doesn't need to reach orbit. but these ICBM's were converted to reach orbit(something they weren't intended to do) in order to launch satellites
i am sure it is easy to design something that works well for its designed purpose, but doesn't do a very good job when you try using it for something entirely different.
TECH: Hello, you reach Dell's Quantum Tech support USER: I think the cat is dead TECH: did you look in the box? USER: err...i only opened it a short time...
no, the problem is that when you put a person at a computer their intelligence drops 10 fold. they just seem to lose all common sense when a computer is involved.
for example, if a random stranger walked up to you on the street and said that they were a representative from your bank and said that they must verify your account information otherwise they will have to close down your account, you would tell them to fuck off, walk away, and maybe even call the police on them. now, that same person gets an email stating the same thing that the stranger on the street said, and suddenly they worry that "OMG i need to give this strange person all my data or they might close down my account."
they just need to learn to delete and ignore their email, similar to how they would have walked away from the stranger on the street.
Slashdot Mirror
Real geeks have PVRs (Tivo, MythTv, etc)
:-)
yes, but they will still be home friday night.
simple, they just make their own root servers. and ignore the US's everyone in europe and the rest of of the world then use the new "free" (as in free from US control) root servers.
requiring a floppy drive is the reason i decided not to get sata drives for my most recent computer!
exactly, i shut off all the eyecandy. the gui should respond as fast as possible and anything that slows it down just to look pretty is in the way and thus hampering productivity (not that posting on slashdot helps it...)
No, Firefox has been downloaded a number of times equal to 8-9% of the browsing population. That's wildly different than saying 8-9% of people on the internet browse exclusively with Firefox and have no access to any other tool.
indeed i downloaded firefox one time, burned it onto a cd and then installed it on my computer and 5 other computers of friends and family.
number of dl's means nothing, but actual usage could just as easily be higher than the number of dl's than lower.
the ultimate way of seeing the lines of code merge is by running the program. in order to see this you don't really need any particular knowledge of how the program was written, you merely need to be capable of operating a computer.
the true painting is watching the program run. the lines of code are merely the brushstrokes. if you are only looking at the individual brush strokes, then maybe you need to take a few more steps back so you can see the actual painting, because you aren't going to see anything in the brushstrokes.
maybe on some paintings the brushstrokes (or lines of code) themselves are a marvel. but in order to really appreciate them that is when you need an understanding of how the painting was made. however you do not need to undesrtand them in order to step back and admire the painting as a whole.
not really sure my post makes sense
meant to say that if the bulk mailers paid the same rate we do, it should help lower the postage for everyone
"If they had to pay $.37 to get a letter delivered like I do..."
not to mention cheaper postage!
That would be unconstitutional.
but not impossible. theoretically how congress is treating current copyrights by continually extending them retroactively and never letting them expire is the same as putting and infinate term on them, however sadly apparently the supreme court failed to notice that and ruled it as being ok.
Have you done the math? You're giving away the barn. Trademarks have 10 year renewals (basically) and cost hundreds of dollars each go.
fine, then start the fee at $200, then using my method a publishing company holding say 1000 copyrighted works for 98 years would cost about $3mil granted $3mil is still pocket change to a lot of companies
but renewing again at the 98 year mark would cost an additional 3.2mil to keep all of those works copyrighted, then 14 years later $6.4mil 14 years later another $12.8mil, then $25.6 mil and so on
this would allow companies to keep their already long copyrights for a reasonable fee, but if they want to keep a lot of copyrighted works then eventually this will add up and they will have to start releasing some works into the public domain.
the idea is to stop large companies from ammassing a giant copyright portfolio and never releasing them to the public...sort of like the big publishing houses were doing at the time the constitution was written, which spawned the original copyright law. and now because of the constant retroactive extensions from congress we are quickly returning to the time before the original copyright law was written.
copyright law as it is currently written is broken. many times things were supposed to start entering the public domain but were saved at the last minute by congress. because of this i no longer have any reasonable expectation that any of these works will ever enter the public domain. the next time copyrights start getting close to expire i very well expect congress will pass the "mickey mouse protection act" which will once again retroactively extend copyrights another thousand years. i believe my idea to be a possible solution, it allows a company to keep their copyright as long as they want, but the longer they keep it the more they have to pay. as well as it doesn't significantly punish an artist(or the artists family) or a company that is only holding onto one or two copyrights.
well then i guess that is why i am not a lawyer.
anyway, what i think they should do is allow for indefinate copyright renewal, but at a cost.
for example shorten copyright to 14 years. allow one free renewel. after that we should start charging copyright holders money to allow them to keep their monopoly on the copyrighted work at the publics expense. if the copyright holder views they can still make money on the copyright, then it would definately be worth some money for them to keep their copyright. but by keeping that copyright they are harming the public domain, and so the copyright holder should have to pay to renew the copyright after the first free renewal.
it should start at a low price, say 25 cents and will extend the copyright an additional 14 years. this would bring abandoned works into the public domain, because the copyright holder would not buy an extension.
and then every 14 years the copyright holder would have to buy a new extension for each copyrighted work, but the price for this extension should be doubled. so the next extension would be $.50 then $1 then $2 and so on. i believe this to be a simple solution to many problems.
it allows a copyright holder to keep their copyright as long as they want, however it punishes them for not releasing it into the public domain and thus enriching all of society.
eventually a large publishing house with many copyrights would not be able to afford renewals on all of their copyrights, so they would eventually be forced to release the non-profitable ones into the public domain
if a copyright holder isn't willing to pay $1 to keep their copyright, then maybe they should have that copyright anymore.
they shouldn't have to worry about losing the copyright, because the mouse is trademarked. trademarks never expire for as long as they are enforced. even if disney loses the copyright on mickey, no one can use his image anyway without violating the trademark.
i believe what disney is doing is simply trying to get added insurance by making sure copyrights never expire.
yes, and so that particular corperate mouse would be protected by trademark even if it's copyrights were to expire.
meaning that you still wouldn't be able to make derivitive works that contained said mouse even if the copyright on steamboat willy were to expire.
this is exactly what copyrights were meant to do, but thanks to the *AA and congress the copyright system is now broken and so nothing enters the public domain anymore.
the patent system also works in a similar way, and even with all of its flaws at least patents still expire.
my parents still watch OTA broadcasts
they get 14 channels all of them of reasonable clarity. and 5 of them are crystal clear. and most of them would probably be crystal clear if they had an antena on the roof of the house. they live in the middle of nowhwere 45 miles from any real cities, and so they can't get cable even if they wanted.
my parents are in the 12% of people that would care.
the lawyer is just saying what he was paid to say.
i assume this lawyer is on new lines payroll, of course he isn't going to say "hahaha, we screwed peter jackson good". he is going to try to paint a picture of how peter jackson is being greedy and trying to take all of the poor movie studio's money. he is trying to turn public opinion against peter jackson, so the movie studio will be viewed as the victem
yeah much like powered flight was just out of reach a bit over 100 years ago
and electricity once was
and combustion engines...and the transister
a lot of things at one time were just out of reach at the fringes of technology for a long time. give them a dozen or so years, and someone might be able to figure out a way to improve or use these technologies.
give them a 100 more years, and by then maybe we will have the jumbo jet as compared to the wright brother flier equivalents of these technologies.
in other news google has anounced a new project called gclock google's CEO was quoted as saying "now not only shall we control the internet, but we shall also control time also! MUAHAHAHAHA!!!*choke* *cough*...err...i mean 'don't be evil' yeah that's it!"
trademarks never expire as long as they are enforced by the owner. if the owner stops enforcing it and it becomes a household word then the owner can lose the trademark.
ianatl
there is a vast difference, an ICBM doesn't need to reach orbit. but these ICBM's were converted to reach orbit(something they weren't intended to do) in order to launch satellites
i am sure it is easy to design something that works well for its designed purpose, but doesn't do a very good job when you try using it for something entirely different.
i thought the joy of playing quantum pong would be that you only have to imagine yourself hitting the ball
tech support call of the future
...
TECH: Hello, you reach Dell's Quantum Tech support
USER: I think the cat is dead
TECH: did you look in the box?
USER: err...i only opened it a short time
and when was the last time someone stole your account information?
:-)
they haven't?
must mean it is working!
i find it amazing that with all the spam and viruses that spread through email, that people still trust it.
no, the problem is that when you put a person at a computer their intelligence drops 10 fold. they just seem to lose all common sense when a computer is involved.
for example, if a random stranger walked up to you on the street and said that they were a representative from your bank and said that they must verify your account information otherwise they will have to close down your account, you would tell them to fuck off, walk away, and maybe even call the police on them. now, that same person gets an email stating the same thing that the stranger on the street said, and suddenly they worry that "OMG i need to give this strange person all my data or they might close down my account."
they just need to learn to delete and ignore their email, similar to how they would have walked away from the stranger on the street.
and what do you think would have happened if a select few people had decided to keep the secret of fire to themselves?