The law in many countries provide a way to punish those who infringe the copyright of others.
The above is without doubt, i would assume everyone would agree, true. From this you seem to come to the conclusion that infringing copyrights of others is moraly wrong. (As i interpret your post, unless you use "justify theft" in a way not related to morality)
There is no ethical connection, none i have been able to find, between the fact that there is a law and the judgement that it is immoral. I don't know whetever you belive in moral absolutism or moral relativism, but I belive in the latter.
My ethical views do not make it immoral to infring copyright in general. So there's nothing immoral for me not to "cough up the cash" in the way the media industry demands today. I just don't agree with the kind of ethical system they wish to impose on me, though that doesn't make their view "wrong".
Unless someone can convince me that i should hold other views on this matter, or proves moral absolutism and the moral validity of the above law... I'll keep downloading stuff without feeling bad.
Note that i do pay for stuff, like subscription to di.fm. So i'm not a freeloader, i just don't agree with the current price level and rules.
Most texts comes with an assumption of the prior knowledge possesed by the reader. Childrens books assume their readers are children, thus using a vocabulary suitable for them. Newspapers make the same kind of assumptions.
This book, and review, is obviously for people who have a some amount of prior experience with 3d graphics programming. Thus both may assume that the reader knows those domain specific terms.
If the reader doesn't, then it is the readers task to look up their meaning.
You seem to be living in a different world than me.
*Everyone*, even kids, have a mobile phone here. Depending on the person they either have a subscription or pay-as-you-go. The carriers all use GSM, so any phone you buy here will work with any carrier.
Only reason you would have for buying a new phone would be if there was something better being released, or the old one broke. This makes it no different from portable music players or PDAs.
Much is illegal and depending on your ethical belifs much more may be immoral. But do not assume one is a superset/subset of the other. Most you can propably say about it is that they intersect.
It helps because the site you are browsing will require your cookie to display correctly.
What i *think* might have happen to the user in the above article is that the site used the IP address, not a cookie, to identify the user. Thus there was no cookie being misplaced but rather the site assumed google's ip belonged to the same user.
Why don't we just let you sleep until we spot a rock that sends out radio signals? Meanwhile, others are eager to learn as much as possible *now*.
BTW, these *are* important discoveries as they give us an insight into what kind of planetary systems are out there. Though we are only yet able to see those that have large mass planets in close orbit to the stars. This gives a possibly slightly skewed sample, but it's better than nothing.
Wrong, this planet is *not* 5x the size of Jupiter. It has a *mass* 5x that of Jupiter. Due to gravity etc no planet can grow much beyond the size of Jupiter. Don't remember the exact size but it was some 10-30% larger that was the limit.
I think he felt he couldn't release it earlier else it would feel like he was gloating. Now things have calmed down abit and people have had time to think things over.
Not really, they can point to their SEC filing and say it's part of the companys mission. Anyone investing should know what kind of company google is, and therefor can't sue it for not maximising profit at all cost.
Yes it is slightly suprising. Hydrogen "evaporates" out into space unless it is forms some heavier molecules. What this simulation showed was that the rate of evaporation was propably lower than what was previously assumed. This means that life had time to form, and start binding the hydrogen into heavier compounds.
Slashdot Mirror
The law in many countries provide a way to punish those who infringe the copyright of others.
The above is without doubt, i would assume everyone would agree, true. From this you seem to come to the conclusion that infringing copyrights of others is moraly wrong. (As i interpret your post, unless you use "justify theft" in a way not related to morality)
There is no ethical connection, none i have been able to find, between the fact that there is a law and the judgement that it is immoral. I don't know whetever you belive in moral absolutism or moral relativism, but I belive in the latter.
My ethical views do not make it immoral to infring copyright in general. So there's nothing immoral for me not to "cough up the cash" in the way the media industry demands today. I just don't agree with the kind of ethical system they wish to impose on me, though that doesn't make their view "wrong".
Unless someone can convince me that i should hold other views on this matter, or proves moral absolutism and the moral validity of the above law... I'll keep downloading stuff without feeling bad.
Note that i do pay for stuff, like subscription to di.fm. So i'm not a freeloader, i just don't agree with the current price level and rules.
Sorry, that would be GDP, not BNP which is a non-english version of the acronym.
The day RIAA, MPAA and BSA report loses to piracy exceeding global BNP can't be that far ahead...
It's according to wikipedia now at $44.000 billion and they estimate $200 billion will be lost to software piracy...
I always wondered why so many companies managed to violate the GNU GPL... Now i understand, they read /.!
Sure, because (A) already happened to MS and we see how they were crushed.
Most texts comes with an assumption of the prior knowledge possesed by the reader. Childrens books assume their readers are children, thus using a vocabulary suitable for them. Newspapers make the same kind of assumptions.
This book, and review, is obviously for people who have a some amount of prior experience with 3d graphics programming. Thus both may assume that the reader knows those domain specific terms.
If the reader doesn't, then it is the readers task to look up their meaning.
You seem to be living in a different world than me.
*Everyone*, even kids, have a mobile phone here. Depending on the person they either have a subscription or pay-as-you-go. The carriers all use GSM, so any phone you buy here will work with any carrier.
Only reason you would have for buying a new phone would be if there was something better being released, or the old one broke. This makes it no different from portable music players or PDAs.
Only problem i see is the battery life...
No, you still need to manually apply tissue paper.
Much is illegal and depending on your ethical belifs much more may be immoral. But do not assume one is a superset/subset of the other. Most you can propably say about it is that they intersect.
It helps because the site you are browsing will require your cookie to display correctly.
What i *think* might have happen to the user in the above article is that the site used the IP address, not a cookie, to identify the user. Thus there was no cookie being misplaced but rather the site assumed google's ip belonged to the same user.
The earth has been hit by asteroids several times in the past. There's nothing we need to do about future asteroids since it has happened before.
I'm sure some of us would survive...
It wasn't meant as a joke. It wasn't even *written* as if it was a joke.
That's why they hate the USA that much, ha ha?
Maybe your brain can't cope with it without turning that little factoid into a joke.
That's why people fly planes into their buildings. Didn't help much though, or it did.
For C this is true, but C++ has gained alot of ground on Fortran through the use of templates and template metaprogramming.
Blitz++ performs very close to or better than Fortran on many numerical calculations.
I should propably mention that we are going to be detecting those rocks when Darwin, an infrared interferometer telescope, launches in 2015.
Why don't we just let you sleep until we spot a rock that sends out radio signals? Meanwhile, others are eager to learn as much as possible *now*.
BTW, these *are* important discoveries as they give us an insight into what kind of planetary systems are out there. Though we are only yet able to see those that have large mass planets in close orbit to the stars. This gives a possibly slightly skewed sample, but it's better than nothing.
Wrong, this planet is *not* 5x the size of Jupiter. It has a *mass* 5x that of Jupiter. Due to gravity etc no planet can grow much beyond the size of Jupiter. Don't remember the exact size but it was some 10-30% larger that was the limit.
The parent and all the posters above failed in basic math, sorry.
Note that you need to swivel it 180 degrees to get the screen area to face away from you. Then you can close it to get a "tablet pc".
I think he felt he couldn't release it earlier else it would feel like he was gloating. Now things have calmed down abit and people have had time to think things over.
Considering how lawmakers usually look (fat old guys), maybe you should reconsider your target?
Whatever kind of world you envision, please use another planet for it.
There is a minor risk of them being hit by asteroids.
Not really, they can point to their SEC filing and say it's part of the companys mission. Anyone investing should know what kind of company google is, and therefor can't sue it for not maximising profit at all cost.
Why arn't you playing by *my* rules?!? Shut up and give me all your money.
Yes it is slightly suprising. Hydrogen "evaporates" out into space unless it is forms some heavier molecules. What this simulation showed was that the rate of evaporation was propably lower than what was previously assumed. This means that life had time to form, and start binding the hydrogen into heavier compounds.