Silverlights video streaming is rather better than flash. I was impressed with both the olympic and march madness (HQ) streaming. You can hate on microsoft if you want, but it doesn't make silverlight any worse.
It was my understanding that the entire problem was caused by some Shadowrunners hired by GM and Ford to break into the Toyato supply lines. I heard it was a three pronged attack, their decker injected some software bugs, they let a troll loose in the factory to fuck with the pedals and they got a shaman to curse the floor mats.
I believe the cut off point for fair use is generally considered 10%. If you copy/distribute/include in your own work more then that you are violating the copyright.
It seems to me getting things into space is _really_ expensive. I would be much more impressed with a device that took space debris and dragged it all together. That way it could eventually be recycled in space. Instead of just burning it up.
This is actually very important. Most of us here (me included) are too young to remember. But our parents generation lived in fear of a nuclear war. Tensions were very high and the nuclear build up was huge. Moving from the cold war state to full nuclear disarmament won't happen quickly, but any step in that direction should be encouraged and hopefully there will not be another generation who has to fear a nuclear war.
he country who has the most extensive history of subverting governments and encouraging "regime change" in other countries, is the US.
ummmm, the US doesn't even make the top 10 here. Nearly every other developed country was
subverting governments and encouraging "regime change" in other countries
before the US even existed. Even much of the less developed world has conquered, subverted and otherwise encouraged regime change more than the US.
The more likely party to start a war in this case is the US - over the supreme levels of debt they have to china, when they decide they're unable to pay it back.
Why would someone start a war because they didn't have enough money to pay their debts? Here are a couple cheaper and simpler solutions. 1) Pay the debts (I put this here because this is the one the US, China, Japan, etc all think is by far the most likely scenario. If they thought otherwise they would not still be buying the debt). 2) Hyper-inflate the currency than pay the debt. 3) Not pay the debt.
Finally my proposition (economic entanglement) works equally well no matter who the more likely aggressor is.
My fear is based on some fundamental differences in perceived human rights combined with the worlds largest military.
I propose we push for an increase in there citizens freedoms while increasing trade with China till a point is reached where our economies are so interlocked that nobody would even consider a war as a possible solution to any possible future problems.
Well, letting an entire country choose its own path sounds good. Letting a very small % choose the path for a really large country has some problems with it. I mean do the citizens even know about Tiananmen Square? If my country was hiding something that recent and that huge from me I would hope somebody on the outside might put some pressure on them.
The proof required and the due process required are the same as any other civil lawsuit (or your countries equivalent). This draft relies on local laws, local courts, judges, juries, etc.
If an investigating official suspects something but is not sure I would assume he would ask his supervisor to take a look.
The Burden of Proof in a civil case is much looser than in a criminal case.
So in a criminal case you argue all three of those and if any of them stand then there is reasonable doubt. In a civil case the jury just needs to believe that it is more likely that one party is in the right then the other. So if you make a bunch of different arguments and some seem to hold water but others don't your not really helping yourself.
After reading through the entire thing it actually doesn't look too bad.
The only major problem I see in it is trying to make 3rd parties liable for people who use their services. I'd recommend pestering your elected representatives and tell them to follow NZ lead on those articles.
The rest of it basically says: 1) make sure its illegal to copy and distribute pirated works. 2) make sure there are tools to enforce those laws. 3) provide these legal tools to foreign copyright holders.
These seem like pretty logical steps. I think the real fight here should be to shorten the absurd copyright lengths currently in use.
Section 2 Options 1,2,3 state that personal baggage of a non-commercial nature do not need to be searched.
Later in that section the only things Border Guards would have control over are items where they have been provided with accurate enough descriptions in order to identify them.
It doesn't look to me that this guards searching your iPod for illegal mp3s. Rather I think this is a truck full of burned DVDs, knockoff designer items, etc.
If we (the earth) ever end up with global internet censorship its not going to be coming from the US and its not going to come until after someone pries our (Americans) First Amendment from our cold dead hands.
Limiting trading with a country that commits crimes against you isn't an abuse of foreign policy. This isn't being "cops of the world" this is being cops of the US and interacting less with countries that won't play nice.
And yes, it is the US definition of nice, but so what? Each country is free to choose who they want to trade with and it is usually based upon the countries following each other's laws when dealing with each other.
I doubt any of those things would result in less trade with Canada. I am sure NAFTA would over rule it for one.
How about Botnet command centers that have been located, the IPs they are using have been found, the ISPs providing the internet connection have been found and asked to take them offline. However the ISPs and the country will not take them offline.
I agree that you should not have to follow US laws. However it also seems fair that we (the US) should cut back on foreign aid to a country that say won't shut down the Botnet command centers operating in their borders.
Slashdot Mirror
The people who lose the case will pay for the courts time.
Yes, it is stealing. The actual damages are hard to calculate, and they are important because in a civil case you are suing for damages.
Silverlights video streaming is rather better than flash. I was impressed with both the olympic and march madness (HQ) streaming. You can hate on microsoft if you want, but it doesn't make silverlight any worse.
Chrysler was owned by a German company at the time.
It was my understanding that the entire problem was caused by some Shadowrunners hired by GM and Ford to break into the Toyato supply lines. I heard it was a three pronged attack, their decker injected some software bugs, they let a troll loose in the factory to fuck with the pedals and they got a shaman to curse the floor mats.
I believe the cut off point for fair use is generally considered 10%. If you copy/distribute/include in your own work more then that you are violating the copyright.
It seems to me getting things into space is _really_ expensive. I would be much more impressed with a device that took space debris and dragged it all together. That way it could eventually be recycled in space. Instead of just burning it up.
This is actually very important. Most of us here (me included) are too young to remember. But our parents generation lived in fear of a nuclear war. Tensions were very high and the nuclear build up was huge. Moving from the cold war state to full nuclear disarmament won't happen quickly, but any step in that direction should be encouraged and hopefully there will not be another generation who has to fear a nuclear war.
North Korea could most likely nuke Japan. While that would result in the end of their current government its still a threat.
he country who has the most extensive history of subverting governments and encouraging "regime change" in other countries, is the US.
ummmm, the US doesn't even make the top 10 here. Nearly every other developed country was
subverting governments and encouraging "regime change" in other countries
before the US even existed. Even much of the less developed world has conquered, subverted and otherwise encouraged regime change more than the US.
The more likely party to start a war in this case is the US - over the supreme levels of debt they have to china, when they decide they're unable to pay it back.
Why would someone start a war because they didn't have enough money to pay their debts? Here are a couple cheaper and simpler solutions.
1) Pay the debts (I put this here because this is the one the US, China, Japan, etc all think is by far the most likely scenario. If they thought otherwise they would not still be buying the debt).
2) Hyper-inflate the currency than pay the debt.
3) Not pay the debt.
Finally my proposition (economic entanglement) works equally well no matter who the more likely aggressor is.
My fear is based on some fundamental differences in perceived human rights combined with the worlds largest military.
I propose we push for an increase in there citizens freedoms while increasing trade with China till a point is reached where our economies are so interlocked that nobody would even consider a war as a possible solution to any possible future problems.
Yeah, the cold-war didn't really bring out the best in the US, or Europe, or the USSR, or China, etc. At least nobody got nuked (sorry Japan).
Well, letting an entire country choose its own path sounds good.
Letting a very small % choose the path for a really large country has some problems with it. I mean do the citizens even know about Tiananmen Square? If my country was hiding something that recent and that huge from me I would hope somebody on the outside might put some pressure on them.
Then you probably shouldn't be entering a trade treaty designed to protect IP...
The proof required and the due process required are the same as any other civil lawsuit (or your countries equivalent). This draft relies on local laws, local courts, judges, juries, etc.
If an investigating official suspects something but is not sure I would assume he would ask his supervisor to take a look.
The Burden of Proof in a civil case is much looser than in a criminal case.
So in a criminal case you argue all three of those and if any of them stand then there is reasonable doubt.
In a civil case the jury just needs to believe that it is more likely that one party is in the right then the other. So if you make a bunch of different arguments and some seem to hold water but others don't your not really helping yourself.
After reading through the entire thing it actually doesn't look too bad.
The only major problem I see in it is trying to make 3rd parties liable for people who use their services. I'd recommend pestering your elected representatives and tell them to follow NZ lead on those articles.
The rest of it basically says:
1) make sure its illegal to copy and distribute pirated works.
2) make sure there are tools to enforce those laws.
3) provide these legal tools to foreign copyright holders.
These seem like pretty logical steps. I think the real fight here should be to shorten the absurd copyright lengths currently in use.
Section 2 Options 1,2,3 state that personal baggage of a non-commercial nature do not need to be searched.
Later in that section the only things Border Guards would have control over are items where they have been provided with accurate enough descriptions in order to identify them.
It doesn't look to me that this guards searching your iPod for illegal mp3s. Rather I think this is a truck full of burned DVDs, knockoff designer items, etc.
If we (the earth) ever end up with global internet censorship its not going to be coming from the US and its not going to come until after someone pries our (Americans) First Amendment from our cold dead hands.
Limiting trading with a country that commits crimes against you isn't an abuse of foreign policy. This isn't being "cops of the world" this is being cops of the US and interacting less with countries that won't play nice.
And yes, it is the US definition of nice, but so what? Each country is free to choose who they want to trade with and it is usually based upon the countries following each other's laws when dealing with each other.
I doubt any of those things would result in less trade with Canada. I am sure NAFTA would over rule it for one.
How about Botnet command centers that have been located, the IPs they are using have been found, the ISPs providing the internet connection have been found and asked to take them offline. However the ISPs and the country will not take them offline.
Oh? Are you sure they don't mean botnet command centers?
Um, how about: Don't let criminals strike at the US from within your borders if you want us to give you free money.
I guess there are a multiple ways to think of the same actions.
I agree that you should not have to follow US laws.
However it also seems fair that we (the US) should cut back on foreign aid to a country that say won't shut down the Botnet command centers operating in their borders.
It costs $1.05