penrose's philosophy/logic is wrong. i'm not going to say quantum-consciousness is wrong, but without the logical argument, there's little reason to posit such an exotic explanation. occam's razor compels us to accept our humble place in the universe.
i don't really care what my computer looks like, but i do care how it sounds. i find the whining of the fans & disks to be quiet disturbing. one of the great things about the original mac was that it was completely silent.
so where can i find such a beast? i have looked in vain for years.
I wouldn't worry too much about the patent issue. I must plea ignorance about the details of wavelet compression, but if it's anything like the Fourier transform or any other integral transform, then it should be rather easy to implement...I don't see how a company can patent an integral.
the problem is that apparently the current j2k proposal does require patents to implement. the fact that wavelets are indeed mathematical no longer appears to matter to the patent office with their more-is-better attitude.
Besides, the bottom of the article says that companies have already agreed to make all parts of JPEG2000 part 1 royalty-free.
for what duration and with what conditions, and what developers? i am not reassured.
Give a group a hackers a few weeks, and I'll betcha that there will be free implementations of everything available with part 2.
maybe so, but that doesn't really solve the problem because you would not be able to distribute the resulting software legally, so a company like redhat/netscape would not be able to incorporate it into their products. sure it could float on the fringe, but it's gotta be standard!
there's another reason for the CSS: the geographic component. the world is divided into about six regions, and each has its own keys. each DVD will only play in one region. this allows the record companies to control how movies are launched, and (this i don't fully understand) make more money by keeping the hype up longer. the CSS crack threatens this as well.
it is completely moral to crack the code & publish the results.
it is illegal but completely moral to use the crack to copy DVDs.
there is no "right to profit", but there are right ways to profit. hollywood is in no danger, they are just too greedy and shortsighted to see how they can make money without copyright (ie, in a free market).
Without patents, there would be no reason to invent anything, except the extremely dubious motivational power of generosity
this is false.
there are may ways to profit from innovation without patents. the obvious one that if you invent something you get a natural exclusive market just because it will take some time for the competition to reverse engineer and copy your idea - and by that time you can move on to your next product/idea. it's really quite simple.
clear-headed libertarian thinkers see the patent system as unnecessary government meddling in the free market.
No. UCITA is a step in the wrong direction. It outlaws reverse engineering. It makes EULAs enforceable.
The tighter they squeeze, the more justification they have for squeezing tighter. Don't count on them going too far, seeing the error of their ways, and then swinging them back.
wow, this looks great. I have been using Max on the macintosh for some time (my GPL visual musical project bomb works in Max), and been very frustrated by the proprietary environment (despite the wonderful people behind it).
with max, you can have either MIDI or digital audio (with the MSP extension) flowing along wires that connect boxes. the boxes are objects that you can write in C. It's really good for doing real time control & interactive things.
jMax is scriptable in tcl (no java here, despite the name), and looks like it has the same midi/audio capabilities.
lately i have just started working with pd, which is miller puckette's current software platform. it uses the same box/wire and midi/audio ideas. see his page. It works on linux and also has a OpenGL graphics package GEM, so you can do 3d graphics with music.
now i have to choose between pd and jmax! oh sorry day:)
It's just the same as if you go into the corner store and walk out with groceries without paying.
no it isn't. if you steal groceries then nobody else can eat them. if you copy software, then nobody else is deprived.
you might say "oh but the author lost their potential gains". but this is not theft. this is more like using advertisement blocking software, which deprives the ad companies of their revenue. obviously this is not theft.
When we live in a Star Trek world, where money is not needed, then all software can be free.
of course we will always need money, but that doesn't mean that we need to legal system of copyright. these are independent ideas.
you appear to be confounding capitalism with intellectual property. In fact these ideas are in opposition: capitalism is about individual freedom of choice, and copyright is about control of individuals and government regulation.
pointing guns at people and telling them to "innovate or die" would also encourage innovation. but it's a stupid idea.
so are patents.
nature already provides plenty of motivation to innovate. we don't need the government to mess with the incentive system given to us in the form of the free market.
copyrights and patents are just another form of corporate welfare. copyright is the source of the next war on drugs.
Sure it's stupid to say that OSS will make money obsolete.
But it's also stupid to start with the premise "there's something to be said for the profit motive" and conclude that we need copyright as a legal and social system. To think that without copyright one cannot profit from creation of "intellectual capital" just shows your lack of a creativity. A direct, per-copy payment system is not the the only way. You need a better business plan, not government help.
Finally you say "nobody's gonna do high-end olap tools". First it was compilers, then it was operating systems, then it was GUIs and applications, now this. give up.
Imagine a world without copyrights. There's still contract law, though... [ and the result is the same just with less hassle ]
this is a common misconception.
the important difference is third parties: if person A signs a contract with B, but then A violates the contract and posts the information on the internet, and C downloads it and gives a copy to D.
now under copyright, B & C are criminals. but with contracts, only B has violated the law and their on word.
The entire idea of patents needs to be thrown out, and replaced with something that protects inventors...
You are only half right. The patent system should be thrown out, period. I would be willing to compromise and continue to protect drugs since it's not clear how that industry would work without them.
invention has its own rewards (including financial) without a ridiculous legal structure and buearacracy to support it.
all you said was "i like the power copyright gives me". you didn't explain why copyright is a good system for running society. you didn't explain why your made up desire to control other people trumps their desire to control themselves.
this is not an anti-government group. they are also for the war on drugs. this is a right-wing group (hence the liberal bashing). contrary to "conservative" rhetoric, the right has nothing to do with small government (witness large military, religious invasion of autonomy, etc).
A monopoly (control of 100% of the market) will never be created without a government mule to create and control the market.
the microsoft monopoly is the result of a government mule: copyright.
If you truly believe in a competitive environment
then you should understand that people have a right to copy, modify, and distribute information.
"ownership" cannot apply to something that can be copied.
that said, forcible licensing and auctioning of the source code is a stupid remedy. the legal problem isn't the monopoly, but leveraging the monopoly into other markets (OS to internet). so the obvious solution is to break them up into smaller companies (OS, app, internet/media).
but this is just treating the symptoms. the only way to cure the disease is to eliminate copyright.
copying information is not theft in the normal sense of the word. legally we have this thing "intellectual property" and indeed people violate these laws all the time. in short: i do have the god-given right.
IP is government-run extortion system supported by big-businesses like microsoft and disney. IP is the next war on drugs. IP is obsolete.
ps. i am not a script kiddie.
pps: see ipnot for justification of the above position. __
the capitalist system is not the enemy. copyright is the enemy. in fact these two positions have the same foundation: personal freedom & non-intiation of force. see ipnot. __
Why Linux is bad for a serious C/C++ developer
on
Linux on CNN Tonight
·
· Score: 1
it has a lot to do with it. i use compilers all day long, and would *love* for my compiles to run faster. this really is a weakness of gcc (great though it is in so many other ways), and a weakness of the standard compiler is a weakness of the whole system.
i believe that objective-c may actually have implemented something like this, in which case there might GPL code for it floating around, or an obscure option. __
Slashdot Mirror
there is no convincing medical evidence that moderate use of drugs such as marijuana, alcohol, mdma, and lsd cause brain damage.
the primary risk of drugs results from the ridiculous establishment drug laws.
see the dpf.
information is free.
the only question is:
try this link: Penrose is Wrong by Drew McDermott
information is free.
the only question is:
so where can i find such a beast? i have looked in vain for years.
information is free.
the only question is:
information is free.
the only question is:
sigh.
information is free.
the only question is:
there's another reason for the CSS: the geographic component. the world is divided into about six regions, and each has its own keys. each DVD will only play in one region. this allows the record companies to control how movies are launched, and (this i don't fully understand) make more money by keeping the hype up longer. the CSS crack threatens this as well.
it is illegal but completely moral to use the crack to copy DVDs.
there is no "right to profit", but there are right ways to profit. hollywood is in no danger, they are just too greedy and shortsighted to see how they can make money without copyright (ie, in a free market).
information is free.
the only question is:
there are may ways to profit from innovation without patents. the obvious one that if you invent something you get a natural exclusive market just because it will take some time for the competition to reverse engineer and copy your idea - and by that time you can move on to your next product/idea. it's really quite simple.
clear-headed libertarian thinkers see the patent system as unnecessary government meddling in the free market.
information is free.
the only question is:
The tighter they squeeze, the more justification they have for squeezing tighter. Don't count on them going too far, seeing the error of their ways, and then swinging them back.
think of it as war. every battle counts.
information is free.
the only question is:
with max, you can have either MIDI or digital audio (with the MSP extension) flowing along wires that connect boxes. the boxes are objects that you can write in C. It's really good for doing real time control & interactive things.
jMax is scriptable in tcl (no java here, despite the name), and looks like it has the same midi/audio capabilities.
lately i have just started working with pd, which is miller puckette's current software platform. it uses the same box/wire and midi/audio ideas. see his page. It works on linux and also has a OpenGL graphics package GEM, so you can do 3d graphics with music.
now i have to choose between pd and jmax! oh sorry day :)
information is free.
the only question is:
you might say "oh but the author lost their potential gains". but this is not theft. this is more like using advertisement blocking software, which deprives the ad companies of their revenue. obviously this is not theft.
of course we will always need money, but that doesn't mean that we need to legal system of copyright. these are independent ideas.you appear to be confounding capitalism with intellectual property. In fact these ideas are in opposition: capitalism is about individual freedom of choice, and copyright is about control of individuals and government regulation.
information is free.
the only question is:
so are patents.
nature already provides plenty of motivation to innovate. we don't need the government to mess with the incentive system given to us in the form of the free market.
copyrights and patents are just another form of corporate welfare. copyright is the source of the next war on drugs.
information is free.
the only question is:
But it's also stupid to start with the premise "there's something to be said for the profit motive" and conclude that we need copyright as a legal and social system. To think that without copyright one cannot profit from creation of "intellectual capital" just shows your lack of a creativity. A direct, per-copy payment system is not the the only way. You need a better business plan, not government help.
Finally you say "nobody's gonna do high-end olap tools". First it was compilers, then it was operating systems, then it was GUIs and applications, now this. give up.
information is free.
the only question is:
the important difference is third parties: if person A signs a contract with B, but then A violates the contract and posts the information on the internet, and C downloads it and gives a copy to D.
now under copyright, B & C are criminals. but with contracts, only B has violated the law and their on word.
the difference is critical.
information is free.
the only question is:
invention has its own rewards (including financial) without a ridiculous legal structure and buearacracy to support it.
information is free.
the only question is:
information is free.
the only question is:
information is free.
the only question is:
information is free.
the only question is:
"ownership" cannot apply to something that can be copied.
that said, forcible licensing and auctioning of the source code is a stupid remedy. the legal problem isn't the monopoly, but leveraging the monopoly into other markets (OS to internet). so the obvious solution is to break them up into smaller companies (OS, app, internet/media).
but this is just treating the symptoms. the only way to cure the disease is to eliminate copyright.
information is free.
the only question is:
it's not surprising that with the force of guns the the government behind them, proprietary software could "beat out" free software.
by letting the Darwinian model flourish, i hope you don't mean that murder is ok.
__
IP is government-run extortion system supported by big-businesses like microsoft and disney.
IP is the next war on drugs.
IP is obsolete.
ps. i am not a script kiddie.
pps: see ipnot for justification of the above position.
__
the capitalist system is not the enemy. copyright is the enemy. in fact these two positions have the same foundation: personal freedom & non-intiation of force. see ipnot.
__
i believe that objective-c may actually have implemented something like this, in which case there might GPL code for it floating around, or an obscure option.
__