Right. Something I've been wondering about is how do we rally other businesses to our side. What if we all went out and bought various software packages with click agreements. Then, preferably all on the same day, returned them because the license was unacceptable? Would the retailers wake up and realise that licenses ARE important to consumers?
What would this do to the retailers? Most of the software return policies I've seen say that open software can only be exchanged. It's been a long time since I clicked "I Agree", so what do those things say to do if you don't agree? Do you have to take it up with the manufacturer, or does it say something like "return to the place of purchase". If the latter, our friends the retailers are going to find out that the manufacturers are binding them to a contractual obligation, enforceable under UCITA. I'm sure that would be quite a shock to them.
NOT. At least in my environment, where there are multiple Java-based servers (not servelets!), I can't buy memory fast enough to keep them all running. Not that I can blame it completely on the language...Could also be multiple vendors, each of which includes their own version of a JVM. (I wish some vendors would get a clue and just say "This application requires [JVM|perl|web-server|whatever]. Go get the one you want", instead of installing their own versions all over the place.) Whoops, slipped into rant mode.
Besides that, if I had to have some Java feature I'd still use jpython. You code and test like a scripting language and, when everything works, compile into native Java classes. Much faster for occasional Java use..
Anyone who is unable to submit comments in electronic form (which I assume would include because they would not meet the submission format guidelines) should submit on original and fifteen paper copies by hand or in the mail to the appropriate address.
So, let's do it their way. Send a long, detailed explanation of reverse engineering, it's role in the promotion of competition, blah, blah all the other points that are truly relevant to the issue. You may also want to include a polite note of apology for not being able to conform to the submission guidelines, but that you have no applications that use those proprietary formats.
On an added note, summarize this issue and contact your U.S. Senators and Congressmen and ask them if only users of Adobe, Microsoft, or Corel products have an equal voice in government. Explain that it appears the Library of Congress is only interested in comments from large organizations and others that can afford more expensive software. Perhaps they are only looking for comments from those "interested parties" that have property to protect? Send that by snail mail too! Our congressional representatives give slightly more than ZERO weight to e-mail correspondence. For added measure, include your comment to the Library of Congress to your representative.
Naw, you're not an ass;) ('course you probably won't read this since it's way late and I'm just wasting "y2k" duty time). You're right in that (at least) the parties are a major influence on politics. My point is more that I really wish voters, politicians and the media would focus more on issues and government, than on "races" (who's ahead in the polls) and "politics" (Them vs. the Other Them [vs. Another Them]).
On your points to my points:
Not the same. Party primaries are exclusively for the selection of representatives for that party. Funding for women, the poor, etc. is determined by congress, which I am allowed to vote for (even if it's only between what the major parties present). Therefore, wether I agree or not, I am represented so they have a right to tax me. Since I'm not in a political party, they don't.
I meant that the major parties automatically get a slot, while "third" parties have to petition. In most areas, I believe ballots are printed randomly with the names in different orders on different ballots. I'd just like to see the Dems and Reps sweat just as hard as others to get their name in lights.
That was what I meant. Maybe we just have to swing enough votes away from the big 2 to cut into their monopoly.
Okay, I'll buy that. I just go a little further in that I don't think a candidate should have to claim membership in any party to be taken seriously. In any case, I could just as easily work to support candidates from multiple parties.
Lastly, I didn't think you meant just the big ones. Your original post was quite clear on that. In fact, your point on the off-year elections is probably one of the most important made in this whole thread. Like I said, I was rushed and pushed on the button that has just annoyed me for years. I chose to register "No Party" (NOT "Indepentent"; that's George Wallace's old party in my state!) knowing that I would have no voice in their primaries. I simply refuse to provide them with any support, even implied, when I don't feel they represent my interests. None-the-less, I have to agree that parties are an essential part of our system. What I don't like is the common misconception that the "two-party system" is a consitutional institution, and that the Democrats and Republicans are those two (and they certainly do nothing to rectify that perception!). Personally, I don't see a party that represents me right now, and I resent the implication that in order to be represented in my governement, I have to pick one anyway. Still I'll fight for your right to belong to and support any number of them. I'll also fight to see that they remain political parties and not government institutions.
So, the question is; How do we inform computer illiterate managers that the Web is a collaberative community of standards, rather than a dictatorship governed by high school bully tactics?
This is exactly why users of alternate browsers should politely email or call the offending sites. When we, as customers, start backing up what the technical people are saying, the PHB's will realize that customer functionality is more important than pretty pages.
Of course, they won't admit it. They'll just blame us for not doing it right the first time (so what else is new). The end result is the same.
You can't hedge your bet, you've only got ONE vote. This is exactly why every four year term is exactly like the last four year term. Every voter in America is "convinced" not to "waste their vote". No, they "hedge their bet". (Can you say "media manipulation?")
I'm really getting tired of the American citizen simply not standing up for the choices, their rights, and their responsibilities. Until we do so, can we honestly expect anyone in Washington to do so.
I don't think anyone should vote for who they think is second best if their first choice is still there. Didn't Ross Perot "win" the exit polls in that, enough people said they would have voted for him if they thought he could win, that he would have won had they actually voted that way.
Not that I'm upset that Perot didn't win. I am, however, VERY pissed that the "major media" effectively prevented the people's real choice from being elected.
The parties are NOT part of the machinery of democracy, they are part of the machinery of POLITICS. How about this: First, no tax dollars to party primaries. If I'm not a member of a particular party, isn't my paying for their primary "taxation without representation"?, Second, no party "preference" when it comes to placement on the ballot. "Third" parties have specific ballot requirements they have to meet, X number of petition signatures, etc. The Repulicans and Democrats should have the same requirements. Enough of us getting the last Bozo to survive the media feeding frenzy, make people get out and work for someone they really believe in.
Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories;: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work. Making or selling devices that are used to circumvent either category of technological measures is prohibited in certain circumstances, described below. As to the act of circumvention itself, the provision prohibits circumventing the first category of technological measures, but not the second.
This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological measure that prevents copying.
It goes on to say that fair use is not a defense to the act of gaining access to the work. So you can copy a work only if you already have access to it. Assumming the DeCSS author, and those that use it, have authorized "access" (they bought and paid for the DVD), copying for backup purposes, or to allow playing on an unsupported OS should be considerd fair use.
But, then again, IANAL (which is why i read the summary instead of the full bill!)
Re:Is this really an area that needs filling?
on
IceWM 1.0.0 released
·
· Score: 2
This is a huge discouragement for new users.
Unless the new user runs a 486 laptop w/12 Meg of memory on which icewm flies . I've got alot of attention from new users when they see what I can do on such a crappy little machine. And icewm is very intuitive to them, too.
You're confusing patents with copyrights. Both your book and music would be copyrighted, and you would be protected from infringement.
You could not claim, however, to have invented the concept of stringing together words into sentencences, sentences into paragraphs, arranging paragraphs such that the form a plot and thereby patent a device called a "novel".
I think there are archived posts by Derek that clearly indicate the goal of this project was to allow the playing of DVD's. His intent can be demonstrated as such, not to "enable and assist" circumvention. Intent is clearly stated as being primary to the offense.
None-the-less, I wouldn't mess with the lawyers either. It's one thing to work on open source software. It's another thing entirely to back your work up with your life savings and criminal record.
Article 5 Distinctiveness: The word or character, device, symbol, color combination or any combination thereof included in a trademark must be capable of enabling the average commodity purchasers to recognize the mark as an indication of the applicant's goods, thereby distinguishing such goods from those of others.
Article 6 Definition of "trademark use": "Trademark use" as referred to in this Law means the use of a trademark on goods or their packages, containers, labels, instructional manuals, price lists, or other similar articles possessed, displayed or distributed for marketing purposes.
There's probably alot more to indicate that this is not a trademark infringement and that IDG needs to lighten up. They didn't invent dummies. Although if they want to make that claim, I'm sure we can come up with LOTS of liability suits. Dummies cause alot of problems for me...
Although I'd kinda like to see a break-up, just for the impact it would have on the "big-business" customers I don't beleive it will stop collusion between the seperate idvisions, so...
Break 'em or not, require documentation on all API's and file formats on all products. Any product discovered to have "undocumented features" should be required to be completely (not just the suspect portions) open-sourced to prove they're not hiding anything.
I don't mind any company keeping their source closed, as long as they play fair. This would let them keep their code IF they stay honest. If they don't, they lose it all. I think even MS management can understand what that means.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Which, since it was properly adopted, according to article 5 of the constitution "shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution"
First: I hate guns. I don't have any, and I don't want any.
I am, however, tired of the argument against our constitutional right to bear them focusing on their use in crime and crime prevention. The US Consitution provides for the individual's right to bear arms, not for hunting, not for protection from criminals, and certainly not to equalize some perception of physical prowess. The right to bear arms was intended to ensure that the citizenry could always protect itself from an over-bearing and unjust government. Think about the US approach to cryptography, censorship, personal privacy, and other favorite/. discussions.
If only the government has assault weapons, how do we protect ourselves from the government? There may come a time when I feel I need to take up arms to protect my liberty and my constitutional rights. Will I be able to? Think about it.
From a bumber sticker: "I love my country. It's my government that I don't trust."
This article was posted at 12:11. By the time I got to it, there were -1:163 comments. When I got through those and refreshed with "newest first" there were 50+ more.
So, this post will probably get completely lost in the shuffle. My only hope is that Rob may read it, since he posed the question and actually cares about his community. The up-side is that I have all the previous comments to try to pull together.
First, when I've noticed that I had moderator points, I have tried to switch to -1, flat mode to be as fair and impartial as possible, but, if I were to try to moderate a topic such as this I'd have to quit my day job. A couple of things would help this:
Highly visible moderator notice: Turn the banner red, auto-switch prefs to -1, flat, oldest first (this should be a requirement for moderation anyway), or else-wise slap me to get my attention. I'd make more effort to go off the headlines and into the comments.
Don't expire points so quickly: Those of us who hit/. throughout the workday are more likely to glance at the headlines and get back to work. Give us a few evenings and weekends to spend our points, or am I the only one who actually uses the "Older Stuff" box?. I dispute the argument that moderators, or anyone else, usually only see the first 50 or so posts. I RARELY get to a story on/. that quickly. I usually tag the headlines during the workday and pick up the comments later, when I have time. If anyone is checking them ONLY that quickly, and not coming back later, they are missing some great comments!
Random Moderation
Nope. Been said all over this page. Moderation would be less of a responsibility and less compelling for those of us who care about the impact to the/. community. It wouldn't be worth the effort.
Meta-Moderation
I think M2 may work in 2 directions. Instead of just ranking the moderators, it could also rank your opinion of the moderators and be another factor in your preferences. I'd like to see the M2 boxes on all the comments. I don't think they'd be used that much, but when they were used, they'd be used on comments that people really care about. This should address the problem of moderators with agendas. Let's face it, if someone has an agenda, that happens to agree with mine, than that's a good thing to me.
Fractional Moderation
This is a good idea, both for moderation and for M2. It would take at least 2 moderators to change the moderation.
Unscored Moderation
Some people have pointed out that the categories available are not necessarily complete (like missing stupid), approriate (OR/UR being more relevant to M2), or positive or negative (some people LIKE Trolls, some don't want Funny). So:
First expand the list of tags available. Forget -1:+5, and just keep a list of tags, and the number of each type of tag on the comment.
Allow users to specify both categories and thresholds in their prefs. e.g. I'll take Interesting:2, Funny:4, Insightful:3, Normal:0 and Troll:5, in that order.
Karma
Rob says it doesn't factor that much anyway, but I think it should be affected by only the most positive and negative moderations and M2. I know I said no numbers, but, while one person's Flamebait is another person's Funny, Offtopic is not good. Redundant is irrelevant, since everyone has different views (prefs., NOT opinions) it's probably not redundant to readers with different preferences.
Maybe instead of adding +1 to future posts, Karma could add personality tags. If a poster consistently gets Interesting:2 or higher, then that person is probably interesting. These tags should be clearly distinct from moderation tags, so the reader and moderators knows that it applies to the author and, not necessarily, to the post.
A Changing Face
This should keep Rob busy for a year or so, but imagine the possibilities. For a discussion about webcams in public restrooms, I could view at Funny:2, Interesting:3. For a discussion on security, I could use Insightful:2, Interesting:2.
Since this would put my viewing entirely into the hands of moderators, I'd probably add Normal:1 to any view. Or, I could read on pass one a topic for Interesting and Insightful comments, and a second pass for Funny.
Conclusion
The whole point of moderation and meta-moderation is to filter the/. experience for the sake of the individual participant. Being a moderator is a pain in the [insert your desired portion of anatomy here] and it is difficult to do fairly. Try to remember that if it weren't for their efforts, you wouldn't be able filter your view at all.
People laugh at me because I still use slirp with my primary ISP. I started using it (my first open source software) when they were charging a $50+ setup for ppp acccounts. Then, I realized slirp is keeping people out of my machine. Not only did I get ppp for the price of a shell account, but I got an instant firewall too! I'm still "grandfathered" on my ISP as a shell account, since they no longer provide them. (I couldn't manage without telnetting in to get my mail.)
So, now I got an ISDN connection (through work). Took me 3 days to get a reasonable firewall setup, and I still can't get my second NIC to give up IRQ 3 for the modem. Slirp saved me time, money, and peace of mind for many years.
Much to my surprise, I actually like this idea. I would much rather give my public key than my SSN to get a Linux Fund credit card, or anything else for that matter. (Do you know how hard it is to convince companies that they do not need, and have no right to your SSN?)
I started using KDE at beta 1. Flakey, a couple of X server crashes a month. Everything worked as advertized, there just wasn't much advertized. At the time, however, I was ready to give up on Linux rather than learn m4 to configure fvwm. KDE B1 was a breeze to customize. Everything I wanted in my menus was there in minutes.
But the license really bothered me. I was very excited at the announcement of gnome and tried 2-3 betas. I couldn't keep it up for an hour at a time. OK, patience, let's see what 1.0 brings....
What an amazing disappointment! I loaded 1.0 with Great Anticipation. It crashed X 3 times while exploring the control-panel. Several more X crashes, and I gave up. I know this is NOT a universal experience, many people are happily using GNOME, so maybe it's a Video card/Xserver/Gnome compatibility thing ('tho I tried 2 very different machines).
I am truly grateful for QPL2, and the efforts of BOTH the KDE and GNOME developers. The coopetition breeds better software. And I wish GNOME the best of luck. But for someone who X's to Solaris & HP boxes to do real work, including critical admin work that had better not be dropped by a hung/trashed X session, KDE gets my vote. KDE Beta 1 was better than GNOME 1.0. The only time I have problems with KDE is when I play with themes (which are still experimental anyway). Swap themes a few times to check them out, and it's best to log out and back in when you're ready to start working again.
I'll play with GNOME at home as new releases come out, but it has lost any change of being put on my production machine until it proves itself worthy. None-the-less, I believe it WILL prove itself one day. Then, we'll have to vote again.
As it stands, conventional methods of contacting Congress still carry the most weight, even in offices where staff members read e-mail daily.
"A well-written letter is always the best way to go about it," said Scott Harshman, a legislative assistant who routes e-mail for Representative John Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania. Still, from seeing so much e-mail, he recognizes the importance of Congressional offices' offering online communication. "People ask, 'How come this representative doesn't have e-mail?'" Harshman said. "It sends a message to your constituency."
Even so, in Congressional offices that offer constituents no electronic avenue for communication, aides say the decision holds no visible repercussions.
"Once in a while, somebody will write us a letter that says, 'When will you get it?' But it has not been a big issue," said Vince Morelli, legislative director to Representative Elton Gallegly, Republican of California. "Nobody seems to be complaining. People prefer to do it the old-fashioned way."
SO COMPLAIN! Let them know that if they don't use the internet, especially to communicate with their constituents, they have no business trying to dictate how others use it.
I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore! -- Peter Finch's character, Network
Remember when major news organizations had something called an "investigative journalist"? These people listened to what was said by the politicos, then actually researched the documents and bills that where refered to and blew the whistle on the liars. Now they just have "pundits" who tell us who can and who can't win an election, so we won't "waste our vote". (I can't imagine Ross Perot as president, but it pisses me off that a majority of voters who wanted him where literally talked out of voting for him by being convinced he "couldn't win".)
Bill Moyers recently did a PBS documentary on "The Media". Take a serious look at who owns TV, radio, and newspapers in this country, and you will no longer wonder why truth in reporting doesn't matter. Ratings matter. The American citizen does not have a chance of getting the truth on any issue.
Simple example....What should we do with the "budget surplus"? How many trillions of dollars of dollars in debt are we? If I owe Visa more than my weekly paycheck, I do NOT call that a surplus! I recently heard some statistics on a radio talk show (grab your grain of salt). Approximately 50% of the American citizenry believe the U.S Government has it's own money, and that's what it is spending for all these programs. Also, there are currently more people receiving federal funds, than are currently paying taxes. Sorry folks, it's MY money and I'm tired of giving it away.
While I'm on wasting my money, why does congress keep wasting time and resources on bills and laws that are clearly in violation of the constitution? The CDA, CDAII, Crypto controls...? If cryptography is a munition, don't citizens have a right to bear arms?
So, what can we do? Keep links to real information available. Keep links to email Representatives and Senators prominently available. Use those links often.
If Mindshare can simply get the politicians to recognize email as a legitimate and sincere form of voter communication, I'm sure that the/. effect will pale in comparison to the/tax,/bull,/waste effect.
Actually, you CAN do somethings with Motif apps displaying on KDE. On the KDE Styple control panel, there's an option to apply fonts & colors to non-KDE apps.
I love watching jaws drop when I pop up HP OpenView (Motif based) on my KDE themed desktop. With fonts, colors and window decorations all the same, it looks very much like KDE OpenView!
Prelude: This is going to ramble a little, as I've been jumping around the net getting more info from ICANN, IANA, NIS, etc. Bear with me.....
My first though was to reply to this with an "Amen". NSI is not, has never been, and will never be the "Internet Authority" (Patent Pending [or so they think]).
Aside from the other officially sanctioned registrars, I seem to recall reading about a volunteer organization (probably on/.) offering to provide DNS services without the value-added BS of NSI. Anyway, with more registrars being accredited, I'd say its time to put NSI behind us completely.
While considering the implications of all this, I was perusing www.iana.org and was delighted at the prominent notation:
Please note that this transitional site presents both initial steps and currently accepted practices that are subject to input by the international Internet community and approval by the Board of Directors.
If you go to their site, there is a forum for public comments./.'em with honest, frank, unflaming input on why the agreement with NSI should be terminated.
Now, if you want to be horrified, go to www.internic.net to read about the coming changes in Domain registration. First, you'll notice that you're really at networksolutions.com. But wait! If you read really, really slow (just leave the window open), you will be automatically forwarded to the NSI front door.
Going deeper into the ICANN FAQ, I found Ammendment 11 to the Dept. of Commerce/NSI contract. An excerpt regarding existing NSI customers:
Commencing upon the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, and for a period of 18 months thereafter, NSI shall permit any customer with whom it has a contract pursuant to which NSI provides registration services that is either facially or effectively exclusive as to registration services, to terminate the registration provisions of such contract (following payment of all amounts due up through the time of such termination) and obtain registration services from other registrars; provided, however, that NSI may enter into agreements pursuant to which NSI's counterparty agrees not to utilize proprietary intellectual property or confidential proprietary information provided by NSI to the counterparty pursuant to their agreement.
Now, I wonder why NSI has been putting up such a forcefull argument that the info in the WHOIS database is "proprietary intellectual property". As far as I can see, you can change registrars by giving them the same contact information you originally gave NSI. It may be proprietary in their database, but it is not when it's your personal information on an application form.
If I'm reading that right, anyone registered with NSI can switch to another registrar, with a pro-rated refund of domain fees.
Back to the original topic: Putting NSI on the RBL would be a serious wake-up call that without the participation of each and every transport provider on the 'net, they are worthless (Ok, MORE worthless).
Slashdot Mirror
What would this do to the retailers? Most of the software return policies I've seen say that open software can only be exchanged. It's been a long time since I clicked "I Agree", so what do those things say to do if you don't agree? Do you have to take it up with the manufacturer, or does it say something like "return to the place of purchase". If the latter, our friends the retailers are going to find out that the manufacturers are binding them to a contractual obligation, enforceable under UCITA. I'm sure that would be quite a shock to them.
Worth considering or not?
NOT. At least in my environment, where there are multiple Java-based servers (not servelets!), I can't buy memory fast enough to keep them all running. Not that I can blame it completely on the language...Could also be multiple vendors, each of which includes their own version of a JVM. (I wish some vendors would get a clue and just say "This application requires [JVM|perl|web-server|whatever]. Go get the one you want", instead of installing their own versions all over the place.) Whoops, slipped into rant mode.
Besides that, if I had to have some Java feature I'd still use jpython. You code and test like a scripting language and, when everything works, compile into native Java classes. Much faster for occasional Java use..
Anyone who is unable to submit comments in electronic form (which I assume would include because they would not meet the submission format guidelines) should submit on original and fifteen paper copies by hand or in the mail to the appropriate address.
So, let's do it their way. Send a long, detailed explanation of reverse engineering, it's role in the promotion of competition, blah, blah all the other points that are truly relevant to the issue. You may also want to include a polite note of apology for not being able to conform to the submission guidelines, but that you have no applications that use those proprietary formats.
On an added note, summarize this issue and contact your U.S. Senators and Congressmen and ask them if only users of Adobe, Microsoft, or Corel products have an equal voice in government. Explain that it appears the Library of Congress is only interested in comments from large organizations and others that can afford more expensive software. Perhaps they are only looking for comments from those "interested parties" that have property to protect? Send that by snail mail too! Our congressional representatives give slightly more than ZERO weight to e-mail correspondence. For added measure, include your comment to the Library of Congress to your representative.
On your points to my points:
- Not the same. Party primaries are exclusively for the selection of representatives for that party. Funding for women, the poor, etc. is determined by congress, which I am allowed to vote for (even if it's only between what the major parties present). Therefore, wether I agree or not, I am represented so they have a right to tax me. Since I'm not in a political party, they don't.
- I meant that the major parties automatically get a slot, while "third" parties have to petition. In most areas, I believe ballots are printed randomly with the names in different orders on different ballots. I'd just like to see the Dems and Reps sweat just as hard as others to get their name in lights.
- That was what I meant. Maybe we just have to swing enough votes away from the big 2 to cut into their monopoly.
- Okay, I'll buy that. I just go a little further in that I don't think a candidate should have to claim membership in any party to be taken seriously. In any case, I could just as easily work to support candidates from multiple parties.
Lastly, I didn't think you meant just the big ones. Your original post was quite clear on that. In fact, your point on the off-year elections is probably one of the most important made in this whole thread. Like I said, I was rushed and pushed on the button that has just annoyed me for years. I chose to register "No Party" (NOT "Indepentent"; that's George Wallace's old party in my state!) knowing that I would have no voice in their primaries. I simply refuse to provide them with any support, even implied, when I don't feel they represent my interests. None-the-less, I have to agree that parties are an essential part of our system. What I don't like is the common misconception that the "two-party system" is a consitutional institution, and that the Democrats and Republicans are those two (and they certainly do nothing to rectify that perception!). Personally, I don't see a party that represents me right now, and I resent the implication that in order to be represented in my governement, I have to pick one anyway. Still I'll fight for your right to belong to and support any number of them. I'll also fight to see that they remain political parties and not government institutions.This is exactly why users of alternate browsers should politely email or call the offending sites. When we, as customers, start backing up what the technical people are saying, the PHB's will realize that customer functionality is more important than pretty pages.
Of course, they won't admit it. They'll just blame us for not doing it right the first time (so what else is new). The end result is the same.
In the meantime, send your PHB to "Why can't we just ask people to upgrade their browsers or switch browsers?".
I'm really getting tired of the American citizen simply not standing up for the choices, their rights, and their responsibilities. Until we do so, can we honestly expect anyone in Washington to do so.
Not that I'm upset that Perot didn't win. I am, however, VERY pissed that the "major media" effectively prevented the people's real choice from being elected.
The parties are NOT part of the machinery of democracy, they are part of the machinery of POLITICS. How about this: First, no tax dollars to party primaries. If I'm not a member of a particular party, isn't my paying for their primary "taxation without representation"?, Second, no party "preference" when it comes to placement on the ballot. "Third" parties have specific ballot requirements they have to meet, X number of petition signatures, etc. The Repulicans and Democrats should have the same requirements. Enough of us getting the last Bozo to survive the media feeding frenzy, make people get out and work for someone they really believe in.
The summary states:
Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories;: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work. Making or selling devices that are used to circumvent either category of technological measures is prohibited in certain circumstances, described below. As to the act of circumvention itself, the provision prohibits circumventing the first category of technological measures, but not the second.
This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological measure that prevents copying.
It goes on to say that fair use is not a defense to the act of gaining access to the work. So you can copy a work only if you already have access to it. Assumming the DeCSS author, and those that use it, have authorized "access" (they bought and paid for the DVD), copying for backup purposes, or to allow playing on an unsupported OS should be considerd fair use.
But, then again, IANAL (which is why i read the summary instead of the full bill!)
Unless the new user runs a 486 laptop w/12 Meg of memory on which icewm flies . I've got alot of attention from new users when they see what I can do on such a crappy little machine. And icewm is very intuitive to them, too.
You could not claim, however, to have invented the concept of stringing together words into sentencences, sentences into paragraphs, arranging paragraphs such that the form a plot and thereby patent a device called a "novel".
None-the-less, I wouldn't mess with the lawyers either. It's one thing to work on open source software. It's another thing entirely to back your work up with your life savings and criminal record.
From what I found re: Trademarks
There's probably alot more to indicate that this is not a trademark infringement and that IDG needs to lighten up. They didn't invent dummies. Although if they want to make that claim, I'm sure we can come up with LOTS of liability suits. Dummies cause alot of problems for me...
Break 'em or not, require documentation on all API's and file formats on all products. Any product discovered to have "undocumented features" should be required to be completely (not just the suspect portions) open-sourced to prove they're not hiding anything.
I don't mind any company keeping their source closed, as long as they play fair. This would let them keep their code IF they stay honest. If they don't, they lose it all. I think even MS management can understand what that means.
The ICANN agreement page is supposed to have a public comment form soon. Think they can handle the /. effect?
It's the second ammendment:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Which, since it was properly adopted, according to article 5 of the constitution "shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution"
Therefore, it does.
I am, however, tired of the argument against our constitutional right to bear them focusing on their use in crime and crime prevention. The US Consitution provides for the individual's right to bear arms, not for hunting, not for protection from criminals, and certainly not to equalize some perception of physical prowess. The right to bear arms was intended to ensure that the citizenry could always protect itself from an over-bearing and unjust government. Think about the US approach to cryptography, censorship, personal privacy, and other favorite /. discussions.
If only the government has assault weapons, how do we protect ourselves from the government? There may come a time when I feel I need to take up arms to protect my liberty and my constitutional rights. Will I be able to? Think about it.
From a bumber sticker: "I love my country. It's my government that I don't trust."
This article was posted at 12:11. By the time I got to it, there were -1:163 comments. When I got through those and refreshed with "newest first" there were 50+ more.
So, this post will probably get completely lost in the shuffle. My only hope is that Rob may read it, since he posed the question and actually cares about his community. The up-side is that I have all the previous comments to try to pull together.
First, when I've noticed that I had moderator points, I have tried to switch to -1, flat mode to be as fair and impartial as possible, but, if I were to try to moderate a topic such as this I'd have to quit my day job. A couple of things would help this:
Random Moderation
Nope. Been said all over this page. Moderation would be less of a responsibility and less compelling for those of us who care about the impact to the /. community. It wouldn't be worth the effort.
Meta-Moderation
I think M2 may work in 2 directions. Instead of just ranking the moderators, it could also rank your opinion of the moderators and be another factor in your preferences. I'd like to see the M2 boxes on all the comments. I don't think they'd be used that much, but when they were used, they'd be used on comments that people really care about. This should address the problem of moderators with agendas. Let's face it, if someone has an agenda, that happens to agree with mine, than that's a good thing to me.
Fractional Moderation
This is a good idea, both for moderation and for M2. It would take at least 2 moderators to change the moderation.
Unscored Moderation
Some people have pointed out that the categories available are not necessarily complete (like missing stupid), approriate (OR/UR being more relevant to M2), or positive or negative (some people LIKE Trolls, some don't want Funny). So:
Karma
Rob says it doesn't factor that much anyway, but I think it should be affected by only the most positive and negative moderations and M2. I know I said no numbers, but, while one person's Flamebait is another person's Funny, Offtopic is not good. Redundant is irrelevant, since everyone has different views (prefs., NOT opinions) it's probably not redundant to readers with different preferences.
Maybe instead of adding +1 to future posts, Karma could add personality tags. If a poster consistently gets Interesting:2 or higher, then that person is probably interesting. These tags should be clearly distinct from moderation tags, so the reader and moderators knows that it applies to the author and, not necessarily, to the post.
A Changing Face
This should keep Rob busy for a year or so, but imagine the possibilities. For a discussion about webcams in public restrooms, I could view at Funny:2, Interesting:3. For a discussion on security, I could use Insightful:2, Interesting:2.
Since this would put my viewing entirely into the hands of moderators, I'd probably add Normal:1 to any view. Or, I could read on pass one a topic for Interesting and Insightful comments, and a second pass for Funny.
Conclusion
The whole point of moderation and meta-moderation is to filter the /. experience for the sake of the individual participant. Being a moderator is a pain in the [insert your desired portion of anatomy here] and it is difficult to do fairly. Try to remember that if it weren't for their efforts, you wouldn't be able filter your view at all.
And thanks, Rob. It just keeps getting better.
People laugh at me because I still use slirp with my primary ISP. I started using it (my first open source software) when they were charging a $50+ setup for ppp acccounts. Then, I realized slirp is keeping people out of my machine. Not only did I get ppp for the price of a shell account, but I got an instant firewall too! I'm still "grandfathered" on my ISP as a shell account, since they no longer provide them. (I couldn't manage without telnetting in to get my mail.)
So, now I got an ISDN connection (through work). Took me 3 days to get a reasonable firewall setup, and I still can't get my second NIC to give up IRQ 3 for the modem. Slirp saved me time, money, and peace of mind for many years.
Thank you, Danny!
Much to my surprise, I actually like this idea. I would much rather give my public key than my SSN to get a Linux Fund credit card, or anything else for that matter. (Do you know how hard it is to convince companies that they do not need, and have no right to your SSN?)
I started using KDE at beta 1. Flakey, a couple of X server crashes a month. Everything worked as advertized, there just wasn't much advertized. At the time, however, I was ready to give up on Linux rather than learn m4 to configure fvwm. KDE B1 was a breeze to customize. Everything I wanted in my menus was there in minutes.
But the license really bothered me. I was very excited at the announcement of gnome and tried 2-3 betas. I couldn't keep it up for an hour at a time. OK, patience, let's see what 1.0 brings....
What an amazing disappointment! I loaded 1.0 with Great Anticipation. It crashed X 3 times while exploring the control-panel. Several more X crashes, and I gave up. I know this is NOT a universal experience, many people are happily using GNOME, so maybe it's a Video card/Xserver/Gnome compatibility thing ('tho I tried 2 very different machines).
I am truly grateful for QPL2, and the efforts of BOTH the KDE and GNOME developers. The coopetition breeds better software. And I wish GNOME the best of luck. But for someone who X's to Solaris & HP boxes to do real work, including critical admin work that had better not be dropped by a hung/trashed X session, KDE gets my vote. KDE Beta 1 was better than GNOME 1.0. The only time I have problems with KDE is when I play with themes (which are still experimental anyway). Swap themes a few times to check them out, and it's best to log out and back in when you're ready to start working again.
I'll play with GNOME at home as new releases come out, but it has lost any change of being put on my production machine until it proves itself worthy. None-the-less, I believe it WILL prove itself one day. Then, we'll have to vote again.
Reply to self:
from an article linked to by Mindshare
As it stands, conventional methods of contacting Congress still carry the most weight, even in offices where staff members read e-mail daily.
"A well-written letter is always the best way to go about it," said Scott Harshman, a legislative assistant who routes e-mail for Representative John Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania. Still, from seeing so much e-mail, he recognizes the importance of Congressional offices' offering online communication. "People ask, 'How come this representative doesn't have e-mail?'" Harshman said. "It sends a message to your constituency."
Even so, in Congressional offices that offer constituents no electronic avenue for communication, aides say the decision holds no visible repercussions.
"Once in a while, somebody will write us a letter that says, 'When will you get it?' But it has not been a big issue," said Vince Morelli, legislative director to Representative Elton Gallegly, Republican of California. "Nobody seems to be complaining. People prefer to do it the old-fashioned way."
SO COMPLAIN! Let them know that if they don't use the internet, especially to communicate with their constituents, they have no business trying to dictate how others use it.
I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore! -- Peter Finch's character, Network
Bill Moyers recently did a PBS documentary on "The Media". Take a serious look at who owns TV, radio, and newspapers in this country, and you will no longer wonder why truth in reporting doesn't matter. Ratings matter. The American citizen does not have a chance of getting the truth on any issue.
Simple example....What should we do with the "budget surplus"? How many trillions of dollars of dollars in debt are we? If I owe Visa more than my weekly paycheck, I do NOT call that a surplus! I recently heard some statistics on a radio talk show (grab your grain of salt). Approximately 50% of the American citizenry believe the U.S Government has it's own money, and that's what it is spending for all these programs. Also, there are currently more people receiving federal funds, than are currently paying taxes. Sorry folks, it's MY money and I'm tired of giving it away.
While I'm on wasting my money, why does congress keep wasting time and resources on bills and laws that are clearly in violation of the constitution? The CDA, CDAII, Crypto controls...? If cryptography is a munition, don't citizens have a right to bear arms?
So, what can we do? Keep links to real information available. Keep links to email Representatives and Senators prominently available. Use those links often.
If Mindshare can simply get the politicians to recognize email as a legitimate and sincere form of voter communication, I'm sure that the /. effect will pale in comparison to the /tax, /bull, /waste effect.
I love watching jaws drop when I pop up HP OpenView (Motif based) on my KDE themed desktop. With fonts, colors and window decorations all the same, it looks very much like KDE OpenView!
My first though was to reply to this with an "Amen". NSI is not, has never been, and will never be the "Internet Authority" (Patent Pending [or so they think]).
Aside from the other officially sanctioned registrars, I seem to recall reading about a volunteer organization (probably on /.) offering to provide DNS services without the value-added BS of NSI. Anyway, with more registrars being accredited, I'd say its time to put NSI behind us completely.
While considering the implications of all this, I was perusing www.iana.org and was delighted at the prominent notation:
Please note that this transitional site presents both initial steps and currently accepted practices that are subject to input by the international Internet community and approval by the Board of Directors.
If you go to their site, there is a forum for public comments. /.'em with honest, frank, unflaming input on why the agreement with NSI should be terminated.
Now, if you want to be horrified, go to www.internic.net to read about the coming changes in Domain registration. First, you'll notice that you're really at networksolutions.com. But wait! If you read really, really slow (just leave the window open), you will be automatically forwarded to the NSI front door.
Going deeper into the ICANN FAQ, I found Ammendment 11 to the Dept. of Commerce/NSI contract. An excerpt regarding existing NSI customers:
- Commencing upon the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, and for a period of 18 months thereafter, NSI shall permit any customer with whom it has a contract pursuant to which NSI provides registration services that is either facially or effectively exclusive as to registration services, to terminate the registration provisions of such contract (following payment of all amounts due up through the time of such termination) and obtain registration services from other registrars; provided, however, that NSI may enter into agreements pursuant to which NSI's counterparty agrees not to utilize proprietary intellectual property or confidential proprietary information provided by NSI to the counterparty pursuant to their agreement.
Now, I wonder why NSI has been putting up such a forcefull argument that the info in the WHOIS database is "proprietary intellectual property". As far as I can see, you can change registrars by giving them the same contact information you originally gave NSI. It may be proprietary in their database, but it is not when it's your personal information on an application form.If I'm reading that right, anyone registered with NSI can switch to another registrar, with a pro-rated refund of domain fees.
Back to the original topic: Putting NSI on the RBL would be a serious wake-up call that without the participation of each and every transport provider on the 'net, they are worthless (Ok, MORE worthless).