Just wondering where I can hide when they test this thing!
One nice thing about rockets (ala ICBMs) is that they have guidance systems. Does anybody realize what it would take to launch a rock from the moon, with no further guidance once launched, and be able to hit a given city, much less a specific target within the city? And that's not even considering the effect of the atmosphere both on the trajectory and in burning any winnebago-sized rock into nothing before it hit the ground.
IMO, this kind of scenario is only going to work if you aren't very choosy about what you hit.
... its just that its so damned far away, and the time between (getting there) is where the difficulty lays.
I think that point really needs to be emphasized. Its no big deal for an unmanned probe, but for a manned mission you have to consider everything from the very concrete need for food and water, to the less concrete physical and psychological fitness of the crew during such an expedition.
There's a big difference between a two-week trip to the moon with continuous real-time communication and the ability to abort and return to the earth in hours vs. two months with long delays in communication and days required to return the astronauts in case of emergency. Its a whole new level of "being out there".
And let's be honest, many, many rappers may not be in it for the money, but they're in it for the women. In no other places can you see so many fine looking women around so many butt ugly fat guys as in a rap music video.
Unfortunately for those rappers, those women are in it for the money!
Except that it is part of the SCO/IBM case. If you read SCO's last response to the court, they spent a lot of ink covering this issue between IBM and AutoZone.
So what are the legal definitions of fraud and extortion?
IIRC for it to be fraud you have to show that SCO intentionally midled someone. As whacked as it may seem, its possible SCO actually believes what its saying and it would be almost impossible (IMO) to prove they don't believe what they're saying.
I'm thinking at best they might be able to recover the cost of the licenses, which probably wouldn't be woth the effort.
Quite the contrary. Criminals have been breaking into windows for centuries. Windows have been a security threat since man upgraded from the cave -either full of holes or easy to break (or both).
First off, MS is making a statement they can't possibly know to be true. "We have never had vulnerabilities exploited before the patch was known." At best all they can say is never that they know of. Then we find out its a lie anyway because the article later says that "he could only think of one instance when a vulnerability was exploited before a patch was available".
Which is it, never or one? Or do they just not know?
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but its not the script kiddies MS is talking about that I'm worried about. Its the professional crackers who are willing to take the time to find a new exploit because they're after something more specific than bragging rights on some IRC channel. They are the ones MS isn't going to hear about because they don't go around submitting vulnerabilities or bragging about their escapades. They are the ones who are going to do real damage, and they are not the ones who are going to be stopped if MS stops issuing patches.
That's what I can't figure out. What's to get upset about? So they're essentially doing inventory tracking on a daily basis -keeping track of how much of what was sold for how much. Even if you use a credit card and tell the cashier your name address and telephone number, they (Anheuser-Busch) still don't know who walked out with what.
From the article it sounds like just a bunch of people walking through the stores punching what they see (prices, quantities...) into their PDA to uplod to the home office.
Reminds me of one of the other factors the RIAA seems to ignore when looking at sales trends. Many of us older folks have spent a lot of money not only on new music, but to replace all the vinyl we still wanted to listen to. I don't remember where I read it about a year ago, but it seems most of us have replaced everything we think worth replacing and have slowed our purchases to new stuff only.
IOW the upgrade gravy-train in over for the RIAA and they still haven't figured out how to maintain sales with only new stuff.
Its like that in most "industries". The farmer who grew the corn in your $3 box of corn flakes is lucky to get 10 cents for the corn that went into the box. Figure the cost doubles every step up the chain as "value" is added and you come up about right.
most employers will not do this for any appreciable amount of money
The reason being that when it comes time for the business to do its taxes, it wants to be able to deduct all business expenses -a big one being what they paid employees.
That problem is over-inflated here on Slashdot. Microsoft has proven time and time again that they cannot simply make a monopoly out of everything it touches. (XBOX, PocketPC, UltimateTV, etc...)
What version are these things? Seems it generally takes MS about 3 major revisions before they start to take over. It wasn't until Windows 3 that MS had a "good enough" GUI to shut Apple out, it wasn't until IE 3.0 that they had a "good enough" browser to close the door on Netscape...
Give them a little more time. Unfortunately, very few companies can afford to burn money until their version 3 product comes out before they start to see a return. That's one of the advantages of having a monopoly.
IMO its not an either/or thing. The number of viruses written is a combination of popularity and ease. MS is in the unenviable position of winning in both cases.
The one difference with the library is that they have to "loan out" a physical copy. During the time that physical copy is out, the library cannot loan it to anyone else. The mp3, however, can be "borrowed" by more than one person at a time and you are not deprived of its use while it is being loaned out.
Made me wonder if there was a way to do a PtP network where works were "moved" instead of "copied". That way you could more literally loan me your music and I would maybe be expected to return it to you when done.
How does a library get out of this type of "illegal distribution" mess? Someone can go in and photocopy and entire book,
First, the library did purchase a copy of the book, they don't make any copies themselves.
Second, it would cost more to photocopy most books than to buy them. OTOH you can also check out CDs from your local library and copy them fairly cheaply, but the library has demonstrated significant non-infringing use for several decades.
The quote mentioned in the article is 90% copyrighted. So in your scenario, its 100% copyrighted, but not 100% infringing. That's the problem I have with the 90% figure.
They are thus looking for an indication that at least a marginal percentage of usage is legal or non-copyright infringement use.
What I found interesting was the quote "One academic study found that 90 percent of the content exchanged on file-sharing networks is copyrighted, Frackman noted."
Personally, I'm amazed its not closer to 100%. That still doen't mean infringement. After all, isn't Linux copyrighted, and aren't I allowed to share it via a PtP network if I want?
So, IMO, the question isn't what percentage is copyrighted vs. public domain, but what percentage of it constitutes infringement?
Slashdot Mirror
Just wondering where I can hide when they test this thing!
One nice thing about rockets (ala ICBMs) is that they have guidance systems. Does anybody realize what it would take to launch a rock from the moon, with no further guidance once launched, and be able to hit a given city, much less a specific target within the city? And that's not even considering the effect of the atmosphere both on the trajectory and in burning any winnebago-sized rock into nothing before it hit the ground.
IMO, this kind of scenario is only going to work if you aren't very choosy about what you hit.
... its just that its so damned far away, and the time between (getting there) is where the difficulty lays.
I think that point really needs to be emphasized. Its no big deal for an unmanned probe, but for a manned mission you have to consider everything from the very concrete need for food and water, to the less concrete physical and psychological fitness of the crew during such an expedition.
There's a big difference between a two-week trip to the moon with continuous real-time communication and the ability to abort and return to the earth in hours vs. two months with long delays in communication and days required to return the astronauts in case of emergency. Its a whole new level of "being out there".
And let's be honest, many, many rappers may not be in it for the money, but they're in it for the women. In no other places can you see so many fine looking women around so many butt ugly fat guys as in a rap music video.
Unfortunately for those rappers, those women are in it for the money!
Someone's been watching too much Scooby Doo!
Except that it is part of the SCO/IBM case. If you read SCO's last response to the court, they spent a lot of ink covering this issue between IBM and AutoZone.
Of course many kinds of bacteria can swim too.
So what are the legal definitions of fraud and extortion?
IIRC for it to be fraud you have to show that SCO intentionally midled someone. As whacked as it may seem, its possible SCO actually believes what its saying and it would be almost impossible (IMO) to prove they don't believe what they're saying.
I'm thinking at best they might be able to recover the cost of the licenses, which probably wouldn't be woth the effort.
Quite the contrary. Criminals have been breaking into windows for centuries. Windows have been a security threat since man upgraded from the cave -either full of holes or easy to break (or both).
I guess MS really did name their OS accurately.
The arguement is still horribly flawed though.
Its flawed alright.
First off, MS is making a statement they can't possibly know to be true. "We have never had vulnerabilities exploited before the patch was known." At best all they can say is never that they know of. Then we find out its a lie anyway because the article later says that "he could only think of one instance when a vulnerability was exploited before a patch was available".
Which is it, never or one? Or do they just not know?
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but its not the script kiddies MS is talking about that I'm worried about. Its the professional crackers who are willing to take the time to find a new exploit because they're after something more specific than bragging rights on some IRC channel. They are the ones MS isn't going to hear about because they don't go around submitting vulnerabilities or bragging about their escapades. They are the ones who are going to do real damage, and they are not the ones who are going to be stopped if MS stops issuing patches.
MS just doesn't get it.
That's what I can't figure out. What's to get upset about? So they're essentially doing inventory tracking on a daily basis -keeping track of how much of what was sold for how much. Even if you use a credit card and tell the cashier your name address and telephone number, they (Anheuser-Busch) still don't know who walked out with what.
From the article it sounds like just a bunch of people walking through the stores punching what they see (prices, quantities...) into their PDA to uplod to the home office.
Instead of H-Pod, simply HPod.
I was thining HP-od, but that could be misread.
Once that was done, I slowed down.
Reminds me of one of the other factors the RIAA seems to ignore when looking at sales trends. Many of us older folks have spent a lot of money not only on new music, but to replace all the vinyl we still wanted to listen to. I don't remember where I read it about a year ago, but it seems most of us have replaced everything we think worth replacing and have slowed our purchases to new stuff only.
IOW the upgrade gravy-train in over for the RIAA and they still haven't figured out how to maintain sales with only new stuff.
Actually, its not Apple's DRM either. They license it from a 3rd party (Freeplay), who AFAIK is free to license it to companies other than Apple.
Its like that in most "industries". The farmer who grew the corn in your $3 box of corn flakes is lucky to get 10 cents for the corn that went into the box. Figure the cost doubles every step up the chain as "value" is added and you come up about right.
I'm picturing labels like "Don't Ever Push This Big Red Button" floating off into space.
Or the "Pull" label next to the hatch.
Those kinds of labels.
Minnesota can't even beat Iowa at that game!
$8 million on an ice palace in Minnesota makes perfect sense compared to $220 million for a !@#$% tropical rain forest in Iowa.
They're still trying to get it done....
most employers will not do this for any appreciable amount of money
The reason being that when it comes time for the business to do its taxes, it wants to be able to deduct all business expenses -a big one being what they paid employees.
It might be worth taking a look at the "Computer Simulation of Autonomous Navigation" video at
r tunity01.html
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/video/oppo
I think it would clear up a lot of the misconceptions about what the rover can and can't do.
That problem is over-inflated here on Slashdot. Microsoft has proven time and time again that they cannot simply make a monopoly out of everything it touches. (XBOX, PocketPC, UltimateTV, etc...)
What version are these things? Seems it generally takes MS about 3 major revisions before they start to take over. It wasn't until Windows 3 that MS had a "good enough" GUI to shut Apple out, it wasn't until IE 3.0 that they had a "good enough" browser to close the door on Netscape...
Give them a little more time. Unfortunately, very few companies can afford to burn money until their version 3 product comes out before they start to see a return. That's one of the advantages of having a monopoly.
IMO its not an either/or thing. The number of viruses written is a combination of popularity and ease. MS is in the unenviable position of winning in both cases.
I understand your point, and its a good question.
The one difference with the library is that they have to "loan out" a physical copy. During the time that physical copy is out, the library cannot loan it to anyone else. The mp3, however, can be "borrowed" by more than one person at a time and you are not deprived of its use while it is being loaned out.
Made me wonder if there was a way to do a PtP network where works were "moved" instead of "copied". That way you could more literally loan me your music and I would maybe be expected to return it to you when done.
How does a library get out of this type of "illegal distribution" mess? Someone can go in and photocopy and entire book,
First, the library did purchase a copy of the book, they don't make any copies themselves.
Second, it would cost more to photocopy most books than to buy them. OTOH you can also check out CDs from your local library and copy them fairly cheaply, but the library has demonstrated significant non-infringing use for several decades.
The quote mentioned in the article is 90% copyrighted. So in your scenario, its 100% copyrighted, but not 100% infringing. That's the problem I have with the 90% figure.
They are thus looking for an indication that at least a marginal percentage of usage is legal or non-copyright infringement use.
What I found interesting was the quote "One academic study found that 90 percent of the content exchanged on file-sharing networks is copyrighted, Frackman noted."
Personally, I'm amazed its not closer to 100%. That still doen't mean infringement. After all, isn't Linux copyrighted, and aren't I allowed to share it via a PtP network if I want?
So, IMO, the question isn't what percentage is copyrighted vs. public domain, but what percentage of it constitutes infringement?
A detector doesn't solve the problem unless you can get rid of the tag. Me, I just want a jammer. Someone scans me, the jammer blasts out garbage.