> The IMF protestors have one thing right - if you > want attention you've got to break something.
Yes, children who throw tantrums and smash windows do get attention. Of a sort.
> The Bolsheviks had it down even better - if you > want real change you have to smash an entire > system.
The Bolsheviks smashed nothing but a lot of infrastructure and the lives of millions. They just replaced the ruling class with themselves. No matter what slogans the politicians swindle their followers into mouthing, all revolutions have the same goal: kill the rich and take their money. [ Reply to This | Parent
Cherenkov Radiation is emitted when a massive particle travels faster than the speed of light in the local medium. The most common example is the blue glow in a pool reactor, caused by fast neutrons moving faster through the water than light can.
> Don't trust the mainstream media's portrayal of > anything related to computers...
And just what _can_ you trust the mainstream media's portrayal of? You know they get computer stuff wrong because you know something about it yourself, but what reason do you have to believe that they get anything else right?
> Or here is another scenario-- hacking Wall Street > and hampering the trading of stocks (think about > the economic damage of that one).
That is one of the things that the attack on the World Trade Center was supposed by the attackers to do. They assumed that destroying the records of the brokerages and investment banks would cause complete chaos in the US financial markets. How likely do you think it is that people who have never heard of off-site backups would be able to crack Wall Street's computers?
Doesn't sound like science fiction to me. Science fiction tends to be at least a little bit plausible. This thing sounds like ordinary everyday quackery.
> If you want to take it one step further, don't > watch TV for a week. See how uncomfortable, edgy > and irritable you get.
My TV broke down about six or seven years ago and I didn't get uncomfortable, edgy or irritable at all. It's still broken not because I am engaged in some heroic gesture of self-denial but because I have simply never gotten around to fixing it. After all, I hardly ever watched it anyway. Too many more interesting things to do.
> They've offered financial rewards to families > that could pull it off and most couldn't, > citing the same types of moods that caused them > to switch back on.
I know several families that don't own TVs. Of course you'd probably call the religious nuts.
You can sue for statutory damages if the work is registered even if you suffered no actual damages. IIRC the damages can run to six figures. Look it up.
Equally important is the fact that the infringer can be ordered to cease distributing the infringing work and seek out and destroy all the copies they can find. It would be pretty expensive for Sigma to be told that not only can they never sell their product again, but they must attempt to buy back and destroy all the copies they've sold so far.
> Otherwise, I don't think anybody has had a court > rule that you would be bound by the GPL contract > if you used GPLd code. They would rule you > violated copyright, but will they rule more?
They would rule that the copyright had been infringed and order Sigma to cease distribution of the infringing material immediately. They would also award damages: statutory, if the infringed work was registered. They would probably accept a settlement in which Sigma agreed to comply with the terms of the GPL.
> Okay, lets just say that Sigma is in violation > of, or rejects, the GPL.
If they reject the GPL they are left with only the rights they would have in the absence of any licens at all. Those rights do not include the right to create derivatives or to distribute copies.
> What laws prevent them from > shamelessly stealing the code?
Copyright law, of course. What would you expect?
> If XVID prevails in this case, will Sigma be > allowed to continue their practice but > not allowed to distribute to the US market?
I assume that XVID would have to bring seperate suits in each jurisdiction.
The GPL grants rights not available to recipients of copies under bare copyright. Thus if the GPL is not enforceable recipients of copies of GPLd works have no right at all to create derivatives or distribute copies.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are thinking in terms of winning and losing, you have already lost.
> The IMF protestors have one thing right - if you
> want attention you've got to break something.
Yes, children who throw tantrums and smash windows do get attention. Of a sort.
> The Bolsheviks had it down even better - if you
> want real change you have to smash an entire
> system.
The Bolsheviks smashed nothing but a lot of infrastructure and the lives of millions. They just replaced the ruling class with themselves. No matter what slogans the politicians swindle their followers into mouthing, all revolutions have the same goal: kill the rich and take their money.
[ Reply to This | Parent
Anything other than each protester repeatedly hitting 'Reload' and/or 'Send' is DDOS and will be dismissed as such, even if nominally legal.
Why? The end user read the EULA.
...It refers to a portion of the back end of a horse. This makes it quite appropriate for an all-in-one "Outlook-like" application.
"good single-signon" is an oxymoron.
> Will you really click a banner ad?
The ad says "Eat at Joe's, right across Main from the park". What the hell is there to "click" on?
I meant group velocity, of course. "Preview" is useless if you don't _look_ at what you wrote.
Cherenkov Radiation is emitted when a massive particle travels faster than the speed of light in the local medium. The most common example is the blue glow in a pool reactor, caused by fast neutrons moving faster through the water than light can.
> They're talking about interfering waves.
They're talking about phase velocity. It can be faster than light, since it conveys no information and transports no energy.
Gnus has had this ability for years.
If it was we wouldn't be spending so much time reverse-engineering it.
Most peer reviewers are not paid.
> Don't trust the mainstream media's portrayal of
> anything related to computers...
And just what _can_ you trust the mainstream media's portrayal of? You know they get computer stuff wrong because you know something about it yourself, but what reason do you have to believe that they get anything else right?
> Or here is another scenario-- hacking Wall Street
> and hampering the trading of stocks (think about
> the economic damage of that one).
That is one of the things that the attack on the World Trade Center was supposed by the attackers to do. They assumed that destroying the records of the brokerages and investment banks would cause complete chaos in the US financial markets. How likely do you think it is that people who have never heard of off-site backups would be able to crack Wall Street's computers?
Doesn't sound like science fiction to me. Science fiction tends to be at least a little bit plausible. This thing sounds like ordinary everyday quackery.
Actually, the speed of sound is almost completely independent of pressure.
> I'm dating a fundamentalist for the last 6
> months. I, however, am an atheist.
Then you and I are both abnormal: we are among the few on this continent who are not religious nuts.
> I personally would rather give my money to a
> reliable hige company than one that could fold
> any minute.
A big reliable company that couldn't fold any minute? Such as Enron or Worldcom, perhaps?
When you rely on a small company and it folds you can find another just like it down the street. When you rely on a big company and it folds...
> If you want to take it one step further, don't
> watch TV for a week. See how uncomfortable, edgy
> and irritable you get.
My TV broke down about six or seven years ago and I didn't get uncomfortable, edgy or irritable at all. It's still broken not because I am engaged in some heroic gesture of self-denial but because I have simply never gotten around to fixing it. After all, I hardly ever watched it anyway. Too many more interesting things to do.
> They've offered financial rewards to families
> that could pull it off and most couldn't,
> citing the same types of moods that caused them > to switch back on.
I know several families that don't own TVs. Of course you'd probably call the religious nuts.
You can sue for statutory damages if the work is registered even if you suffered no actual damages. IIRC the damages can run to six figures. Look it up.
Equally important is the fact that the infringer can be ordered to cease distributing the infringing work and seek out and destroy all the copies they can find. It would be pretty expensive for Sigma to be told that not only can they never sell their product again, but they must attempt to buy back and destroy all the copies they've sold so far.
> Otherwise, I don't think anybody has had a court
> rule that you would be bound by the GPL contract
> if you used GPLd code. They would rule you
> violated copyright, but will they rule more?
They would rule that the copyright had been infringed and order Sigma to cease distribution of the infringing material immediately. They would also award damages: statutory, if the infringed work was registered. They would probably accept a settlement in which Sigma agreed to comply with the terms of the GPL.
> Okay, lets just say that Sigma is in violation
> of, or rejects, the GPL.
If they reject the GPL they are left with only the rights they would have in the absence of any licens at all. Those rights do not include the right to create derivatives or to distribute copies.
> What laws prevent them from
> shamelessly stealing the code?
Copyright law, of course. What would you expect?
> If XVID prevails in this case, will Sigma be
> allowed to continue their practice but
> not allowed to distribute to the US market?
I assume that XVID would have to bring seperate suits in each jurisdiction.
The GPL grants rights not available to recipients of copies under bare copyright. Thus if the GPL is not enforceable recipients of copies of GPLd works have no right at all to create derivatives or distribute copies.
> what in practise - makes the GPL spread to new
> code - when does your software become
> automagically governed by GPL?
Never.