Why? Isn't this the new way to handle economic competitivity worldwide nowadays? Companies claim that having their IP used elsewhere stops innovation; in truth when users will be locked up into your strategy no company will have to bother innovating anymore.
I think accepting Christ as Messiah would represent a pretty drastic shift in their faith.
Saying this would kind of imply that Judaism defines itself as a reaction to Christianity... This is a rather an anachronical point of view.
I would have imagined that following the rituals and rules written in the Old Testament would have been enough to define the jewish faith. In that respect we have to bear in mind that Jesus was Jewish and to my knowledge has never instructed acting differently to the scriptures and just bought a different approach. Still I am ready to be proven wrong.
I suggest you just walk by... If you do not like the principle noone is forcing you to donate.
You may find it more normal to force licence fee down the users throats to pay for developer's meetings.
Besides every donator is not necessarily a US resident who will get tax reduction.
I still think that honesty really *is* the best policy. Let your children know the weaker, less perfect side of people.
On the whole I agree with you, besides there is NO freedom without choice, and no choice without knowledge.
However there is also a limit to this system : Even if I can take the risk to let my 18 months old fall now and then as this will teach her where are her own limits on what she can and can't do, I cannot let her conduct that experiment from the top of a step-ladder.... yet. When she is older and has fully mastered her balance she may move on to using a ladder.
...All this to get to the point : There is a time for everything.
I spend a lot of time with all my children on the computer and over the internet. As a result the 2 older ones are very computer litterate, and are completely able to use it when I am not there either to control content or to help them understand the meaning of information that they are still to young to understand by themselves. So, even if I agree that 'definition of what's "appropriate" differs from ' other people, it cannot be a bad thing to agree on a minimal consensus.
Creating a restricted domain is not a bad thing in itself, even though these restrictions should not be a replacement for parental responsabilities.
Talking of which... I agree that the fact of you not having children does not make your agumentation invalid, OTOH I think you have to live through parental responsibily to fully understand the weight of it.
It locks the text down to one paper layout format, destroying all of the advantages computers can bring to perusing text. Microsoft Word(tm) you can at least repaginate.
You can view PDFs because you have Acrobat reader installed. This is precisely what PDF is about, and also having platform independant layout for a document. PDF documents are not meant to be edited, only the source document is. If the document you read have a messy layout, this is a design issue, not a file format one.
It's Pogo only ISP... And they charge £7.99/month for access.
Besides this extract from the FAQ does not make it look that good. Pogo works well with millions of web pages, but pages that use the following may not work as intended by the designers: audio and video streaming (Real, Quicktime, MPEG), animated GIFs, DHTML, CSS, plug-ins, ActiveX and Java applets (except Flash 4). JavaScript requiring anything more than the level 0 DOM or a mouse action (e.g. mouseover) may also experience some confusion.
Doesn't work as expected with GIFS, DHTML, CSS, plug-ins, java, javascript... So, just plain hypertext hey?
It is probably important to differentiate, the action from the intent of the action:
In the case you state there is definitely intention of destroying
In Reuters case they were just requesting information. (with the intent of publishing it, but that's what they get paid for)
I would say one is wrong the other isn't.
Anyway in Intentia situation, this would be like if you got sued for viewing and publishing hidden easter eggs on software...
What would be the point in that?
Having Linux people pointed at as pirate and thugs. As has been mentionned before cleaning up could have been a good idea.
Besides, penguins eat fish not butterflies.
It's about time that I rushed out and claimed patents over bus stops, lamp posts and mail boxes, before public transportation, town hall or Post office do.
Frankly, trade mark on street furniture!!!! This is really getting out of hand!!!
I do not know enough about UK law to accept or refute these arguments. However my main point is that ISPs are not making their choices on philantropic grounds.
This is perfectly obvious:"Cost" and nothing else. The legal matter does not appear to be such an issue when it increases a company's revenue or share value (faulty tax declarations, altered accountancy, etc...)
I feel sure that if the british government offered extra money or tax deduction for such practices, they would all rush for it.
Re:This isn't very useful - except maybe as a back
on
Downloading The Mind
·
· Score: 1
Metaphysically this is about as practical as putting your soul in a brass pot for storage until you get your new body ready.
Just one little question: what do you do with the mind of that new body before installing yours?
Passeport is not THE only way for a Windows user to anthenticate online. The point is that you are just adding an extra one(And probably not one easy to get extra information about)!!
> Well I don't like RMS due to many reasons, mainly that he follows his ideas like a religious fanatic altogether with some very faint ideals on how the world should be.
Whether one likes him or not is irrelevant. There may be after all, similarities between religion and free software. Judeo-Christian religions (for an example I know) pre-supose that every human being is a sinner. Nevertheless each one of these religion keep on holding a strict position on the guidelines their followers should comply with.
To a certain extent RMS is acting in the same way. It is then your choice to be or not a sinner. However it is crucial having some moral authority giving a general direction even if none of us take the straight path. As far as I am concerned, it is RMS approach of software that has lead me to using GNU/Linux, not hatred of proprietary software, and even if I do not agree with every philosophical point of vue RMS may have, I am greateful to him for expressing it, as it at least remains good food for thought.
Without going into whether online music sharing is bad or good, music is a product, and taking a commercial product for nothing is called theft... (and by this description I may be described as a thief myself)
However I am surprised by all the posts coming in a massive outcry. There is nothing surprising : The the whole principle of p2p is based on ignoring traditionnal morality to bring personnal satisfaction at no cost or price. So this is not even taking it a step further it just another instance of a same concept!
I agree with you... But if you look carefully at section 3.1 where the authors describe the algorithm, just after the (4) " Now send this operative on a mission with intent to harm, complete with weapons or explosives"
This should make sense :
*the CAPS algorithm and parameters are unknown,
* you do not know what information the system contains concerning a given individual.
* A random selection is included in the system
Because of these three factors, you cannot categorize what kind of people get flagged.
I suppose this is why the authors claim terrorists would have to send the same individual.
I once watched a program on how French customs dealt with drug smugglers. It seems that most often they know who they are going to search before the plane even lands. One of the information they were using was how often the person travels. I have personally experienced this when travelling for work throughout Europe: on one of my flights I got pulled aside by the Norwegian customs and my luggage was searched. Based on this knowledge, one could assume that frequent travellers may also be a relevant parameter to the system. Therefore sending six times the same individual would really make him stick out of the pack.
Slashdot Mirror
So that means that if I buy a bottle of cola, I cannot fill it with water after?
Why? Isn't this the new way to handle economic competitivity worldwide nowadays?
Companies claim that having their IP used elsewhere stops innovation; in truth when users will be locked up into your strategy no company will have to bother innovating anymore.
I think accepting Christ as Messiah would represent a pretty drastic shift in their faith.
Saying this would kind of imply that Judaism defines itself as a reaction to Christianity... This is a rather an anachronical point of view.
I would have imagined that following the rituals and rules written in the Old Testament would have been enough to define the jewish faith.
In that respect we have to bear in mind that Jesus was Jewish and to my knowledge has never instructed acting differently to the scriptures and just bought a different approach. Still I am ready to be proven wrong.
Counterstrike in Russia
Quake in Afghanistan
And now Everquest if the Far East...
I hope we never have nuclear winter nights!!!
I suggest you just walk by... If you do not like the principle noone is forcing you to donate.
You may find it more normal to force licence fee down the users throats to pay for developer's meetings.
Besides every donator is not necessarily a US resident who will get tax reduction.
Hi hate sports on TV... and I hate even more the commercial aspect behind it... It seems the next "Tour de France" has found it's new gadget!! :-(
I still think that honesty really *is* the best policy. Let your children know the weaker, less perfect side of people.
...All this to get to the point : There is a time for everything.
On the whole I agree with you, besides there is NO freedom without choice, and no choice without knowledge.
However there is also a limit to this system : Even if I can take the risk to let my 18 months old fall now and then as this will teach her where are her own limits on what she can and can't do, I cannot let her conduct that experiment from the top of a step-ladder.... yet. When she is older and has fully mastered her balance she may move on to using a ladder.
I spend a lot of time with all my children on the computer and over the internet. As a result the 2 older ones are very computer litterate, and are completely able to use it when I am not there either to control content or to help them understand the meaning of information that they are still to young to understand by themselves. So, even if I agree that 'definition of what's "appropriate" differs from ' other people, it cannot be a bad thing to agree on a minimal consensus.
Creating a restricted domain is not a bad thing in itself, even though these restrictions should not be a replacement for parental responsabilities.
Talking of which... I agree that the fact of you not having children does not make your agumentation invalid, OTOH I think you have to live through parental responsibily to fully understand the weight of it.
Mental symptoms such as... "reluctance to go to work"...
Being reluctant to go to work is a mental symptom??? I thought it was the opposite!!!
So? What's the point in this question?
What really matters is whether the final product is up to it or not.
It locks the text down to one paper layout format, destroying all of the advantages computers can bring to perusing text. Microsoft Word(tm) you can at least repaginate.
You can view PDFs because you have Acrobat reader installed. This is precisely what PDF is about, and also having platform independant layout for a document. PDF documents are not meant to be edited, only the source document is.
If the document you read have a messy layout, this is a design issue, not a file format one.
It's Pogo only ISP... And they charge £7.99/month for access.
Besides this extract from the FAQ does not make it look that good.
Pogo works well with millions of web pages, but pages that use the following may not work as intended by the designers: audio and video streaming (Real, Quicktime, MPEG), animated GIFs, DHTML, CSS, plug-ins, ActiveX and Java applets (except Flash 4). JavaScript requiring anything more than the level 0 DOM or a mouse action (e.g. mouseover) may also experience some confusion.
Doesn't work as expected with GIFS, DHTML, CSS, plug-ins, java, javascript... So, just plain hypertext hey?
It is probably important to differentiate, the action from the intent of the action:
In the case you state there is definitely intention of destroying
In Reuters case they were just requesting information. (with the intent of publishing it, but that's what they get paid for)
I would say one is wrong the other isn't.
Anyway in Intentia situation, this would be like if you got sued for viewing and publishing hidden easter eggs on software...
Either they called it 3.0 and the release date was June 2004, or it was 2.6 and released June 2003...
What would be the point in that?
Having Linux people pointed at as pirate and thugs. As has been mentionned before cleaning up could have been a good idea.
Besides, penguins eat fish not butterflies.
It's about time that I rushed out and claimed patents over bus stops, lamp posts and mail boxes, before public transportation, town hall or Post office do.
Frankly, trade mark on street furniture!!!! This is really getting out of hand!!!
I do not know enough about UK law to accept or refute these arguments.
However my main point is that ISPs are not making their choices on philantropic grounds.
This is perfectly obvious :"Cost" and nothing else. The legal matter does not appear to be such an issue when it increases a company's revenue or share value (faulty tax declarations, altered accountancy, etc...)
I feel sure that if the british government offered extra money or tax deduction for such practices, they would all rush for it.
Metaphysically this is about as practical as putting your soul in a brass pot for storage until you get your new body ready.
Just one little question: what do you do with the mind of that new body before installing yours?
Passeport is not THE only way for a Windows user to anthenticate online. The point is that you are just adding an extra one(And probably not one easy to get extra information about)!!
Mmmm... maybe this would be the appropriate moment to recount once again.
Anyway DMCA was not Bush...
> Well I don't like RMS due to many reasons, mainly that he follows his ideas like a religious fanatic altogether with some very faint ideals on how the world should be.
Whether one likes him or not is irrelevant.
There may be after all, similarities between religion and free software. Judeo-Christian religions (for an example I know) pre-supose that every human being is a sinner. Nevertheless each one of these religion keep on holding a strict position on the guidelines their followers should comply with.
To a certain extent RMS is acting in the same way. It is then your choice to be or not a sinner. However it is crucial having some moral authority giving a general direction even if none of us take the straight path.
As far as I am concerned, it is RMS approach of software that has lead me to using GNU/Linux, not hatred of proprietary software, and even if I do not agree with every philosophical point of vue RMS may have, I am greateful to him for expressing it, as it at least remains good food for thought.
Yeah!!! And the FAQ page is copyrighted, you may be in trouble here!!!!
Without going into whether online music sharing is bad or good, music is a product, and taking a commercial product for nothing is called theft... (and by this description I may be described as a thief myself)
However I am surprised by all the posts coming in a massive outcry. There is nothing surprising : The the whole principle of p2p is based on ignoring traditionnal morality to bring personnal satisfaction at no cost or price. So this is not even taking it a step further it just another instance of a same concept!
So what?
I agree with you... But if you look carefully at section 3.1 where the authors describe the algorithm, just after the (4) " Now send this operative on a mission with intent to harm, complete with weapons or explosives" This should make sense :
*the CAPS algorithm and parameters are unknown,
* you do not know what information the system contains concerning a given individual.
* A random selection is included in the system
Because of these three factors, you cannot categorize what kind of people get flagged. I suppose this is why the authors claim terrorists would have to send the same individual.
I once watched a program on how French customs dealt with drug smugglers. It seems that most often they know who they are going to search before the plane even lands. One of the information they were using was how often the person travels. I have personally experienced this when travelling for work throughout Europe: on one of my flights I got pulled aside by the Norwegian customs and my luggage was searched.
Based on this knowledge, one could assume that frequent travellers may also be a relevant parameter to the system. Therefore sending six times the same individual would really make him stick out of the pack.