Re:We need a simple definition of planet...
on
Is Pluto A Planet?
·
· Score: 1
Please post it; I'm not really zealot@linux.org, and I'm not putting my email address up while that law enforcement dude is lurking [see the Kiddie Porn threads].
Generally the old RISC OS crowd were quite good at releasing file format specs. There were always plenty of RISC OS hackers - a tradition predating Linux by some years (although the OS wasn't open-source, it was written in assembly so the disassembly was almost as good as the source, IYSWIM). I'm be surprised if the Sibelius guys refused to release details if there was some interest.
Yeah, but PS2 has been out for 3 months and DC has been out for 18. PS2 kicks DC's ass on current titles alone. Mmm. Tekken Tag. I guess if you don't like Tekken or SSX or Dead or Alive you're SOL until the summer. And you might be able to buy a PS2 by summer.
By that logic, all discontinued products should go up in price the closer you get to selling the final one.
Last time I bought a discontinued model CD player, it was actually cheaper than the new model.
I appreciate your appeal to the law of supply and demand, but here it's lack of demand that's driving supply down, not lack of supply driving demand down. The former causes prices to drop; the latter causes them to rise.
Some people are able to seperate their personal lives from the business lives. Loving someone is not the same as believing all the things they believe, or even approving of everything they do. Anyway, for all you know he might be one of the coolest execs in the industry, trying to fight for artist's rights but never getting anywhere thanks to those above him.
Courtney Love also has not been quiet about artists getting shafted... indeed, there was a transcription of a speech she gave to a crowd of several tens of thousands of fans about exactly this [sorry, no link].
As for Kurt Cobain, a friend of mine saw her a few days after he died. She was pretty upset about it.
Whatever you have against Courtney Love, she deserves more credit than that.
There's a commercial package for RISC OS called Sibelius which, in the mid-90s, was almost the industry standard for sheet music composition. IIRC, that could OCR sheet music and produce MIDI.
Not sure if they're gonna port it to Linux, though. Or even Windows.
All your property is nothing more than a specific arrangement of a finite number of atoms. The entire concept that someone can "own" a particular grouping of atoms is at best ludicrous. So give me all your money.
I must admit I find this all very interesting. Since I never went to high school in the USA I never got this basic grounding in the US legal system. It's a lot different where I come from (the UK).
Not at all; I think you did a good job of explaining it. So what you're saying is that no matter what precedent gets set, it doesn't affect one until one is hauled in front of the court.
That's fine, but it seems that anyone working in this area is going to have to do some risk analysis in determining the likelihood of getting hauled in front of court... which in practice, means many people will back down.
Anyway, it's not just being "required to stop", is it? Can't the MPAA also bankrupt me and effectively ruin my life, if I lose a court case against them?
It seems like you're saying, "It's not a crime unless you get caught, so I don't care what laws are passed";)
IANAL, and your Dad is, so I feel loath to argue. BUT...
Isn't it true that court cases set precedent? I mean, the linked article here quotes not only from the lawbooks but also from case law. So a decision in DeCSS is likely to be quoted in future cases... hence the DeCSS decision will affect other people than just the two parties.
What's wrong with my reasoning here?
It also seems pretty damned obvious to me that the choice of president does affect other people than George W. Bush and Al Gore. Like, the whole damned population;) But maybe I'm misinterpreting you?
I don't think that'll be entirely necessary. You're doing a great job on your own.
there's a number of professional counselors out there that are basing their careers on false doctrine.
Yes, there are. False doctrine is more common than you might think.
This law specifically makes the digitally altered evidence LEGAL
If it does, it's extremely badly worded.
You're getting out of your depth again, digital evidence and forensic analysis is one of my areas of expertise, one of my primary job duties for over 4 years.
I'm out of my depth because that's your speciality? How does that work, exactly? You might know how to operate image processing software; I know how to write image processing software. So now we've ascertained that I'm not actually out of my depth... did you have a point to make?
Again you show your ignorance, as the prosecution is required to demonstrate 3 images
Oh, OK, three images. Not 50,000, as you originally claimed. Glad we got that one straight.
I guess you'll have to be a victim to understand how callous that last statement is.
This is exactly what's wrong with your entire outlook. You're not THINKING. You have a bleeding heart for all your victims and that is coloring your judgement so badly that you're incapable of making a sustained rational argument. Are you implying that all laws should be passed this way - as a knee-jerk reaction to emotive issues? You should run for President.
When it's your child, or your cousin
When it's my child or my cousin, I won't be in a position to make rational judgements. Like you clearly aren't. If your job makes you this irrational and emotional, you should quit and do something where lapses in judgement don't hurt people.
You have this unwavering picture of jack-booted thugs out to destroy innocent people
If you say so. You should know, obviously. I have a picture of you that includes swastikas, I must confess. But I do know that not all policemen are idiots.
"probable intent"
I said provable intent not probable intent. Only one letter difference, so I can see how you would get confused. Who's the "STUPID STUPID FUCK" now?;) Sending people to jail for "probable intent" is horrific. It's a shame you can't see that.
If it becomes legal to posess digitally generated child porn, there will be no effective difference between "virtual" porn and any other porn on a computer screen. That means no enforcement
It's your job to deal with that within the constraints of the First Amendment. If you can't do that, we should fire your sorry ass (you're our employee, remember?) and get someone who CAN. Many policemen clearly think that the consitution is just something that gets in the way of their fine work. It isn't. It's the basis of American society. Policemen who can't appreciate that SHOULD BE IN JAIL THEMSELVES, or at least kicked out of the republic.
Are you really associated with linux.org?
No I'm not. I think that much is obvious, to the initiated. Are you really in law enforcement? I take it you are. Man, that's so sad. Law enforcement really is filled with all the wrong people. Their reward system is so badly designed, though, that it's a predictable outcome.
Why are you even reading Slashdot? Are you also investigating hackers as part of your job? Or is the child abuse section so underworked that you have time for this? Maybe this is why you want to create work by creating yet another victimless crime?
Now, I think this conversation is over. Your ad hominem arguments are really not working. You're obviosly VERY upset, so I would go and have a nice cup of tea and a cigarette and calm down.
I wouldn't want you taking it out on some poor guy who you've decided is "likely to commit crimes against children".
Well, I think your views of commercial programming houses are clear! It seems to me that this opinion - a political opinion - is what's really behind the GPL. If Stallman really wanted to open systems up to benefit the public at large, he'd let commercial users in. It makes me highly dubious of the high moral claims that GPL advocates make.
Slashdot Mirror
Please post it; I'm not really zealot@linux.org, and I'm not putting my email address up while that law enforcement dude is lurking [see the Kiddie Porn threads].
Could be wrong, though.
That really made me laugh ;)
I think you're right. About the consoles *and* the moderators ;)
Yeah, but PS2 has been out for 3 months and DC has been out for 18. PS2 kicks DC's ass on current titles alone. Mmm. Tekken Tag. I guess if you don't like Tekken or SSX or Dead or Alive you're SOL until the summer. And you might be able to buy a PS2 by summer.
[Sorry, brit joke].
Sorry, that just made me laugh. The console was one of DOS's most powerful features too ;)
Last time I bought a discontinued model CD player, it was actually cheaper than the new model.
I appreciate your appeal to the law of supply and demand, but here it's lack of demand that's driving supply down, not lack of supply driving demand down. The former causes prices to drop; the latter causes them to rise.
Maybe this should be in a FAQ somewhere, but isn't it technically illegal to "dump" products on the market, meaning to sell them at below cost price?
Courtney Love also has not been quiet about artists getting shafted ... indeed, there was a transcription of a speech she gave to a crowd of several tens of thousands of fans about exactly this [sorry, no link].
As for Kurt Cobain, a friend of mine saw her a few days after he died. She was pretty upset about it.
Whatever you have against Courtney Love, she deserves more credit than that.
But you can still do it on a couch, right?
Not sure if they're gonna port it to Linux, though. Or even Windows.
All your property is nothing more than a specific arrangement of a finite number of atoms. The entire concept that someone can "own" a particular grouping of atoms is at best ludicrous. So give me all your money.
Is this a troll? We're talking about the music of J.S.Bach and Mozart. It really, really, really is in the public domain. No question.
I must admit I find this all very interesting. Since I never went to high school in the USA I never got this basic grounding in the US legal system. It's a lot different where I come from (the UK).
That's fine, but it seems that anyone working in this area is going to have to do some risk analysis in determining the likelihood of getting hauled in front of court ... which in practice, means many people will back down.
Anyway, it's not just being "required to stop", is it? Can't the MPAA also bankrupt me and effectively ruin my life, if I lose a court case against them?
It seems like you're saying, "It's not a crime unless you get caught, so I don't care what laws are passed" ;)
Isn't it true that court cases set precedent? I mean, the linked article here quotes not only from the lawbooks but also from case law. So a decision in DeCSS is likely to be quoted in future cases ... hence the DeCSS decision will affect other people than just the two parties.
What's wrong with my reasoning here?
It also seems pretty damned obvious to me that the choice of president does affect other people than George W. Bush and Al Gore. Like, the whole damned population ;) But maybe I'm misinterpreting you?
Yay Verio! Good to see an ISP with bollocks. I'm glad I chose them to host my site. Time to put DeCSS up there.
I was shocked, I must admit!
Wow. So maybe it makes a kind-of "flower pattern" e.g. think of a circle and add circles around its edge. That is surprising.
I don't think that'll be entirely necessary. You're doing a great job on your own.
there's a number of professional counselors out there that are basing their careers on false doctrine.
Yes, there are. False doctrine is more common than you might think.
This law specifically makes the digitally altered evidence LEGAL
If it does, it's extremely badly worded.
You're getting out of your depth again, digital evidence and forensic analysis is one of my areas of expertise, one of my primary job duties for over 4 years.
I'm out of my depth because that's your speciality? How does that work, exactly? You might know how to operate image processing software; I know how to write image processing software. So now we've ascertained that I'm not actually out of my depth ... did you have a point to make?
Again you show your ignorance, as the prosecution is required to demonstrate 3 images
Oh, OK, three images. Not 50,000, as you originally claimed. Glad we got that one straight.
I guess you'll have to be a victim to understand how callous that last statement is.
This is exactly what's wrong with your entire outlook. You're not THINKING. You have a bleeding heart for all your victims and that is coloring your judgement so badly that you're incapable of making a sustained rational argument. Are you implying that all laws should be passed this way - as a knee-jerk reaction to emotive issues? You should run for President.
When it's your child, or your cousin
When it's my child or my cousin, I won't be in a position to make rational judgements. Like you clearly aren't. If your job makes you this irrational and emotional, you should quit and do something where lapses in judgement don't hurt people.
You have this unwavering picture of jack-booted thugs out to destroy innocent people
If you say so. You should know, obviously. I have a picture of you that includes swastikas, I must confess. But I do know that not all policemen are idiots.
"probable intent"
I said provable intent not probable intent. Only one letter difference, so I can see how you would get confused. Who's the "STUPID STUPID FUCK" now? ;) Sending people to jail for "probable intent" is horrific. It's a shame you can't see that.
If it becomes legal to posess digitally generated child porn, there will be no effective difference between "virtual" porn and any other porn on a computer screen. That means no enforcement
It's your job to deal with that within the constraints of the First Amendment. If you can't do that, we should fire your sorry ass (you're our employee, remember?) and get someone who CAN. Many policemen clearly think that the consitution is just something that gets in the way of their fine work. It isn't. It's the basis of American society. Policemen who can't appreciate that SHOULD BE IN JAIL THEMSELVES, or at least kicked out of the republic.
Are you really associated with linux.org?
No I'm not. I think that much is obvious, to the initiated. Are you really in law enforcement? I take it you are. Man, that's so sad. Law enforcement really is filled with all the wrong people. Their reward system is so badly designed, though, that it's a predictable outcome.
Why are you even reading Slashdot? Are you also investigating hackers as part of your job? Or is the child abuse section so underworked that you have time for this? Maybe this is why you want to create work by creating yet another victimless crime?
Now, I think this conversation is over. Your ad hominem arguments are really not working. You're obviosly VERY upset, so I would go and have a nice cup of tea and a cigarette and calm down.
I wouldn't want you taking it out on some poor guy who you've decided is "likely to commit crimes against children".
Well, I think your views of commercial programming houses are clear! It seems to me that this opinion - a political opinion - is what's really behind the GPL. If Stallman really wanted to open systems up to benefit the public at large, he'd let commercial users in. It makes me highly dubious of the high moral claims that GPL advocates make.
Taco, get your head out of your ass. Microsoft is a major player in this industry. You're a journalist. Go figure.
But at least they never did a country song.
Well it's not surprising in retrospect! Nothing ever is ;)