There's no way to browse or search by genre,only by artist, song title or words in the lyrics (although admittedly this is kind of cool). But without listings by genre it does me no good.
A pirate is a robber attacking from a ship or boat. Pirates usually attack other vessels, usually with the intention of looting their cargo, but may also attack targets on shore. They were termed buccaneers if they operated in the West Indies. See also piracy in the Caribbean. Piracy is significant in international law because it marks one of the first cases where the doctrine of universal jurisdiction was invoked.
Privateering A privateer or corsair was similar in method, but had a commission or a letter of marque from a government or king to capture merchant ships belonging to an enemy nation. The famous Barbary Corsairs of the Mediterranean were privateers as were the Maltese Corsairs, who were authorized by the Knights of St. John. The letter of marque was recognized by international law and meant that a privateer could not be charged with piracy, although this was often not enough to save them. The letter of marque was banned under international law in 1854.
Apples and oranges. M$ Windows is closed source, so they're responsible for maintaining the security of the OS. Open Source includes the source code, or makes it readily available, which provides end-users with the means to determine whether there are any security holes. That puts the ball in the user's court.
Yeah. Instead of being glued in front of TV sets for hours being deluged with commercials calling "buy, buy" like we were, they're actually going outside and experiencing real life (according to the article, anyway).
Hmm, maybe this generation will grow up being able to think for themselves rather than responding Pavlov-like to televised brainwashing.
Actually the little tykes are probably all on the Internet surfing for pr0n while their parents are still sleeping off their hangovers, the scamps!:)
>>Nobody gets jail time for copyright violations.
>Under the DMCA you can get jail-time.
That's exactly why the DCMA should be repealed. It lets the RIAA, the MPAA, Adobe, etc. shift the cost of enforcing their copyrights onto the taxpayers.
Copyright violations are normally a civil offence, meaning if you violate my copyright I can sue you. But under DCMA, if the material is in digital format violating my copyright suddenly becomes a criminal offence. Why?
>Law enforcement is the job of the police, not sys-admins.
And copyright violation enforcement is the job of the copyright holder, not the police! These matters should be resolved in a civil court via lawsuit. My tax dollars should NOT go towards protecting individuals or corporations financial interests.
Illegally copying a copyrighted item is NOT the same as stealing, since the original item is still in the posession of the original owner. We haven't taken someone else's property away from them.
If I copy someone else's source code and use it in my product (or copy a play, a book, whatever, and pass it off as my work), then the copyright holder of that code sends me notification of my violation, and (hopefully) a dialogue ensues. If this isn't fruitful they proceed with legal action against me- getting a temporary cease-and-desist order, hauling me before a judge, getting a settlement. Note that it is up to the copyright owner to take action and provide their own lawyers.
But where we're talking about filesharing, or anything with the magic words "Internet", "computer" or "cyberspace" associated with it, we get shitty laws like DCMA and the No Electronic Theft Act. Now publicly funded prosecutors press the case, and pubicly funded prisons punish the wrongdoers (usually all out of proportion to the scope of the offence). This is wrong!
Either their running credit checks on potential employees is illegal where you are, or it isn't.
If it isn't, then it doesn't matter whether anyone else has negotiated their way out of such a requirement. It only matters whether or not you can do so with this employer.
If they insist on a credit check, either sumbit or don't work there.
Cable, telephone, and Internet are another story entirely, though. There's absolutely NO REASON that a second cable or local telco company couldn't be profictable in many situations, but they're prohibited from running a wire to your house in the name of protecting competition.
Local governments grant regulated-monopoly status to one cable company, one telco, etc. simply to avoid having dozens of competing companies string wires all over the place creating an eyesore, or blocking traffic by constantly digging up roads to bury their own cables.
Agfa Monotype, per their own Web site, came about in 1998 when "Monotype® Typography [was] acquired by Agfa Corporation in 1998...". You wrote embed in 1997. So sue them.
Slashdot Mirror
"As if it matters what word people use--"cracker" or "hacker.""
:)
ITYM GNU/cracker.
Get your terminology straight!
There's no way to browse or search by genre,only by artist, song title or words in the lyrics (although admittedly this is kind of cool). But without listings by genre it does me no good.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate
A pirate is a robber attacking from a ship or boat. Pirates usually attack other vessels, usually with the intention of looting their cargo, but may also attack targets on shore. They were termed buccaneers if they operated in the West Indies. See also piracy in the Caribbean.
Piracy is significant in international law because it marks one of the first cases where the doctrine of universal jurisdiction was invoked.
Privateering
A privateer or corsair was similar in method, but had a commission or a letter of marque from a government or king to capture merchant ships belonging to an enemy nation. The famous Barbary Corsairs of the Mediterranean were privateers as were the Maltese Corsairs, who were authorized by the Knights of St. John. The letter of marque was recognized by international law and meant that a privateer could not be charged with piracy, although this was often not enough to save them. The letter of marque was banned under international law in 1854.
Apples and oranges. M$ Windows is closed source, so they're responsible for maintaining the security of the OS. Open Source includes the source code, or makes it readily available, which provides end-users with the means to determine whether there are any security holes. That puts the ball in the user's court.
He didn't say it would be on the Internet. He just said "web services". Intranet? Thin client?
>Isn't that supposed to be you're?
No, apo'strophe's only go in front of e's'se's.
>Definitely IMO kids these days are losing out.
:)
Yeah. Instead of being glued in front of TV sets for hours being deluged with commercials calling "buy, buy" like we were, they're actually going outside and experiencing real life (according to the article, anyway).
Hmm, maybe this generation will grow up being able to think for themselves rather than responding Pavlov-like to televised brainwashing.
Actually the little tykes are probably all on the Internet surfing for pr0n while their parents are still sleeping off their hangovers, the scamps!
>>Nobody gets jail time for copyright violations.
>Under the DMCA you can get jail-time.
That's exactly why the DCMA should be repealed. It lets the RIAA, the MPAA, Adobe, etc. shift the cost of enforcing their copyrights onto the taxpayers.
Copyright violations are normally a civil offence, meaning if you violate my copyright I can sue you. But under DCMA, if the material is in digital format violating my copyright suddenly becomes a criminal offence. Why?
>Try a good one like iHateSpam [ihatespam.com] and see
See another domain snatched up by Ultimate Search like a shark in a wading pool!
>Law enforcement is the job of the police, not sys-admins.
And copyright violation enforcement is the job of the copyright holder, not the police! These matters should be resolved in a civil court via lawsuit. My tax dollars should NOT go towards protecting individuals or corporations financial interests.
Illegally copying a copyrighted item is NOT the same as stealing, since the original item is still in the posession of the original owner. We haven't taken someone else's property away from them.
If I copy someone else's source code and use it in my product (or copy a play, a book, whatever, and pass it off as my work), then the copyright holder of that code sends me notification of my violation, and (hopefully) a dialogue ensues. If this isn't fruitful they proceed with legal action against me- getting a temporary cease-and-desist order, hauling me before a judge, getting a settlement. Note that it is up to the copyright owner to take action and provide their own lawyers.
But where we're talking about filesharing, or anything with the magic words "Internet", "computer" or "cyberspace" associated with it, we get shitty laws like DCMA and the No Electronic Theft Act. Now publicly funded prosecutors press the case, and pubicly funded prisons punish the wrongdoers (usually all out of proportion to the scope of the offence). This is wrong!
Either their running credit checks on potential employees is illegal where you are, or it isn't.
If it isn't, then it doesn't matter whether anyone else has negotiated their way out of such a requirement. It only matters whether or not you can do so with this employer.
If they insist on a credit check, either sumbit or don't work there.
Cable, telephone, and Internet are another story entirely, though. There's absolutely NO REASON that a second cable or local telco company couldn't be profictable in many situations, but they're prohibited from running a wire to your house in the name of protecting competition.
Local governments grant regulated-monopoly status to one cable company, one telco, etc. simply to avoid having dozens of competing companies string wires all over the place creating an eyesore, or blocking traffic by constantly digging up roads to bury their own cables.
Agfa Monotype, per their own Web site, came about in 1998 when "Monotype® Typography [was] acquired by Agfa Corporation in 1998...". You wrote embed in 1997. So sue them.
Per this site (opensecrets.org), in 2000 he accepted only $2500 from Disney, the only big entertainment PAC donating to him.
In 2002 it was $4000 from Disney, $3000 from the MPAA, $2000 from Viacom, $2500 from AOL/Time Warner, and $500 from ASCAP.
The man sounds like a cheap date to me.