It's kinda funny how people can't stand behind what they say by using their name. But anonymity is important, it allows more free opinions without fear of retribution. Well, there used to be no fear of retribution.
Oh, and don't bother pointing out the irony of my pointing out that people won't use their real names when I post under "vinnythenose" (no, that's not my birthname;) and don't give you any contact information:)
Anywho, good for AOL on protecting the rights of the anonymous. But I guess the question lies, is anonymity enoforcable? If I try to be anonymous, does that mean I should legally be anonymous, even if they can find out who I was (via IP addresses, logs, etc)?
Who is in the wrong in a posting situation. If I break my contract and try to dissuade people from purchasing from my company (assuming my contract has a clause like that). I am still wrong for doing that, even if I am anonymous. But if they can find out who I am, I'm no longer anonymous. Are they breaking my rights as an individual by finding out who I am? But I did break my contract...
AHHH!!!! I'm confusing myself! Anyhow, it's an interesting topic/thought.
Basically, if a band is under the RIAA "protection", they don't own their songs anymore. The label does. (Why Metallica is a rare case of a band owning their own songs)
The problem lies in that the smart people are smart enough not to use it when driver. However, the other 80% of the population that probably never should have receieved their drivers liscences (this includes, fixing the hair/make-up/popping pimples in the rear view mirror while driving, turning to face whoever you're talking to, and not turning back, like in the movies, those that cannot angle park, much less parallel park, driver in their own lane, etc, etc. The list goes on).
Although the people that actually need a device like this in their car are generally smart enough not to use when driving, it's the people that want to fun toy, or are in a rush to work and forgot to read the news are check their stocks in the morning.
As for the darwin awards, hey if they can get one, great! I just don't want to be the innocent bystander that gets to take part (rather unwillingly) in the entry into the Darin awards.
But then again, that's just my screwed up opinion.
May they never ride unicycles. Think, first they're riding unicycles, then, their mimes!! Real mimes are bad enough, but now robotic onces that can go years (hours if it runs Windows) of miming without stopping...
I would like to see the proof that Linux affects the stability and security of a network. Unless poorly configured it is no more of a security threat than using, say, Windows? I'd be willing to bed that on average Windows is more insecure for a network. Granted, you can get people who can tighten up windows really well, same with Linux. You can also get people that can't configure anything (here's hoping it's not me) and Linux will just be a big hole, yes, it could be bigger than Windows.
My only suggestion is that if you argue something is proven, try to provide some proof.
Regarding who owns the network, the postal system owns the postal network, do they read my mail or open my parcels (unless their ticking) ? Just a thought.
If it were advanced enough, could you imagine the legal battles?!?!?! Think about it, I go and buy some specs from Intel for a newish system. I give the specs to a friend, they do the same, and so on. It would be the whole copy music and videos all over again, but with whole computers!
But luckily, even were it to work quite like that, with systems that rivalled traditional circuitry, I think there'd be a few years before the courts good too tied up.
You could always photocopy your computer in case you overclocked it too much and it got fried:)
This falls in line with how companies want to know of everything you ever invented and they want what you invent while you work with them. Pure corporate crap. I wouldn't mind signing a clause that said that I can't use materials designed at work, elsewhere but for work, or that I may be prosecuted if I use proprietary information from one company at another (both of these are hard to enforce as well). But if I leave a company, I should be allowed to go wherever I want. If I develope something at home with no help from materials from work, it's mine, not the company's.
If they want attention, they should just make all of the ISP's interrupt your connection every 10 minutes and spew out 5 minutes worth of commercials, then continue.
Sure there's netscape for sun machines. It's available off of Sun's page I think. But netscape's page will link you over to it. I installed it on an ultra 10 a couple of days ago (then deleted it in disgust!)
Here's a great idea. Do this whole forcing people to upgrade to browsers that support the current standard, that's great. But force the browser companies to make watered down versions of their browsers for the people running on old pentiums and the such, so the rest don't have to completely miss out on the web because they aren't advanced enough.
Well, can I patent me and all my contents first? Then demand a paltry sum if they can make millions off of my bits and pieces? Not much mind you, just a bit if they start making billions off of me.
Some how I doubt the music industry will allow you to legally copy copyrighted music just because you paid extra for your machine and the extra went to them. They're going to use this as a way of recouping losses. They're probably going use it to make you pay for everyone else that steals music, whether you steal it or not.
Just because you gave them money, doesn't mean they're going to give anything back.
Woo hoo!! Soon they'll be charging you at the moment of your new child's birth. This is just in case your child should ever grow up to pirate anything. That way they're covered.
I'm getting real tired of everything cropping up because of copyright... it is apparent to me that the copyright system does not work well in the "digital age". But how does one go about changing an old system like that, and what do they change it to???
There are many benefits to these digital books. Mostly it comes from a convenience or laziness aspect. Libraries could become online libraries and the books equipped with wireless networking capabilities. You connect to the Internet, sign out a book and read it on your sheet of paper.
But from an historical point of view, this could launch our society into sort of a dark age. Not dark as in an unenlightened age, but dark as in, if something happened to destroy our technology and knowledge, future archaeologists would have nothing to learn about our society from.
Books can be thought of as analogue, as they degrade, they are still usable for a long long time, whereas digital, when it starts to degrade, it is very usable and then can become unusable in a relatively short amount of time.
And personally, I kinda like holding a book when I curl up to read (like I ever get the chance these days!)
It's really neat what we can do now a-days. I remember hearing about this digital paper last year. Cool...
Linux Thorvald owes nothing to the Linux community. He doesn't have to give up every waking hour to appearse millions of people just because they want to use something he created. The bottom line is that If someone creates something and people start using it, the creater does not owe those people anything.
It pisses me off when people refer to musics grous and claim the the group owes their fans a new album. The group only needs to put out a new album if they want to continue their popularity. If they don't care, more power to 'em.
Is this a message slanted towards a discussion about freedom of speech and the like on the 'net??
I kinda like it when not just anyone was on the Internet and you kinda had to know what you were doing to do anything. I guess that would have been before the advent of the World Wide Web (that they that so many people confuse as the Internet).
Ahh!! Incoming ethical debates, run run as fast as you can!!!. It would be so much easier if someone decided everything for us... oh wait, they already do...
Almost anyone else in Bill Gates' shoes would have done the same thing. Microsoft turned into a money making machine, this is what happens when a company gets large. Bill Gates was a good business man and did what was right for his business. But remember, it's been a while since it was entirely his business, he also had to please share holders. And what to share holders want?? More income for the coming so their shares go up! It's a bit of a self defeating cycle, but this is what happens to business. The bigger they become, the more investors they need, the more investors they need, the more profit they need, the more profit they get, the bigger they become, the bigger they become, the more investers they need. And so on. The problem is, that once you get to the top, to stay on top you must build a better product and swallow up anything that comes close (otherwise you won't be on top for long).
As for Bill Gates himself, I somewhat respect the guy. I saw an interview with him and he said the when he died his family wouldn't get copious amounts of money. They would have to earn it themselves if they wanted it. The bulk of his money was going to charity. Does that sound evil? He's already donated millions to charities.
But before people think me pro-microsoft and start bashing the hell out of me. I am a Linux lover. But I grew up using DOS and Windows. I use them, at home I use them a lot right now (at least until I get Linux up and running, I just need to find the time), at work I use Solaris. I'm not a hacker, I can solve problems when they crop up, but I don't go around recoding my kernel on a whim. I don't like Windows, I have issues with it, but you'll find that you have issues with any operating system that you didn't make yourself. And when you did make it yourself, you'll probably have even more issues, but at least you can try to fix them.
In short, Microsoft != Bad, Microsoft == Money Making Corporate machine, well hey, that's what every corporation does!! They're just not all on top of the world. Bill Gates (although I don't know him personally), seems like a decent guy, a decent guy who loves the company he built (wow, no one ever does that do they?).
If you're going to bash Microsoft for their practices, bash every corporation and every small company that wants to become the #1 corporation. They're all the same.
If DirecTV wanted to be bastards they would have done the infinite loop thing an hour before Super Bowl. A few people would have been pissed of and hacking faster than you can believe:)
Which is more frightening to you?
Millions of little tiny nanobots that you can't see, going around wreaking havoc on the world (okay, if there's enough of them you'll be able to see them as the afore mentions "gray goo") or a couple of really large robots that you can see a mile away?
At least they will be wreaking havoc once the first nanobot virus is written (will it be in Visual Basic? Damn those script kiddies)
Slashdot Mirror
Go out and get yourself Spy Hunter, the big huge arcade game. Oh yes, that was the stuff! Minutes of fun (until I crashed in a flaming wreckage)
Oh, and don't bother pointing out the irony of my pointing out that people won't use their real names when I post under "vinnythenose" (no, that's not my birthname ;) and don't give you any contact information :)
Anywho, good for AOL on protecting the rights of the anonymous. But I guess the question lies, is anonymity enoforcable? If I try to be anonymous, does that mean I should legally be anonymous, even if they can find out who I was (via IP addresses, logs, etc)?
Who is in the wrong in a posting situation. If I break my contract and try to dissuade people from purchasing from my company (assuming my contract has a clause like that). I am still wrong for doing that, even if I am anonymous. But if they can find out who I am, I'm no longer anonymous. Are they breaking my rights as an individual by finding out who I am? But I did break my contract...
AHHH!!!! I'm confusing myself! Anyhow, it's an interesting topic/thought.
Basically, if a band is under the RIAA "protection", they don't own their songs anymore. The label does. (Why Metallica is a rare case of a band owning their own songs)
Although the people that actually need a device like this in their car are generally smart enough not to use when driving, it's the people that want to fun toy, or are in a rush to work and forgot to read the news are check their stocks in the morning.
As for the darwin awards, hey if they can get one, great! I just don't want to be the innocent bystander that gets to take part (rather unwillingly) in the entry into the Darin awards.
But then again, that's just my screwed up opinion.
And there we have it, yet another excuse for bad unfocused drivers. Woo hoo!! Roads are getting safer by the minute.
Perhaps that is what is meant by the apocolypse.
:
Regarding who owns the network, the postal system owns the postal network, do they read my mail or open my parcels (unless their ticking) ? Just a thought.
But luckily, even were it to work quite like that, with systems that rivalled traditional circuitry, I think there'd be a few years before the courts good too tied up.
You could always photocopy your computer in case you overclocked it too much and it got fried :)
But I never said me and my views were perfect.
Hell, it worked for TV.
Sure there's netscape for sun machines. It's available off of Sun's page I think. But netscape's page will link you over to it. I installed it on an ultra 10 a couple of days ago (then deleted it in disgust!)
Well, can I patent me and all my contents first? Then demand a paltry sum if they can make millions off of my bits and pieces? Not much mind you, just a bit if they start making billions off of me.
Here in Canada, remember that temporary War time tax introduced during WW1? Hey guess what, we still pay income tax!! (sometimes as high as 50+%)
Just because you gave them money, doesn't mean they're going to give anything back.
Woo hoo!! Soon they'll be charging you at the moment of your new child's birth. This is just in case your child should ever grow up to pirate anything. That way they're covered.
I'm getting real tired of everything cropping up because of copyright... it is apparent to me that the copyright system does not work well in the "digital age". But how does one go about changing an old system like that, and what do they change it to???
But from an historical point of view, this could launch our society into sort of a dark age. Not dark as in an unenlightened age, but dark as in, if something happened to destroy our technology and knowledge, future archaeologists would have nothing to learn about our society from.
Books can be thought of as analogue, as they degrade, they are still usable for a long long time, whereas digital, when it starts to degrade, it is very usable and then can become unusable in a relatively short amount of time.
And personally, I kinda like holding a book when I curl up to read (like I ever get the chance these days!)
It's really neat what we can do now a-days. I remember hearing about this digital paper last year. Cool...
They would however be fornicating which isn't looked to kindly upon in a biblical sense either.
It pisses me off when people refer to musics grous and claim the the group owes their fans a new album. The group only needs to put out a new album if they want to continue their popularity. If they don't care, more power to 'em.
Same goes here.
I kinda like it when not just anyone was on the Internet and you kinda had to know what you were doing to do anything. I guess that would have been before the advent of the World Wide Web (that they that so many people confuse as the Internet).
Ahh!! Incoming ethical debates, run run as fast as you can!!!. It would be so much easier if someone decided everything for us... oh wait, they already do...
As for Bill Gates himself, I somewhat respect the guy. I saw an interview with him and he said the when he died his family wouldn't get copious amounts of money. They would have to earn it themselves if they wanted it. The bulk of his money was going to charity. Does that sound evil? He's already donated millions to charities.
But before people think me pro-microsoft and start bashing the hell out of me. I am a Linux lover. But I grew up using DOS and Windows. I use them, at home I use them a lot right now (at least until I get Linux up and running, I just need to find the time), at work I use Solaris. I'm not a hacker, I can solve problems when they crop up, but I don't go around recoding my kernel on a whim. I don't like Windows, I have issues with it, but you'll find that you have issues with any operating system that you didn't make yourself. And when you did make it yourself, you'll probably have even more issues, but at least you can try to fix them.
In short, Microsoft != Bad, Microsoft == Money Making Corporate machine, well hey, that's what every corporation does!! They're just not all on top of the world. Bill Gates (although I don't know him personally), seems like a decent guy, a decent guy who loves the company he built (wow, no one ever does that do they?).
If you're going to bash Microsoft for their practices, bash every corporation and every small company that wants to become the #1 corporation. They're all the same.
My 4 cents work (CDN funds, so 2 cents US)
Wow... it's so shiny....
If DirecTV wanted to be bastards they would have done the infinite loop thing an hour before Super Bowl. A few people would have been pissed of and hacking faster than you can believe :)
I don't know, the whole using Roman Numerals can lead to interesting concepts. Star Trek X? Hmm, remember Super Bowl XXX ?
At least they will be wreaking havoc once the first nanobot virus is written (will it be in Visual Basic? Damn those script kiddies)
Except when you replicate that DNA and use it at a bank terminal to pull money from the credit card.