It's the PHBs, too. Microsoft FUD has so completely blown over the non-technical that anyone espousing an anti-MS thought is considered clueless. And that goes double if they don't have an MCxx certification. Catch-22? Yep. And Microsoft loves it that way. For 99% of the companies out there, the only right answers are "Yep, we can buy that from Microsoft." or "We're going to have to buy that from someone else...Microsoft doesn't sell anything that does that." And the list for which the second answer is true is getting smaller every year.
Some embedded processors run on a very low margin. If some piece of your code enables a performance increase that is essentially independent of the hardware, you need to keep that code away from your competitors for as long as you can.
Imagine an automobile engine computer. Some piece of code you devise allows you to pinch out an extra 5 miles per gallon by adjusting the performance of the engine. Now if you're required to open-source the code, every one of your competitors will have that same code in their next version. If you don't, you've got 6 months to a year before they figure out how you did it. And your higher efficiency gives you a market edge.
But... by being a US corporation, they have an easier time selling to US government agencies, as well as not having to deal with import taxes. And with their clout and money, they don't really have any trouble with our laws, anyway.
More like saying: Darwin was wrong, a little. The theory of evolution is still basically the same. Gradual change over millenia produce speciation. The difference is that on the smaller time scales, change is either much higher or much lower than the average. Again, the difference is in the mechanism behind evolution, not the actual theory of progress by natural selection.
In fact, Kazaa's attempt to use an EULA in their defense of this practice might just provide enough legal leverage to get EULA's declared non-binding.
Go Kazaa!!!
Well, not really... but I see it as a win/win situation. Kazaa gets trampled for fraud, or EULAs get shown as worthless pieces of paper.
It's called Punctuated Equilibirum...
on
Ready, Steady, Evolve
·
· Score: 5, Informative
And it's been a theory for a good twenty years at least in evolutionary biology. It explains why we find a lot of fossils of different species, but very few fossils that qualify as a "missing link" between species. This just gives a reasonable explanation for the mechanism which produces punctuated equilibrium.
OK... the probability distribution is longer on the z axis than it is on the x or y axes. What are the axes relative to? If z is the direction of motion, then we have something which seems to be explainable by relativity. If z is perpendicular to the direction of motion, relativity is screwed...
The main difference that Microsoft encourages the development of clueless admins. The MCxx certifications are geared to producing admins that can pass a test, not admins who can effectively administrate. Yes, there exist lame Linux certs, too, and yes, we do have clueless Linux admins. But the whole community of Linux is based on educating the user, admin or not, about how to properly configure the system. Thus, a vastly smaller percentage of Linux admins end up clueless, and the ones that do really deserve what they get. MCxx admins often have the mistaken impression that they already know enough to do their job. Linux admins generally know what they don't know, and know who to go to to ask.
I've been dreaming of a watch that'd constantly tell me my blood sugar since I was a boy.
There is such a watch. Glucowatch. My mother has just recently gotten one, and it does pretty well. There are alarms for sugar too high, too low, or just changing fast and you really aught to check it. Sensors are good for 12 hours straight. Unfortunately, the website says pick US or Europe, so it may not be available in New Zealand.:(
Since copyright law is so obviously screwed up right now, anyway, I'll ignore wheteer or not this is legal, and discuss whether it should be.
Copyright law was intended to allow creators to make a profit from their creations, but still allow the public to benefit. In this case, the creators still make a profit, since every edited copy is bought from them before being edited. In fact, the creators are getting more profit than before, since some of the people buying the Clean Flicks version would refuse to buy the original.
On the other hand, the public is also benefiting, by having access to a range of moveis that they otherwise would have felt obligated to ignore.
As such, this is a win/win situation, and should be legal, whatever the current law has to say.
Notably missing are two leading ISPs owned by one of the plaintiffs: AOL and CompuServe. I'd be interested to know if those ISPs are blocking this site.
Yes and no. I've got RoadRunner, and Listen4Ever.com automagically routes me to MP3Mediaworld.com, which looks nothing like the cached version of Listen4Ever that Google gives me. So, there blocking it, but in a backhanded way that doesn't even let the average mp3 leech know what they're missing.
I had to read that in a SF class in high school. Good book. Of course, it kinda get's ruined when you have write an essay on how the "Brownie's" are the working underclass that are enslaved by the white Ambasadors.
Note:
I'm not giving the name of the book either, I feel like I'm playing alone here... Not that it isn't fun, anyway.
In the NY Lotto, several years ago, there was a group of numbers that came out which formed a triangle on the "fill in the squares" form used to buy tickets. There was no investigation into "how" this happened. It was readily explained as change. However, the previous posters are correct. There were 50 or 60 "winners", and the individual take was much smaller than other drawings.
Unfortunately, the BoR only applies to the federal government. Since this is a public company collecting the information, there is no guarantee against it due to the BoR. Hopefully, it can be made illegal on the grounds of invasion of privacy, but it would have to be challenged.
Actually the number coming from a sperm is not just trivial, it's nothing. The mitochondria in sperm are all in the tail, and are never absorbed by the egg. This was the basis for the tracing of the "Genetic Eve" through mitochondrial DNA.
Anybody know if mitochondrial DNA is included in the Human Genome Project?
He's not trying to determine what should and should not be in the movie. He's stating his preference. Nowhere does he say that the original version should be censored. What he IS doing, is providing a service to other people who agree with him, by editing the movie to remove the parts that he/they find objectionable.
I don't think that doing this is morally wrong, in the least. It may be legally questionable in some instances, as a violation of copyright. If you buy the movies, edit them, then re-sell them, you are probably (IANAL) violating the studio's copyright. If someone buys the movie, then brings it to you and asks you to edit it, it shouldn't be.
NOT...
The difference is that it was the copyright holder that was doing colorization. In this new case, it is the individual consumer, or a business agency at the behest of a consumer. If I bring you my copy of Titanic, and ask you to cut out some scenes, neither one of us should have a problem. When Albertson's buys 10,000 copies of Titanic, has them edited, and then re-sells them, its diluting the copyright, and quite probably illegal. Even without the DMCA.
That is not spam. Not UN-solicited email, only solicited email that has been sent to the wrong address. It may be a near-criminally stupid use of a web form, but they (perhaps erroneously) believe that you asked for it, hence it is not spam.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the PHBs, too. Microsoft FUD has so completely blown over the non-technical that anyone espousing an anti-MS thought is considered clueless. And that goes double if they don't have an MCxx certification. Catch-22? Yep. And Microsoft loves it that way. For 99% of the companies out there, the only right answers are "Yep, we can buy that from Microsoft." or "We're going to have to buy that from someone else...Microsoft doesn't sell anything that does that." And the list for which the second answer is true is getting smaller every year.
Imagine an automobile engine computer. Some piece of code you devise allows you to pinch out an extra 5 miles per gallon by adjusting the performance of the engine. Now if you're required to open-source the code, every one of your competitors will have that same code in their next version. If you don't, you've got 6 months to a year before they figure out how you did it. And your higher efficiency gives you a market edge.
What, you want to argue during sex?
But... by being a US corporation, they have an easier time selling to US government agencies, as well as not having to deal with import taxes. And with their clout and money, they don't really have any trouble with our laws, anyway.
More like saying: Darwin was wrong, a little. The theory of evolution is still basically the same. Gradual change over millenia produce speciation. The difference is that on the smaller time scales, change is either much higher or much lower than the average. Again, the difference is in the mechanism behind evolution, not the actual theory of progress by natural selection.
Go Kazaa!!!
Well, not really... but I see it as a win/win situation. Kazaa gets trampled for fraud, or EULAs get shown as worthless pieces of paper.
And it's been a theory for a good twenty years at least in evolutionary biology. It explains why we find a lot of fossils of different species, but very few fossils that qualify as a "missing link" between species. This just gives a reasonable explanation for the mechanism which produces punctuated equilibrium.
Anybody have a link to a more scientific article?
The main difference that Microsoft encourages the development of clueless admins. The MCxx certifications are geared to producing admins that can pass a test, not admins who can effectively administrate. Yes, there exist lame Linux certs, too, and yes, we do have clueless Linux admins. But the whole community of Linux is based on educating the user, admin or not, about how to properly configure the system. Thus, a vastly smaller percentage of Linux admins end up clueless, and the ones that do really deserve what they get. MCxx admins often have the mistaken impression that they already know enough to do their job. Linux admins generally know what they don't know, and know who to go to to ask.
Unfortunately, only for female geeks. It would be a whole nother order of miracle if a male virgin shark gave birth.
There is such a watch. Glucowatch. My mother has just recently gotten one, and it does pretty well. There are alarms for sugar too high, too low, or just changing fast and you really aught to check it. Sensors are good for 12 hours straight. Unfortunately, the website says pick US or Europe, so it may not be available in New Zealand. :(
Copyright law was intended to allow creators to make a profit from their creations, but still allow the public to benefit. In this case, the creators still make a profit, since every edited copy is bought from them before being edited. In fact, the creators are getting more profit than before, since some of the people buying the Clean Flicks version would refuse to buy the original.
On the other hand, the public is also benefiting, by having access to a range of moveis that they otherwise would have felt obligated to ignore.
As such, this is a win/win situation, and should be legal, whatever the current law has to say.
But that wouldn't qualify as "recorded" history, would it?
Yes and no. I've got RoadRunner, and Listen4Ever.com automagically routes me to MP3Mediaworld.com, which looks nothing like the cached version of Listen4Ever that Google gives me. So, there blocking it, but in a backhanded way that doesn't even let the average mp3 leech know what they're missing.
Great.... The somebody from the FBI just read your post, and now we're invading Sweden for supporting "terrorist robots."
Note:
I'm not giving the name of the book either, I feel like I'm playing alone here...
Not that it isn't fun, anyway.
In the NY Lotto, several years ago, there was a group of numbers that came out which formed a triangle on the "fill in the squares" form used to buy tickets. There was no investigation into "how" this happened. It was readily explained as change. However, the previous posters are correct. There were 50 or 60 "winners", and the individual take was much smaller than other drawings.
Unfortunately, the BoR only applies to the federal government. Since this is a public company collecting the information, there is no guarantee against it due to the BoR. Hopefully, it can be made illegal on the grounds of invasion of privacy, but it would have to be challenged.
IANAL
Anybody know if mitochondrial DNA is included in the Human Genome Project?
Dude, That's IReland...not ICeland. BIG difference.
He's not trying to determine what should and should not be in the movie. He's stating his preference. Nowhere does he say that the original version should be censored. What he IS doing, is providing a service to other people who agree with him, by editing the movie to remove the parts that he/they find objectionable.
I don't think that doing this is morally wrong, in the least. It may be legally questionable in some instances, as a violation of copyright. If you buy the movies, edit them, then re-sell them, you are probably (IANAL) violating the studio's copyright. If someone buys the movie, then brings it to you and asks you to edit it, it shouldn't be.
NOT...
The difference is that it was the copyright holder that was doing colorization. In this new case, it is the individual consumer, or a business agency at the behest of a consumer. If I bring you my copy of Titanic, and ask you to cut out some scenes, neither one of us should have a problem. When Albertson's buys 10,000 copies of Titanic, has them edited, and then re-sells them, its diluting the copyright, and quite probably illegal. Even without the DMCA.
That is not spam. Not UN-solicited email, only solicited email that has been sent to the wrong address. It may be a near-criminally stupid use of a web form, but they (perhaps erroneously) believe that you asked for it, hence it is not spam.
Maybe one of href=http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/08/04/0 00205&mode=nested&tid=106
Jbhyq lbh gjb fgbc jnfgvat zbzragf bs zl zrnavatyrff yvsr?!?