I wasn't aware that Google was an ISP in France. My point about Google losing it's common carrier status by going along with this is not addressed your statement in any way and is strictly irrelevant.
US citizens and companies are bound to US law when outside the country. When you agree to willingly give up your common carrier status in France, that can be used in court in the States to demonstrate you are no longer a common carrier. They may or may not win, something like that hasn't been brought up yet, but it's a foreseeable problem that is easily avoided. It is for that reason that no company that does business in the States would ever sign up for something like this, because to do otherwise just invites trouble.
Also, you know the reason someone like Google won't sign up to be willing participants is because it's signing away their common carrier status. That will have HUGE legal repercussions in the United States. They will be suddenly responsible for even the most minor violation and susceptible to law suit. No company in their right mind would do that. It's not going to be out of the kindness of their hearts. If they could help nail people who are violating copyright without carrying any legal responsibility at all, I'm sure they would.
I'm not seeing a problem with this. You don't have a right to "share" material that is copyrighted by someone other than you if they didn't give you consent. You may not like this, you can come up with all the (possibly valid) reasons things should not be that way. It's not for YOU to decide. The only real problem is how something like this is enforced. I'm willing to bet it will be done with a false positive rate that won't go over well with the French people, who from this side of the pond seem the kind of people who don't put up with their government doing stupid things (I seriously commend them for their idea of how to go on strike).
I'm not sure what your definition of free is, but in order for me to get a copy of IE, I would need to BUY a copy of Windows. It's like saying DirectX 10 is free. It's not free, they are charging for it.
So the camera I have now will magically follow this, as will the untold millions of cameras currently in use.
I prefer the good old fashioned calling people out method of enforcement. I've had a professor who answered peoples cell phones, I've seen a recital stopped completely because of a camera and the person kicked out. Anyhow, anything I own should never be under your control. Sorry, but it's just that way.
The only reason ideas of this caliber get used in mass is so that those who have power can remove what little power the rest have. Organize protest, sorry you cameras can't work, it's for the safety of those around you.
I'm also seriously beginning to think that there is a group of people in this world who consider better communication and record keeping on the part of the masses is a bad thing and should be stopped.
Here's the funny thing. You OWN a copy of a defective movie. You have every right to back it up before it can no longer be read. It's not a rental, it's a purchase of a self destructing disk at a reduced price. In this case, it's not pirating.
A metadata based filesystem, that's how. There's an API for writing a file, which I'm assuming Microsoft controls. That API could store not only creation and used dates in the written files, but who "created" it. It could also record if it's ever been launched, assuming it's an application. Since of course Microsoft is well aware of the existence of Safari, any.exe file created by Safari, but never launched could trigger a dialog asking you if it's safe. That same thing for Explorer could be done too.
With the big exception of the TCP/IP stack and basic command line tools (FTP, telnet, etc). Remember, we know these because the BSD license specifically requires the original authors copyright to be shipped with the modified binaries.
Nasa has pointed out to news agencies that only 5 of the 13 previous landings have been successful. Odds are, as always, this is not going to work. As slow as this science goes, taking several years from start of the project to a result, that a whole lot of pressure. The two most dangerous parts of this trip are the take off and landing. It's "easy" to adjust the craft when it's moving over 10 months in space, here we have a 7 minute fall from 12,000 mph to 5 mph. A LOT can go wrong.
Here's to hoping we learn something about Mars again. If not, as always, we need to keep trying. If it weren't for these people, things we take for granted in daily life wouldn't exist.
First sale allows you to distribute modified works, but not copies of the modified work. The key difference being that you can buy a book, rip out pages, draw all in it, turn it into a mosaic or what not. You can not photocopy the book, leaving the book in tact, modify the copy then sell that copy, even if it's bundled with the book. This is true for software too.
Even if software licenses have no bearing what so ever, Apple still has a claim against Pystar. Pystar is modifying, copying, then distributing copyrighted material. You NEED a license to do that. First sale doesn't allow you to distribute copies, even if it's with the original work.
BUT...* no normal program has any valid reason to run some complex unpack/decrypt/re-order process on code before running it.
Mask the virus as being a DRM process. In the near future, proper corporate anti-virus software will make an attempt to ignore "valid" DRM encryption/decryption for files and software.
Skimming this board I was thinking to myself, what will Windows have in the future? More DRM so companies can control distribution of their files. Not only that, talk about the perfect way to control who can run a binary. I can see people doing this kind of thing on purpose for "valid" code. What's to stop malware from hiding itself as a valid DRM system?
Sedition is illegal where I'm from and a very much prosecutable offense, especially in a time of war. Where as libel is merely a civil matter and typically only applies to willful falsehoods not personal opinion.
LIke I said, Britain has it's priorities backwards.
I make no claim that the United States is some form of utopia when it comes to how police power is used. The fact of the matter is, any officer giving a ticket to someone in the US for having a sign that labels a group a cult would have that ticket immediately thrown out of the court. You're not going to find a judge in the US that would enforce that law, if it even existed. It seems that Europeans have adapted a policy of banning "hate speech" while at the same time allowing minority groups to commit sedition for the purposes of establishing a theocracy. They do a lot of things right, don't get me wrong, but it's really a case of having broken priorities.
Can someone explain to me how this works. Someone can be summoned because they express a non-violent opinion about a group, yet religious groups who advocate the violent over throw of the government and the establishment of a theocracy falls under protected speech. From this side of the pond, Britain clearly needs to get it's priorities straight before the movie "Brazil" because a reality.
He may have been better off advocating the death of all Scientologists because the FSM needs their blood to build the greatest pirate ship of all time.
You're assume you don't need a license to modify, copy and then distribute copyrighted material for commercial purposes. Well, you do NEED a license to do that, otherwise, you just aren't allowed to do it.
The only thing that comes to mind is Mac only. Bento (which from the write up is exactly what you want). I really think the only thing on Windows that really comes close is Microsoft Access and even that isn't what you're looking for.
If you are just doing tabulated data in a piece meal form, Excel with an Access back-end will do the trick, I'd be willing to be you're going to be able to find templates that help you start. You could also use File-maker (which is overkill, but easy to use) and go to the user community for starting templates.
What do they expect? Industrialized societies destroy their surroundings. From shipping products, to driving to the store to buy it, all the way to the manufacturing process. The best you can honestly hope for these days is that the product doesn't poison your kids and even that isn't a guarantee. To call out "consoles" over, say computers in general, is merely an attempt to ride the media buzz surrounding a market that isn't being hampered in the United States during it's recession.
To be honest, I could never take these guys seriously anyways. They aren't interested to solutions or working within the economic reality of the planet, they seem to want to end the industrial revolution and have everyone go back to farming. Nuclear power, nope. Working with companies to make an imperfect process better, while letting it remain imperfect, nope can't do that rather continue to yell at them from over here rather than work with them. It's all or none.
Nature conservancy is an example of a environmental group actually making a real difference. Green peace is a bunch of self important attention whores.
Windows has never been nor never will be designed for the "common man". The entire Windows experience is designed entirely to be put on corporate networks. It's designed to be set up and maintained by a geek. The corporate market is the base of income for Microsoft. The users are non-technical, so there are attempts at "ease of use", but when it comes down to it, features make it into Windows because the corporate market is moving in that direction. Every now and then home users get features too, but they account for such a small amount of computer purchases that Microsoft can ignore them and rely on the network effect to force them to use Windows at home.
Linux suffers the same kind of mentality, but in a difference direction. Desktop Linux is designed for it's user base, which is programmers, network admins, and more technically inclined users. They find, on the whole, "Linux" (insert favorite distribution here) to be on par with Windows. From their point of view, they are right. My mother would highly disagree. When it comes to generic operating system environments, Linux has a STRONG advantage. The level of customization possible due to the availability of the source has allowed manufactures to created smaller integrated products that are easy to use, but generally trade a degree of functionality for that (Nokia and Asus come immediately to mind)
OS X is designed for environments where administration cost is a very big concern and for people doing design work. On the whole, Apple ignores a large part of the development community and relies on making tools that encourage specific practices. This is done under the philosophy that any developer that wants more Windows like dev environment will just end up messing up OS X, via the user and this will reflect poorly on Apple. Hence their reportedly large market share on the home user market, "it just works" when compared to its competitors is a valid comparison. Because of how they treat developers, their market will never grow outside of it's established core base.
I think you're missing the most important part. Touch interfaces that are being used in mass production are in the form of Point Of Sale machines and Cell Phones.
A touch based point of sale machine, 30 years ago, would cost so much more than a cash register that it wouldn't even remotely have a chance. Cells Phones, well, a touch based Car Phone that could check your e-mail in 80s would have been bought by SOMEONE, but the rest of the population would have wondered WTF it was for.
Other than those two applications, touch interfaces fail. Neither one of them were feasible to use on a large scale until the last couple years recently.
If you read the translation of letter that's being sold, you can see a little further into his views of religion and Spinoza, more specifically:
"As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the priviliege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one.
A belief in a world with natural and supernatural causes is on par with merely accepting supernatural causes. His reference to Spinoza is to his art work as it relates to his philosophical views on pantheism and substance. His creation of art was an expression of "God" in the form of "substance". This relates to Einstein's reference to "God" when he talks about science, to him, "God" is science. He's not supernatural, he's all around you and expressed in equations.
Combine those two sentences with the rest of the passage and I interpret Einstein as being VERY atheistic and a natural extension of Spinoza's work, which at his time was also thought to be far to materialistic to be of any value in expressing "God". This letter clearly puts the matter to rest, when Einstein talks of "God" he's not talking about any "God" the people in the society around you believe in, he's talking about the expression of nature in it's physical form.
Apple is doing the same thing all other OEMs do: update current machines based of demand and inventory and introduce new machines when best possible. Apple has already updated the Macbook, Macbook Pro and iMac this year. All without any Steve Jobs announcement. New products come at conferences, usually Macworld, but not always. The electronics industry LOVES to annouce new products at conferences and conventions, because the press is there. Apple is no different. What causes frustration with Windows people is that with Mac, you only have ONE company doing the announcing, hence there is no overlap to make up for the timely gaps in the machines. If you put any Windows OEM under the same microscope as Apple, you end up being able to make the same observations about price problems in the product line.
Additionally, comparisons of price usually aren't even possible with Windows machines because of two things. Apple's love of putting nearly useless hardware in every Mac (Bluetooth, Video Camera, Wireless N, Gigabit networking) that do add value to the machine, but is either not needed or overkill for people's needs AND the inclusion of software that barebones machines just don't have (iLife).
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't aware that Google was an ISP in France. My point about Google losing it's common carrier status by going along with this is not addressed your statement in any way and is strictly irrelevant.
US citizens and companies are bound to US law when outside the country. When you agree to willingly give up your common carrier status in France, that can be used in court in the States to demonstrate you are no longer a common carrier. They may or may not win, something like that hasn't been brought up yet, but it's a foreseeable problem that is easily avoided. It is for that reason that no company that does business in the States would ever sign up for something like this, because to do otherwise just invites trouble.
Also, you know the reason someone like Google won't sign up to be willing participants is because it's signing away their common carrier status. That will have HUGE legal repercussions in the United States. They will be suddenly responsible for even the most minor violation and susceptible to law suit. No company in their right mind would do that. It's not going to be out of the kindness of their hearts. If they could help nail people who are violating copyright without carrying any legal responsibility at all, I'm sure they would.
I'm not seeing a problem with this. You don't have a right to "share" material that is copyrighted by someone other than you if they didn't give you consent. You may not like this, you can come up with all the (possibly valid) reasons things should not be that way. It's not for YOU to decide. The only real problem is how something like this is enforced. I'm willing to bet it will be done with a false positive rate that won't go over well with the French people, who from this side of the pond seem the kind of people who don't put up with their government doing stupid things (I seriously commend them for their idea of how to go on strike).
The solution is to migrate TCP/IP to a public key system. The entire protocol.
I'm not sure what your definition of free is, but in order for me to get a copy of IE, I would need to BUY a copy of Windows. It's like saying DirectX 10 is free. It's not free, they are charging for it.
So the camera I have now will magically follow this, as will the untold millions of cameras currently in use.
I prefer the good old fashioned calling people out method of enforcement. I've had a professor who answered peoples cell phones, I've seen a recital stopped completely because of a camera and the person kicked out. Anyhow, anything I own should never be under your control. Sorry, but it's just that way.
The only reason ideas of this caliber get used in mass is so that those who have power can remove what little power the rest have. Organize protest, sorry you cameras can't work, it's for the safety of those around you.
I'm also seriously beginning to think that there is a group of people in this world who consider better communication and record keeping on the part of the masses is a bad thing and should be stopped.
Here's the funny thing. You OWN a copy of a defective movie. You have every right to back it up before it can no longer be read. It's not a rental, it's a purchase of a self destructing disk at a reduced price. In this case, it's not pirating.
A metadata based filesystem, that's how. There's an API for writing a file, which I'm assuming Microsoft controls. That API could store not only creation and used dates in the written files, but who "created" it. It could also record if it's ever been launched, assuming it's an application. Since of course Microsoft is well aware of the existence of Safari, any .exe file created by Safari, but never launched could trigger a dialog asking you if it's safe. That same thing for Explorer could be done too.
With the big exception of the TCP/IP stack and basic command line tools (FTP, telnet, etc). Remember, we know these because the BSD license specifically requires the original authors copyright to be shipped with the modified binaries.
Nasa has pointed out to news agencies that only 5 of the 13 previous landings have been successful. Odds are, as always, this is not going to work. As slow as this science goes, taking several years from start of the project to a result, that a whole lot of pressure. The two most dangerous parts of this trip are the take off and landing. It's "easy" to adjust the craft when it's moving over 10 months in space, here we have a 7 minute fall from 12,000 mph to 5 mph. A LOT can go wrong.
Here's to hoping we learn something about Mars again. If not, as always, we need to keep trying. If it weren't for these people, things we take for granted in daily life wouldn't exist.
They're shaping it by send malformed packets, causing bittorrent connections to be reset. The process is well known now and easily proved in court.
You're extremely limited to the modifications. Basically you can sharpie the DVD, hit it with a sledgehammer, things like that.
First sale allows you to distribute modified works, but not copies of the modified work. The key difference being that you can buy a book, rip out pages, draw all in it, turn it into a mosaic or what not. You can not photocopy the book, leaving the book in tact, modify the copy then sell that copy, even if it's bundled with the book. This is true for software too.
Even if software licenses have no bearing what so ever, Apple still has a claim against Pystar. Pystar is modifying, copying, then distributing copyrighted material. You NEED a license to do that. First sale doesn't allow you to distribute copies, even if it's with the original work.
BUT...* no normal program has any valid reason to run some complex unpack/decrypt/re-order process on code before running it.
Mask the virus as being a DRM process. In the near future, proper corporate anti-virus software will make an attempt to ignore "valid" DRM encryption/decryption for files and software.
Skimming this board I was thinking to myself, what will Windows have in the future? More DRM so companies can control distribution of their files. Not only that, talk about the perfect way to control who can run a binary. I can see people doing this kind of thing on purpose for "valid" code. What's to stop malware from hiding itself as a valid DRM system?
Sedition is illegal where I'm from and a very much prosecutable offense, especially in a time of war. Where as libel is merely a civil matter and typically only applies to willful falsehoods not personal opinion.
LIke I said, Britain has it's priorities backwards.
I make no claim that the United States is some form of utopia when it comes to how police power is used. The fact of the matter is, any officer giving a ticket to someone in the US for having a sign that labels a group a cult would have that ticket immediately thrown out of the court. You're not going to find a judge in the US that would enforce that law, if it even existed. It seems that Europeans have adapted a policy of banning "hate speech" while at the same time allowing minority groups to commit sedition for the purposes of establishing a theocracy. They do a lot of things right, don't get me wrong, but it's really a case of having broken priorities.
Can someone explain to me how this works. Someone can be summoned because they express a non-violent opinion about a group, yet religious groups who advocate the violent over throw of the government and the establishment of a theocracy falls under protected speech. From this side of the pond, Britain clearly needs to get it's priorities straight before the movie "Brazil" because a reality.
He may have been better off advocating the death of all Scientologists because the FSM needs their blood to build the greatest pirate ship of all time.
You're assume you don't need a license to modify, copy and then distribute copyrighted material for commercial purposes. Well, you do NEED a license to do that, otherwise, you just aren't allowed to do it.
The only thing that comes to mind is Mac only. Bento (which from the write up is exactly what you want). I really think the only thing on Windows that really comes close is Microsoft Access and even that isn't what you're looking for.
If you are just doing tabulated data in a piece meal form, Excel with an Access back-end will do the trick, I'd be willing to be you're going to be able to find templates that help you start. You could also use File-maker (which is overkill, but easy to use) and go to the user community for starting templates.
What do they expect? Industrialized societies destroy their surroundings. From shipping products, to driving to the store to buy it, all the way to the manufacturing process. The best you can honestly hope for these days is that the product doesn't poison your kids and even that isn't a guarantee. To call out "consoles" over, say computers in general, is merely an attempt to ride the media buzz surrounding a market that isn't being hampered in the United States during it's recession.
To be honest, I could never take these guys seriously anyways. They aren't interested to solutions or working within the economic reality of the planet, they seem to want to end the industrial revolution and have everyone go back to farming. Nuclear power, nope. Working with companies to make an imperfect process better, while letting it remain imperfect, nope can't do that rather continue to yell at them from over here rather than work with them. It's all or none.
Nature conservancy is an example of a environmental group actually making a real difference. Green peace is a bunch of self important attention whores.
Windows has never been nor never will be designed for the "common man". The entire Windows experience is designed entirely to be put on corporate networks. It's designed to be set up and maintained by a geek. The corporate market is the base of income for Microsoft. The users are non-technical, so there are attempts at "ease of use", but when it comes down to it, features make it into Windows because the corporate market is moving in that direction. Every now and then home users get features too, but they account for such a small amount of computer purchases that Microsoft can ignore them and rely on the network effect to force them to use Windows at home.
Linux suffers the same kind of mentality, but in a difference direction. Desktop Linux is designed for it's user base, which is programmers, network admins, and more technically inclined users. They find, on the whole, "Linux" (insert favorite distribution here) to be on par with Windows. From their point of view, they are right. My mother would highly disagree. When it comes to generic operating system environments, Linux has a STRONG advantage. The level of customization possible due to the availability of the source has allowed manufactures to created smaller integrated products that are easy to use, but generally trade a degree of functionality for that (Nokia and Asus come immediately to mind)
OS X is designed for environments where administration cost is a very big concern and for people doing design work. On the whole, Apple ignores a large part of the development community and relies on making tools that encourage specific practices. This is done under the philosophy that any developer that wants more Windows like dev environment will just end up messing up OS X, via the user and this will reflect poorly on Apple. Hence their reportedly large market share on the home user market, "it just works" when compared to its competitors is a valid comparison. Because of how they treat developers, their market will never grow outside of it's established core base.
I think you're missing the most important part. Touch interfaces that are being used in mass production are in the form of Point Of Sale machines and Cell Phones.
A touch based point of sale machine, 30 years ago, would cost so much more than a cash register that it wouldn't even remotely have a chance. Cells Phones, well, a touch based Car Phone that could check your e-mail in 80s would have been bought by SOMEONE, but the rest of the population would have wondered WTF it was for.
Other than those two applications, touch interfaces fail. Neither one of them were feasible to use on a large scale until the last couple years recently.
If you read the translation of letter that's being sold, you can see a little further into his views of religion and Spinoza, more specifically:
"As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the priviliege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one.
A belief in a world with natural and supernatural causes is on par with merely accepting supernatural causes. His reference to Spinoza is to his art work as it relates to his philosophical views on pantheism and substance. His creation of art was an expression of "God" in the form of "substance". This relates to Einstein's reference to "God" when he talks about science, to him, "God" is science. He's not supernatural, he's all around you and expressed in equations.
Combine those two sentences with the rest of the passage and I interpret Einstein as being VERY atheistic and a natural extension of Spinoza's work, which at his time was also thought to be far to materialistic to be of any value in expressing "God". This letter clearly puts the matter to rest, when Einstein talks of "God" he's not talking about any "God" the people in the society around you believe in, he's talking about the expression of nature in it's physical form.
Apple is doing the same thing all other OEMs do: update current machines based of demand and inventory and introduce new machines when best possible. Apple has already updated the Macbook, Macbook Pro and iMac this year. All without any Steve Jobs announcement. New products come at conferences, usually Macworld, but not always. The electronics industry LOVES to annouce new products at conferences and conventions, because the press is there. Apple is no different. What causes frustration with Windows people is that with Mac, you only have ONE company doing the announcing, hence there is no overlap to make up for the timely gaps in the machines. If you put any Windows OEM under the same microscope as Apple, you end up being able to make the same observations about price problems in the product line.
Additionally, comparisons of price usually aren't even possible with Windows machines because of two things. Apple's love of putting nearly useless hardware in every Mac (Bluetooth, Video Camera, Wireless N, Gigabit networking) that do add value to the machine, but is either not needed or overkill for people's needs AND the inclusion of software that barebones machines just don't have (iLife).