What about Mosoto, currently in alpha? At first glance, it looks rather interesting as well... interface is slick, it lets you mouse over friends to see common interests, and it is said that you can use this to stream music to your friends. It has buttons for using a webcam, too; I haven't played with Mosoto much yet but it's worth a look if we're talking about IM through Facebook.
-- Joren
Default judgment is a binding judgment in favor of the plaintiff when the defendant has not responded to a summons or has failed to appear before a court. In a civil trial involving damages, a default judgment will enter the amount of damages pled in the original complaint. If proof of damages is required, the court may schedule another hearing on that issue. A defendant can have a default judgment vacated, or set aside, by filing a motion, after the judgment is entered, by showing of a proper excuse.
No he's not making DRM moonshine on the side; just look at the actual context. The article blew it way out of proportion. Of course, even with this quote you're still better off just going to the URL and seeing the argument he was responding to.
The GPLv3 can never do that. Quite fundamentally, whenever you extend the
"reach" of a license past just the derived work, you will *always* get
into a situation where people who designed two different things get into a
conflict when they meet. The GPLv2 simply avoids the conflict entirely,
and has no problem at all with the "Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you".
In a very real sense, the GPLv3 asks people to do things that I personally
would refuse to do. I put Linux on my kids computers, and I limit their
ability to upgrade it. Do I have that legal right (I sure do, I'm their
legal guardian), but the point is that this is not about "legality", this
is about "morality". The GPLv3 doesn't match what I think is morally where
I want to be. I think it *is* ok to control peoples hardware. I do it
myself.
OtOH, I don't think GPLv3 actually prevents Linus from controlling his computer in the way that he is describing here...the key is, the owner can do what they want, not the user, hence the whole voting machine FAQ on the GNU site...am I right?
Actually, as far as the web address, searching for gmail.de works fine. g-mail.de doesn't exist; there's no hyphen in the company's webaddress.
But yeah, it is kind of annoying how Google's auto-correction decides you really mean to search for "Gmail" and not "G-Mail". What does it take to make google search on the hyphen?
You appear to be looking at the post by daveschroeder entitled "Other Reviews", not the one by Anonymous entitled "Personal Review" with an abridged version of "Other Reviews". Not really sure why Anony felt compelled to copy/paste it, but there you go. Anony's post really does stop at "fea"
Actually, my understanding from the articles is that he was quitting the feature film business and going into made-for-TV stuff instead. From the quitting story, we have
"We don't want to make movies. We're about to get into television. As far as Lucasfilm is concerned, we've moved away from the feature film thing because it's too expensive and it's too risky."...
He calls himself "semi-retired" but reiterated his plans to direct "small movies, esoteric in nature," after his other projects are launched. He expects to serve as exec producer on the two features and the TV shows, including a live-action "Star Wars" skein.
Note that the quote from the earlier article even mentions the Star Wars live-action. And from the new article, we have:
The two extra films will also be made for TV and probably be an hour long each. But, like "Clone Wars," Lucas doesn't know where on TV they will land.
Hello, HBO and Showtime. It may be time to pony up.
Actually, the first five letters:D. Apparently Forgent Networks merely bought the rights to (not applied for) the original patent when they acquired Compression Networks, and then tried to enforce it. But still, amusingly named...
I feel like the fact that they deliberately falsified their application by not submitting known about prior art should be a crime of some sort, or at least punishable by a hefty fine and a possible civil suit. It's so easy to game the patent system without any accountability...
-- Joren
So, screw whether he's actually guilty, we will punish him severely to make an example of him to our enemies. Or wait, maybe we should just punish people who were actually proven guilty in court, and punish them by law, according to the severity of their crime, rather than to make them an example? You know, treat them like actual human beings instead of messages to the rest of the world about our superiority.
"Given the fact that this guy is a national security threat" -- original post
Not that I disagree with you about fundamental human rights, but it seems kind of a contrived response to say the original poster didn't care whether the person was guilty. The argument seems to be more about how the person should be dealt with (ie, what was his crime), not whether he did anything illegal. Even his lawyers are admitting his actions; it's the motives they are disagreeing about.
I definitely believe everyone accused should have a trial. I'm not a fan of exchanging fundamental rights for a perceived advantage of security. As for this case, I don't see why the US govt. doesn't just give the guarantee that he will be given a fair trial if they're so sure he's not going to Gitmo...
Remember, it's Google's site, not the advertisers'. They are a portal only to the extent that they wish to be; if Google wishes to sell parts of their site (e.g., ads) to others, that's their business, but ultimately claiming Google is unfairly censoring image ads is like claiming I'm unfairly preventing someone else's blog entries from appearing on my home page. Key word: MINE.
Oh, and if you really want to see banner ads so badly, why not do a Google image search for them? They don't seem to be preventing those from showing up:P
Main Entry: depress
Pronunciation: di-'pres, dE-
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French depresser, from Latin depressus, past participle of deprimere to press down, from de- + premere to press -- more at PRESS
[...]
2 a : to press down <depress a typewriter key> b : to cause to sink to a lower position
Slashdot Mirror
What about Mosoto, currently in alpha? At first glance, it looks rather interesting as well... interface is slick, it lets you mouse over friends to see common interests, and it is said that you can use this to stream music to your friends. It has buttons for using a webcam, too; I haven't played with Mosoto much yet but it's worth a look if we're talking about IM through Facebook. -- Joren
Anyone else see the irony in Slashdot being Slashdotted?
The joke ain't older than his own 2002 posting, is it?
Double-quoting was actually the first thing I tried. Why don't you?
Actually, as far as the web address, searching for gmail.de works fine. g-mail.de doesn't exist; there's no hyphen in the company's webaddress. But yeah, it is kind of annoying how Google's auto-correction decides you really mean to search for "Gmail" and not "G-Mail". What does it take to make google search on the hyphen?
You appear to be looking at the post by daveschroeder entitled "Other Reviews", not the one by Anonymous entitled "Personal Review" with an abridged version of "Other Reviews". Not really sure why Anony felt compelled to copy/paste it, but there you go. Anony's post really does stop at "fea"
Actually, the first five letters :D. Apparently Forgent Networks merely bought the rights to (not applied for) the original patent when they acquired Compression Networks, and then tried to enforce it. But still, amusingly named...
I feel like the fact that they deliberately falsified their application by not submitting known about prior art should be a crime of some sort, or at least punishable by a hefty fine and a possible civil suit. It's so easy to game the patent system without any accountability...
-- Joren
Not that I disagree with you about fundamental human rights, but it seems kind of a contrived response to say the original poster didn't care whether the person was guilty. The argument seems to be more about how the person should be dealt with (ie, what was his crime), not whether he did anything illegal. Even his lawyers are admitting his actions; it's the motives they are disagreeing about.
I definitely believe everyone accused should have a trial. I'm not a fan of exchanging fundamental rights for a perceived advantage of security. As for this case, I don't see why the US govt. doesn't just give the guarantee that he will be given a fair trial if they're so sure he's not going to Gitmo...
Remember, it's Google's site, not the advertisers'. They are a portal only to the extent that they wish to be; if Google wishes to sell parts of their site (e.g., ads) to others, that's their business, but ultimately claiming Google is unfairly censoring image ads is like claiming I'm unfairly preventing someone else's blog entries from appearing on my home page. Key word: MINE. Oh, and if you really want to see banner ads so badly, why not do a Google image search for them? They don't seem to be preventing those from showing up :P
I'm sure it was a rhetorical remark, but the thing actually does work with Firefox...
Main Entry: depress
Pronunciation: di-'pres, dE-
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French depresser, from Latin depressus, past participle of deprimere to press down, from de- + premere to press -- more at PRESS
[...]
2 a : to press down <depress a typewriter key> b : to cause to sink to a lower position
^.^
Isn't that what a gas tax is?