Copyright terms should be max(author, spouse). When you're dead, it's time to pay society back for what you have built on top of a civilization that was here long before you were born.
Copyright terms should be max(author, spouse). When you're dead, it's time to pay society back for what you have built on top of a civilization that was here long before you were born.
There are times when I think they should be no more than about 25 years period.
Unless you're a one-trick pony, if you're any good, you should have been producing other works as well, thus keeping a continuous stream of copyrighted works collecting royalties.
As it is, you can be a JD Salinger, pop out one opus and be basically an artistic dead weight with no incentive to contribute further.
Ironic, isn't it? A private-enterprise concept whose rules encourage one of the major things we pretend to despise about socialism - being non-productive.
Government, kings and so on are just proxies for your ability to keep land or property. Without it, you would protect your land bu ypurself using whatever means you can.
Or more likely, some marauding horde would come storming in, burn your house, rape your women, enslave your children and quite possibly set themselves up to become what would eventually evolve into a kingdom/government.
Because most of us cannot afford to maintain our own private armies and the Magnificent Seven often are off defending someone else's property.
There's a reason that Abraham had a "tribe" and not a "family", even though a tribe is often an extended (large) family. And why hospitality was such a remarked-upon thng. Because any time someone from outside the tribe showed up, there was potential for trouble.
Think of how many Shakespeare works couldn't have been done if someone else had held copyright. Julius Caesar, Name-any-Random-English-King, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, MacBeth, probably a Merchant of Venice, Midsummer Night's Dream, and so forth.
Really? 'Cause a lot of people have no territorial ownership.
The concept is innate. The actual act varies. That's what confused a lot of the original migratory inhabitants of North America. They thought that the land belonged to everyone and the most "ownership" they claimed was to keep other people from getting the food first. Then the Europeans came in and parked permanently on it.
Territorial ownership gets a leg up when territory is no longer a commodity. Because it's being farmed, mined, or otherwise exploited in a unique way.
Hammermill, Brother, and Keurig aren't going to get pushed around by anyone.
Don't be so sure. Those UPC barcodes on everything came from Wal-Mart's foisting them off on anyone who even dreamed of seeing their products in the Walton stores.
There's a lawnmower manufacturer who balked, because they didn't want their quality standards watered down by fiat just so they could be an Everyday Low Price in the Wal-Mart garden shop, but a lot of companies aren't so devoted.
I think if someone were to create a simulation model of a truly free market with no regulation, and seed it with hundreds (thousands) of little businesses to start with, given enough time, you'll end up single monopoly that controls every industry, service, and product.
It seems to depend on what the business is. If a business is capital-intensive, commodity-based and can benefit from economies of scale chances are that, yes, a positive feedback loop will be established and, as the old maxim goes, "nothing succeeds like success".
On the other hand, not all businesses are driven solely on price. Multiple big players exist in such things as fast food and pizza joints, but within the big chains, I'll avoid MacDonalds and hit Burger King because to me McD's milkshakes taste like library paste. And the local neighborhood pizzaria beats Papa John's 20 ways from Sunday. Because what they're selling is a commodity only in broad terms.
There exist also Natural Monopolies where it's essentially a Buyer's or Seller's Market. A classic example is a product that requires laying down underground cables to individual residences. It's simply not tolerable to have 37 different companies rooting around in the dirt all the time, so the "last mile" belongs to a chosen few.
Stuff like this is why auto-quacking that The Market Solves Everything makes one look like an idiot. There are so many exceptions even before the big mean government steps in. In fact, a true Free Market is a pretty rare (and often short-lived) bird.
I think the biggest take-away from this is that in the very near future every 'application' will be its own container.
It depends. I have certain services that I feel obligated to run on physical hosts, not necessarily dedicated. I also have certain services that have their own private VMs. For example, all the email servers including mailing list servers. Some pre-packaged Docker services have multiple daemons in them, such as Ngnix and MongoDB. And I have certain services of my own that are single-app containers. Nice to have flexibility.
I've yet to inflict systemd on any of these and I'm in no hurry to do so. I can dimly perceive how systemd is supposed to make containerization work better and I hope it does, but the hell-spawn part (specifically the abomination that is journalctl) has kept me from rushing to embrace it.
don't fix it. I mean sure I'd like more features and stuff, but it works out of the box. No tweaking (other than to guest vm's) or anything necessary. It just works. Sure there are other (paid) alternatives out there but VirtualBox does it's job well for me.
VirtualBox is one of the most frequently-broken packages in my system. I run Vagrant and Fedora. Vagrant is supposed to have extensions for Xen, KVM and libvirt, but they're not part of the core package and the Fedora support for them is dicey (to be fair, developers say that's because Vagrant itself is somewhat quirky).
Red Hat and related distros don't let you mix and match kernels and kernel modules. If you get a kernel update, you have to get the kmod-VirtualBox update too.
The last Fedora 20 kernel update I got wasn't provided with a kmod-VirtualBox update (they tend to lag at the best of times), so I was forced to upgrade to Fedora 21. Which in turn, gave me new reasons to hate systemd, since bizarrely, the Fedora 21 systemd seems to have dropped some of the diagnostic logging I was getting off service modules in Fedora 20. If I hadn't remembered what the problem was in Fedora 20 (someone assumed the wrong name and location of a pidfile in the systemd service definition), I'd still be trying to get things working.
So I'm not real keen on the assumption that everyone can just walk away from maintenance and things will keep running.
Take for example a bull that breaks through a fence and breeds with some of my cattle. Do I have to pay a breeding fee for you bull's "service" to my herd? No.
Actually, that's a really bad example. It has been a point of contention throughout history. In fact, IIRC, the Old Testament sets forth rules on that very topic.
Anecdotal? I don't think I'd use that word to describe something that can be objectively determined by anyone willing to look at the numbers.
The snideness about Libertarianism and the Free Market comes from the fact that very, very few markets are really Free Markets, government or no government.
To be truly free, not only do you have to be free of government regulation, you must not be able to profit by economies of scale (positive feedback loops, which help form monopolies), not have a natural monopoly (that is, only you can produce Jackson Pollock paintings because you're Jackson Pollock), and not have such a major mismatch between buyers and sellers that one side or another can unilaterally set terms the way that say, corporations can for most non-union employees.
That basically means Free Markets mostly exist as things things like neighborhood pizza joints and dry cleaners and even dry cleaners may be endangered if a recent franchise ad I saw recently comes to anything.
We laugh not because the Free Market "is a failure", but because the Free Market is such a rare beast that it's simply not available to cure all the problems that it's alleged to be capable of curing. And on top of that, the Free Market doesn't select for happy customers, or even quality for quality's sake, it selects for maximum profitability. Which is why Your Call is VERY Important To Us, so Please Stay on the Line. Average Waiting Time is now... 54 minutes.
The only barriers now are that it is a huge initial capital expense and large incumbents who will try every dirty trick to block new entrants.
The bolded part describes a government-mandated monopoly, FCC rules notwithstanding.
Strange. When I read the word "incuments", that suggested competitors. Nor did I limit myself to thinking that the only dirty tricks competitors play require government involvement.
If you're employing a gas that's heavier than air in an underground environment, I rather doubt that you'll need to worry about its greenhouse properties.
The greenhouse gasses I worry about are the ones that rise up overhead.
No matter how many panes of glass your greenhouse has, if they're lying on the floor, they're not going to do much.
I'm going to have to assume that the computers logged were using FCC-compliant CPUs, seeing as nothing was said about using special noisy CPUs.
For keyloggers, obviously shielded keyboard electronics and cables helps. Once it gets into the CPU, a lot of other noisy things are also happening. Although strewing a couple of modules around the site that do nothing much more than emit random character codes in the same RF format would be worth considering.
Me too. I had no idea that many people worked at Institutes of Technology.
Actually, I first thought of Game of Thrones, but I read things funny sometimes.
Internet of Things wasn't the first thing (no pun intended) that popped into my head and I've been programming things for years. Some of them even On the Internet (patent pending).
I could do it with corporate code without any analytical software at all.
One guy I know consistently introduced bugs because he didn't understand assembly language (ironically, he was an assembly language bigot).
Another caused people to complain because he never coded a subroutine where he could simply cut-and-paste code. And that was in a shop with all sorts of standards.
Then there are the comments (or lack of them) and their distinctive, but not always professional observations.
The whole idea of a "zone of lawlessness" has it all inside out.
The law is supposed to exist to protect and to serve the people, not something that the people are there to serve and protect.
In other words, you make and enforce laws when the lack of law causes problems. Not build laws and then expect people to move into them like they're a house, a reservation or a "free speech zone".
The main difference was that before, people at least tried to pretend that that wasn't proper behavior, and maybe just occasionally thought before they violated it.
It's referring to killing one innocent, not imprison.
Imprison sounds like "whoops, we fucked your life", but at least isn't taking one away. Killing an innocent refers to what happens in Texas regularly.
If you'd been unable to see your children grow up or grow old with your wife or even miss that once-in-a-lifetime travel vacation, then most people would consider their life to have been "taken away". The part that's worth living, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright terms should be max(author, spouse). When you're dead, it's time to pay society back for what you have built on top of a civilization that was here long before you were born.
Copyright terms should be max(author, spouse). When you're dead, it's time to pay society back for what you have built on top of a civilization that was here long before you were born.
There are times when I think they should be no more than about 25 years period.
Unless you're a one-trick pony, if you're any good, you should have been producing other works as well, thus keeping a continuous stream of copyrighted works collecting royalties.
As it is, you can be a JD Salinger, pop out one opus and be basically an artistic dead weight with no incentive to contribute further.
Ironic, isn't it? A private-enterprise concept whose rules encourage one of the major things we pretend to despise about socialism - being non-productive.
Government, kings and so on are just proxies for your ability to keep land or property. Without it, you would protect your land bu ypurself using whatever means you can.
Or more likely, some marauding horde would come storming in, burn your house, rape your women, enslave your children and quite possibly set themselves up to become what would eventually evolve into a kingdom/government.
Because most of us cannot afford to maintain our own private armies and the Magnificent Seven often are off defending someone else's property.
There's a reason that Abraham had a "tribe" and not a "family", even though a tribe is often an extended (large) family. And why hospitality was such a remarked-upon thng. Because any time someone from outside the tribe showed up, there was potential for trouble.
Think of how many Shakespeare works couldn't have been done if someone else had held copyright. Julius Caesar, Name-any-Random-English-King, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, MacBeth, probably a Merchant of Venice, Midsummer Night's Dream, and so forth.
The guy was a plagarizing fool.
Really? 'Cause a lot of people have no territorial ownership.
The concept is innate. The actual act varies. That's what confused a lot of the original migratory inhabitants of North America. They thought that the land belonged to everyone and the most "ownership" they claimed was to keep other people from getting the food first. Then the Europeans came in and parked permanently on it.
Territorial ownership gets a leg up when territory is no longer a commodity. Because it's being farmed, mined, or otherwise exploited in a unique way.
Oh come on. It wouldn't be the first time in history that some people only counted as fractions of a person.
Yep, it's really that simple. Life is a binary equation.
Exactly. It's all either-or, diametric opposites. One eats their own babies, the other eats other people's babies.
Hammermill, Brother, and Keurig aren't going to get pushed around by anyone.
Don't be so sure. Those UPC barcodes on everything came from Wal-Mart's foisting them off on anyone who even dreamed of seeing their products in the Walton stores.
There's a lawnmower manufacturer who balked, because they didn't want their quality standards watered down by fiat just so they could be an Everyday Low Price in the Wal-Mart garden shop, but a lot of companies aren't so devoted.
I think if someone were to create a simulation model of a truly free market with no regulation, and seed it with hundreds (thousands) of little businesses to start with, given enough time, you'll end up single monopoly that controls every industry, service, and product.
It seems to depend on what the business is. If a business is capital-intensive, commodity-based and can benefit from economies of scale chances are that, yes, a positive feedback loop will be established and, as the old maxim goes, "nothing succeeds like success".
On the other hand, not all businesses are driven solely on price. Multiple big players exist in such things as fast food and pizza joints, but within the big chains, I'll avoid MacDonalds and hit Burger King because to me McD's milkshakes taste like library paste. And the local neighborhood pizzaria beats Papa John's 20 ways from Sunday. Because what they're selling is a commodity only in broad terms.
There exist also Natural Monopolies where it's essentially a Buyer's or Seller's Market. A classic example is a product that requires laying down underground cables to individual residences. It's simply not tolerable to have 37 different companies rooting around in the dirt all the time, so the "last mile" belongs to a chosen few.
Stuff like this is why auto-quacking that The Market Solves Everything makes one look like an idiot. There are so many exceptions even before the big mean government steps in. In fact, a true Free Market is a pretty rare (and often short-lived) bird.
I think the biggest take-away from this is that in the very near future every 'application' will be its own container.
It depends. I have certain services that I feel obligated to run on physical hosts, not necessarily dedicated. I also have certain services that have their own private VMs. For example, all the email servers including mailing list servers. Some pre-packaged Docker services have multiple daemons in them, such as Ngnix and MongoDB. And I have certain services of my own that are single-app containers. Nice to have flexibility.
I've yet to inflict systemd on any of these and I'm in no hurry to do so. I can dimly perceive how systemd is supposed to make containerization work better and I hope it does, but the hell-spawn part (specifically the abomination that is journalctl) has kept me from rushing to embrace it.
"does everything you should want to do".
Do you work for Apple?
Fedora has been using it for years now and it has been fine.
Mostly fine.
don't fix it. I mean sure I'd like more features and stuff, but it works out of the box. No tweaking (other than to guest vm's) or anything necessary. It just works. Sure there are other (paid) alternatives out there but VirtualBox does it's job well for me.
VirtualBox is one of the most frequently-broken packages in my system. I run Vagrant and Fedora. Vagrant is supposed to have extensions for Xen, KVM and libvirt, but they're not part of the core package and the Fedora support for them is dicey (to be fair, developers say that's because Vagrant itself is somewhat quirky).
Red Hat and related distros don't let you mix and match kernels and kernel modules. If you get a kernel update, you have to get the kmod-VirtualBox update too.
The last Fedora 20 kernel update I got wasn't provided with a kmod-VirtualBox update (they tend to lag at the best of times), so I was forced to upgrade to Fedora 21. Which in turn, gave me new reasons to hate systemd, since bizarrely, the Fedora 21 systemd seems to have dropped some of the diagnostic logging I was getting off service modules in Fedora 20. If I hadn't remembered what the problem was in Fedora 20 (someone assumed the wrong name and location of a pidfile in the systemd service definition), I'd still be trying to get things working.
So I'm not real keen on the assumption that everyone can just walk away from maintenance and things will keep running.
Take for example a bull that breaks through a fence and breeds with some of my cattle. Do I have to pay a breeding fee for you bull's "service" to my herd? No.
Actually, that's a really bad example. It has been a point of contention throughout history. In fact, IIRC, the Old Testament sets forth rules on that very topic.
No, the core problem is that these countries do not produce enough things of value.
Or, the bastards at the top keep all the profits.
All of your emails in one app. Gmail, IMAP and MAPI are presently in different apps.
Not on my devices. One email program handles multiple email clients.
Now if I could just persuade the built-in Gmail listener not to pop up a redundant gmail notification alongside that apps notification...
Anecdotal? I don't think I'd use that word to describe something that can be objectively determined by anyone willing to look at the numbers.
The snideness about Libertarianism and the Free Market comes from the fact that very, very few markets are really Free Markets, government or no government.
To be truly free, not only do you have to be free of government regulation, you must not be able to profit by economies of scale (positive feedback loops, which help form monopolies), not have a natural monopoly (that is, only you can produce Jackson Pollock paintings because you're Jackson Pollock), and not have such a major mismatch between buyers and sellers that one side or another can unilaterally set terms the way that say, corporations can for most non-union employees.
That basically means Free Markets mostly exist as things things like neighborhood pizza joints and dry cleaners and even dry cleaners may be endangered if a recent franchise ad I saw recently comes to anything.
We laugh not because the Free Market "is a failure", but because the Free Market is such a rare beast that it's simply not available to cure all the problems that it's alleged to be capable of curing. And on top of that, the Free Market doesn't select for happy customers, or even quality for quality's sake, it selects for maximum profitability. Which is why Your Call is VERY Important To Us, so Please Stay on the Line. Average Waiting Time is now ... 54 minutes.
The only barriers now are that it is a huge initial capital expense and large incumbents who will try every dirty trick to block new entrants.
The bolded part describes a government-mandated monopoly, FCC rules notwithstanding.
Strange. When I read the word "incuments", that suggested competitors. Nor did I limit myself to thinking that the only dirty tricks competitors play require government involvement.
Wait! Competitors! Free Market! Right?
If you're employing a gas that's heavier than air in an underground environment, I rather doubt that you'll need to worry about its greenhouse properties.
The greenhouse gasses I worry about are the ones that rise up overhead.
No matter how many panes of glass your greenhouse has, if they're lying on the floor, they're not going to do much.
I'm going to have to assume that the computers logged were using FCC-compliant CPUs, seeing as nothing was said about using special noisy CPUs.
For keyloggers, obviously shielded keyboard electronics and cables helps. Once it gets into the CPU, a lot of other noisy things are also happening. Although strewing a couple of modules around the site that do nothing much more than emit random character codes in the same RF format would be worth considering.
I had to google IoT....
Me too. I had no idea that many people worked at Institutes of Technology.
Actually, I first thought of Game of Thrones, but I read things funny sometimes.
Internet of Things wasn't the first thing (no pun intended) that popped into my head and I've been programming things for years. Some of them even On the Internet (patent pending).
A sonnet has strict rules, too.
But I'd wager that someone could tell one of Shakespeare's from one of yours.
I could do it with corporate code without any analytical software at all.
One guy I know consistently introduced bugs because he didn't understand assembly language (ironically, he was an assembly language bigot).
Another caused people to complain because he never coded a subroutine where he could simply cut-and-paste code. And that was in a shop with all sorts of standards.
Then there are the comments (or lack of them) and their distinctive, but not always professional observations.
So definitely.
The whole idea of a "zone of lawlessness" has it all inside out.
The law is supposed to exist to protect and to serve the people, not something that the people are there to serve and protect.
In other words, you make and enforce laws when the lack of law causes problems. Not build laws and then expect people to move into them like they're a house, a reservation or a "free speech zone".
The main difference was that before, people at least tried to pretend that that wasn't proper behavior, and maybe just occasionally thought before they violated it.
Now they don't even care or try to pretend.
It's referring to killing one innocent, not imprison.
Imprison sounds like "whoops, we fucked your life", but at least isn't taking one away. Killing an innocent refers to what happens in Texas regularly.
If you'd been unable to see your children grow up or grow old with your wife or even miss that once-in-a-lifetime travel vacation, then most people would consider their life to have been "taken away". The part that's worth living, anyway.