Back to the wheat thing, though, you'd probably just be told that it "affects" commerce in some way, which "affects" interstate commerce, so you're SOL.
You could... but you'd fail. The Interstate Commerce clause has been stretched so far by now that all the Feds need to do is say "Oh yes it does!" in a brash voice, and the courts just fold.
In US law, I'm pretty sure that there's a clause in copyright law saying that the normal copying (to RAM, to HDD) needed to actually run a piece of software does not actually constitute "copying". In any case, if you're the sole holder of all copies, then it's fair under First Sale doctrine.
I'd cite, but I really don't feel like poring over Title 17 to make an argument.
I think it does belong to a class of "glamourous" jobs, that look like all play and little work to the uninitiated. This means that there is a glut of people rushing for training in the field, and a glut of people out to get these jobs. This makes it a buyer's market, and you have to be suprisingly top-notch, just to make it to the level of "some work, some play".
Other jobs are either obviously above most people's self-assessed skill (neurosurgeon), or dull-surfaced enough only to attract the people who are actually interested (CPA).
Look at how computers are built, however. It's all Legoed components. I doubt you'll see much lucrative innovation from anything remotely close to the "home/office PC" industry.
The big innovation is going to be with the component producers, both internal and peripheral.
Also, software will continue to be a big place for innovation, although its (general) lack of large required material investment (you really don't need fab plants or high-priced prototypes for innovating software), leads to lower overall prices and less payoff for one particular invention.
The general-purpose computer of today doesn't need innovation. There is still has mountains of potential to tap with the common PC. The fact that you can completely emulate complete machines (and not just computers) of only a few years ago on a modest modern machine tells the power and versatility that's out there with current general-purpose machines. Why innovate, when we still haven't cleaned the plates we have?
That's when the situations are best attacked with maximum granularity (defer to the locals). States' rights actually apply rather well in this case. Since it's really no great benefit to the Feds, they haven't used some obtuse form of the Commerce Clause to butt in... yet.
Personally, I'd be happiest to see smoking outlawed in publically (government) owned buildings by a state or municipal law. Personally, I'd like to see public no-smoke in my state). For other types of buildings, leave it up to the property owners. I wouldn't be against legislation bolstering property-owners' right to enforce their own private smoking bans, but I don't agree with the legislative "class" bans saying "nobody can smoke in restaurants, even if the restauranteur wants it".
Right, because that's what the suicide bombings were about. They want our library records searched and our phones tapped.
Well, they hate our freedom, and although I am an advocate of diplomacy over war, the US gov't is just going about it all wrong.
Right now, in the US, we're on track to just keep on losing freedoms, since no one's bothered to go and ask the Terrorists (who also appearantly hate freedom) "Okay, WHICH freedoms, specifically, do you hate?" The dismantling of freedom, albeit slow, does show initiative in diplomacy, but this sort of "groping in the dark" method of diplomacy just won't work without more communication.
Unfortunately, until both sides get on the same page with the specifics, and actually start talking things out which freedoms "they" hate, we'll continue to see this situation... scattershot freedom-reduction on the U.S. end, and continued aggressive action on the Terrorist end.
If the US and Terrorists could just sit down, communicate, and agree on which freedoms they hate, uniformly (of course, compromises would be made), the problem could be swept up much more quickly and efficiently.
Re:For those who don't want to RTFA, the top 10:
on
Top 10 Web Fads
·
· Score: 1
Far into the Windows 9x era (actually, I think 2k was probably out, but I didn't have it), trying to remember the first letter of everything in the C:\DOS directory on a friend's woefully anachronistic DOS 6.22 machine, when I acidentally did a "del *.*" while I thought I was on the A:.
I had one of those incompetent HS computer programming (VB) teachers, as well. he had little-to-no clue what was going on, so the grading consisted of testing our ability to copy projects EXACTLY, to the letter, space, and typo, out of the book. I, being one of the few people who knew the first thing of programming in the class (I had puzzled my way through beginners' C++), completely stumped in class him with TERRIBLY DIFFICULT questions such as "Can I make an Integer unsigned, so it can range up to 65,535?" Answer: He didn't understand the concept of "unsigned" variables.
I learned later that he was a former science teacher that just still needed a job. I ended up getting a D+ in the class.
Why would I spend $300 (more, after having to buy Mac-compatible software, new connections, and any extra peripherals), and then still have to have someone make the workflow? I could just get a relevant consultant and be able to use the hardware that already exists, needs no further physical interconnection, and is tried-and-true with my current environment.
I'd rather have targeted ads than scattershot, as well. The biggest consideration, however, is how much information I'm giving up in order to be "targeted". Something as simple as a "thumbs up/down" on ads or (more likely usable) content might provide a good model.
Just an idea... How about making it just say something like "and again" if it's an identical access attempt, and it hasn't been, say, 20 seconds since the last one.
Slashdot Mirror
Me, I can't stand violent people. Damn s**sers.
The thing is, though, I'm sure it's only a short leap of technology to get Skype onto VoIP, or perhaps take it into another arena altogether.
As do I, but I know enough to use a POP client with local storage for all my old mail. Eas(ier) conversion, easy to back up, always available.
And hit up your local library to spring for a copy (if you have a local library that may).
Double-blind penetration testing? Wander around in a blindfold until something happens?
Or, on a more likely risk: Getting blacklisted by your ISP for spamming, etc. Even saying "I was open sharing!" would just dig the hole deeper.
Me? I would like to open my AP, but I have shares on a number of machines that I just don't want to make that more open.
Back to the wheat thing, though, you'd probably just be told that it "affects" commerce in some way, which "affects" interstate commerce, so you're SOL.
You could... but you'd fail. The Interstate Commerce clause has been stretched so far by now that all the Feds need to do is say "Oh yes it does!" in a brash voice, and the courts just fold.
In US law, I'm pretty sure that there's a clause in copyright law saying that the normal copying (to RAM, to HDD) needed to actually run a piece of software does not actually constitute "copying". In any case, if you're the sole holder of all copies, then it's fair under First Sale doctrine.
I'd cite, but I really don't feel like poring over Title 17 to make an argument.
(IANAL, as if that wasn't obvious.)
I think it does belong to a class of "glamourous" jobs, that look like all play and little work to the uninitiated. This means that there is a glut of people rushing for training in the field, and a glut of people out to get these jobs. This makes it a buyer's market, and you have to be suprisingly top-notch, just to make it to the level of "some work, some play".
Other jobs are either obviously above most people's self-assessed skill (neurosurgeon), or dull-surfaced enough only to attract the people who are actually interested (CPA).
I'm flexible. I'll take "cheap".
Really? Explain. (I don't disbelieve you, I'm just curious.)
There are legitimate times to kill (or wound) people.
Same concept, really.
Look at how computers are built, however. It's all Legoed components. I doubt you'll see much lucrative innovation from anything remotely close to the "home/office PC" industry.
The big innovation is going to be with the component producers, both internal and peripheral.
Also, software will continue to be a big place for innovation, although its (general) lack of large required material investment (you really don't need fab plants or high-priced prototypes for innovating software), leads to lower overall prices and less payoff for one particular invention.
The general-purpose computer of today doesn't need innovation. There is still has mountains of potential to tap with the common PC. The fact that you can completely emulate complete machines (and not just computers) of only a few years ago on a modest modern machine tells the power and versatility that's out there with current general-purpose machines. Why innovate, when we still haven't cleaned the plates we have?
That's when the situations are best attacked with maximum granularity (defer to the locals). States' rights actually apply rather well in this case. Since it's really no great benefit to the Feds, they haven't used some obtuse form of the Commerce Clause to butt in... yet.
Personally, I'd be happiest to see smoking outlawed in publically (government) owned buildings by a state or municipal law. Personally, I'd like to see public no-smoke in my state). For other types of buildings, leave it up to the property owners. I wouldn't be against legislation bolstering property-owners' right to enforce their own private smoking bans, but I don't agree with the legislative "class" bans saying "nobody can smoke in restaurants, even if the restauranteur wants it".
Right, because that's what the suicide bombings were about. They want our library records searched and our phones tapped.
Well, they hate our freedom, and although I am an advocate of diplomacy over war, the US gov't is just going about it all wrong.
Right now, in the US, we're on track to just keep on losing freedoms, since no one's bothered to go and ask the Terrorists (who also appearantly hate freedom) "Okay, WHICH freedoms, specifically, do you hate?" The dismantling of freedom, albeit slow, does show initiative in diplomacy, but this sort of "groping in the dark" method of diplomacy just won't work without more communication.
Unfortunately, until both sides get on the same page with the specifics, and actually start talking things out which freedoms "they" hate, we'll continue to see this situation... scattershot freedom-reduction on the U.S. end, and continued aggressive action on the Terrorist end.
If the US and Terrorists could just sit down, communicate, and agree on which freedoms they hate, uniformly (of course, compromises would be made), the problem could be swept up much more quickly and efficiently.
That godawful "Weeeeee" song.
Reminds me of:
Far into the Windows 9x era (actually, I think 2k was probably out, but I didn't have it), trying to remember the first letter of everything in the C:\DOS directory on a friend's woefully anachronistic DOS 6.22 machine, when I acidentally did a "del *.*" while I thought I was on the A:.
I had one of those incompetent HS computer programming (VB) teachers, as well. he had little-to-no clue what was going on, so the grading consisted of testing our ability to copy projects EXACTLY, to the letter, space, and typo, out of the book. I, being one of the few people who knew the first thing of programming in the class (I had puzzled my way through beginners' C++), completely stumped in class him with TERRIBLY DIFFICULT questions such as "Can I make an Integer unsigned, so it can range up to 65,535?" Answer: He didn't understand the concept of "unsigned" variables.
I learned later that he was a former science teacher that just still needed a job. I ended up getting a D+ in the class.
Why would I spend $300 (more, after having to buy Mac-compatible software, new connections, and any extra peripherals), and then still have to have someone make the workflow? I could just get a relevant consultant and be able to use the hardware that already exists, needs no further physical interconnection, and is tried-and-true with my current environment.
I'll take PITA over $300+PITA, thanks.
They are, however, picking up the video market. What's more, they're doing a lot of it on their own software, as well as hardware.
GPP's not really a "liberal" POV, really.
I'd rather have targeted ads than scattershot, as well. The biggest consideration, however, is how much information I'm giving up in order to be "targeted". Something as simple as a "thumbs up/down" on ads or (more likely usable) content might provide a good model.
Just an idea... How about making it just say something like "and again" if it's an identical access attempt, and it hasn't been, say, 20 seconds since the last one.
"TCP 6881"
"and again"
"and again"
"and again"
"and again"
Of course, then your computer would just start to sound like the annoying kid in the backseat you'd want to smack.