I'll explain it to you. A religion can't have trade secrets. Not under swedish law anyway. The United States is behind this court. Read on.
What happened in Sweden was this:
Some guy published the book.
The book then found itself into a public institution and became a public document.
I don't know how, but my guess is that it had to do with the court that Panoussis was holding.
In Sweden there is a constitutional law called "Offentlighetsprincipen", i.e. "the Principle of Openness", which dictates that all documents (including letters, email, everything) held by the public institutions can be read by any citizen upon request. The only exceptions (and there are few) are for military safety reasons, or to protect witnesses, etc.
So, if you are a journalist, you get access to the mailboxes of all government officials among other things.
At this point in time, you could also read the whole Scientology bible, because it had been made public. Under swedish law this is fully legal, no matter what the copyright laws say.
The next thing that happened was that a bunch of people from Washington, congressmen and others, all of them from the scientology church, went directly to the government of Sweden and put serious pressure on them to stop the bible from being read. This was reported in all the newspapers and our prime minister spoke about how the united states was threatening to take Sweden to court for neglecting IP rights, they were going to boycott Sweden in the UN for neglecting freedom of religion and a lot of other things.
Our prime minister admitted that it was dubious under our consitution to prevent the Scientology bible from being read, but that the pressure from the US was too strong and would have serious consequences for Sweden, if we didn't follow suit. It was "nobody cares about Scientology anyway, and we don't want to lose any trade benefits, so let's do what they say.."
This whole court was then arranged to fit Americas needs.
It is the biggest political shame that Sweden has had to deal with for many, many years, if you ask me. Because the principle of openness is the best law we have in Sweden, bar none. It is the only law people really like, because it is essentially a non-control, anti-government law. It has practically made corruption impossible for parliament members..
This story is a great example how America can easily get smaller countries around the world to do their errands.
I wonder how much slashdot makes on that silly little ad they got on top of the page.
Could it ever be enough to support this gigantic web-site and all of it's employees? Or is Slashdot really painting themselves into a corner by bashing ads, and making it harder for them to get more revenue streams in the future?
...animators are not engineers. I don't think they fully understand the importance of not re-inventing the wheel in a software environment. Not the ones I have met anyway. Instead, artsy people tend to think that more automation means less quality and, above all, less work for artsy people. More often than not, the opposite is true.
I feel that parametric would be better because the tools to automatically generate facial expressions would open up a lot of new possibilities and bring more life to the game (especially mods), at zero marginal cost.
I don't care if it doesn't look perfect. I want id and mod-makers to be able to play voice.wavs in the game without thinking: "this would be cool, but it requires too much animation work so we gotta scrap it".
Would half-life have had such a strong and immersive plot without facial animation at no cost? I don't think so.
The animator wouldn't become obsolete with this! He could perfect the parametric system by doing different sets of expression templates like "scream", "normal", "whisper", "shout", "zombie", "deamon" etc, that could be used depending on model, situation or sound pitch, without losing the main generality of the system.
Australians sure have deep knowledge about PR. I mean, what better way to convince the public of the promises of new technology than by deliberatly blowing it up?
I can see it now:
A: "Lets use one of those scramjet engines."
B: "Is it safe?"
A: "I dunno. But it makes a hell of a crater!"
The marketing illiteracy that stems from hi-tech companies outside the US scares me. It even makes me want to move to the US. God save us all.
Just use dijkstras algorithm on a massive scale!
Have you ever played Warcraft? How come the ogres can find the point you clicked on the map so fast?
They don't have a "server", they use peer-to-peer networking to find the answer.
>1. How do you identify all the peers?
>Thats discussed on the site I mentioned, but >essentially you each pick an ID to associate a >given peer with. Its that simple.
If the users are chained together through ids one hop at a time, then you would have to route and re-ruote a query for their ids before you even do anything! So you would still get the routing problem, only then you go wasting bandwidth again by broadcasting your search to all the user ids you just connected.
A few years ago portuguese bus drivers went on a strike, but instead of staying in their homes they went out to work as usual. What they did was follow ALL the traffic rules, especially speed limits, at ALL times.
The result? The whole city of Lisbon was filled with traffic jams and nobody was able to get to work! And this was bus drivers!
Never underestimate the social benefits of criminal behavior!
The digital divide has a halflife of 18 months (Moore's law).
I am so sick of confused left-wingers in their fifties complaining about globalization and the digital divide, because honestly, to think that we could be closing the gap faster than we are is ludicrous!
"But what about the 1 billion people living on less than 1 dollar a day?"
Well, those people are surely illiterate and aren't suffering more from todays globalization than they were suffering from anything in the past. On the contrary, computers and the Internet is a means of closing the gap between rich and poor countries, it's not a threat that is going to widen it! People from third world countries such as Brazil wouldn't be able to raise their voices on an American forum as much as we have seen here on Slashdot today if we didn't have a globalized world!
"Who will get the job done faster, a group of Java geeks who can read each others' code ("extreme programming" in pairs, etc.) or a group of people where some are using COBOL, some C#, some VB, etc...tied together by.Net services at runtime?"
You missed the point. The advantage of this is:
1) It will become easier to integrate really old systems that are still running banks etc, with new ones or just make them available on the internet through simple xml dumps. The Java approach more or less requires you to scrap your old (and working) system completely and then build the old logic all over again. This often leads to massive and very expensive projects.
2) Hordes of old senior programmers who could never learn to think in OO-terms get an oppurtunity to stick around and deliver competitive software to the market. These guys, and there are a lot of them, will probably all choose the MS platform over Java. This will probably be the biggest blow to Java delivered by.NET.
3) The entrance cost for a programmer is low. Building in java requires a lot more experience and knowledge than building a webpage with VBscript. This means that.NET allows you to mix junior and senior programmers more easily and still come out with a pretty solid product. This can cut costs dramatically. I know that jsp is pretty easy to use, but it's still nothing that you would see the average script-kiddie playing around with.
Re:You know what I hate about Slashdot? Read on..
on
Rice Genome Mapped
·
· Score: 1
But that doesn't mean you can't sell it. Ask Bill Gates about this! He will tell you that people really are stupid enough to actually pay for bits and bytes!
I remember how people talked about virtual reality 8 years ago. Funny thing is, nobody seemed to realize that 3d games would be the platform for the development of virtual worlds.
I hope they win the fight, because if they do, it will be a huge PR success for all online games.
1. We don't like the idea of constructing a race superior to ours (or even different).
2. It is our human tradition to adapt the environment to us, instead of adpating to the environment. Why? Because it's a faster and less complicated change. Humans are vegetarians by nature. The only reason we eat meat is because we cook it! Instead of making our teeth stronger, we made the meat softer! I think that is the human way of doing things, and it is brilliant. It has allowed us to do so many things. Why wait until we have changed the genes of a few, when we can find a way of adapting the environment to suit many!
This touches somewhat on my topic here, but I still don't agree with you. There is a big difference between colonizing Mars and colonizing Africa, and it's a bit sad if we would let the mistakes of one prevent the other.
The difference?
There are no humans on mars.
That means no presumable victims and no previous owners of the land. Nonetheless I think an international effort would be much more positive than the colonization of Mars by one single nation. If we don't go in there together now, we will have serious fights over the land later on.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll explain it to you. A religion can't have trade secrets. Not under swedish law anyway. The United States is behind this court. Read on.
What happened in Sweden was this:
Some guy published the book.
The book then found itself into a public institution and became a public document.
I don't know how, but my guess is that it had to do with the court that Panoussis was holding.
In Sweden there is a constitutional law called "Offentlighetsprincipen", i.e. "the Principle of Openness", which dictates that all documents (including letters, email, everything) held by the public institutions can be read by any citizen upon request. The only exceptions (and there are few) are for military safety reasons, or to protect witnesses, etc.
So, if you are a journalist, you get access to the mailboxes of all government officials among other things.
At this point in time, you could also read the whole Scientology bible, because it had been made public. Under swedish law this is fully legal, no matter what the copyright laws say.
The next thing that happened was that a bunch of people from Washington, congressmen and others, all of them from the scientology church, went directly to the government of Sweden and put serious pressure on them to stop the bible from being read. This was reported in all the newspapers and our prime minister spoke about how the united states was threatening to take Sweden to court for neglecting IP rights, they were going to boycott Sweden in the UN for neglecting freedom of religion and a lot of other things.
Our prime minister admitted that it was dubious under our consitution to prevent the Scientology bible from being read, but that the pressure from the US was too strong and would have serious consequences for Sweden, if we didn't follow suit. It was "nobody cares about Scientology anyway, and we don't want to lose any trade benefits, so let's do what they say.."
This whole court was then arranged to fit Americas needs.
It is the biggest political shame that Sweden has had to deal with for many, many years, if you ask me. Because the principle of openness is the best law we have in Sweden, bar none. It is the only law people really like, because it is essentially a non-control, anti-government law. It has practically made corruption impossible for parliament members..
This story is a great example how America can easily get smaller countries around the world to do their errands.
Don't be so prejudiced. The bible is full of pretty childish stuff too. Except those parts are rarely read.
1. God created eve from a bone from Adam.
2. Like Jesus made a little devil fly out of the sick man, the little devil then ran away and jumped into the water.
Sounds like sci-fi anno 0 bc to me...
If my memory is correct, someone even got a Nobel Prize for doing this several years ago..
I wonder how much slashdot makes on that silly little ad they got on top of the page.
Could it ever be enough to support this gigantic web-site and all of it's employees? Or is Slashdot really painting themselves into a corner by bashing ads, and making it harder for them to get more revenue streams in the future?
...animators are not engineers. I don't think they fully understand the importance of not re-inventing the wheel in a software environment. Not the ones I have met anyway. Instead, artsy people tend to think that more automation means less quality and, above all, less work for artsy people. More often than not, the opposite is true.
.wavs in the game without thinking: "this would be cool, but it requires too much animation work so we gotta scrap it".
I feel that parametric would be better because the tools to automatically generate facial expressions would open up a lot of new possibilities and bring more life to the game (especially mods), at zero marginal cost.
I don't care if it doesn't look perfect. I want id and mod-makers to be able to play voice
Would half-life have had such a strong and immersive plot without facial animation at no cost? I don't think so.
The animator wouldn't become obsolete with this! He could perfect the parametric system by doing different sets of expression templates like "scream", "normal", "whisper", "shout", "zombie", "deamon" etc, that could be used depending on model, situation or sound pitch, without losing the main generality of the system.
Where can I buy tickets for this flight?
Australians sure have deep knowledge about PR. I mean, what better way to convince the public of the promises of new technology than by deliberatly blowing it up?
I can see it now:
A: "Lets use one of those scramjet engines."
B: "Is it safe?"
A: "I dunno. But it makes a hell of a crater!"
The marketing illiteracy that stems from hi-tech companies outside the US scares me. It even makes me want to move to the US. God save us all.
I like every rule except no 2.
And number 4, 5, 6, 7 , 8 and 10.
Good job!
We need to outlaw it fast!
So why is it a treat?
''There is always something enamoring about thinking you can get something for free.''
What, like IE? Yea, we knew you just screwed us with that to get rid of netscape. The cost we had to pay as consumers was less choice.
Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer
Open source is based on voluntarily giving up some of your ip rights. So the point is destroying it.
This guy seriously needs to cut down on the crack.
Nobody likes to have their product-cycles prolonged.
Just use dijkstras algorithm on a massive scale! Have you ever played Warcraft? How come the ogres can find the point you clicked on the map so fast? They don't have a "server", they use peer-to-peer networking to find the answer.
>I haven't worked for Napster in 3 months. What do you do now? Are you rich and retired? =)
Well, a human can fit 640Mbytes in a small area of a cell.
So you get an even bigger problem.
only on slashdot can I find someone who calls himself howard@dopemotherfucker and has just written a PhD on massive networks. Thanks!
The result? The whole city of Lisbon was filled with traffic jams and nobody was able to get to work! And this was bus drivers!
Never underestimate the social benefits of criminal behavior!
Never
The digital divide has a halflife of 18 months (Moore's law).
I am so sick of confused left-wingers in their fifties complaining about globalization and the digital divide, because honestly, to think that we could be closing the gap faster than we are is ludicrous!
"But what about the 1 billion people living on less than 1 dollar a day?"
Well, those people are surely illiterate and aren't suffering more from todays globalization than they were suffering from anything in the past. On the contrary, computers and the Internet is a means of closing the gap between rich and poor countries, it's not a threat that is going to widen it! People from third world countries such as Brazil wouldn't be able to raise their voices on an American forum as much as we have seen here on Slashdot today if we didn't have a globalized world!
Thank you very much!
Answer: Good education should be available to everybody, not just the well-off white americans.
You missed the point. The advantage of this is:
1) It will become easier to integrate really old systems that are still running banks etc, with new ones or just make them available on the internet through simple xml dumps. The Java approach more or less requires you to scrap your old (and working) system completely and then build the old logic all over again. This often leads to massive and very expensive projects.
2) Hordes of old senior programmers who could never learn to think in OO-terms get an oppurtunity to stick around and deliver competitive software to the market. These guys, and there are a lot of them, will probably all choose the MS platform over Java. This will probably be the biggest blow to Java delivered by .NET.
3) The entrance cost for a programmer is low. Building in java requires a lot more experience and knowledge than building a webpage with VBscript. This means that .NET allows you to mix junior and senior programmers more easily and still come out with a pretty solid product. This can cut costs dramatically. I know that jsp is pretty easy to use, but it's still nothing that you would see the average script-kiddie playing around with.
Censorship?
software doesn't exist period.
But that doesn't mean you can't sell it. Ask Bill Gates about this! He will tell you that people really are stupid enough to actually pay for bits and bytes!
I hope they win the fight, because if they do, it will be a huge PR success for all online games.
It might even make Doom look like Pong.
1. We don't like the idea of constructing a race superior to ours (or even different).
2. It is our human tradition to adapt the environment to us, instead of adpating to the environment. Why? Because it's a faster and less complicated change. Humans are vegetarians by nature. The only reason we eat meat is because we cook it! Instead of making our teeth stronger, we made the meat softer! I think that is the human way of doing things, and it is brilliant. It has allowed us to do so many things. Why wait until we have changed the genes of a few, when we can find a way of adapting the environment to suit many!
I would suspect that our microbes would easily kill off any martian ones, and martian microbes wouldn't stand a chance on earth.
This touches somewhat on my topic here, but I still don't agree with you. There is a big difference between colonizing Mars and colonizing Africa, and it's a bit sad if we would let the mistakes of one prevent the other.
The difference?
There are no humans on mars.
That means no presumable victims and no previous owners of the land. Nonetheless I think an international effort would be much more positive than the colonization of Mars by one single nation. If we don't go in there together now, we will have serious fights over the land later on.