"Stop thinking of software as an asset, and start thinking of it as you think about paper and pens," White said. Astonishingly, he then added, "It may require huge changes in your accounting procedures."
So you think because a few million people run Apps that the entire corporate infrastructure, the existing mainframe, unix, windows, and linux systems, and EVERYTHING ELSE is going to change to make ROOM for Apple in the enterprise?
Sir, you SERIOUSLY underestimate your importance to North American enterprises. Even Microsoft isn't that ignorant of their REAL place in the IT industry.
The main reason that Nazi Germany got out of hand is the same dirty tricks used to shovel cannabis prohibition through the US Congress all those decades ago: suppression of the media.
Even the AMA didn't know the "marijuana" slang being referred to by Congress in the newspapers of the day was in fact referring to the cannabis that was in 70+% of medicines of the day. The newspapers (mostly owned by one man on a mission) conveniently neglected to mention that fact.
Similarly, the atrocities the Nazis started performing simply weren't reported.
We CAN avoid a repeat thanks to the internet providing UNFILTERED news to the public, but only if the public pulls their head out of their collective arses and realize that those who would dominate the world will always try again. We MUST remain ever vigilant for the abuse of power, and denying that it can happen again will lead us right back down that terrible path to social destruction again.
Wow, this new escape clause should be even easier to wield than "temporary insanity." All you have to do is convince a couple doctors you MIGHT get suicidal if deported, and you get off scott free.
Clue in: If you violate a foreign nation's laws and your home country has an extradition treaty with them, you're HOOPED.
Maybe they need to move their headquarters. The right to back up media is enshrined in Canadian law, because we OWN our media, not "license" or "lease" it. So unless the *AA companies want to GUARANTEE to replace damaged or lost media AT NO CHARGE TO THE CONSUMER, they have to suck it up, give up on DMCA-type legislation, and go home with their tails between their legs like the whipped dogs they are.:P
The predecessors to the TSA have long taken a dim view of bomb, gun, and other "terrorist" jokes. I've known people who missed meetings due to being overheard joking by the wrong airline staff member.
Why would "overhearing" a public twitter post be any different than overhearing a wisecrack between passengers in a lineup?
Table a new law: Any company doing business in a foreign nation is required to meet the environmental, labour, pay scales, and health/safety regulations of it's home country when doing business overseas.
Force companies like Apple to bring the standards of employment in China UP instead of letting them offshore slavery.
And if you think you can come up with my algorithms by fluke or accident or some marvelous insight without a lot of hard work, good luck PROVING you did so without looking at my software first. It took me NINE YEARS to come up with the core algorithm.
Fine, don't use the software. I don't care. I can't FORCE you to use it or my services. But as the offer is out there, I do believe I DID give the world something rather substantial, even if it doesn't realize it yet.
As to "nobody owes you an entitlement of maintaining your copy-entitlement over it", I can only say:
Yeah, but if I cited the actual cases, they wouldn't have that nice "once a decade" rhythm going.
You also note I didn't mention the music industry's bad decision to accept a levy on blank CDs when they were losing their battle to take away our format shifting and backup-your-OWN-media rights. The movie industry has therefore NOT done the same with blank DVDs or BluRay discs.
Unfortunately for the media companies, when the music industry accepted the levy, they enshrined our right to make backups INTO EXPLICIT LAW. The DMCA-like provisions of the latest round of lobbyist inspired bullshit in Canada is in direct contravention of the precedents set over the year and in violation of that explicit agreement regarding levies.
You misunderstand copyright and it's enforcement COMPLETELY if you think "nobody will be able to stop downstream coders from publishing the code themselves".
Companies HATE GPL software, that's why I CHOSE that license. Corporations are pretty much forced by it to PAY for the software they want if they want to integrate or modify it, which was and is the whole point of the dual license approach I used.
Free for individual or sane use; for-fee if you want to integrate or "embrace and extend" like some companies are wont to do.
<SARCASM>You wouldn't believe how GUILTY I feel expecting poor multi-nationals and corporations to pay for my 24 years of hard work.</SARCASM>
I gave you a GPLv3 TOOL worth 1-3 million dollars to try out and even USE for free, provided you can live with the odious demand that you PUBLISH any changes or enhancements.
And like any other freetard, you think I should GIVE you the $1-3 MILLION DOLLARS worth of R&D I did over 24 YEARS of my life. See these double digits waving on high? They're just for YOU! That's ALL I'm giving you -- a symbol of my disgust at YOUR greed.
You're under the mistaken impression that I AGREE with the BSD license in anything other than concept. While I tip my hat to those who are willing to GIVE their software away, I have to EAT, so I chose the GPLv3 and LGPLv3 after YEARS of consideration.
You will NEVER convince me to release my work under a BSD, Mozilla, or Apache license, so don't waste your breath.
Google, Bing, Yahoo, and the other search providers are part of the modern internet INFRASTRUCTURE, like it or not. That means they have to be managed as GLOBAL resources, not US-centric companies.
I really don;t see what's so bad about wanting known infringers to be delisted
It's the same problem as SOPA -- using the laws of ONE nation to ENFORCE those laws over the objections and rights of the GLOBAL community.
The only way to avoid that would be to create a "google.us", similar to the way some companies have set up special divisions to cater to the unique needs of serving China's market. So google.us could implement such filtering, but you can NOT mandate that google.com filter the data for THE WORLD.
...they do know how to play the lobbying game better than the entire tech industry combined and are quite willing to buy as much influence as they can.
I think Google's anti-SOPA stance may be the beginning of a shift in that "soft" stance of the IT industry. It's becoming quite clear that without spending money on lobbyists to tell the IT side of the story, government will CONTINUE to be ruled by ignorant luddites.
On that point, we're in 100% agreement!:D They have WAY too much money to "invest" in lobbyists over the will of the people, never mind foreign governments and their citizens.
Slashdot Mirror
So you think because a few million people run Apps that the entire corporate infrastructure, the existing mainframe, unix, windows, and linux systems, and EVERYTHING ELSE is going to change to make ROOM for Apple in the enterprise?
Sir, you SERIOUSLY underestimate your importance to North American enterprises. Even Microsoft isn't that ignorant of their REAL place in the IT industry.
Easy.
Take their lunch.
Then steal their wallet.
And tell them it's because you THINK they pirated a movie or music CD and they "owe" you.
Smashing their laptop or other portable computing device is optional.
That's SOPA, ACTA, and a host of others in action: no due process.
Ouch. Yes, definitely the wrong thread. I must have clicked when I should have menued. *LOL*
Sorry about that, folks. 'twas an accident, not a hijack.
The main reason that Nazi Germany got out of hand is the same dirty tricks used to shovel cannabis prohibition through the US Congress all those decades ago: suppression of the media.
Even the AMA didn't know the "marijuana" slang being referred to by Congress in the newspapers of the day was in fact referring to the cannabis that was in 70+% of medicines of the day. The newspapers (mostly owned by one man on a mission) conveniently neglected to mention that fact.
Similarly, the atrocities the Nazis started performing simply weren't reported.
We CAN avoid a repeat thanks to the internet providing UNFILTERED news to the public, but only if the public pulls their head out of their collective arses and realize that those who would dominate the world will always try again. We MUST remain ever vigilant for the abuse of power, and denying that it can happen again will lead us right back down that terrible path to social destruction again.
Wow, this new escape clause should be even easier to wield than "temporary insanity." All you have to do is convince a couple doctors you MIGHT get suicidal if deported, and you get off scott free.
Clue in: If you violate a foreign nation's laws and your home country has an extradition treaty with them, you're HOOPED.
Maybe they need to move their headquarters. The right to back up media is enshrined in Canadian law, because we OWN our media, not "license" or "lease" it. So unless the *AA companies want to GUARANTEE to replace damaged or lost media AT NO CHARGE TO THE CONSUMER, they have to suck it up, give up on DMCA-type legislation, and go home with their tails between their legs like the whipped dogs they are. :P
Much though they object, BREIN, MPAA, RIAA, et. al ARE NOT POLICE and have NO AUTHORITY.
Thank GOD no one ever gave you belligerent, greedy jack-boots a badge!
The predecessors to the TSA have long taken a dim view of bomb, gun, and other "terrorist" jokes. I've known people who missed meetings due to being overheard joking by the wrong airline staff member.
Why would "overhearing" a public twitter post be any different than overhearing a wisecrack between passengers in a lineup?
Table a new law: Any company doing business in a foreign nation is required to meet the environmental, labour, pay scales, and health/safety regulations of it's home country when doing business overseas.
Force companies like Apple to bring the standards of employment in China UP instead of letting them offshore slavery.
The issue is not that you "only took 30 seconds."
The issue is that the 30 seconds you took is the ENTIRE AD!
If you're entire "term paper" is one long quote, it's called "plagiarism", not "quoting".
Fair use by anti-medical-cannabis scum sucker: denied.
Why are all freetards arguing the same selfish greedy viewpoint in the end?
"But I WANT it! I should be able to have it if I WANT it! The world isn't FAIR! I WANT it! I WANT it! I WANT it!. *looks around* Fine, I'll STEAL it!"
And if you think you can come up with my algorithms by fluke or accident or some marvelous insight without a lot of hard work, good luck PROVING you did so without looking at my software first. It took me NINE YEARS to come up with the core algorithm.
I "didn't give anything to anybody"?
Fine, don't use the software. I don't care. I can't FORCE you to use it or my services. But as the offer is out there, I do believe I DID give the world something rather substantial, even if it doesn't realize it yet.
As to "nobody owes you an entitlement of maintaining your copy-entitlement over it", I can only say:
GO FUCK YOURSELF, FREETARD!
Yeah, but if I cited the actual cases, they wouldn't have that nice "once a decade" rhythm going.
You also note I didn't mention the music industry's bad decision to accept a levy on blank CDs when they were losing their battle to take away our format shifting and backup-your-OWN-media rights. The movie industry has therefore NOT done the same with blank DVDs or BluRay discs.
Unfortunately for the media companies, when the music industry accepted the levy, they enshrined our right to make backups INTO EXPLICIT LAW. The DMCA-like provisions of the latest round of lobbyist inspired bullshit in Canada is in direct contravention of the precedents set over the year and in violation of that explicit agreement regarding levies.
You misunderstand copyright and it's enforcement COMPLETELY if you think "nobody will be able to stop downstream coders from publishing the code themselves".
Read. Think. Learn.
THEN speak.
So said the dogmatic moralist who thinks HIS view of what "free software" means is what EVERYONE means.
Go cry in a corner, baby. Go cry. You earned nothing. You deserve nothing. You get nothing but what GPLv3 permits you.
Companies HATE GPL software, that's why I CHOSE that license. Corporations are pretty much forced by it to PAY for the software they want if they want to integrate or modify it, which was and is the whole point of the dual license approach I used.
Free for individual or sane use; for-fee if you want to integrate or "embrace and extend" like some companies are wont to do.
<SARCASM>You wouldn't believe how GUILTY I feel expecting poor multi-nationals and corporations to pay for my 24 years of hard work.</SARCASM>
Oh wait, that's RIGHT. That ISN'T all I gave you.
I gave you a GPLv3 TOOL worth 1-3 million dollars to try out and even USE for free, provided you can live with the odious demand that you PUBLISH any changes or enhancements.
Man but I'm a GREEDY bastard, aren't I?
http://msscodefactory.sourceforge.net/ is the R&D project; http://singularityone.ca/ is the commercial arm I'm sparking into existence.
And like any other freetard, you think I should GIVE you the $1-3 MILLION DOLLARS worth of R&D I did over 24 YEARS of my life. See these double digits waving on high? They're just for YOU! That's ALL I'm giving you -- a symbol of my disgust at YOUR greed.
You're under the mistaken impression that I AGREE with the BSD license in anything other than concept. While I tip my hat to those who are willing to GIVE their software away, I have to EAT, so I chose the GPLv3 and LGPLv3 after YEARS of consideration.
You will NEVER convince me to release my work under a BSD, Mozilla, or Apache license, so don't waste your breath.
BSD is YOUR preferred license and model, not mine.
Google, Bing, Yahoo, and the other search providers are part of the modern internet INFRASTRUCTURE, like it or not. That means they have to be managed as GLOBAL resources, not US-centric companies.
It's the same problem as SOPA -- using the laws of ONE nation to ENFORCE those laws over the objections and rights of the GLOBAL community.
The only way to avoid that would be to create a "google.us", similar to the way some companies have set up special divisions to cater to the unique needs of serving China's market. So google.us could implement such filtering, but you can NOT mandate that google.com filter the data for THE WORLD.
I think Google's anti-SOPA stance may be the beginning of a shift in that "soft" stance of the IT industry. It's becoming quite clear that without spending money on lobbyists to tell the IT side of the story, government will CONTINUE to be ruled by ignorant luddites.
On that point, we're in 100% agreement! :D They have WAY too much money to "invest" in lobbyists over the will of the people, never mind foreign governments and their citizens.