The vast majority don't live in Hicksville with you. I think you'll find infant mortality is quite high in places called Africa and Asia. Ask your geography teacher to show you them on a map, you fat imbecile.
I don't think the kids in Africa and Asia would be helped much by GPS tracking, either. Plastic is not a good source of nutrition, after all, you skinny genius.
Oh please. The vast majority of kids today are not subjected to GPS tracking, and yet they survive. Birth rates are irrelevant here, as most of the things that threaten a child's survival cannot be solved via GPS tracking?
Unless this girl is the sort of kid who easily gets lost due to some medical issue, knowing her personally is quite irrelevant to whether she needs to be tracked via GPS.
For kids who are normal, this sort of thing best viewed as a statistical problem: Of the thousands of children a school has to deal with, only a very small percentage of them will encounter such issues and then only very rarely. Attaching a GPS to this girl is ultimately a brilliant technical solution to a statistically insignificant problem.
Are you joking? Let me fill you in... Obama doesn't give a rat's ass about copyright legislation. He has a nuclear-armed Korea threatening war, a nuclear-armed Pakistan fighting for its life against the Taliban, extreme tensions between Israel and Iran (one of which has nukes, and the other's probably working on it), two wars of our own to deal with, a collapsed global economy, and on top of that, he still probably wants to get his universal health care plan rolling.
He cares enough about copyright to appoint former RIAA lawyers to the DOJ, and in any case I think he's capable of worrying about more than just those things you happen to see as significant.
This wouldn't bug me as much if the new garbage collector were only included as part of a paid-for distribution, but the fact that they're charging for the way it's used rather than for the right to obtain a copy of it makes me worry about additional restrictions on use being added in the future. I hope there's enough people making backups of all of Sun's open source software.
"And SAP, for its part, says it has 'searched extensively' for the system and wants it 'as much or more' as Waste Management, since it 'will help SAP disprove WM's fraud claim.'"
Hmm... "I want police to find my wife as much or more as the District Attorney, since she will help disprove the DA's claim that I killed her and neatly disposed of her body."
Coca cola already contains real Coca, with the cocaine removed. There is only one company licensed to import Coca leafs into the US, and as far as I'm aware they only sell the extract to Coca Cola.
Nice way to get a legal monopoly on that special "Coca Cola" flavor, no?
What if the software did not include the keys itself but provided an option to pull them from a known location on the internet (or maybe from torrents using a magnet link)?
I don't know, but if I were the one distributing the software I'd be afraid to include any links to the encryption keys.
Interesting. According to Wikipedia, rtmpdump included encryption keys taken from Adobe Flash, which unfortunately means Adobe most likely has a legitimate DMCA case against it and any other implementation that were to include a copy of the encryption keys. Clean rooming would be irrelevant if the actual encryption keys were included in any other project.
It's not as if copyright law explicitly makes exceptions for "clean room" procedures. It's something the judge decides on a case by case basis and is informed by precedent, and therefore is more like fair use -- which is hardly the most precise of definitions.
It means reverse engineering a protocol or specification with no access to any outside information of any form.
No. From Sony v Connectix, on appeal:
The question then becomes whether the methods by which Connectix reverse-engineered the Sony BIOS were necessary to gain access to the unprotected functional elements within the program. We conclude that they were. Connectix employed several methods of reverse engineering (observation and observation with partial disassembly) each of which required Connectix to make intermediate copies of copyrighted material. Neither of these methods renders fair use protection inapplicable. Sega expressly sanctioned [p*604] disassembly. See id. at 1527-28. We see no reason to distinguish observation of copyrighted software in an emulated computer environment. Both methods require the reverse engineer to copy protected as well as unprotected elements of the computer program. Because this intermediate copying is the gravamen of the intermediate infringement claim, see 17 U.S.C. 106(1); Sega, 977 F.2d at 1518-19, and both methods of reverse engineering require it, we find no reason inherent in these methods to prefer one to another as a matter of copyright law. Connectix presented evidence that it observed the Sony BIOS in an emulated environment to observe the functional aspects of the Sony BIOS. When this method of reverse engineering was unsuccessful, Connectix engineers disassembled discrete portions of the Sony BIOS to view directly the ideas contained therein. We conclude that intermediate copying in this manner was "necessary" within the meaning of Sega.
Evidently, you don't. It's really quite simple: Party A looks at the rtmpdump source code and writes a document describing the protocol at the level necessary to create a compatible implementation. Party B looks at the document describing the protocol and creates an implementation of the protocol that contains no source code from rtmpdump. Party B now has a clean-room implementation of RTMPE.
"The parents have to consent to cameras in the computers, otherwise they are removed."
This is why I'm not too excited by the prospect of schools giving computers to every child. Not that the computers might have built-in cameras, but that the schools are in control of how children use the computers they are required to use for school. It's, potentially, an authoritarian wet dream.
I agree. I don't recall Atari games looking quite that bad on my TV screen. The effect here is more like looking at an old CRT from two inches apart, except you're really much further away.
Lessig supported Obama during his presidential candidacy. How ironic, then, that the very candidate he supported all along ended up appointing people who stand for the very opposite of what Lessig has stood for as the public face of Creative Commons. Judging by his record so far, I seriously doubt Obama would ever appoint somebody like Lessig to the position of Copyright Czar, and besides I'm not sure the job is all that compatible with the principles of the Creative Commons movement.
Attributor would keep track of it all and manage the requests for payment.
If I were running a website with advertising on it I'd be worried about the accuracy of Attributor's attributions. How often would I lose money due to false positives? How often would I lose money due to fair-use citations?
I don't trust these kinds of systems, and I wouldn't want my revenue to depend upon them.
I wonder how much less money Slashdot would make through Google Ads if its stories were run through Attributor.
You aren't an atheist, you're afraid of religion. A true atheist wouldn't be afraid of it, they just wouldn't care.
An atheist wouldn't be afraid of God, which is quite a different thing to fear than religion. There are many legitimate reasons to fear religion, not the least of which is the way in which it warps the minds of the young.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think the kids in Africa and Asia would be helped much by GPS tracking, either. Plastic is not a good source of nutrition, after all, you skinny genius.
"Much higher birth rates."
Oh please. The vast majority of kids today are not subjected to GPS tracking, and yet they survive. Birth rates are irrelevant here, as most of the things that threaten a child's survival cannot be solved via GPS tracking?
Unless this girl is the sort of kid who easily gets lost due to some medical issue, knowing her personally is quite irrelevant to whether she needs to be tracked via GPS.
For kids who are normal, this sort of thing best viewed as a statistical problem: Of the thousands of children a school has to deal with, only a very small percentage of them will encounter such issues and then only very rarely. Attaching a GPS to this girl is ultimately a brilliant technical solution to a statistically insignificant problem.
OP is right. It's all just paranoia.
I hope you're right, but the fact is he's also appointed others who've worked in the interest of aggressive copyright holders.
He cares enough about copyright to appoint former RIAA lawyers to the DOJ, and in any case I think he's capable of worrying about more than just those things you happen to see as significant.
This wouldn't bug me as much if the new garbage collector were only included as part of a paid-for distribution, but the fact that they're charging for the way it's used rather than for the right to obtain a copy of it makes me worry about additional restrictions on use being added in the future. I hope there's enough people making backups of all of Sun's open source software.
"And SAP, for its part, says it has 'searched extensively' for the system and wants it 'as much or more' as Waste Management, since it 'will help SAP disprove WM's fraud claim.'"
Hmm... "I want police to find my wife as much or more as the District Attorney, since she will help disprove the DA's claim that I killed her and neatly disposed of her body."
Did i tell you about my memory condition?
My eyes say "yes," but my memory condition says "no".
Coca cola already contains real Coca, with the cocaine removed. There is only one company licensed to import Coca leafs into the US, and as far as I'm aware they only sell the extract to Coca Cola.
Nice way to get a legal monopoly on that special "Coca Cola" flavor, no?
I don't know, but if I were the one distributing the software I'd be afraid to include any links to the encryption keys.
Interesting. According to Wikipedia, rtmpdump included encryption keys taken from Adobe Flash, which unfortunately means Adobe most likely has a legitimate DMCA case against it and any other implementation that were to include a copy of the encryption keys. Clean rooming would be irrelevant if the actual encryption keys were included in any other project.
Clean room is legally carefully defined.
[citation needed]
It's not as if copyright law explicitly makes exceptions for "clean room" procedures. It's something the judge decides on a case by case basis and is informed by precedent, and therefore is more like fair use -- which is hardly the most precise of definitions.
It means reverse engineering a protocol or specification with no access to any outside information of any form.
No. From Sony v Connectix, on appeal:
Someone doesn't know what "clean room" means
Evidently, you don't. It's really quite simple: Party A looks at the rtmpdump source code and writes a document describing the protocol at the level necessary to create a compatible implementation. Party B looks at the document describing the protocol and creates an implementation of the protocol that contains no source code from rtmpdump. Party B now has a clean-room implementation of RTMPE.
"Real adults are far past that stage and have no real desire to subject themselves to unsavory sights and sounds."
So... no real adult, and certainly no true Scotsman would do such a thing?
"The parents have to consent to cameras in the computers, otherwise they are removed."
This is why I'm not too excited by the prospect of schools giving computers to every child. Not that the computers might have built-in cameras, but that the schools are in control of how children use the computers they are required to use for school. It's, potentially, an authoritarian wet dream.
I agree. I don't recall Atari games looking quite that bad on my TV screen. The effect here is more like looking at an old CRT from two inches apart, except you're really much further away.
Had the VCR been invented in a copyright climate like today's, would it ever have survived the legal attack against it?
I'm trying to figure out what's different, other than the fact we now have the DMCA.
Lessig supported Obama during his presidential candidacy. How ironic, then, that the very candidate he supported all along ended up appointing people who stand for the very opposite of what Lessig has stood for as the public face of Creative Commons. Judging by his record so far, I seriously doubt Obama would ever appoint somebody like Lessig to the position of Copyright Czar, and besides I'm not sure the job is all that compatible with the principles of the Creative Commons movement.
If I were running a website with advertising on it I'd be worried about the accuracy of Attributor's attributions. How often would I lose money due to false positives? How often would I lose money due to fair-use citations?
I don't trust these kinds of systems, and I wouldn't want my revenue to depend upon them.
I wonder how much less money Slashdot would make through Google Ads if its stories were run through Attributor.
An atheist wouldn't be afraid of God, which is quite a different thing to fear than religion. There are many legitimate reasons to fear religion, not the least of which is the way in which it warps the minds of the young.
I'd be equally as upset. Would you, on the other hand, be quite as dismissive of it as you are now being?
Hence the Libertarian credo: TANSTAAFP!
That's why the blogger is calling for a boycott, rather than a lawsuit.
No. If the defendant rolls a 20, he has to pay double damages.
They might, but they are not supposed to.