What difference does it make? Anything produced today won't be in the public domain until well into the 22nd century. In fact, anything produced in our lifetimes will be covered by copyright until probably long after any of us are dead.
This will only increase when Disney sees fit to buy another Congress. Orrin Hatch call your office.
At the rate this is going, I can see Senators having to use scientific notation for something other than how much money they are squandering.
Hey, no fair. You're interpreting the clearly spelled out intention with which the Constitution was written. You know that's not allowed any more. I think it is you that has failed Civics 101. How else can you explain the massive accumulation of Federal Power that started in the latter half of the 19th century and has greatly accelerated in the past 50 years? If your interpretation of the simple, unambiguous and plain-spoken words of the Constitution, specifically enumerating those powers the Federal government can have, and the Bill of Rights, specifically forbidden the government to exercise any powers not specifically listed in the main body of the Constitution, is correct, then where does the Federal government come off regulating, oh, I dunno, such minutia as how your toilet should work?
I'm sorry, but your very obvious, common-sensical world view conflicts with the reality we see all around us, and therefore must be completely insane, because we know the democratically elected officials of the greatest nation on the Earth would never behave in such a ludricrously corrupt manner.
Of course, all this is moot because AOL is not part of the government, but don't tell these people because it's fun the watch them get all exercised about it.
You have the right not to give them the information in the first place. Once you give them the information, they have the right to do with it whatever they please. It is to your benefit that they have a stated policy describing what they will and won't do with the information. You are giving them information, they are giving you information back. It's a quid quo pro, even if what you are giving them isn't of any particular value.
If you don't want to risk your privacy being invaded, then don't give out the information in the first place. That's where your rights come in, and how you need to comport yourself if you want to maintain your privacy.
What if they said, "Give us naked pictures of your girlfriend." and you say, "OK, here you go, but according to my right to privacy, you aren't allowed to look at them."
Exactly who in this scenario is being foolish, naive and downright stupid in expecting them to abide by that, given that there is no reason, under the law or anything else, that they should?
That's just it. They'll end up with "every video" and I still won't be able to find anything. People complain that eMusic.com doesn't have much selection because the major labels snub them. Well, I've been digging on Napster, and for supposedly having a million and a half songs, I can't even find a lot of mainstream stuff. I'm talking songs that were big hits in the 70's and 80's. I have little hope that these guys will come up with a selection of videos that's actually interesting (or as interesting as all the stuff people are uploading despite copyrights).
What's even funnier is that in Michio Kaku's latest book "Parallel Worlds" (and as a bigshot physicist, he _should_ know better... although maybe it was an editor's mistake), he referred to the number 10^100 as a "google".
Of course, there was another serious typo in the book (a logarithmic time-line that should have been in seconds, but was labelled in years. Great book nonetheless.
I don't know. I'm 41 and I hack and wack, although I'm pretty good at it, but I've been having some problems on and off. It's not getting worse (or I'm getting more tolerant of it), but I definitely can't play video games (with a controller like Gamecube, etc) very long without my hands hurting. Of course, I don't usually play console games, but the fact that it happens bothers me.
We'll see. I try to be reasonable and exercise my hands, but, well, we'll see...
The "terrorists" (knowing this describes lots of different people from potentially lots of groups) seem to want to do Big Things. I would think they would be a whole lot more effective at terror if they went for numerous small targets. However, they don't seem to want to do that, and of course, I'm very glad.
I don't begin to understand the psychology that drives these people to kill, nor do I understand why they want the Big Enchilada as opposed to more numerous smaller, softer targets, which I think would do more damage.
Of course, hat's off and great appreciation and respect for those hard-working individuals in the U.S. and U.K. who are working tireless to prevent these horrible tragedies, as well as our brave military and our leaders, who are maybe making some wrong decisions, but I do believe they are trying to do what's best for the U.S., the U.K. and the rest of the world.
To be fair, there isn't a whole lot AOL can do about the data that's already been released. In fact, nothing. That genie's out of the bottle, and while it is totally their fault for allowing someone to make such an enormously foolish and potentially dangerous decision, they have stated that they are taking steps so that it won't happen again. Believe me, with so many people looking for an excuse to further bash AOL, they won't dare let this kind of thing continue.
"Not keeping data like this" doesn't make any sense at all and doesn't accomplish any good for customers. Indeed there is great value in understanding what searches are made and how the search process can be improved. Keeping this kind of data secure is sufficient in my mind. The last two sentences are something I would agree with.
I just have to wonder who would be stupid enough to not realize the ramifications of doing this. It doesn't take "thorough vetting" to figure out that this would cause a firestorm of bad publicity.
Of course, the real lesson here is: Don't do anything on the Internet you wouldn't want your mother to find out about. There is no anonymity on the Web. It doesn't take a stupid decision by a large company to prove this.
Next you'll be telling me there was a sequel to the movie "The Highlander".
Yeah, but if they did that, they'd probably make a really crappy one and have to do a third just to set the record straight... better they don't do any more.
Everything was corny, and would appear to lack polish compared to today's shows.
I would disagree. I've been watching old Twilight Zone episodes from Netflix, and while the ideas they had have been beaten to death, I find them them to be pretty fresh and engaging.
Now production quality, sure. But that's technology. Any knob can use technology, but it takes real talent to write and direct a good story.
But maybe I'm unconsciously cutting the show slack because it's so old.
Shoot, physicists are even starting to examine the possibility of warp drives as a means of travel.
The warp drive concept was lifted from theoretical physics from the 60's and earlier, not the other way around. I think you'd be surprised (as I often am) how old a lot of these ideas really are.
There I'm enough of a nerd to be able to make references, or to know there was actually a proposal to add Klingon letters to the Unicode standard, even if I don't know anything about the language itself...
It;s tough balancing being a geek with actually having a life.:-)
Didn't they just discover proof that Centrinos have mass? I hear they've got some neat experiments set up for the Large Hadron Collider when it comes online.
From the point of view of creating technology, who cares?
Once it can be demonstrated, then you can worry about the legal issues of combining photos from disparate sources with, presumably, disparate rights.
If MS can deliver the technological goods, that will be quite an accomplishment. Especially since so little of the cool stuff MS Research does gets to see the light of day.
Possibly, but they want to retool the show a bit... change the name, the city it's set in. I'm sure there will be a new cast too, although the "Bring 'em On!" guy already has a contract to appear. Oh, and Jesse Jackson has already filed a suit alleging that tropical depressions are racist. I hear he's going to call for a boycott of NOAA and the National Weather Service if there aren't more white victims this year.
Slashdot Mirror
I can.
Can Senator Stevens?
What difference does it make? Anything produced today won't be in the public domain until well into the 22nd century. In fact, anything produced in our lifetimes will be covered by copyright until probably long after any of us are dead.
This will only increase when Disney sees fit to buy another Congress. Orrin Hatch call your office.
At the rate this is going, I can see Senators having to use scientific notation for something other than how much money they are squandering.
Hey, no fair. You're interpreting the clearly spelled out intention with which the Constitution was written. You know that's not allowed any more. I think it is you that has failed Civics 101. How else can you explain the massive accumulation of Federal Power that started in the latter half of the 19th century and has greatly accelerated in the past 50 years? If your interpretation of the simple, unambiguous and plain-spoken words of the Constitution, specifically enumerating those powers the Federal government can have, and the Bill of Rights, specifically forbidden the government to exercise any powers not specifically listed in the main body of the Constitution, is correct, then where does the Federal government come off regulating, oh, I dunno, such minutia as how your toilet should work?
I'm sorry, but your very obvious, common-sensical world view conflicts with the reality we see all around us, and therefore must be completely insane, because we know the democratically elected officials of the greatest nation on the Earth would never behave in such a ludricrously corrupt manner.
Of course, all this is moot because AOL is not part of the government, but don't tell these people because it's fun the watch them get all exercised about it.
You have the right not to give them the information in the first place. Once you give them the information, they have the right to do with it whatever they please. It is to your benefit that they have a stated policy describing what they will and won't do with the information. You are giving them information, they are giving you information back. It's a quid quo pro, even if what you are giving them isn't of any particular value.
If you don't want to risk your privacy being invaded, then don't give out the information in the first place. That's where your rights come in, and how you need to comport yourself if you want to maintain your privacy.
What if they said, "Give us naked pictures of your girlfriend." and you say, "OK, here you go, but according to my right to privacy, you aren't allowed to look at them."
Exactly who in this scenario is being foolish, naive and downright stupid in expecting them to abide by that, given that there is no reason, under the law or anything else, that they should?
Hint: It's not them.
If you want privacy, don't use the search engine.
How hard is that to understand?
You are giving them the information, yet you insist that they not receive the information?
That's just it. They'll end up with "every video" and I still won't be able to find anything. People complain that eMusic.com doesn't have much selection because the major labels snub them. Well, I've been digging on Napster, and for supposedly having a million and a half songs, I can't even find a lot of mainstream stuff. I'm talking songs that were big hits in the 70's and 80's. I have little hope that these guys will come up with a selection of videos that's actually interesting (or as interesting as all the stuff people are uploading despite copyrights).
What's even funnier is that in Michio Kaku's latest book "Parallel Worlds" (and as a bigshot physicist, he _should_ know better... although maybe it was an editor's mistake), he referred to the number 10^100 as a "google".
Of course, there was another serious typo in the book (a logarithmic time-line that should have been in seconds, but was labelled in years. Great book nonetheless.
Oh, they mean _legally_.
OK. That's nice.
I don't know. I'm 41 and I hack and wack, although I'm pretty good at it, but I've been having some problems on and off. It's not getting worse (or I'm getting more tolerant of it), but I definitely can't play video games (with a controller like Gamecube, etc) very long without my hands hurting. Of course, I don't usually play console games, but the fact that it happens bothers me.
We'll see. I try to be reasonable and exercise my hands, but, well, we'll see...
You've never heard of touch-typing, have you?
The "terrorists" (knowing this describes lots of different people from potentially lots of groups) seem to want to do Big Things. I would think they would be a whole lot more effective at terror if they went for numerous small targets. However, they don't seem to want to do that, and of course, I'm very glad.
I don't begin to understand the psychology that drives these people to kill, nor do I understand why they want the Big Enchilada as opposed to more numerous smaller, softer targets, which I think would do more damage.
Of course, hat's off and great appreciation and respect for those hard-working individuals in the U.S. and U.K. who are working tireless to prevent these horrible tragedies, as well as our brave military and our leaders, who are maybe making some wrong decisions, but I do believe they are trying to do what's best for the U.S., the U.K. and the rest of the world.
You are clearly doing something wrong, or your emulator is broken, or you're trying to run a DOS emulator on a 386-20.
If they do not, then they have done nothing but say, "We will feign remorse when we get caught." That is not good enough.
You're right, I guess. But that's what everyone else does, including the government. Why should we expect any different?
Ah yes, I will always love Mr. Tesla's comment to another much more famous inventor, which I'm paraphrasing.
If Mr. Edison thought a little harder, maybe he wouldn't perspire so much.
Tesla never got the credit he deserved... sometimes the world needs wild-eyed visionaries.
To be fair, there isn't a whole lot AOL can do about the data that's already been released. In fact, nothing. That genie's out of the bottle, and while it is totally their fault for allowing someone to make such an enormously foolish and potentially dangerous decision, they have stated that they are taking steps so that it won't happen again. Believe me, with so many people looking for an excuse to further bash AOL, they won't dare let this kind of thing continue.
"Not keeping data like this" doesn't make any sense at all and doesn't accomplish any good for customers. Indeed there is great value in understanding what searches are made and how the search process can be improved. Keeping this kind of data secure is sufficient in my mind. The last two sentences are something I would agree with.
I just have to wonder who would be stupid enough to not realize the ramifications of doing this. It doesn't take "thorough vetting" to figure out that this would cause a firestorm of bad publicity.
Of course, the real lesson here is: Don't do anything on the Internet you wouldn't want your mother to find out about. There is no anonymity on the Web. It doesn't take a stupid decision by a large company to prove this.
Next you'll be telling me there was a sequel to the movie "The Highlander".
Yeah, but if they did that, they'd probably make a really crappy one and have to do a third just to set the record straight... better they don't do any more.
Although it might have made a good TV series.
Yeah, but you oughta see 'em soon, because as soon as he locates a six-pack of Mountain Dew, he's gonna snarf 'em both.
Everything was corny, and would appear to lack polish compared to today's shows.
I would disagree. I've been watching old Twilight Zone episodes from Netflix, and while the ideas they had have been beaten to death, I find them them to be pretty fresh and engaging.
Now production quality, sure. But that's technology. Any knob can use technology, but it takes real talent to write and direct a good story.
But maybe I'm unconsciously cutting the show slack because it's so old.
Shoot, physicists are even starting to examine the possibility of warp drives as a means of travel.
The warp drive concept was lifted from theoretical physics from the 60's and earlier, not the other way around. I think you'd be surprised (as I often am) how old a lot of these ideas really are.
There I'm enough of a nerd to be able to make references, or to know there was actually a proposal to add Klingon letters to the Unicode standard, even if I don't know anything about the language itself...
:-)
It;s tough balancing being a geek with actually having a life.
Opinions are great! Everyone should have one!
Thanks, shreak. Of course, it seems most people don't agree because my post got modded down past the Mohorovicic Discontinuity.
Kinda proves the point I was trying to make, don'tcha think?
Didn't they just discover proof that Centrinos have mass? I hear they've got some neat experiments set up for the Large Hadron Collider when it comes online.
It's not funny if you have to explain it. Now THAT'S spineless. A true warrior is never afraid to offend. /.)
(Besides, this is
From the point of view of creating technology, who cares?
Once it can be demonstrated, then you can worry about the legal issues of combining photos from disparate sources with, presumably, disparate rights.
If MS can deliver the technological goods, that will be quite an accomplishment. Especially since so little of the cool stuff MS Research does gets to see the light of day.
I don't know what you are talking about. The SAT had plenty of questions like:
LOL is to as BRB is to:
a.) NSFW
b.) ROFL
c.) YT?
d.) TTFN
Possibly, but they want to retool the show a bit... change the name, the city it's set in. I'm sure there will be a new cast too, although the "Bring 'em On!" guy already has a contract to appear. Oh, and Jesse Jackson has already filed a suit alleging that tropical depressions are racist. I hear he's going to call for a boycott of NOAA and the National Weather Service if there aren't more white victims this year.