As for TM vs (C), that's an interesting aspect of Intellectual Property law that I honestly haven't read up on... but upon entry to public domain, it'd potentially be a razor-thin line between 2 renditions of an archtype (and public domain) character. To get away from the character in question here, at what point do the illustrations of Lewis Carroll's books dating from the 1860's-80's (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice's_Adventures_in_Wonderland#Illustrations ) tapdance between their obvious public domain nature and their trademarked near-twins nature as used in movies?
IANAL, but I have been a party to IP lawsuits. While I agree with you that you don't get rights to newer content, derivative rights to steamboat willie grant:
-- rights to improve steamboat willie: colorization, a soundtrack, a voice track, improvements to the script/narrative. -- rights to using the rat (not meant as a slur, but to avoid any mention of a certain 2-word aliterative trademarked character name) elsewhere: a new storyline, a story arch, use in any genre desirable (rat rogers in the 23rd century!), new characters, and adjustments to character appearance. -- mashup rights.
More interestingly, there's nothing stopping the original content generators from 'raiding the vault' and doing this themselves. Any new content gets a (c)2011. A digital remastering gets (c) 2011. Archives including photos, audio, video of the creators themselves -- new (c) 2011.
Yeah, we can finally hack the bejeebers out of mi ^h^h^h that first bit of content, but SO CAN original copyright holder. And they're professionals. What exactly are the RIAA and MPAA so zealously guarding again!?
And next year (and each year after that) another few bits of content chew thru their chains. After winning the rights question, everything else falls to a question of talent. Hopefully, eventually we learn it's not about control itself, but what gets DONE to enjoy these new members of the public domain.
We'll quickly learn that 90% of everything is crap -- just rent a decades-old non-disney version of any knockoff children's animation flick and brace yourself for the horrible mediocrity. My kids have come home from the video rental shop with a crappy 'thumbelina', a blah collection of americana (Paul Bunyan, Pecos Bill), a graphically-uninspired cinderella and FSM-knows-how-many-other lame also-runs. But they also brought home HR Puffinstuff. In other words, it's like youtube, but from the 70's.
Yo.
I'm a let you finish, but first you need to check out platinumtel.com -- stupid cheap per-minute plan. Found it via cellguru's prepaid comparison chart, if memory serves. No other relationship.
Wow, it's now her union's fault that all the rest of us didn't get a decent contract. All the corporate efforts to bust unions and resist employees having anything but a right to be fired immediately without cause are irrelevant? Meh, I don't buy it.
And 'privileged few'? Who the hell's fault is that? Certainly not the unions. These labor laws will never come into effect with the US's right-of-center politics. Nor will those mythic privacy protections enjoyed in europe, equitable healthcare, etc. Heck, we're losing ground on most of these right now. Huge chunks of middle america seem to think anything more than $17 an hour is undeservedly lavish pay, FFS.
Since you're 'good' at this, maybe you can show how unions are also to blame for the existence of Paris Hilton?
Are we reading the same Jason? I mean, fear of scarcity vs. empire building are hardly 'same thing by degrees', and what Medea did was... er... not the sort of thing that leads to a monty python sketch ("Help, help, I'm being repressed!").
(.... sigh, johnny went to google Jan 18, 2011... why the hell didn't *that* exit make slashdot?)
That reinforces the braindrain message from TFA, but I still believe many microsoft technologies drive markets. Not Bing (how busted do you have to be to copy a competitor and still score several percent lower?)
Huh, I coulda sworn Johnny Lee was (A) innovative and (B) working at microsoft. And that his blog (procrastineering.blogspot.com) raves about the smarter-than-him crowd he's with.
(what the hell is wrong with slashcode? I've got sixteen \n's and 2
tags and this paragraph still won't end!)
The rest of your rant reads a lot like antimac screeds calling osx, the ipod, then the iphone being co-opted rehashes of (insert mumblemumble). That doesn't matter -- Kinect is better by the bottom line: it sells like hotcakes and has features that force the market to compete with it.
tl;dr: Kinect is a game-changer.
Sorry it doesn't fit your vision of Microsoft being a kludgeworks, but neither do (for their own reasons) Win Server 2k8, XBox Live, Powershell, Windows 7, Sharepoint, etc. The truth is somewhere in between. Given corporate tendencies to bloat with bureaucracies, I'm actually impressed with the last few years of MSFT.
(Full Disclosure: I admin Linux servers at work and have 2 of 9 of my own computers/handhelds running OSX or Linux -- so I'm definitely NOT a win fanboy)
How many years have libertarians or others been threatening to scurry to some state and declare it theirs? It's like threats of going Galt; all sorts of strutting and bold claims until someone actually has to act as promised, whereupon the plan implodes as everyone hesitates, then decides they'll do it... uh... soon. Besides, there's a new season of [insert reality tv title] coming up soon.
Photographers have used ownership of copyright and markup on copies made for virtually the entire history of photography. It isn't Olin Mills. *EVERYONE* in the field knows this, most use it.
If you want to fight the power, try to hire a photographer (or videographer) who doesn't retain copyright (i.e., they'll sign a work-for-hire contract). Just don't be shocked if the few photogs that'll say yes give you work whose quality's a bit diminished or charge *considerably* more.
That markup on reprints and derivative work is what pays for lights, studio rent, staff, maintenance on hardware, etc.
At first thought you were pushing a fake _yet another bogus detail_ troll. Hadn't heard about the gender change, but what's it matter, really.
So now we call them The Wachowski's. Big deal. Even saves a word. It's not like the Baldwins, where there are several actors to confuse, including one that's unrelated(The Man they call Jayne!).
Dipping componentry in resin has always been an excellent counterpart to eggshells or glass: Tamper-evident, cheap/easy/trivial to manufacture, damn hard to nondestructively breach and reassemble.
Since these facilities were opened, we've added comsat, gps, ISS, and countless military/industrial/commercial space programs. NASA provides data for everything from urban planning to weather to crop planning and cultivation, and is involved in deep space research, materials science, world climate research and god knows what else.
But Apollo and a closing space shuttle program mean these facilities should be mothballed.
God I hate the stupid that comes out when slashdotters start speaking authoritatively about NASA. "It's not like it's rocket science..."
Non-disclaimer: I have never earned a dime for/from anything NASA-related.
It's not digital, but for sheer awesome age of the data recovered, my vote would go to the audio recovered from phonautograms here: http://www.firstsounds.org/sounds/scott.php
Shit, if I want god-knows-how-many-paragraphs of lead-in followed by a bunch of handwavy bullshit seemingly intended for people that enjoy feeling smart without having to think or understand things, I'd get a subscription to People magazine.
While the underlying news is definitely for nerds, THIS was not the link we're looking for.
While we're at it, can we ban all mouthbreathers from consuming oxygen until they've gone through a rigorous training exercise for how to properly consume air?
("hmm, about 90 minutes should be sufficient....wait, no, no! I've got a headcold!")
Snark aside, "walking is a right" and yet where I live there are *months* where sidewalks on major streets are piled with icy road-plowing debris until nobody can reasonably walk them. This drops my enthusiasm for treating driving licenses and hypotheticals like yours as privileges.
Was going to give eldavojohn a tl;dr flame because he sounded a bit like one of those bad slashdot commenters dissing scientists' real work in favor of intuition, but I recognize his nick and that's not his style. On rereading, Eldavojohn prolly is asking like he did because he's curious and the issues seem counterintuitive, not because he thought he was being insightful (stupid mod system needs a '+1 good question')
Earthquakes and plate tectonics don't map ideally to simple, intuitive physics. Then again, nothing does.
IANAG, but the earth's surface as a giant rubbery sheet analogy works a bit *IF* one remembers that every atom in that giant sheet of rubber has net-force vectors pulling them. Lower layers that are well-adhered causing drag, other areas that move more easily, gravity, surge/subsidence due to deep-crust activity, hydraulic forces (literally, as in aquifers causing pressure/flow), shear forces and edges where contradictory motion causes drag. And compression, which is stored energy. Some geological structures are really boring (stable) and all of these forces are minor. I'm guessing that'd be the US midwest. Others could have an order or two of magnitude more action.
We get a glimpse of these dynamics (especially compressive forces, movement and accumulated shear forces) by tracking positions carefully. I ran into this monitoring huge dams: if monitoring points' relative positions across both a dam and the canyon walls adjacent remain fairly uniform, life's good. If anything (or the 2nd-order function: rate of movement) changes dramatically, it's cause for immediate attention/study/alarm: water leakage, subsidence, fracturing... any of them could lead to collapse. That's probably a gross oversimplification of what TFA was reviewing, but if all the deltas (movement) in an area are trivial and there's no history or evidence of faultlines, that's a safe area. If movement is substantial, nonuniform, sporadic... that's not. Now, why the hell am I handwaving my way thru this crap? Where's a geophysicist when we need one?!
Wow, GP makes an unsubstantiated claim that the nobel is worthless and gets modded +5 insightful. Parent calls bullshit, and lists impacts, questions if there's political motivation for the diatraibe, then lists deserving Nobel-Peace-Prize names, the help the prize granted them and mroe, and gets called flamebait.
By all means, feel free to explain how the individuals you list are *ridiculous* candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize. I'd conceed that this list has names that are contestable, controversial, politically-charged... but ridiculous? The world is nowhere near that black and white, and a human life never fits one definition.
I disagree with one name, I've heard counterarguments that I don't immediately toss aside (due to the source) on a few others... but I also can see how each of them has, for reasons stated by the Nobel Committee's award, impacted the world and our prospects for peace by *some* of their actions.
You claiming devaluation before we agree that the choices are ridiculous is a fallacy. And demanding that a candidate be lily-white is your (wrongheaded) standard, not the Nobel's. FFS, the prize itself comes from a man whose life epitomizes that there can be profound duality in everything we do and every day's acts.
Neither have I, so I was bowled over when my dad started telling about doing so when he worked with military munitions (Germany, 1950's). I knew munitions-rated high explosive needs to be relatively thermal- and impact-stable (it sucks to be blown up by your own gear), but am still amazed that it'd burn kinda like 'sterno' (jellied fuel for non usians).
Slashdot Mirror
Why will this make teh Steve move away?
As for TM vs (C), that's an interesting aspect of Intellectual Property law that I honestly haven't read up on... but upon entry to public domain, it'd potentially be a razor-thin line between 2 renditions of an archtype (and public domain) character. To get away from the character in question here, at what point do the illustrations of Lewis Carroll's books dating from the 1860's-80's (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice's_Adventures_in_Wonderland#Illustrations ) tapdance between their obvious public domain nature and their trademarked near-twins nature as used in movies?
I said that wrong... 'derivative rights'... I meant "the reverting to the public domain grants us:"
IANAL, but I have been a party to IP lawsuits. While I agree with you that you don't get rights to newer content, derivative rights to steamboat willie grant:
-- rights to improve steamboat willie: colorization, a soundtrack, a voice track, improvements to the script/narrative.
-- rights to using the rat (not meant as a slur, but to avoid any mention of a certain 2-word aliterative trademarked character name) elsewhere: a new storyline, a story arch, use in any genre desirable (rat rogers in the 23rd century!), new characters, and adjustments to character appearance.
-- mashup rights.
More interestingly, there's nothing stopping the original content generators from 'raiding the vault' and doing this themselves. Any new content gets a (c)2011. A digital remastering gets (c) 2011. Archives including photos, audio, video of the creators themselves -- new (c) 2011.
Yeah, we can finally hack the bejeebers out of mi ^h^h^h that first bit of content, but SO CAN original copyright holder. And they're professionals. What exactly are the RIAA and MPAA so zealously guarding again!?
And next year (and each year after that) another few bits of content chew thru their chains. After winning the rights question, everything else falls to a question of talent. Hopefully, eventually we learn it's not about control itself, but what gets DONE to enjoy these new members of the public domain.
We'll quickly learn that 90% of everything is crap -- just rent a decades-old non-disney version of any knockoff children's animation flick and brace yourself for the horrible mediocrity. My kids have come home from the video rental shop with a crappy 'thumbelina', a blah collection of americana (Paul Bunyan, Pecos Bill), a graphically-uninspired cinderella and FSM-knows-how-many-other lame also-runs. But they also brought home HR Puffinstuff. In other words, it's like youtube, but from the 70's.
Yo. I'm a let you finish, but first you need to check out platinumtel.com -- stupid cheap per-minute plan. Found it via cellguru's prepaid comparison chart, if memory serves. No other relationship.
RevWaldo, sir, I'd like to subscribe to your Manga.
And 'privileged few'? Who the hell's fault is that? Certainly not the unions. These labor laws will never come into effect with the US's right-of-center politics. Nor will those mythic privacy protections enjoyed in europe, equitable healthcare, etc. Heck, we're losing ground on most of these right now. Huge chunks of middle america seem to think anything more than $17 an hour is undeservedly lavish pay, FFS.
Since you're 'good' at this, maybe you can show how unions are also to blame for the existence of Paris Hilton?
Are we reading the same Jason? I mean, fear of scarcity vs. empire building are hardly 'same thing by degrees', and what Medea did was... er... not the sort of thing that leads to a monty python sketch ("Help, help, I'm being repressed!").
(.... sigh, johnny went to google Jan 18, 2011... why the hell didn't *that* exit make slashdot?) That reinforces the braindrain message from TFA, but I still believe many microsoft technologies drive markets. Not Bing (how busted do you have to be to copy a competitor and still score several percent lower?)
tags and this paragraph still won't end!)
The rest of your rant reads a lot like antimac screeds calling osx, the ipod, then the iphone being co-opted rehashes of (insert mumblemumble). That doesn't matter -- Kinect is better by the bottom line: it sells like hotcakes and has features that force the market to compete with it.
tl;dr: Kinect is a game-changer.
Sorry it doesn't fit your vision of Microsoft being a kludgeworks, but neither do (for their own reasons) Win Server 2k8, XBox Live, Powershell, Windows 7, Sharepoint, etc. The truth is somewhere in between. Given corporate tendencies to bloat with bureaucracies, I'm actually impressed with the last few years of MSFT.
(Full Disclosure: I admin Linux servers at work and have 2 of 9 of my own computers/handhelds running OSX or Linux -- so I'm definitely NOT a win fanboy)
How many years have libertarians or others been threatening to scurry to some state and declare it theirs? It's like threats of going Galt; all sorts of strutting and bold claims until someone actually has to act as promised, whereupon the plan implodes as everyone hesitates, then decides they'll do it... uh... soon. Besides, there's a new season of [insert reality tv title] coming up soon.
Try typing 'Global Thermonuclear War' instead of 'hello'.
Photographers have used ownership of copyright and markup on copies made for virtually the entire history of photography. It isn't Olin Mills. *EVERYONE* in the field knows this, most use it.
If you want to fight the power, try to hire a photographer (or videographer) who doesn't retain copyright (i.e., they'll sign a work-for-hire contract). Just don't be shocked if the few photogs that'll say yes give you work whose quality's a bit diminished or charge *considerably* more.
That markup on reprints and derivative work is what pays for lights, studio rent, staff, maintenance on hardware, etc.
TANSTAFL.
At first thought you were pushing a fake _yet another bogus detail_ troll. Hadn't heard about the gender change, but what's it matter, really.
So now we call them The Wachowski's. Big deal. Even saves a word. It's not like the Baldwins, where there are several actors to confuse, including one that's unrelated(The Man they call Jayne!).
tl;dr: British Imperialism applied to Sense of Humor.
This.
Dipping componentry in resin has always been an excellent counterpart to eggshells or glass: Tamper-evident, cheap/easy/trivial to manufacture, damn hard to nondestructively breach and reassemble.
Fascinating.
Since these facilities were opened, we've added comsat, gps, ISS, and countless military/industrial/commercial space programs. NASA provides data for everything from urban planning to weather to crop planning and cultivation, and is involved in deep space research, materials science, world climate research and god knows what else.
But Apollo and a closing space shuttle program mean these facilities should be mothballed.
God I hate the stupid that comes out when slashdotters start speaking authoritatively about NASA. "It's not like it's rocket science..."
Non-disclaimer: I have never earned a dime for/from anything NASA-related.
um, We attacked Japan?
Either your fingers got ahead of you or I need someone to 'splain where my admittedly-lame US-ian education got that detail backwards...
It's not digital, but for sheer awesome age of the data recovered, my vote would go to the audio recovered from phonautograms here: http://www.firstsounds.org/sounds/scott.php
I feel dumber for having clicked that link:
Newfoundland comedian wha?
Bane of high school students everywhere huh?
Stupid jokey crap that never ends?!
Shit, if I want god-knows-how-many-paragraphs of lead-in followed by a bunch of handwavy bullshit seemingly intended for people that enjoy feeling smart without having to think or understand things, I'd get a subscription to People magazine.
While the underlying news is definitely for nerds, THIS was not the link we're looking for.
While we're at it, can we ban all mouthbreathers from consuming oxygen until they've gone through a rigorous training exercise for how to properly consume air?
("hmm, about 90 minutes should be sufficient ... .wait, no, no! I've got a headcold!")
Snark aside, "walking is a right" and yet where I live there are *months* where sidewalks on major streets are piled with icy road-plowing debris until nobody can reasonably walk them. This drops my enthusiasm for treating driving licenses and hypotheticals like yours as privileges.
Was going to give eldavojohn a tl;dr flame because he sounded a bit like one of those bad slashdot commenters dissing scientists' real work in favor of intuition, but I recognize his nick and that's not his style. On rereading, Eldavojohn prolly is asking like he did because he's curious and the issues seem counterintuitive, not because he thought he was being insightful (stupid mod system needs a '+1 good question')
Earthquakes and plate tectonics don't map ideally to simple, intuitive physics. Then again, nothing does.
IANAG, but the earth's surface as a giant rubbery sheet analogy works a bit *IF* one remembers that every atom in that giant sheet of rubber has net-force vectors pulling them. Lower layers that are well-adhered causing drag, other areas that move more easily, gravity, surge/subsidence due to deep-crust activity, hydraulic forces (literally, as in aquifers causing pressure/flow), shear forces and edges where contradictory motion causes drag. And compression, which is stored energy. Some geological structures are really boring (stable) and all of these forces are minor. I'm guessing that'd be the US midwest. Others could have an order or two of magnitude more action.
We get a glimpse of these dynamics (especially compressive forces, movement and accumulated shear forces) by tracking positions carefully. I ran into this monitoring huge dams: if monitoring points' relative positions across both a dam and the canyon walls adjacent remain fairly uniform, life's good. If anything (or the 2nd-order function: rate of movement) changes dramatically, it's cause for immediate attention/study/alarm: water leakage, subsidence, fracturing... any of them could lead to collapse. That's probably a gross oversimplification of what TFA was reviewing, but if all the deltas (movement) in an area are trivial and there's no history or evidence of faultlines, that's a safe area. If movement is substantial, nonuniform, sporadic... that's not. Now, why the hell am I handwaving my way thru this crap? Where's a geophysicist when we need one?!
Wow, GP makes an unsubstantiated claim that the nobel is worthless and gets modded +5 insightful. Parent calls bullshit, and lists impacts, questions if there's political motivation for the diatraibe, then lists deserving Nobel-Peace-Prize names, the help the prize granted them and mroe, and gets called flamebait.
Bravo, slashdot. The stupidity burns...
By all means, feel free to explain how the individuals you list are *ridiculous* candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize. I'd conceed that this list has names that are contestable, controversial, politically-charged... but ridiculous? The world is nowhere near that black and white, and a human life never fits one definition.
I disagree with one name, I've heard counterarguments that I don't immediately toss aside (due to the source) on a few others... but I also can see how each of them has, for reasons stated by the Nobel Committee's award, impacted the world and our prospects for peace by *some* of their actions.
You claiming devaluation before we agree that the choices are ridiculous is a fallacy. And demanding that a candidate be lily-white is your (wrongheaded) standard, not the Nobel's. FFS, the prize itself comes from a man whose life epitomizes that there can be profound duality in everything we do and every day's acts.
Apparently you've never cooked with C-4.
Neither have I, so I was bowled over when my dad started telling about doing so when he worked with military munitions (Germany, 1950's). I knew munitions-rated high explosive needs to be relatively thermal- and impact-stable (it sucks to be blown up by your own gear), but am still amazed that it'd burn kinda like 'sterno' (jellied fuel for non usians).