Even if your conclusion is right, your arguments are weak. Bacteria aren't people. Sperm can't grow into a human. If the blastocyst is 'alive', then it's a human being, at one stage of development. Whether that demands societal or governmental protection is a separate matter. Defining 'life' is tricky.
Since 'funding scientific research' isn't an enumerated power of Congress, there's an easier solution than all of this debate-without-resolution - just stop.
Since last year the LOC has made a rule that DRM breaks are legal if readers are shut out:
(6) Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book's read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format.
If we want fast pipes, we should be asking for pay as you go data plans
Yes, but we need a competitive market for that to play out. So long as municipalities are granting local monopolies (and not owning them) both the consumer and producer incentives are all wrong.
The current détente is the telcos charging about as much as they figure an average consumer is willing to pay, and then providing just enough service at that price to keep the regulators off their backs (which is some function of the consumers being on the regulators backs and the backroom deals).
No -- in the USA, only a prosecutor can file criminal charges.
This varies by State. In New Hampshire, a citizen can file a criminal complaint if the Statute does not provide jail time for a conviction (class A misdemeanors or felonies here).
It's been used to bring complaints against government agents who selectively refuse to do their jobs (this can be a useful way to oppress disfavored population segments). The odds of a County DA prosecuting a government worker are asymptotic to 'yeah, right'.
(6) Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book's read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format.
That sure seems to open up the way for an eBook DRM-breaking project as an input to a Braille display.
Pretty every contract I explicitly and implicitly enter into with any company includes the terms "We reserve the right to changes the terms of this agreement". I get notices from the bank, websites I have an account with, all sorts of places about how such and such has changed all of the time. That is how the world works.
In the case of the gov't, if I don't like "the terms of the contract" then I need to use the ballot box to change that.
Those are complete opposites - in the case of the bank or the website, you have the option to simply discontinue use of their services if they change the contract. At that point, you have satisfaction, and likely go to the competition.
With a tyrannical government, you must continue to comply with any and all terms under penalty of theft, capture, rape, or death. You have no effective recourse for satisfaction, and no competition.
I wonder... if somebody made an image with a self-registering Tor relay* that looked at the TCP congestion control state and throttled dynamically... and then people started dropping $100 on these and plugging them in to random office buildings where a free data jack and power outlet were available - how many of them would still be operating after a couple years?
* I know you said 'torrent slave', but it gave me the idea
The thing is: If blind people were such an attractive market, then by the laws of the market, suppliers would be all over them to provide them with stuff. I'm not blind, and I don't know anyone closely who is, but from what I gather, that is not exactly the case.
I agree completely. Part of it is that it's really hard. Ray's magazine reader was revolutionary. His gear was(is?) expensive (to produce and purchase). Groups have formed to issue grants, but if the manufacturer isn't compensated, they can't be produced.
Going digital greatly simplified this. There are screen readers for most kinds of computers. Even GNOME, free, has one. There's no factory to build, so the costs are greatly reduced, thus producers increase.
Now, I understand that the best screenreader is on Windows. Interpreting screen layout and window stacking isn't algorithmically simple. As I understand it, GNOME can't do as well because of patent protection (threats of violence from the Government) on the commercial software. One would have to assume that GNOME (backed by however many blind-people's foundations it could attract) would do worse than the commercial offering for this to be a net benefit to blind people. It's not even clear in this simple case that there is a utilitarian benefit.
Then take DRM'ed e-Books or periodicals. The problem is further simplified - data is linear, or at least semantically organized (like a newspaper feed) a priori - one of the hardest parts of screen and book readers!
But, as you mention the market isn't huge compared to non-blind people. Amazon only has so much money. They probably don't want to invest that in what would be for them a small return, when they can get a bigger return elsewhere. But for a startup (innovation always comes from startups) it's a juicy, lucrative market. But why can't they address this market? Artificial impediments imposed by the Government. Go ahead and try to break Amazon's DRM to help blind people - it's not even a viable business plan with the Sword of Damocles a horsehair away.
Last, but not least, most utilitarian arguers tend to set the value of Liberty to 0. This is demonstrably untrue. Whether you take King John being surrounded at Runnymede or the liberation of women in any recent society, the benefits of Liberty are clear and apparent. One better fully understand all the consequences of repressing Liberty before deciding that it's a good idea.
OK, fine, I don't know which has a higher data rate, but if you say it's Braille, that's good enough for me. The input to a Braille reader or a text-to-speech reader is the same, letters (hrm, what do the blind do in iconographic locales?).
So, defeating DRM is sufficient in both cases to make a commercial product. DRM can only exist when Government threatens violent action against those who would circumvent it. Remove the threat and DRM-defeats appear on the market.
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
Did James Madison not know what the Constitution meant? Certainly it's flawed document - often vague - and other people would like it to mean different things, but the original intent is not hard to discern.
Really? We had a 28" screen, which seems to be about average even today
That's about right. You'd need around a 35-inch set to get the same height as your 28" CRT. I find height-matching to be more equivalent than area-matching, on a perceptual basis.
When we switched to VHS, the quality difference was very noticeable, even despite the fact that the VHS machine we got was a so-called "VHS-HQ" revision that was supposed to be better than traditional VHS.
That sounds like a marketing gimmick. The only real improvement was S-VHS, which needed expensive tapes (there was a later rev. that tried to use standard tapes, which helped a bit, not a bad compromise for time-delay of TV programs).
Regular VHS was about half of the broadcast quality, Beta and S-VHS were about 3/4, IIRC.
Slashdot Mirror
You do know he was talking about ideas, not recordings, right?
You're contending that Jefferson advocated for ideas spreading across the globe, but only via word-of-mouth, never by written transmittal?
They might work well at that, but getting them to do anything else that pluripotent (embryonic) stem cells can is out of reach.
There was just an announcement a few weeks back about reliably inducing the adult cells to be pluripotent.
Even if your conclusion is right, your arguments are weak. Bacteria aren't people. Sperm can't grow into a human. If the blastocyst is 'alive', then it's a human being, at one stage of development. Whether that demands societal or governmental protection is a separate matter. Defining 'life' is tricky.
Since 'funding scientific research' isn't an enumerated power of Congress, there's an easier solution than all of this debate-without-resolution - just stop.
Thisis the droid you're looking for.
Yeah, and imagine if the books that are speakable are spread across all the available devices. Blind people will need to own a room full of readers.
$lt;/Grammar nazi$gt;
HTML-nazi says, "bad grammar nazi - use ampersands to start your entities."
Since last year the LOC has made a rule that DRM breaks are legal if readers are shut out:
If we want fast pipes, we should be asking for pay as you go data plans
Yes, but we need a competitive market for that to play out. So long as municipalities are granting local monopolies (and not owning them) both the consumer and producer incentives are all wrong.
The current détente is the telcos charging about as much as they figure an average consumer is willing to pay, and then providing just enough service at that price to keep the regulators off their backs (which is some function of the consumers being on the regulators backs and the backroom deals).
We can do better.
No -- in the USA, only a prosecutor can file criminal charges.
This varies by State. In New Hampshire, a citizen can file a criminal complaint if the Statute does not provide jail time for a conviction (class A misdemeanors or felonies here).
It's been used to bring complaints against government agents who selectively refuse to do their jobs (this can be a useful way to oppress disfavored population segments). The odds of a County DA prosecuting a government worker are asymptotic to 'yeah, right'.
Ah, very nice, thank you. For the record:
That sure seems to open up the way for an eBook DRM-breaking project as an input to a Braille display.
Pretty every contract I explicitly and implicitly enter into with any company includes the terms "We reserve the right to changes the terms of this agreement". I get notices from the bank, websites I have an account with, all sorts of places about how such and such has changed all of the time. That is how the world works.
In the case of the gov't, if I don't like "the terms of the contract" then I need to use the ballot box to change that.
Those are complete opposites - in the case of the bank or the website, you have the option to simply discontinue use of their services if they change the contract. At that point, you have satisfaction, and likely go to the competition.
With a tyrannical government, you must continue to comply with any and all terms under penalty of theft, capture, rape, or death. You have no effective recourse for satisfaction, and no competition.
So, which part of the UK are you from?
places have ports enabled that are not is use/conspicuous?
You might need to put a Polycom sticker on it.
that's all.
now to use up 17 more seconds filling up the Slashdot database with usel
Torrent Slaves
I wonder ... if somebody made an image with a self-registering Tor relay* that looked at the TCP congestion control state and throttled dynamically ... and then people started dropping $100 on these and plugging them in to random office buildings where a free data jack and power outlet were available - how many of them would still be operating after a couple years?
* I know you said 'torrent slave', but it gave me the idea
He is still blocked on my account.
Better safe than sorry. I noticed that a couple years ago and figured "better to leave it there, just in case" and blissfully forgot about it again.
The guy who started this thread needs a low-UID ass-kicking.
A fun number to throw around is how many synaptic connections are present in the brain.
Or if anything pans out with the quantum aspect of microtubules, a much bigger number.
ssssshh, they're feeling important right now.
as requested in the other comment, my thoughts:
Thanks, Tom.
The thing is: If blind people were such an attractive market, then by the laws of the market, suppliers would be all over them to provide them with stuff. I'm not blind, and I don't know anyone closely who is, but from what I gather, that is not exactly the case.
I agree completely. Part of it is that it's really hard. Ray's magazine reader was revolutionary. His gear was(is?) expensive (to produce and purchase). Groups have formed to issue grants, but if the manufacturer isn't compensated, they can't be produced.
Going digital greatly simplified this. There are screen readers for most kinds of computers. Even GNOME, free, has one. There's no factory to build, so the costs are greatly reduced, thus producers increase.
Now, I understand that the best screenreader is on Windows. Interpreting screen layout and window stacking isn't algorithmically simple. As I understand it, GNOME can't do as well because of patent protection (threats of violence from the Government) on the commercial software. One would have to assume that GNOME (backed by however many blind-people's foundations it could attract) would do worse than the commercial offering for this to be a net benefit to blind people. It's not even clear in this simple case that there is a utilitarian benefit.
Then take DRM'ed e-Books or periodicals. The problem is further simplified - data is linear, or at least semantically organized (like a newspaper feed) a priori - one of the hardest parts of screen and book readers!
But, as you mention the market isn't huge compared to non-blind people. Amazon only has so much money. They probably don't want to invest that in what would be for them a small return, when they can get a bigger return elsewhere. But for a startup (innovation always comes from startups) it's a juicy, lucrative market. But why can't they address this market? Artificial impediments imposed by the Government. Go ahead and try to break Amazon's DRM to help blind people - it's not even a viable business plan with the Sword of Damocles a horsehair away.
Last, but not least, most utilitarian arguers tend to set the value of Liberty to 0. This is demonstrably untrue. Whether you take King John being surrounded at Runnymede or the liberation of women in any recent society, the benefits of Liberty are clear and apparent. One better fully understand all the consequences of repressing Liberty before deciding that it's a good idea.
but I do also agree it is a living document
Do you agree that it's a contract between the People and the Government?
If so, do you mean then that it's a contract that the People can't ever really know what they've agreed to?
Would you ever sign a contract that could be changed unilaterally?
OK, fine, I don't know which has a higher data rate, but if you say it's Braille, that's good enough for me. The input to a Braille reader or a text-to-speech reader is the same, letters (hrm, what do the blind do in iconographic locales?).
So, defeating DRM is sufficient in both cases to make a commercial product. DRM can only exist when Government threatens violent action against those who would circumvent it. Remove the threat and DRM-defeats appear on the market.
Why get into a utilitarian argument when a principled one will do?
From Federalist Paper Number 45:
Did James Madison not know what the Constitution meant? Certainly it's flawed document - often vague - and other people would like it to mean different things, but the original intent is not hard to discern.
Really? We had a 28" screen, which seems to be about average even today
That's about right. You'd need around a 35-inch set to get the same height as your 28" CRT. I find height-matching to be more equivalent than area-matching, on a perceptual basis.
When we switched to VHS, the quality difference was very noticeable, even despite the fact that the VHS machine we got was a so-called "VHS-HQ" revision that was supposed to be better than traditional VHS.
That sounds like a marketing gimmick. The only real improvement was S-VHS, which needed expensive tapes (there was a later rev. that tried to use standard tapes, which helped a bit, not a bad compromise for time-delay of TV programs).
Regular VHS was about half of the broadcast quality, Beta and S-VHS were about 3/4, IIRC.
Sorry, no mod points today, but effing win.