Most of the people with power only have a vague idea of what the web is, and have never even heard of telnet. You can seek either knowledge or power, but you don't have time for both.
Everyone on the board has some financial interest in the outcome. Besides the fact that they haven't even made any room for consumers, shouldn't they have some people who stand to gain nothing from any outcome? People with, shall we say, academic interest only? They wouldn't be unbiased, but they'd be less biased and probably more useful than anyone there now.
Or for the same price you could live just up 280 in Palo Alto, in a spacious one-bedroom cardboard box like the ones they ship fridges in. On-street parking available for a nominal extra charge.
Will most of the people fighting the RIAA give up and go watch their movies? How much of the rebellion is about freedom, and how much is about playing DVDs under Linux?
"Trademark Use", part 5: You may not use the Marks in a derogatory or defamatory manner, or in any negative context. Such use will terminate your license to use the Marks.
Note that that applies to the web site and the games (top of the license).
Sounds pretty clear to me. If you post a negative review that mentions the trademarks (and they've trademarked anything identifiable), they revoke your license to use the marks (ie you have to pull your review). If you trust them not to use the power even though they explicitly created it, that's your own business.
Yet another problem: Why is it that whenever Tim mentioned obviousness, Dickinson recast it to prior art? Was that intentional? I assume that it's because obviousness is such a loaded concept, but Tim never got around to delving into it. If a new building goes up, and no-one's ever taken the elevator to the ninth floor of that particular building, and someone does, and patents it, there's no prior art. Here, the database won't help!
I've never been particularly stricken by his intelligence. And he excerbates the problem by not knowing when to shut up.
If he's not as smart as you are (yes, probably many slashdotters are pretty far above average, and you know what they say about drummers;) just take what he says, and figure out what he means. It takes two to communicate, and if you can't figure out what he's saying, don't blame him. If he disagrees with you, do something cleverer than calling him stupid. I think he said a couple of dumb things, but his basic thesis---that people should be able to control what they create---is sound. You seem to differ?
So you think that a member of Metallica, the epitome of corporate rock, would have any qualms whatsoever about lying to protect their pocketbook? What about their popularity?
I tend to trust most people too far, but the interview did strike me as basically sincere. Yes, the "1 unsigned artist" did seem contrived, so how about we make like good scientists and try to duplicate the experiment?
I haven't given Napster a fair chance yet, and Gnutella isn't organised well enough to help me find my own butt, but I find it inconceivable that people wouldn't use a free source to check out new things that they haven't heard of. To me, that's what it's all be about!
A large bureaucracy is hurting many people because no-one within the bureaucracy is willing to take responsibility for the actions of the whole. Just because Nazi Germany is the example that the poster happened to pick doesn't invalidate the argument. Although the scale of harm there was much greater, the causes are, in many ways, identical.
Even if the bureaucracy were doing good, you could still make a legitimate comparison to Nazi Germany if the individuals tried to evade responsibility. However, it seems that there are few instances of people trying to evade praise.
Actually, that might be a good metric for when a company should be dissolved: when people start saying that they're not responsible for the company's actions.
That's an interesting point. I don't know the answer, but somebody please moderate that up! Although I would guess that while quoting relevant parts of it in a discussion is fair use, just posting the whole thing verbatim is not. So perhaps a point-by-point analysis would be good...
Is there any way to reprimand/punish the government for breaking laws? I thought that you weren't supposed to send people to prison for saying things (something about an amendment or some such?)... seems that threatening him for talking is incredibly illegal, no? Shouldn't the government parties responsible go to prison or something?
I agree with this, up to a point. Companies should be free to license things however they want.
The problem is that there are soooo many people out there with money, but without the time or inclination or brains to understand what the rights are that they're giving away. By giving the companies their rights, they increase the power of the companies, who thus become more capable of making life really hard for those who did understand what they were giving up.
All that's really needed is for everyone to understand everything. In the meantime, we're pretty much screwed. Perhaps stupidity could be treated like drunkenness: lock people up for a day every time they do something dumb (as defined by, um, me!).
This isn't about getting DVD support for Linux. It's about the right to play DVDs wherever you want. How about NeXTos, OS/2, dunno about BeOS, PalmOS (yeah, right, I know), etc? How about "fair use"? It's nice that Linux will be able to play DVDs, but the MPAA well knows that you can keep most people happy by giving them baubles, not rights.
{ ...where they become brainwashed slaves. There they work a hundred hour week for almost no pay. There they are subject to every cruel whim of their masters. It is a living hell that they endure because of the conditioning they have received and this now perverted sense of ethics that they have accepted. The "Sea Org" is the ultimate in brainwashed slavery. They are expected to work harder and harder to achieve ever higher targets of production. If they fail to meet their targets there are various penalties. One of them is to be put onto a diet of beans and rice and to miss sleep. Another is to be sentenced to a period on the RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force). This is the equivalent to "hard labour". Such is the extent of their brainwashing that they actually write "success stories" when they complete their sentences. }
Yes, I know, I've read about Scientology. It's evil. It's twisted. But it does come close to describing many of my best friends, and I hope to join a very similar organisation in the near future. They call it "grad school". Be afraid.
How many of us here have any control over policy at our organisations? It would be a nice way to protest if we had an official, publicised policy change ready to go the instant this is made into law anywhere, saying that we will not authorise the purchase or use of any software from Virginia...
About a month ago I asked them for pointers to research showing that sexual content hurt families. I said explicitly that I would read biased research if that was all that was available. I was very polite and didn't try to give an opinion, only request information. Naturally(?), they have completely ignored me...
This is not the unconcionable part -- it is in fact routine and expected legal stuff.
I fail to see why the fact that it's "routine and expected legal stuff" necessarily implies that it's not unconcionable. And just because individuals (unwealthy ones, even) use it doesn't mean it's a good thing. Unwealthy people also mug and rape and steal from the undeservedly wealthy. Does that make it right? Rarely...
Remember, please, that this is Arizona we're talking about. It's soooo warm, and the sky is soooo beautiful, that sex is better outdoors anyway. If this bill encourages people to get over their ridiculous prudish hangups about being seen while having sex, I'm all for it! And hey, if they can't download porn, maybe they'll spend more time with real people. After all, it is a team sport.
I think I'd rather have my email sent to me, not to my house. I'm not sure why they'd choose to do it that way, except to reduce anonymity, and of course for targeted email marketing (AKA spam).
The real benefit is that people without email addresses will get them (The homeless are still SOL)... assuming that they have computers or know how to use a public library, which surprisingly few people do.
This is what I predicted about 5 years ago as how MS could kill Linux. It worked for the Mac. If Linux gets a lot of nice MS apps, all using the MS toolkit, then MS would gain control of the Linux apps market (face it, some MS apps are really good, and they're all really compatible with each-other). Then, later, MS could make them work a little slower or a little worse on Linux, and probably even find a way to make them "crash" Linux (denial of RAM attack if nothing else) and people who liked Linux but wanted their apps to work would be forced to get Windows boxen. I'm just surprised that it took MS so long to start, but I guess that they didn't feel too threatened.
Having an Open Source OS is only the first step. All APIs need to be Open Source as well, or they just invite the creation of a monopoly.
What if it were illegal to sell a domain name for more than the going rate for unregistered ones? You could get rid of squatters (there'd be no profit in it), and therefore you could presumably get rid of all the laws that currently exist just to hurt squatters, like giving trademark holders god-like power, etc.
Funny! A friend and I were discussing exactly this kind of product just a couple of nights ago. I thought it could be built; he tried to convince me that man-in-the-middle attacks would make it insecure. I was even going to let people read their key checksums over the phone to each-other, and he argued that voice sampling was getting advanced enough that even that could be faked. But don't they have public-key systems that are immune to man-in-the-middle attacks? So there should be no problem there...
Ok, so it seems Cavedog is being uncooperative. My bad for posting without doing the research. Still, if C&CII comes out for Linux, I'll buy it, if only to encourage Cavedog towards the Path of Righteousness. I know, it is important.
I used to love C&C. Then along came Red Alert, with some major improvements, and some minor regressions. Warcraft and Starcraft were good too. Then I played Total Annihilation from Cavedog, and nothing will be the same again. I haven't really seen much of Cavedog's new game, Kingdoms, but if you want to petition anyone, petition the best!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm no friend of Napster. I'm boycotting the RIAA because of their treatment of musicians and customers! Oh, and because records sound better :)
Most of the people with power only have a vague idea of what the web is, and have never even heard of telnet. You can seek either knowledge or power, but you don't have time for both.
Everyone on the board has some financial interest in the outcome. Besides the fact that they haven't even made any room for consumers, shouldn't they have some people who stand to gain nothing from any outcome? People with, shall we say, academic interest only? They wouldn't be unbiased, but they'd be less biased and probably more useful than anyone there now.
Or for the same price you could live just up 280 in Palo Alto, in a spacious one-bedroom cardboard box like the ones they ship fridges in. On-street parking available for a nominal extra charge.
Will most of the people fighting the RIAA give up and go watch their movies? How much of the rebellion is about freedom, and how much is about playing DVDs under Linux?
Note that that applies to the web site and the games (top of the license).
Sounds pretty clear to me. If you post a negative review that mentions the trademarks (and they've trademarked anything identifiable), they revoke your license to use the marks (ie you have to pull your review). If you trust them not to use the power even though they explicitly created it, that's your own business.
Yet another problem: Why is it that whenever Tim mentioned obviousness, Dickinson recast it to prior art? Was that intentional? I assume that it's because obviousness is such a loaded concept, but Tim never got around to delving into it. If a new building goes up, and no-one's ever taken the elevator to the ninth floor of that particular building, and someone does, and patents it, there's no prior art. Here, the database won't help!
I've never been particularly stricken by his intelligence. And he excerbates the problem by not knowing when to shut up.
If he's not as smart as you are (yes, probably many slashdotters are pretty far above average, and you know what they say about drummers ;) just take what he says, and figure out what he means. It takes two to communicate, and if you can't figure out what he's saying, don't blame him. If he disagrees with you, do something cleverer than calling him stupid. I think he said a couple of dumb things, but his basic thesis---that people should be able to control what they create---is sound. You seem to differ?
So you think that a member of Metallica, the epitome of corporate rock, would have any qualms whatsoever about lying to protect their pocketbook? What about their popularity?
I tend to trust most people too far, but the interview did strike me as basically sincere. Yes, the "1 unsigned artist" did seem contrived, so how about we make like good scientists and try to duplicate the experiment?
I haven't given Napster a fair chance yet, and Gnutella isn't organised well enough to help me find my own butt, but I find it inconceivable that people wouldn't use a free source to check out new things that they haven't heard of. To me, that's what it's all be about!
A large bureaucracy is hurting many people because no-one within the bureaucracy is willing to take responsibility for the actions of the whole. Just because Nazi Germany is the example that the poster happened to pick doesn't invalidate the argument. Although the scale of harm there was much greater, the causes are, in many ways, identical.
Even if the bureaucracy were doing good, you could still make a legitimate comparison to Nazi Germany if the individuals tried to evade responsibility. However, it seems that there are few instances of people trying to evade praise.
Actually, that might be a good metric for when a company should be dissolved: when people start saying that they're not responsible for the company's actions.
That's an interesting point. I don't know the answer, but somebody please moderate that up! Although I would guess that while quoting relevant parts of it in a discussion is fair use, just posting the whole thing verbatim is not. So perhaps a point-by-point analysis would be good...
Is there any way to reprimand/punish the government for breaking laws? I thought that you weren't supposed to send people to prison for saying things (something about an amendment or some such?)... seems that threatening him for talking is incredibly illegal, no? Shouldn't the government parties responsible go to prison or something?
The problem is that there are soooo many people out there with money, but without the time or inclination or brains to understand what the rights are that they're giving away. By giving the companies their rights, they increase the power of the companies, who thus become more capable of making life really hard for those who did understand what they were giving up.
All that's really needed is for everyone to understand everything. In the meantime, we're pretty much screwed. Perhaps stupidity could be treated like drunkenness: lock people up for a day every time they do something dumb (as defined by, um, me!).
This isn't about getting DVD support for Linux. It's about the right to play DVDs wherever you want. How about NeXTos, OS/2, dunno about BeOS, PalmOS (yeah, right, I know), etc? How about "fair use"? It's nice that Linux will be able to play DVDs, but the MPAA well knows that you can keep most people happy by giving them baubles, not rights.
From Operation Clambake:
{
...where they become brainwashed slaves. There they work a hundred hour week for almost no pay. There they are subject to every cruel whim of their masters. It is a living hell that they endure because of the conditioning they have received and this now perverted sense of ethics that they have accepted. The "Sea Org" is the ultimate in brainwashed slavery. They are expected to work harder and harder to achieve ever higher targets of production. If they fail to meet their targets there are various penalties. One of them is to be put onto a diet of beans and rice and to miss sleep. Another is to be sentenced to a period on the RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force). This is the equivalent to "hard labour". Such is the extent of their brainwashing that they actually write "success stories" when they complete their sentences.
}
Yes, I know, I've read about Scientology. It's evil. It's twisted. But it does come close to describing many of my best friends, and I hope to join a very similar organisation in the near future. They call it "grad school". Be afraid.
How many of us here have any control over policy at our organisations? It would be a nice way to protest if we had an official, publicised policy change ready to go the instant this is made into law anywhere, saying that we will not authorise the purchase or use of any software from Virginia...
Is that a halfway decent/feasable idea?
About a month ago I asked them for pointers to research showing that sexual content hurt families. I said explicitly that I would read biased research if that was all that was available. I was very polite and didn't try to give an opinion, only request information. Naturally(?), they have completely ignored me...
This is not the unconcionable part -- it is in fact routine and expected legal stuff.
I fail to see why the fact that it's "routine and expected legal stuff" necessarily implies that it's not unconcionable. And just because individuals (unwealthy ones, even) use it doesn't mean it's a good thing. Unwealthy people also mug and rape and steal from the undeservedly wealthy. Does that make it right? Rarely...
Remember, please, that this is Arizona we're talking about. It's soooo warm, and the sky is soooo beautiful, that sex is better outdoors anyway. If this bill encourages people to get over their ridiculous prudish hangups about being seen while having sex, I'm all for it! And hey, if they can't download porn, maybe they'll spend more time with real people. After all, it is a team sport.
I think I'd rather have my email sent to me, not to my house. I'm not sure why they'd choose to do it that way, except to reduce anonymity, and of course for targeted email marketing (AKA spam).
The real benefit is that people without email addresses will get them (The homeless are still SOL)... assuming that they have computers or know how to use a public library, which surprisingly few people do.
Perhaps it's time to try to auction off the SEC...
This is what I predicted about 5 years ago as how MS could kill Linux. It worked for the Mac. If Linux gets a lot of nice MS apps, all using the MS toolkit, then MS would gain control of the Linux apps market (face it, some MS apps are really good, and they're all really compatible with each-other). Then, later, MS could make them work a little slower or a little worse on Linux, and probably even find a way to make them "crash" Linux (denial of RAM attack if nothing else) and people who liked Linux but wanted their apps to work would be forced to get Windows boxen. I'm just surprised that it took MS so long to start, but I guess that they didn't feel too threatened.
Having an Open Source OS is only the first step. All APIs need to be Open Source as well, or they just invite the creation of a monopoly.
Have a nice day!
What if it were illegal to sell a domain name for more than the going rate for unregistered ones? You could get rid of squatters (there'd be no profit in it), and therefore you could presumably get rid of all the laws that currently exist just to hurt squatters, like giving trademark holders god-like power, etc.
Am I crazy?
Funny! A friend and I were discussing exactly this kind of product just a couple of nights ago. I thought it could be built; he tried to convince me that man-in-the-middle attacks would make it insecure. I was even going to let people read their key checksums over the phone to each-other, and he argued that voice sampling was getting advanced enough that even that could be faked. But don't they have public-key systems that are immune to man-in-the-middle attacks? So there should be no problem there...
...not a security person...
Ok, so it seems Cavedog is being uncooperative. My bad for posting without doing the research. Still, if C&CII comes out for Linux, I'll buy it, if only to encourage Cavedog towards the Path of Righteousness. I know, it is important.
I used to love C&C. Then along came Red Alert, with some major improvements, and some minor regressions. Warcraft and Starcraft were good too. Then I played Total Annihilation from Cavedog, and nothing will be the same again. I haven't really seen much of Cavedog's new game, Kingdoms, but if you want to petition anyone, petition the best!