OK, hypothetical question: As far as I know, making mp3's of music you own is legal, yes? One buys used cd's from the local used cd shop(s) with cash. This person then copies mp3's for private use. Later, they sell the cd's back to the store (also for cash).
Is this person supposed to delete the mp3's for music they no longer own?
If they don't, I don't suppose that's precisely the same crime as illegal downloading/filesharing?
I just thought this was an interesting formulation of the situation.
IANAL but at some point isn't someone going to question the logic of this statement? It's become such a truism of The Law (tm) that nobody thinks about it.
Let's look at her case. If you took the totality of all extant Federal statues that apply to all US citizens, PLUS The totality of all New York state statutes that apply to all New York citizens, PLUS The sum of all city ordinances applicable to her city, borough, neighborhood, whatever:
You'd probably have more text than a single person could read in an ENTIRE LIFETIME of reading 24 hours per day.
Logically, how can anyone be expected to know all the laws?!?!?!?
I know as a practical matter, "ignorance is not an excuse" MUST be the rule, or people would always claim ignorance. But really, how is this dichotomy resolved, aside from us all just 'agreeing to ignore it'?
This was modded "INSIGHTFUL"? Too bad there's not a "+1 POLEMIC" rating.
First paragraph - pretty much spot-on. Second para, 1st sentence - still ok, but drifting into empty spitefulness 2nd P, 2nd s: hard veer into nonsense.
"I doubt anyone much in America sees the oxymoron of this" - Based on what, your own HUMUNGOUS generalizations? Your fervently-held political beliefs?
I think you were right at the beginning. *MOST* of America really doesn't have anything to do with the world, and doesn't want to. Why? Because they don't have to. Provincialism all over the world is being invaded by American products, advertising, and culture (such as it is). SELF-EVIDENTLY, Americans (with no cultural heritage to speak of) don't really mind this.
Thus the furious protests against "globalization" - yes, American culture is shallow and self-serving, but at least it's more benign (as was the British Empire before it) than pretty much any conceivable global alternative, as well as a LARGE number of "local" dogmas, no matter where you are from.
"And the people cling to the national myth out of their personal fears, and in part because the people against the national mythos are for sociological reasons often even more dysfunctional than those for it." I do confess this is a great statement.
how could someone not notice that 2 main fileservers were suddenly offline?
Maybe in a business, but this is government, silly. a) nobody's working b) who would they tell if they DID notice?
If the Australians are anything like the US Customs folks, you can't reach them during business hours 0830-and 1630, and NOBODY is working before 0829 or after 1631.
Of course, then they could have come out with the PalmSprings device powered by solar cells.
Name it the PalmSprings Eternal.
Re:Hm, wildly successful brand name...LET'S CHANGE
on
Palm Reveals New Name
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, it's certainly possible but I rather doubt it. Digiboard had been operating for years under that name, only changed the name after the founder JS left the company and it moved to big fancy new building in EP. Methinks it WASN'T a trademark dispute, OR it was a case of Digi incompetence and someone stole their brand name out from under them.
Hm, wildly successful brand name...LET'S CHANGE IT
on
Palm Reveals New Name
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I don't understand why companies INSIST on doing this? Is this some sort of corporate fear that their brand name is watered-down by ubiquity?
It seems that companies who are so successful that their name BECOMES the product would be happy.
I watched this happen to Digiboard. They were THE standard product in their line but then went & changed their name to Digi International. D'oh.
I would have thought a shortage of power might have had something to do with NIMBY environmentalists (cf. Walter Cronkite) fighting the development of every new power source tooth & nail for the last 40 years.
FWIW, WW2OL (World War 2 Online) is a MMOG that ALSO uses dynamic flight modelling, rather than static tables.
Plus, it's a lot more interesting seeing the dynamic model in action when there's a D.520 behind you being held off by your (human player) tailgunner, while you thread your way through (human controlled) AAA fire, dropping bombs in support of your (human player) buddies on the ground as infantry and tanks.
OK, there is some AI in the AAA, but everything else is played by real people.
And you think a short-approach to EGE (Vail, CO) is stressful? Ha!
Let me see if I understand this - the point of the Salon piece is: Flight sims are getting so good, terrorists could use them to learn to crash planes into buildings.
Apparently Mohammed Atta et al aren't so sanguine about the quality of simulators - THEY all chose to spend $000's to go to flight school.
Oh wait, so they didn't use PC simulators at all and they still learned to crash planes into buildings?
Well, here's my secret: Netflix. I find exercise as boring as anyone, and due to earlier sports injuries, simply cannot do anything with any impact. So I bought a recumbent bike and a nice home theater system. Now 4 days a week I spend an hour on the bike (300 calories burned....gosh they go away slowly), AND get to see all the movies that I've always 'meant' to see. I run through 15-20 movies per month, and am at least staying stable at my weight.
Diet helps too, I hope: 1 liter OJ and a bagel for breakfast Subway Club with diet pepsi & baked lays for lunch dinner of whatever's made, usually something moderate (a couple pieces of pizza, etc). 2-3 liters of water a day in addition
Gauss gun (incidentally theorized in Traveller long before Battletech was a gleam in FASA's eye; envisioned in Sci Fi before that - I'm guessing in The Weapons Shop, off the top o' my head): using electromagnets to accellerate a ferrous projectile without chemical explosives.
Metalstorm: a single barrel with multiple projectiles in it; each is propelled by a standard (essentially) propellant which is layered between the slugs. First the one closest to the muzzle fires, then the next, etc. They are electronically fired, but that's it, otherwise it's pretty much a normal gun. (*and as regards their silly "million rounds" claim, well, yeah, it's a huge ARRAY (not a beowulf cluster, calm down....) of these things, all firing simultaneously. So sure, I could weld a thousand machine gun barrels together and get a 2 million rpm weapon for a VERY short period of time.
But yes, the defense department is funding research into metalstorm (a waste, IMO) AND 'gauss' weapons.
OK, I'm a pro-gun-ownership person myself, although I don't own any guns. I also happen to be a strict constitutionalist, meaning I hold the framers and their ideas in very high regard and the current legislative Supreme Court in equally low regard.
But I will point out that if you read not only the clause, but the text of the different colonies' suggested amendments and correspondence around this issue, it is abundantly clear that the reason the various "right to keep and bear arms" proposals were made were entirely in the context of PREVENTING the establishment of a standing army in the United States.
One could thus either say that SINCE we have a standing army, private ownership of guns should be strictly regulated since the point is now moot.
OR, one could conclude that, with the establishment of a standing army by the United States government, we have progressed DIRECTLY down the road toward an over-intrusive and domineering Federal Government. In which case the citizenry should fight ever stronger AGAINST the further restriction of firearms because it is exactly this which the Founding Fathers prophecied in the case of an over-powerful Federal system: the disarming of the citizenry as a prelude to tyranny.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, hypothetical question:
As far as I know, making mp3's of music you own is legal, yes?
One buys used cd's from the local used cd shop(s) with cash. This person then copies mp3's for private use. Later, they sell the cd's back to the store (also for cash).
Is this person supposed to delete the mp3's for music they no longer own?
If they don't, I don't suppose that's precisely the same crime as illegal downloading/filesharing?
I just thought this was an interesting formulation of the situation.
I was waiting for SOMEONE to say this.
IANAL but at some point isn't someone going to question the logic of this statement? It's become such a truism of The Law (tm) that nobody thinks about it.
Let's look at her case.
If you took the totality of all extant Federal statues that apply to all US citizens, PLUS
The totality of all New York state statutes that apply to all New York citizens, PLUS
The sum of all city ordinances applicable to her city, borough, neighborhood, whatever:
You'd probably have more text than a single person could read in an ENTIRE LIFETIME of reading 24 hours per day.
Logically, how can anyone be expected to know all the laws?!?!?!?
I know as a practical matter, "ignorance is not an excuse" MUST be the rule, or people would always claim ignorance. But really, how is this dichotomy resolved, aside from us all just 'agreeing to ignore it'?
This was modded "INSIGHTFUL"? Too bad there's not a "+1 POLEMIC" rating.
First paragraph - pretty much spot-on.
Second para, 1st sentence - still ok, but drifting into empty spitefulness
2nd P, 2nd s: hard veer into nonsense.
"I doubt anyone much in America sees the oxymoron of this" - Based on what, your own HUMUNGOUS generalizations? Your fervently-held political beliefs?
I think you were right at the beginning. *MOST* of America really doesn't have anything to do with the world, and doesn't want to. Why? Because they don't have to. Provincialism all over the world is being invaded by American products, advertising, and culture (such as it is). SELF-EVIDENTLY, Americans (with no cultural heritage to speak of) don't really mind this.
Thus the furious protests against "globalization" - yes, American culture is shallow and self-serving, but at least it's more benign (as was the British Empire before it) than pretty much any conceivable global alternative, as well as a LARGE number of "local" dogmas, no matter where you are from.
"And the people cling to the national myth out of their personal fears, and in part because the people against the national mythos are for sociological reasons often even more dysfunctional than those for it."
I do confess this is a great statement.
Let's see if that logic holds up, in a slightly less-politically-correct" example:
If those experts had respected the Moral Majority who protested that homosexuality was unnatural, how many lives would have been saved?
How many people have died of AIDS vs. CJS?
Nice argument, might be a bit of a slippery slope to invoke the "it's not natural" claus, you think?
Or, of course it could be ghosts USING infrasound to make people feel fear, revulsion, etc.
Clever ghosts.
Maybe in a business, but this is government, silly.
a) nobody's working
b) who would they tell if they DID notice?
If the Australians are anything like the US Customs folks, you can't reach them during business hours 0830-and 1630, and NOBODY is working before 0829 or after 1631.
"...it's a good way to avoid congestion..."
Are there many people who can afford $300,000 cars who spend a lot of time fighting commuter traffic jams?
Probably Australian. Everyone has priorities.
Rouge? Is that a game by Dan Bunten?
If you don't find this amusing, it won't be more amusing if I have to explain it to you.
Of course, then they could have come out with the PalmSprings device powered by solar cells.
Name it the PalmSprings Eternal.
Hmm, it's certainly possible but I rather doubt it. Digiboard had been operating for years under that name, only changed the name after the founder JS left the company and it moved to big fancy new building in EP. Methinks it WASN'T a trademark dispute, OR it was a case of Digi incompetence and someone stole their brand name out from under them.
I don't understand why companies INSIST on doing this? Is this some sort of corporate fear that their brand name is watered-down by ubiquity?
It seems that companies who are so successful that their name BECOMES the product would be happy.
I watched this happen to Digiboard. They were THE standard product in their line but then went & changed their name to Digi International. D'oh.
Deregulation to blame?
Hm, funny.
Demand...increasing. Supply....decreasing.
I would have thought a shortage of power might have had something to do with NIMBY environmentalists (cf. Walter Cronkite) fighting the development of every new power source tooth & nail for the last 40 years.
But no, I'm sure it's REPUBLICANS fault.
I thought they were called "eyelids"?
Haven't listened to much Britney, have you?
DSP still ain't there.
"completely in the pockets of corporations"
Glad you supplied references for this, else people might think you're just a wanker with a political axe to grind.
"I hear this ship's unsinkable!"
FWIW, WW2OL (World War 2 Online) is a MMOG that ALSO uses dynamic flight modelling, rather than static tables.
Plus, it's a lot more interesting seeing the dynamic model in action when there's a D.520 behind you being held off by your (human player) tailgunner, while you thread your way through (human controlled) AAA fire, dropping bombs in support of your (human player) buddies on the ground as infantry and tanks.
OK, there is some AI in the AAA, but everything else is played by real people.
And you think a short-approach to EGE (Vail, CO) is stressful? Ha!
Let me see if I understand this - the point of the Salon piece is: Flight sims are getting so good, terrorists could use them to learn to crash planes into buildings.
Apparently Mohammed Atta et al aren't so sanguine about the quality of simulators - THEY all chose to spend $000's to go to flight school.
Oh wait, so they didn't use PC simulators at all and they still learned to crash planes into buildings?
So what's your point again?
..and the RIAA will show the loss in sales as "proof" that filesharing is killing them.
Hey, it's at least as solid as the evidence they've shown until now.
And to think, I thought "high-end audiophiles" was a synonym for "self-rationalizing snob".
Boy was I mistaken!
Well, here's my secret: Netflix.
I find exercise as boring as anyone, and due to earlier sports injuries, simply cannot do anything with any impact. So I bought a recumbent bike and a nice home theater system. Now 4 days a week I spend an hour on the bike (300 calories burned....gosh they go away slowly), AND get to see all the movies that I've always 'meant' to see.
I run through 15-20 movies per month, and am at least staying stable at my weight.
Diet helps too, I hope:
1 liter OJ and a bagel for breakfast
Subway Club with diet pepsi & baked lays for lunch
dinner of whatever's made, usually something moderate (a couple pieces of pizza, etc).
2-3 liters of water a day in addition
I'd take old ones, I'm not that picky.
Metalstorm = TOTALLY different tech.
Gauss gun (incidentally theorized in Traveller long before Battletech was a gleam in FASA's eye; envisioned in Sci Fi before that - I'm guessing in The Weapons Shop, off the top o' my head): using electromagnets to accellerate a ferrous projectile without chemical explosives.
Metalstorm: a single barrel with multiple projectiles in it; each is propelled by a standard (essentially) propellant which is layered between the slugs. First the one closest to the muzzle fires, then the next, etc. They are electronically fired, but that's it, otherwise it's pretty much a normal gun. (*and as regards their silly "million rounds" claim, well, yeah, it's a huge ARRAY (not a beowulf cluster, calm down....) of these things, all firing simultaneously. So sure, I could weld a thousand machine gun barrels together and get a 2 million rpm weapon for a VERY short period of time.
But yes, the defense department is funding research into metalstorm (a waste, IMO) AND 'gauss' weapons.
OK, I'm a pro-gun-ownership person myself, although I don't own any guns. I also happen to be a strict constitutionalist, meaning I hold the framers and their ideas in very high regard and the current legislative Supreme Court in equally low regard.
But I will point out that if you read not only the clause, but the text of the different colonies' suggested amendments and correspondence around this issue, it is abundantly clear that the reason the various "right to keep and bear arms" proposals were made were entirely in the context of PREVENTING the establishment of a standing army in the United States.
One could thus either say that SINCE we have a standing army, private ownership of guns should be strictly regulated since the point is now moot.
OR, one could conclude that, with the establishment of a standing army by the United States government, we have progressed DIRECTLY down the road toward an over-intrusive and domineering Federal Government. In which case the citizenry should fight ever stronger AGAINST the further restriction of firearms because it is exactly this which the Founding Fathers prophecied in the case of an over-powerful Federal system: the disarming of the citizenry as a prelude to tyranny.
Take your pick.