The Constitution doesn't explicity require that there be only two parties. But the mechanisms that are explicitly required will almost inevitably lead to a two party system. The founding fathers failed to achieve their objective on that.
I'm unclear on how there can be an international law on this. International law governs the relationships between countries and what happens in international waters and territories; it has no bearing on individuals within a country. It's not as if the UN can pass a law making it illegal to commit blasphemy, have me arrested in the United States, and try me in an International Court. (And yes, I'm aware of the International Criminal Court--but that court only comes into play for acts such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Unless blasphemy is about to be raised to that level, this court is a very different beast.)
So I'm not sure what it is that the Pakistani PM is really asking for here and I didn't find it in the article. A resolution condemning blasphemy? A change in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Some actual but non-binding international law? It's either showboating or there seems to be some nuance of International law in play that I don't understand.
Yes, I think that a good summary of the situation. And yes, many people take all 4 and lump them together. But you also have many people who oppose #4, but argue against it on the basis of #1 or #2. There aren't many people who are actually considering the science and the public policy as two separate domains.
The Beethoven's fifth you linked to is performed by a small town college orchestra, not the Musopen Symphony Orchestra (really the Czech National Symphony Orchestra, but I don't know if Musopen are allowed to say that in advertising!). Anyone can contribute to Musopen - you'll even find midi keyboard renditions there. It's better than nothing, is Musopen's philosophy.
snip
You still have the option to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations. In fact, you probably will always have to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations, the way copyrights are being extended... but now you also have the option of hearing some solid renditions of Brahms symphonies by a professional Czech orchestra, for free. For ever.
I think the project is valuable, I like the idea of having good recordings of these works available for free. For those who can't afford to spend the money or who want to reuse the works in some creative way, this is a real boon. It opens up the music to a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise have access to it.
On the other hand, I don't think the project is going to have any real impact (at least not yet) on the community of listeners who have a love of the music and the resources to indulge their passion. I buy lots of music and will continue to buy lots of music. Not because I enjoy spending the money, but because it's more important to me to have a recording (or even multiple recordings) that I really like. The cost relative to my enjoyment is really pretty minimal. If the free recording is worth having, I'll add it to my library. But I'm happy to pay for a recording if I like that one better.
And I'm not real hopeful that these recordings are quite there yet. I found the Musopen Symphony Orchestra recording of Beethoven's Symphony No. 3. My initial take was that the playing was good, but the sound quality was less than ideal. For example, there's an intermittant but very distracting hissing noise at the beginning. I'm not an audio technician and I couldn't tell you what causes it, but I know that it makes the recording less desirable for me.
Still, I'm glad the project exists. Making this music available to the widest possible audience is a good thing. That's something to applaud.
If you extrapolate from this one fact, that Apple does extremely well but is said to "miss" and the stock price goes down because their profits didn't grow faster than before, if you extrapolate from this one fact, you can understand why the economy - the whole economic system - is collapsing under its own greed. Enough is never enough.
[Full disclosure: I'm a shareholder since the Michael Spindler days, and yes, I understand about corporate "guidance" and what it means to say they "missed". My point stands.]
Of course the price goes down. To a significant extent, the expected profits are already built into the price. So when the target is missed, the price adjusts to the actual profits. That's just the way the market works.
I will agree that the hype in the press is over the top. Missing the target doesn't foretell disaster for Apple--they still made a boatload of money and there's no reason to believe that that's going to change. But that's also typical practice for the financial press. They have to make a story out of it. And so they do.
Common sense has nothing to do with it. As a poster above pointed out, this is purely the result of a lawsuit against the MPD. Just like the Miranda warning, progress most often comes from the court system.
Sure, Ethernet is important. Ethernet contributed to the success of the Internet. But Ethernet only connects hosts on a local network. It isn't the Internet by any stretch of the imagination. The whole underlying premise of the article is just plain wrong.
The article is just a poorly executed attempt to glorify private enterprise and denigrate public involvement in technology. Why is this even on Slashdot? If you can't get the most basic technical information correct, what gives this any relevance at all? Sure, it's possible to have an interesting and valuable discussion of how the Internet came to be, and what part private and public investment played. But if you start with a blatent attempt to misrepresent the basic facts then all you've done is wasted my time.
So Dvorak's excuse is that he didn't get to see the pre-release iPhone. So he based his TV appearances and articles on the rumors and his guesses. Is that how tech journalism works these days?
No, don't answer, I knew it was a bad question as soon as I typed it.
If Dvorak had simply said that he wrote his column based on the very thin public knowledge that was available to him, I would have been fine with it. The problem is that he turns it into a rant about how Apple treats journalists. He's got some serious baggage when it comes to Apple and he drags it out for everyone to see.
Just got our power back on yesterday afternoon. Saturday and Sunday nights were miserable. The problem wasn't just that we had no air conditioning, but that we had no way to move the air at all. We had all our windows open. Not a bit of breeze. The air was just dead. Simply having a fan in the room would have made all the difference.
We'll be ready for next time though. I ordered a bunch of small battery powered fans. They won't move much air, but I think they'll do enough to change our comfort index from miserable to uncomfortable.
Pretty sure it has to do with the decline of pirates. Over this time period, there have been declining numbers of pirates that parallels the decline in number of women in CS related fields.
You fool! You have it all backwards!
Yes, yes, it's true. The decline in pirates is directly responsible for global warming. But it's the decline in women in CS related fields that's directly responsible for the decline in pirates. And don't get caught up on the fact that pirates have been declining steadily since well before CS related fields existed. Ante hoc ergo prompter hoc!
Intelligent Design is a nonsense term anyway, whoever designed the human eye for instance was an idiot. Somehow this same dimwit managed to give proper eyes to nautilus though. If you want to debate the existence of Idiotic Design, then we can have some philosophy, but still not science.
The eye is badly designed, but the whole giving birth thing is a disaster. What kind of intelligent designer would have the baby come out through the pelvis?
He was, of course, making irrational stuff up, that accidentally happened to turn out to be correct. Kind of like the ancient greek version of atomic theory.
If real, usable, economic warp speed spacecraft propulsion is ever invented, that doesn't mean the "star trek" writers should get credit.
I agree. And it's high time that we stopped giving Darwin credit for that evolution thing. He had no idea how it worked! Genes and DNA? He'd never heard of them.
They use a lot of electricity. Unless Microsoft is planning to buy "carbon offset" credits, so they can pollute and yet just handwave it away.
That's exactly what they're doing. They're touting their effort to reduce their energy usage and their purchase of carbon offsets to cover the energy that they can't avoid using.
Once they get into their teen years, heading the ball is quite common. And the risk of concussion is very real. You have a couple of culprits. First, the head-to-head contact that sometimes occurs when two players attempt to head the same ball can lead to a concussion. Second, a ball to the side of the head, especially if it's unexpected, can also sometimes result in a concussion. Finally, the simple act of repeatedly heading the ball leads to a sequence of sub-concussive impacts, which may have some long term affect on the player's brain (though the jury is still out on this part).
According to TFA, this book was legally published abroad by a subsidiary of the American publisher. I don't see it as very complicated at all: the copy was legal, so it should be legal to import it.
That would make sense. Except that U.S. Copyright law explicitly forbids it:
602. Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords
(a) Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501.
What's not clear is whether the First Sale Doctrine applies to books manufactured outside of the U.S. And that's the real question that's being put in front of the SC. If they decide that the First Sale Doctrine applies in this case, then the importation of these books for resale will be legal. If it doesn't apply, then it won't be legal.
This was a test of a weapon delivery system. You do recall the whole point behind the US and the USSR racing to be the first to put a man on the moon? Developing Tang and bringing home a few rocks had nothing to do with it.
One of the largest as in "one of the largest". North Korea has the fourth largest active duty army in the world. Behind China, USA, and India. Ahead of Russia. I think that can safely be considered one of the largest.
Slashdot Mirror
The Constitution doesn't explicity require that there be only two parties. But the mechanisms that are explicitly required will almost inevitably lead to a two party system. The founding fathers failed to achieve their objective on that.
I'm unclear on how there can be an international law on this. International law governs the relationships between countries and what happens in international waters and territories; it has no bearing on individuals within a country. It's not as if the UN can pass a law making it illegal to commit blasphemy, have me arrested in the United States, and try me in an International Court. (And yes, I'm aware of the International Criminal Court--but that court only comes into play for acts such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Unless blasphemy is about to be raised to that level, this court is a very different beast.)
So I'm not sure what it is that the Pakistani PM is really asking for here and I didn't find it in the article. A resolution condemning blasphemy? A change in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Some actual but non-binding international law? It's either showboating or there seems to be some nuance of International law in play that I don't understand.
Yes, I think that a good summary of the situation. And yes, many people take all 4 and lump them together. But you also have many people who oppose #4, but argue against it on the basis of #1 or #2. There aren't many people who are actually considering the science and the public policy as two separate domains.
Insightful? Are you sure? When did we start modding people up for not getting the joke?
The Beethoven's fifth you linked to is performed by a small town college orchestra, not the Musopen Symphony Orchestra (really the Czech National Symphony Orchestra, but I don't know if Musopen are allowed to say that in advertising!). Anyone can contribute to Musopen - you'll even find midi keyboard renditions there. It's better than nothing, is Musopen's philosophy.
snip
You still have the option to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations. In fact, you probably will always have to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations, the way copyrights are being extended... but now you also have the option of hearing some solid renditions of Brahms symphonies by a professional Czech orchestra, for free. For ever.
I think the project is valuable, I like the idea of having good recordings of these works available for free. For those who can't afford to spend the money or who want to reuse the works in some creative way, this is a real boon. It opens up the music to a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise have access to it.
On the other hand, I don't think the project is going to have any real impact (at least not yet) on the community of listeners who have a love of the music and the resources to indulge their passion. I buy lots of music and will continue to buy lots of music. Not because I enjoy spending the money, but because it's more important to me to have a recording (or even multiple recordings) that I really like. The cost relative to my enjoyment is really pretty minimal. If the free recording is worth having, I'll add it to my library. But I'm happy to pay for a recording if I like that one better.
And I'm not real hopeful that these recordings are quite there yet. I found the Musopen Symphony Orchestra recording of Beethoven's Symphony No. 3. My initial take was that the playing was good, but the sound quality was less than ideal. For example, there's an intermittant but very distracting hissing noise at the beginning. I'm not an audio technician and I couldn't tell you what causes it, but I know that it makes the recording less desirable for me.
Still, I'm glad the project exists. Making this music available to the widest possible audience is a good thing. That's something to applaud.
If you extrapolate from this one fact, that Apple does extremely well but is said to "miss" and the stock price goes down because their profits didn't grow faster than before, if you extrapolate from this one fact, you can understand why the economy - the whole economic system - is collapsing under its own greed. Enough is never enough.
[Full disclosure: I'm a shareholder since the Michael Spindler days, and yes, I understand about corporate "guidance" and what it means to say they "missed". My point stands.]
Of course the price goes down. To a significant extent, the expected profits are already built into the price. So when the target is missed, the price adjusts to the actual profits. That's just the way the market works.
I will agree that the hype in the press is over the top. Missing the target doesn't foretell disaster for Apple--they still made a boatload of money and there's no reason to believe that that's going to change. But that's also typical practice for the financial press. They have to make a story out of it. And so they do.
Common sense has nothing to do with it. As a poster above pointed out, this is purely the result of a lawsuit against the MPD. Just like the Miranda warning, progress most often comes from the court system.
Sure, Ethernet is important. Ethernet contributed to the success of the Internet. But Ethernet only connects hosts on a local network. It isn't the Internet by any stretch of the imagination. The whole underlying premise of the article is just plain wrong.
The article is just a poorly executed attempt to glorify private enterprise and denigrate public involvement in technology. Why is this even on Slashdot? If you can't get the most basic technical information correct, what gives this any relevance at all? Sure, it's possible to have an interesting and valuable discussion of how the Internet came to be, and what part private and public investment played. But if you start with a blatent attempt to misrepresent the basic facts then all you've done is wasted my time.
So Dvorak's excuse is that he didn't get to see the pre-release iPhone. So he based his TV appearances and articles on the rumors and his guesses. Is that how tech journalism works these days?
No, don't answer, I knew it was a bad question as soon as I typed it.
If Dvorak had simply said that he wrote his column based on the very thin public knowledge that was available to him, I would have been fine with it. The problem is that he turns it into a rant about how Apple treats journalists. He's got some serious baggage when it comes to Apple and he drags it out for everyone to see.
Just got our power back on yesterday afternoon. Saturday and Sunday nights were miserable. The problem wasn't just that we had no air conditioning, but that we had no way to move the air at all. We had all our windows open. Not a bit of breeze. The air was just dead. Simply having a fan in the room would have made all the difference. We'll be ready for next time though. I ordered a bunch of small battery powered fans. They won't move much air, but I think they'll do enough to change our comfort index from miserable to uncomfortable.
Pretty sure it has to do with the decline of pirates. Over this time period, there have been declining numbers of pirates that parallels the decline in number of women in CS related fields.
You fool! You have it all backwards!
Yes, yes, it's true. The decline in pirates is directly responsible for global warming. But it's the decline in women in CS related fields that's directly responsible for the decline in pirates. And don't get caught up on the fact that pirates have been declining steadily since well before CS related fields existed. Ante hoc ergo prompter hoc!
We can't confuse correlation with causation.
I'd have to disagree. It appears that we *can* confuse correlation with causation. Well enough to get a foolish article posted on Slashdot.
Intelligent Design is a nonsense term anyway, whoever designed the human eye for instance was an idiot. Somehow this same dimwit managed to give proper eyes to nautilus though. If you want to debate the existence of Idiotic Design, then we can have some philosophy, but still not science.
The eye is badly designed, but the whole giving birth thing is a disaster. What kind of intelligent designer would have the baby come out through the pelvis?
He was, of course, making irrational stuff up, that accidentally happened to turn out to be correct. Kind of like the ancient greek version of atomic theory.
If real, usable, economic warp speed spacecraft propulsion is ever invented, that doesn't mean the "star trek" writers should get credit.
I agree. And it's high time that we stopped giving Darwin credit for that evolution thing. He had no idea how it worked! Genes and DNA? He'd never heard of them.
They use a lot of electricity. Unless Microsoft is planning to buy "carbon offset" credits, so they can pollute and yet just handwave it away.
That's exactly what they're doing. They're touting their effort to reduce their energy usage and their purchase of carbon offsets to cover the energy that they can't avoid using.
Once they get into their teen years, heading the ball is quite common. And the risk of concussion is very real. You have a couple of culprits. First, the head-to-head contact that sometimes occurs when two players attempt to head the same ball can lead to a concussion. Second, a ball to the side of the head, especially if it's unexpected, can also sometimes result in a concussion. Finally, the simple act of repeatedly heading the ball leads to a sequence of sub-concussive impacts, which may have some long term affect on the player's brain (though the jury is still out on this part).
According to TFA, this book was legally published abroad by a subsidiary of the American publisher. I don't see it as very complicated at all: the copy was legal, so it should be legal to import it.
That would make sense. Except that U.S. Copyright law explicitly forbids it:
602. Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords
(a) Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501.
What's not clear is whether the First Sale Doctrine applies to books manufactured outside of the U.S. And that's the real question that's being put in front of the SC. If they decide that the First Sale Doctrine applies in this case, then the importation of these books for resale will be legal. If it doesn't apply, then it won't be legal.
1) This was not a weapons test.
This was a test of a weapon delivery system. You do recall the whole point behind the US and the USSR racing to be the first to put a man on the moon? Developing Tang and bringing home a few rocks had nothing to do with it.
One of the largest as in "one of the largest". North Korea has the fourth largest active duty army in the world. Behind China, USA, and India. Ahead of Russia. I think that can safely be considered one of the largest.