Just for the record, the point of copyright was that the "IP owner" was granted a legally protected exclusive right to the work for a limited period. (Originally 17 years, if memory serves me correctly.) In exchange for this after the protected period the work was released into the public domain.
Now though, copyright basically lasts forever. Even if you can't get another extension, you can repackage the same old crap and get a new copyright on that. Thus the public never realizes the benfit of their part of the bargin (i.e. the release of the work into the public domain), even though they are expected to continue to protect copyrighted material.
So, to answer your question, yes I think they no longer deserve their IP rights.
In the original Greedo had his gun aimed at Han, but Han draws and shoots Greedo in the chest before Greedo can shoot.
In the "Special Edition" Greedo has his gun aimed at Han, but Greedo shoots first. The shot is off to the left of Han, and Han is edited to lean to the right, in effect dodging the shot. Only after all of this does Han draw and shoot Greedo in the chest.
I'm not a mathematician, so forgive my ignorance, but aren't the wavelets we're discussing here some sort of math? By which I mean some kind of equation, or maybe you'd say a function in n variables, but in the end it is solvable for a real number, yes?
If so, how do you patent math? Or is the patent on a software program that does this math operation?
Witness, for example, today's news about the FCC selling telephone usage data, where the issue is framed in "free speech" terms by the corporate representatives.
These are the things that get my Irish up, and make me fear the rise of "corporatism"
When you write congress, do you see your representatives change their position to something you can support? Do you see any discernable change in their position at all? Do you get back a reasoned reply, even if it's only a form letter?
I ask because what I usually get back is a form letter that says something like:
Dear Citizen,
Thank you for your input on <subject>. I too am concered about the impact of <subject> on the american people. However, given the information I have, I believe that my position on <subject> is the best one for the government/people of my district/american people. Sincerely,
<Representative>
Dont' get me wrong, I don't expect these people to send me a personal reply. Nor do I expect them to agree with me all the time. It's just that in the last decade I've gotten a similar reply from my Senators and Representatives, on all kinds of subjects: The CDA, the Clipper Chip and Key Escrow, encryption being classified as a munition, the DMCA and Fair Use, corporate abuse, treatment of Afghani prisoners-of-war/"enemy combatants", "homeland" security, et cetera.
Frankly, it's enough to drive me to dispair.
Then again, perhaps it's just me, or just my representatives. Anyone have similar/different experiences?
At the very least these books represent the magnum opus of one of the pioneers of our field. I think they are worth reading for that reason alone.
However, my thoughts were similar to yours until I actually read AoCP. It's not so much learning algorithms as it is learning to think algorithmicly. I rarely get to code at the low level shown in AoCP. Even so, my SQL based reports in PHP and two-bit perl programs benefit from an algorithmic approach.
I am certain that I am better programmer for reading AoCP, and I never did any of the exercises.;)
Actually it's quite simple: Bush the Younger is trying to protect his father. Bush the Elder and his henchmen were accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity for the Gulf War. This was not widely reported in the press, naturally. There was a book written on the subject, War Crimes, by Ramsey Clark. Google turned up this index of the charges.
Basically, the United States Federal Government wants to be able to oust other peoples leaders and governments over war crimes, but not be subject to the same rules.
However, I've found that Constructing Language Processors for Little Languages by Randy M. Kaplan helped me more in constructing small one-off parsers for various purposes. The Dragon Book provides a good grounding in theory, but I've found the utilitarian approach in Little Languages more accessible.
I fly into and out of Reagan National Airport in Washington, DC every week. The security arangements there are supposed to be the best in the nation, due to the proximity to the Capitol, White House, et cetera. Let me tell you about profiling...
They hand check a "random" selection of passengers. Now I am 6' 2", 250 lbs, with shifty eyes, a beard, and very long hair. I look like a biker, except that I usually wear shirts with collars. Guess how often they have checked me?
Once.
The people I usualy see taking off their shoes and having their bag ransacked are senior citizens, and mostly women. Rather than stop someone who might actually be dangerous, they stop people that are so unlikely to be terrorists that it defies reason. This serves two functions. One, it "proves" they aren't profiling. Two, they don't have to worry about their own safety. I mean terrorists are dangerous! These chuckleheads only get paid minimum wage and it's just not worth it to them.
I'm sure that the airlines and security people would give some "rational" explination for this phenomenon. To me, it seems Just Plain Stupid (tm).
You, and everyone else who is calling for more security in airports and aircraft, are missing one thing: Our security arrangements worked perfectly. The terrorists could be sure that there were no armed passengers or crew to contend with. Banning knives is just stupid. You can kill someone with a sharpened pencil too. (Not to mention a million other things.)
What bothers me the most is that a handful of men with knives and box-cutters held off a plane full of Americans! Wake up people, we need to reclaim our status as World-Class Bad-Ass Mofos. John Wayne must be pulling 3500 RPM in his grave.
IIRC Kevin Mitnick was held without bail for four-and-a-half years (Including 8 months in solitary confinement).
Which just goes to show you, don't piss off the United States Federal Government. A government of the corporations, for the corporations, by the corporations.
You know... The more I think about the more Fight Club makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Just for the record, the point of copyright was that the "IP owner" was granted a legally protected exclusive right to the work for a limited period. (Originally 17 years, if memory serves me correctly.) In exchange for this after the protected period the work was released into the public domain.
Now though, copyright basically lasts forever. Even if you can't get another extension, you can repackage the same old crap and get a new copyright on that. Thus the public never realizes the benfit of their part of the bargin (i.e. the release of the work into the public domain), even though they are expected to continue to protect copyrighted material.
So, to answer your question, yes I think they no longer deserve their IP rights.
Actually that's not entirely accurate.
In the original Greedo had his gun aimed at Han, but Han draws and shoots Greedo in the chest before Greedo can shoot.
In the "Special Edition" Greedo has his gun aimed at Han, but Greedo shoots first. The shot is off to the left of Han, and Han is edited to lean to the right, in effect dodging the shot. Only after all of this does Han draw and shoot Greedo in the chest.
For the record I'm a Han Solo Firstist myself.
Right on, Brother-Man!
All Power To The People!
Ian Mead is the man!
UltraEdit has saved my butt on more than one occasion because it just works.
I've pointed this out before, but usually it's older white people being patted down at the airport.
I'm not a mathematician, so forgive my ignorance, but aren't the wavelets we're discussing here some sort of math? By which I mean some kind of equation, or maybe you'd say a function in n variables, but in the end it is solvable for a real number, yes?
If so, how do you patent math? Or is the patent on a software program that does this math operation?
Very true. However, the corporations have been given the same legal status as real human people. While the rights are the same for both, the corporation, being as it is the accumulation of the resources of many people, is in a better position to exercise those rights.
Witness, for example, today's news about the FCC selling telephone usage data, where the issue is framed in "free speech" terms by the corporate representatives.
These are the things that get my Irish up, and make me fear the rise of "corporatism"
When you write congress, do you see your representatives change their position to something you can support? Do you see any discernable change in their position at all? Do you get back a reasoned reply, even if it's only a form letter?
I ask because what I usually get back is a form letter that says something like:
Dont' get me wrong, I don't expect these people to send me a personal reply. Nor do I expect them to agree with me all the time. It's just that in the last decade I've gotten a similar reply from my Senators and Representatives, on all kinds of subjects: The CDA, the Clipper Chip and Key Escrow, encryption being classified as a munition, the DMCA and Fair Use, corporate abuse, treatment of Afghani prisoners-of-war/"enemy combatants", "homeland" security, et cetera.
Frankly, it's enough to drive me to dispair.
Then again, perhaps it's just me, or just my representatives. Anyone have similar/different experiences?
At the very least these books represent the magnum opus of one of the pioneers of our field. I think they are worth reading for that reason alone.
However, my thoughts were similar to yours until I actually read AoCP. It's not so much learning algorithms as it is learning to think algorithmicly. I rarely get to code at the low level shown in AoCP. Even so, my SQL based reports in PHP and two-bit perl programs benefit from an algorithmic approach.
I am certain that I am better programmer for reading AoCP, and I never did any of the exercises. ;)
Actually it's quite simple: Bush the Younger is trying to protect his father. Bush the Elder and his henchmen were accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity for the Gulf War. This was not widely reported in the press, naturally. There was a book written on the subject, War Crimes, by Ramsey Clark. Google turned up this index of the charges.
Basically, the United States Federal Government wants to be able to oust other peoples leaders and governments over war crimes, but not be subject to the same rules.
Panda Sex is okay and Goat Sex is NOT okay?
Sometimes I don't get you guys.
The Dragon Book is the standard reference on this subject.
However, I've found that Constructing Language Processors for Little Languages by Randy M. Kaplan helped me more in constructing small one-off parsers for various purposes. The Dragon Book provides a good grounding in theory, but I've found the utilitarian approach in Little Languages more accessible.
May your life together be even more joyous than you imagine, and your love of each other deepen for all the days of your lives.
I fly into and out of Reagan National Airport in Washington, DC every week. The security arangements there are supposed to be the best in the nation, due to the proximity to the Capitol, White House, et cetera. Let me tell you about profiling...
They hand check a "random" selection of passengers. Now I am 6' 2", 250 lbs, with shifty eyes, a beard, and very long hair. I look like a biker, except that I usually wear shirts with collars. Guess how often they have checked me?
Once.
The people I usualy see taking off their shoes and having their bag ransacked are senior citizens, and mostly women. Rather than stop someone who might actually be dangerous, they stop people that are so unlikely to be terrorists that it defies reason. This serves two functions. One, it "proves" they aren't profiling. Two, they don't have to worry about their own safety. I mean terrorists are dangerous! These chuckleheads only get paid minimum wage and it's just not worth it to them.
I'm sure that the airlines and security people would give some "rational" explination for this phenomenon. To me, it seems Just Plain Stupid (tm).
No, I'm Spartacus!
You, and everyone else who is calling for more security in airports and aircraft, are missing one thing: Our security arrangements worked perfectly. The terrorists could be sure that there were no armed passengers or crew to contend with. Banning knives is just stupid. You can kill someone with a sharpened pencil too. (Not to mention a million other things.)
What bothers me the most is that a handful of men with knives and box-cutters held off a plane full of Americans! Wake up people, we need to reclaim our status as World-Class Bad-Ass Mofos. John Wayne must be pulling 3500 RPM in his grave.
Charlie Rose said it best, "Do you think LBJ would have let his advisers tell him he couldn't go back to the White House?"
IIRC Kevin Mitnick was held without bail for four-and-a-half years (Including 8 months in solitary confinement).
Which just goes to show you, don't piss off the United States Federal Government. A government of the corporations, for the corporations, by the corporations.
You know... The more I think about the more Fight Club makes sense.