Does Katz seriously believe that his commentary about the suspension of Patrick Griffiths won't be noticed as the wholesale, unattributed lifting of somebody else's work that it is?
Open Source is about the willing participation of creators in the distribution, modification, and enhancement of their work. We do not take; we accept what is freely given.
As others have pointed out, this work by itself doesn't seem particularly groundbreaking. However, when considered as part of a series of works by the artist, it does have more meaning.
What Kemp has been doing over a longer period is exploring the medium of writing... How writing feels, how it looks, what it means.
Almost be definition, Palm has established a new writing paradigm: handheld, portable, editable electronic writing. Yes, Apple's Newton and other devices have done this before, but the Palm popularized the medium.
Kemp has taken this new paradigm and expressed it in meatspace, and quite well. If part of the meaning of art is to cause a discussion of issues, then not only has Kemp succeeded in creating a piece of surprising aesthetics, but also in fomenting a discussion of its merits.
It's possible I've carelessly redefined the modern interpretation of Article VI because IANAL (I am not a lawyer). However, from a Libertarian perspective, the Supreme Court's contemporary authority of Constitutional Review isn't enshrined in the Constitution either. It was established later as a result of... the Supreme Court's decision to give itself that authority.
Since IANAL (I am not a Libertarian), I don't buy that reading of history; but that doesn't change my opinion that the Supreme Court would uphold the constitutionality of the treaty if it were ratified.
As I noted earlier, the President must sign and the Senate (NOT "Congress" -- the House of Representatives has no voice on treaty ratification) ratify this treaty before it would have the force of law. However, given the current climate in Washington (and, I might add, recent comments by presidential candidates as well) against networked technologies, I have little doubt that ratification is likely unless people like us make our voices heard in the House and Senate.
Allow me to quote from Article VI of the US Constitution:
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
So, if the President were to sign and the Senate to ratify this treaty -- yes, I know it's a European thing right now -- no other action would be required to give it the force of law in the United States.
It is particularly ironic that Bess is in such wide use in K-12 schools.
My former job was to manage this website for the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA). Clearly, ACSA is an organization devoted to the furtherance of public K-12 education, and one which is listened to and sponsored by the same people who make decisions about software filters on school networks.
I received a call one afternoon from one of my regular users, calling from his school district office. He said (I'm paraphrasing, here), "I can't get to your site. Bess is giving me an error message that your site is not on the approved list. Can you help me?"
Apparently, somebody at N2H2 had made the call that, by default, a website specifically for school administrators was inappropriate for use by schools.
If this is indicative of how Bess and other filters work in the real world (ignoring first amendment issues entirely), I can't imagine any justification for mandating that filters be used by public schools and libraries.
As noted here, the animation is scaling to fit the limited screen real estate; the individual rods remain the same relative length.
In other words, they're not cheating, but rather allowing us to see the mechanism adjusted for a limited medium.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoever modded you down has neither a sense of humor nor irony!
Does Katz seriously believe that his commentary about the suspension of Patrick Griffiths won't be noticed as the wholesale, unattributed lifting of somebody else's work that it is?
Open Source is about the willing participation of creators in the distribution, modification, and enhancement of their work. We do not take; we accept what is freely given.
Right at the end of the email, just above the comments:
Note: This article is a piece of satire meant to brighten your day.
Any questions?
As others have pointed out, this work by itself doesn't seem particularly groundbreaking. However, when considered as part of a series of works by the artist, it does have more meaning.
What Kemp has been doing over a longer period is exploring the medium of writing... How writing feels, how it looks, what it means.
Almost be definition, Palm has established a new writing paradigm: handheld, portable, editable electronic writing. Yes, Apple's Newton and other devices have done this before, but the Palm popularized the medium.
Kemp has taken this new paradigm and expressed it in meatspace, and quite well. If part of the meaning of art is to cause a discussion of issues, then not only has Kemp succeeded in creating a piece of surprising aesthetics, but also in fomenting a discussion of its merits.
It's possible I've carelessly redefined the modern interpretation of Article VI because IANAL (I am not a lawyer). However, from a Libertarian perspective, the Supreme Court's contemporary authority of Constitutional Review isn't enshrined in the Constitution either. It was established later as a result of... the Supreme Court's decision to give itself that authority.
Since IANAL (I am not a Libertarian), I don't buy that reading of history; but that doesn't change my opinion that the Supreme Court would uphold the constitutionality of the treaty if it were ratified.
As I noted earlier, the President must sign and the Senate (NOT "Congress" -- the House of Representatives has no voice on treaty ratification) ratify this treaty before it would have the force of law. However, given the current climate in Washington (and, I might add, recent comments by presidential candidates as well) against networked technologies, I have little doubt that ratification is likely unless people like us make our voices heard in the House and Senate.
Allow me to quote from Article VI of the US Constitution:
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
So, if the President were to sign and the Senate to ratify this treaty -- yes, I know it's a European thing right now -- no other action would be required to give it the force of law in the United States.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
It is particularly ironic that Bess is in such wide use in K-12 schools.
My former job was to manage this website for the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA). Clearly, ACSA is an organization devoted to the furtherance of public K-12 education, and one which is listened to and sponsored by the same people who make decisions about software filters on school networks.
I received a call one afternoon from one of my regular users, calling from his school district office. He said (I'm paraphrasing, here), "I can't get to your site. Bess is giving me an error message that your site is not on the approved list. Can you help me?"
Apparently, somebody at N2H2 had made the call that, by default, a website specifically for school administrators was inappropriate for use by schools.
If this is indicative of how Bess and other filters work in the real world (ignoring first amendment issues entirely), I can't imagine any justification for mandating that filters be used by public schools and libraries.
As noted here, the animation is scaling to fit the limited screen real estate; the individual rods remain the same relative length. In other words, they're not cheating, but rather allowing us to see the mechanism adjusted for a limited medium.