Do software developers employed by companies still retain the copyright to what they write?
No, because they do their work for hire; they're technically not the authors of that work.
As a free-lance programmer, you usually would do the same. You also could develop a piece of code and give your client an unlimited license, but keep the authorship.
2. Steve wants to be the first to ship a 64 bit portable. (No one is closer than Apple now).
I'm too lazy right now to find out when exactly, but Tadpole has been shipping UltraSparc-based notebooks for many years now. I guess one could make the same distinction between "workstation" and "desktop". Although the 970 is far superior in the bang per watt category compared to the US IIi (and I suspect, to the US IIIi as well).
At 30c/SMS, spammers are up for one hell of a phone bill after sending all that spam.
Unfortunatly, I don't have any reference to current figures, but at least in Europe, there's quite a number of wholesale SMS service providers that allow you to send SMSs for a lot less that that...
And as long as the receiving network has peering available between itself and some network the service provider has access to, there's little to control spam.
Amazon labelled/declared a couple of packages so that UPS collected duties and VAT from me on delivery; I had them delivered to Germany and Austria at various times, between September and December last year.
I'm resisting in just modding the parent down; you haven't followed the original story nor the many updates to it.
By way of example: random corporation X tells random ISP Y: "Our copyright was violated; tell us who was using IP address 1.2.3.4 at such-and-such a date." ISP Y says, "Sure, who are you? The police? You have a subpoena for that info?" Random corp X says: "Screw you, we've got the DMCA, so you have to give, or we'll make you responsible for 100 gazillion infringements."
It consistently amazes me how people on/. forget about this little principle "innocent until proven guilty."
I believe that one of the pertinent principles here is "common carrier" status; that is, Verizon is simply providing the medium (like the USPS with mail, or Verizon with the phone system), but is not engaged in controlling in any way the contents of what is being carried. Nor could they reasonably do so. Verizon is not operating the servers, it is providing the data transfer capability to various customers. The principal difference is that the common carrier is not able to control the flows of information (with regards to it's contents).
If this decision stands, anyone can threaten any ISP into dropping customers just by claiming they are perpetrating infringements. (Modulo weight of the complaining party.)
Yes, you are correct that Verizon is challenging certain interpretations of the DMCA, and I believe that it is important that some basic principles are held up.
Did you look before the updated the UK store prices?
The 15" Combo goes for UKP 1599 (about USD 2620). Also remember that the UK prices include VAT. If you were to buy a Powerbook in the States and bring it back, you would need to pay customs and VAT (or equivalent).
Ironically, the appeal of the Apple music store is that you "own" the titles that you buy for. I believe that many people rather choose to pay for specific offers, instead of subscribing to some service.
By way of example: I pay for cable TV, and I have certain expectations. Especially, I don't expect stuff to be worthwile to keep after (possibly) timeshifting it; if there's a movie, series, mini-series I feel I might watch more than once or twice, I'm quite willing to pay some premium to get (practically) unlimited rights to it. Apple's offer is not unlimited, but it's close enough for me to accept it.
On the other hand, a music subscription service, for me, is full of hassles. I need an Internet connection to have my right to listen confirmed; I might need to stream stuff, at potentially low quality, I can't use the devices I want to, etc. pp. In essence, I don't "own" the music.
A newspaper or magazine subscription is similiar in that I don't care that much about last month's issue (with most publications, anyway), but with my personal interest in music, I want to be able to "own" a recording, and rest calmly knowing that I can listen to it when I want, not when some commerical service deems appropriate.
I just had to set up something similar, to be able to access a couple of machines at a client's site, and the client didn't want a real VPN.
The OpenSSH client has the nice feature of being able to act as a SOCKS4 proxy to dynamically build tunnels through a connection. What this means is that you don't have to specify every single forwarding when starting ssh, but you can use a socksified client to connect to ssh(1) and establish further tunnels on an as-needed basis.
Now, my (proprietary) software needed for this project is not socksified. What now? Ah! PFs rdr rules! (Also possible with IPFilter, IPFW (FreeBSD), IPChains...)
My client's private network address does not clash with the ones I use, so I set up my OpenBSD router to redirect TCP packets destined for the client's network to a local port. From there, transproxy (/usr/ports/www/transproxy) picks up the connection, and forwards it through the ssh(1) SOCKS4 proxy to the appropriate machine on the client's network.
The only thing left was to copy the client's private DNS zone over to my internal nameserver to be able to resolve names properly, and e voila!, I had my (almost) transparent ssh-based VPN.
The currect version of transproxy doesn't support SOCKS4, but I've submitted patches to the author. In the meantime, you can find my patches here.
Some kinds of porn are illegal in at least the European Union. If you can convince the appropriate authorities, there might be a chance to get the dial-up machines seized and analysed, and getting a trace back to the original perpetrators. This would also be your chance to hit them with civil charges.
However, I would be surprised if these people only had a single layer of indirection...
Theo is a Canadian living and working in Canada. He doesn't have any 1st Amendment rights. His rights to free speech are entirely determined by his country of residence and to a much lesser extent, his citizenship.
You see, this is exactly one of the issues I have with "globalization".
While corporations and the governments they're lobbying promote "free trade", a lot of the basic rights are not free'd at the same time. Get me right: I'm not saying that the US Government is responsible for assuring Canadian citicens rights, but at the same time, it should be aware of it's actions, and their results.
If trade should be really free, so should be government, participation, and control.
I'm sure Apple has a version of Mac OS X plus some smaller apps going on i386, but forcing third-party vendors, many of which still are based on Carbon, to switch architectures, would massivly hurt the market, and that basically directly after the push to Mac OS X.
Switching to a generic PC architecture is not going to happen either: if Apple gets out of the hardware business, they put themselves up against Microsoft as a OS vendor, on the same platform. I don't think so.
If they try to dongle their own PC-based in some way, so that Mac OS X only runs on their own hardware, people will figure out how to get around this pretty quickly, so this is a non-starter as well.
The article is obviously nonsense, baed on Apple's need for faster processors. Here's why I think Apple will stay with the Power architecture for at least another two years, and probably after:
Although native Cocoa apps probably can be ported over to a different CPU/arch by just recompiling, and the OS foundations are designed to support multiple architectures simultateously, there is a lot of legacy code even with those native apps, not to speak of Carbon ones. The legacy code would need to be emulated, and would severly limit the possible performance gains from a different architecture.
Likewise, vendors need at least a year to get their toolchains, testing, etc. adapted to a new architecture. Also, getting all the little oddities and outright bugs out of the toolchain will take at least a year, if not longer (cf. transition from GCC 2.x to 3.x, which for most systems, has taken more than a year, or isn't fully finished yet).
Apple will need to maintain two product lines for at least two years. I'm not sure this additional expenditure will be offset by potential additional sales.
If indeed Apple's going to switch (he!) from Power to something else, they might as well consider Sparc or whatever Sony's into for the PS3; I'm sure Sun's offerings complement Apple's just as much as IBM's. Intel, on the other hand, is more or less a direct competitor.
IBM's 970 seems to be the perfect match, and right now, I don't see why Apple wouldn't choose it, short of IBM refusing to give it to Apple.
Re:VPC 6 & FreeBSD - Sound, yes; X, no; clock,
on
Virtual PC 6 Review
·
· Score: 1
X has never worked.
This is something that has puzzled me with reviews of both VPC and VMware.
Why do you want to run X on an emulated graphics card? If you're a XFree developer, then this might be useful, but otherwise?
Apple's X server as well as the seperatly maintained XFree-based server seem to work quite fine, and with the inherent transportability of X, it just works.
Or is it that certain people hate X and deliberately break it, like fontconfig?
10Mbps were supposed to be the EOL for ethernet.
Where are we now? 10Gbps is getting to be deployed.
But this is not really Ethernet anymore.
Yes, the frame format is still comparable, but all the electrical parameters have been changed, and the encoding, full-duplex, etc. pp.
I think the amazing thing is that there is a straight-forward way of bridging between a legacy 10 Mbps Ethernet and a 802.x network, while still maintaining many of the original sematics.
Of course, just as I post my story submission to slashdot on this, no sooner than I reload the page after submitting it when the story appears from someone else.
Don't worry, the time for your submission will come.
The practical arts of manufacture and commerce were not valued in British society at the time - not the case in Germany.
Interestingly enough, it was the British who came up with the "Made in..." label. Here's a quick reference I found:
The 1887 British Merchandise Marks Act required the 'Made in Germany' stamp for all German imports: this would prevent consumers from 'accidentally' buying 'cheap and nasty' products. Within a few decades, the connotations were reversed: foreign manufacturers even began to forge the label. German industrial production had shifted to 'quality work', and goods were marketed as embodiments of German cultural superiority.
Slashdot Mirror
As a free-lance programmer, you usually would do the same. You also could develop a piece of code and give your client an unlimited license, but keep the authorship.
It's quite scary: I could immediatly tell the minute the story went live for everyone... the download rate dropped from >50KBps to below 3...
And as long as the receiving network has peering available between itself and some network the service provider has access to, there's little to control spam.
Amazon labelled/declared a couple of packages so that UPS collected duties and VAT from me on delivery; I had them delivered to Germany and Austria at various times, between September and December last year.
(Yes, I know. Google)
By way of example: random corporation X tells random ISP Y: "Our copyright was violated; tell us who was using IP address 1.2.3.4 at such-and-such a date." ISP Y says, "Sure, who are you? The police? You have a subpoena for that info?" Random corp X says: "Screw you, we've got the DMCA, so you have to give, or we'll make you responsible for 100 gazillion infringements."
It consistently amazes me how people on /. forget about this little principle "innocent until proven guilty."
I believe that one of the pertinent principles here is "common carrier" status; that is, Verizon is simply providing the medium (like the USPS with mail, or Verizon with the phone system), but is not engaged in controlling in any way the contents of what is being carried. Nor could they reasonably do so. Verizon is not operating the servers, it is providing the data transfer capability to various customers. The principal difference is that the common carrier is not able to control the flows of information (with regards to it's contents).
If this decision stands, anyone can threaten any ISP into dropping customers just by claiming they are perpetrating infringements. (Modulo weight of the complaining party.)
Yes, you are correct that Verizon is challenging certain interpretations of the DMCA, and I believe that it is important that some basic principles are held up.
The 15" Combo goes for UKP 1599 (about USD 2620). Also remember that the UK prices include VAT. If you were to buy a Powerbook in the States and bring it back, you would need to pay customs and VAT (or equivalent).
The Google search turns up WAP interfaces to triangulation data. How exactly does that to the parent's question?
Ironically, the appeal of the Apple music store is that you "own" the titles that you buy for. I believe that many people rather choose to pay for specific offers, instead of subscribing to some service.
By way of example: I pay for cable TV, and I have certain expectations. Especially, I don't expect stuff to be worthwile to keep after (possibly) timeshifting it; if there's a movie, series, mini-series I feel I might watch more than once or twice, I'm quite willing to pay some premium to get (practically) unlimited rights to it. Apple's offer is not unlimited, but it's close enough for me to accept it.
On the other hand, a music subscription service, for me, is full of hassles. I need an Internet connection to have my right to listen confirmed; I might need to stream stuff, at potentially low quality, I can't use the devices I want to, etc. pp. In essence, I don't "own" the music.
A newspaper or magazine subscription is similiar in that I don't care that much about last month's issue (with most publications, anyway), but with my personal interest in music, I want to be able to "own" a recording, and rest calmly knowing that I can listen to it when I want, not when some commerical service deems appropriate.
Until -stable will be split off around 5.2 release, it's still HEAD, or for the purpose of cvsup, tag=.
Wow, that must be old. I've never seen any milli-bit drive...
The OpenSSH client has the nice feature of being able to act as a SOCKS4 proxy to dynamically build tunnels through a connection. What this means is that you don't have to specify every single forwarding when starting ssh, but you can use a socksified client to connect to ssh(1) and establish further tunnels on an as-needed basis.
Now, my (proprietary) software needed for this project is not socksified. What now? Ah! PFs rdr rules! (Also possible with IPFilter, IPFW (FreeBSD), IPChains...)
My client's private network address does not clash with the ones I use, so I set up my OpenBSD router to redirect TCP packets destined for the client's network to a local port. From there, transproxy (/usr/ports/www/transproxy) picks up the connection, and forwards it through the ssh(1) SOCKS4 proxy to the appropriate machine on the client's network.
The only thing left was to copy the client's private DNS zone over to my internal nameserver to be able to resolve names properly, and e voila!, I had my (almost) transparent ssh-based VPN.
The currect version of transproxy doesn't support SOCKS4, but I've submitted patches to the author. In the meantime, you can find my patches here.
However, I would be surprised if these people only had a single layer of indirection...
You see, this is exactly one of the issues I have with "globalization".
While corporations and the governments they're lobbying promote "free trade", a lot of the basic rights are not free'd at the same time. Get me right: I'm not saying that the US Government is responsible for assuring Canadian citicens rights, but at the same time, it should be aware of it's actions, and their results.
If trade should be really free, so should be government, participation, and control.
For the next few days, you need new hosts every few minutes, as they and their connections buckle under the load...
As I stated in another thread, it doesn't make sense for Apple to switch architectures, unless IBM was refusing to give them the 970. And another rumor site's reports make that seem somewhat unlikely.
I'm sure Apple has a version of Mac OS X plus some smaller apps going on i386, but forcing third-party vendors, many of which still are based on Carbon, to switch architectures, would massivly hurt the market, and that basically directly after the push to Mac OS X.
Switching to a generic PC architecture is not going to happen either: if Apple gets out of the hardware business, they put themselves up against Microsoft as a OS vendor, on the same platform. I don't think so.
If they try to dongle their own PC-based in some way, so that Mac OS X only runs on their own hardware, people will figure out how to get around this pretty quickly, so this is a non-starter as well.
They might claim that my statements are not factual, libelous, and what not.
However, they shouldn't have the right to stop someone from proving facts about the company, it's products, services or dealings with others.
Of course, they try to contract you to be unable to do just that; did you have to sign an EULA for using your card?
IAre you receiving a fax right now?
This is something that has puzzled me with reviews of both VPC and VMware.
Why do you want to run X on an emulated graphics card? If you're a XFree developer, then this might be useful, but otherwise?
Apple's X server as well as the seperatly maintained XFree-based server seem to work quite fine, and with the inherent transportability of X, it just works.
Or is it that certain people hate X and deliberately break it, like fontconfig?
Yes, the frame format is still comparable, but all the electrical parameters have been changed, and the encoding, full-duplex, etc. pp.
I think the amazing thing is that there is a straight-forward way of bridging between a legacy 10 Mbps Ethernet and a 802.x network, while still maintaining many of the original sematics.
Don't worry, the time for your submission will come.
Interestingly enough, it was the British who came up with the "Made in..." label. Here's a quick reference I found:
Buy American?