Sigh. Please learn what "force" means. Hint: it involves guns and courts and jails. No-one is telling authors they must "give something away because somebody else thinks it would be a good choice" or they will be thrown in prison. However, authors are saying they have the exclusive right to make copies of their books and that other people should be imprisoned (after refusing to pay hefty fines) if they dare try to step on that exclusive right.
You simply cannot make a freedom argument for copyright.
Ya know, I really don't have much of a problem with laws to stop people being harassed, sexually, in the work place. What I have a problem with is the incessant "we want to avoid a sexual harassment lawsuit, so you have to submit to.. [whatever they want this week]".. and, frankly, that goes for any other sort of lawsuit too. Somehow "sexual harassment" in the workplace got confused with "being offended by sex" in the workplace. Here, in Australia, they've extended sexual harassment to be a subset of a bigger crock of shit, "creating a hostile workplace". I guess this was supposed to stop bullying. The laws are deliberately open ended and poorly worded, and employers are deathly afraid of them.
Really? A girl puts naked pictures of herself on the internet. She has no problem with her co-workers looking at them. Said co-workers only show the pictures to people who are similarly minded. The fear of litigation causes the girl to lose her job and the co-workers get reprimanded, one of them gets fired too. How can you not come to the conclusion that the law did more harm than good?
Absolutely man. If you choose to have a wife and kids and save for retirement with your white picket fence and your yellow dog, yes, you do gotta get up and go to work every day, and if you don't take shit you'll get fired, or, worse yet, not get that promotion so you can buy more worthless crap than you did last year to make yourself feel worthwhile. But that's your choice.
I worked at a company of about 40 men and 2 women. One of the women was the owner's wife, the other was the receptionist.
The receptionist was a "geek girl" and hung out on some overclocker forums, and so did a bunch of the guys. This girl decides it would be fun to post naked pictures of herself on this forum. The guys totally fell for the bait and started inviting guys who were not on this forum to come over to their computer and have a look. This went on for a few days and eventually my supervisor happened to get invited to take a peek.
No-one really considered that my supervisor was a part owner in the company. I mean, they knew, but they never really thought that he would be more interested in protecting his stake in the company than being "one of the boys". He was shocked that these idiots were passing around naked pictures of a fellow employee (they weren't but hey, close enough) so he went straight to the boss. The forum was blocked.
Everyone who had looked at the pictures was suspended for a week without pay. One of them complained about this, saying that they didn't put the pictures on the site, that this girl did, and why wasn't she being suspended? He was told to drop it, wouldn't, so he was fired.
Later, they had a quiet word with the girl and recommended she not come back after xmas.. and she agreed.
No.. you just didn't RTFA. The jury was presented with the law and most likely told what all juries are told "don't think for yourself, just blindly apply the law as written". The law specifically says that if you're using a computer for activity that you haven't been authorized to use it for then you're committing a felony. The thing that really should get him off is that they never published an acceptable use policy.
Umm.. corporates justify filtering by saying "if we don't do this we could be sued". They justify *everything* like that. And yeah, maybe you can stay working in little shops where they just don't give a shit.
Every geek worth his geek-badge has bypassed the company web-filter. According to this law, that's hacking. That whole "theft of services from office" part was overturned but only because they couldn't show his work had actually suffered from his actions.. whereas if all you do at work is post on Slashdot and your work suffers, you could be charged with a crime.
So yeah, basically, if you have an employer who is a big enough dick, most of us are criminals.
I've noticed a lot of sites lately (I stumble) that feed non-advertising images from the same urls as adverts. The result is that adblock+ blocks them.. and without those images the article is worthless. I expect this will continue and any article where the point is "hey, look at this" will require a temporary disabling of adblock+ and the display of ads.
Ahh, that reminds me. Few years back I did some reverse engineering of Commander Keen using DOSBox.
I tapped the emulation loop and wrote replacement functions for each address. So, for example, whenever address 0x1713 of the Keen segment was executed the function add_monster_1() would be called. It would do its thing and, if I had translated it correctly, the game would appear unchanged. I did this for a lot of functions:
The result was much more enlightening than reading asm code. For example, John Carmack used the same code for doors in the game as he did for monsters. In a sense, doors *were* monsters, they just didn't have as complex "thinking" as some of the other monsters in the game. I could also confirm that there were no more "cheat keys" or secret levels in the game than the ones that had already been advertised:)
I later tried to convert this to compilable source code using libSDL for the graphics but that project has been lost to me.. it's probably floating around on one of my old linux machines.
You Are Not A Lawyer, and you should warn people before posting legal advice
If you live in a highly litigious society like the US. The rest of us think you're a fucking moron if you get your legal advice from Slashdot and deserve anything that results from such.
Yeah, you're not getting it. Because we can't synthesize really long DNA strands with any sort of accuracy yet, DNA Origami was invented. You take some long single strand of DNA that you can get via other means and for which you know the sequence. You then synthesize short DNA fragments that will bind to the sequence as specific points. This causes the DNA to fold up into a mostly predictable shape. The problem is that the most ready supply of long single strands of DNA with known sequence is viruses. Making anything out of virus DNA kinda makes it a little dangerous for, oh, say, drug delivery in the human body.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh. Please learn what "force" means. Hint: it involves guns and courts and jails. No-one is telling authors they must "give something away because somebody else thinks it would be a good choice" or they will be thrown in prison. However, authors are saying they have the exclusive right to make copies of their books and that other people should be imprisoned (after refusing to pay hefty fines) if they dare try to step on that exclusive right.
You simply cannot make a freedom argument for copyright.
Can you recommend one that doesn't cost more than 300 books?
Pages 211 and 216 must have been really good!
http://books.google.com.au/books?printsec=frontcover&id=zmpxV1ygjvsC
"To the end of the solar system .. the story of the Nuclear Rocket." By James A. Dewar
Every page appears to be there. Thanks Google!
Ya know, I really don't have much of a problem with laws to stop people being harassed, sexually, in the work place. What I have a problem with is the incessant "we want to avoid a sexual harassment lawsuit, so you have to submit to .. [whatever they want this week]" .. and, frankly, that goes for any other sort of lawsuit too. Somehow "sexual harassment" in the workplace got confused with "being offended by sex" in the workplace. Here, in Australia, they've extended sexual harassment to be a subset of a bigger crock of shit, "creating a hostile workplace". I guess this was supposed to stop bullying. The laws are deliberately open ended and poorly worded, and employers are deathly afraid of them.
Really? A girl puts naked pictures of herself on the internet. She has no problem with her co-workers looking at them. Said co-workers only show the pictures to people who are similarly minded. The fear of litigation causes the girl to lose her job and the co-workers get reprimanded, one of them gets fired too. How can you not come to the conclusion that the law did more harm than good?
Absolutely man. If you choose to have a wife and kids and save for retirement with your white picket fence and your yellow dog, yes, you do gotta get up and go to work every day, and if you don't take shit you'll get fired, or, worse yet, not get that promotion so you can buy more worthless crap than you did last year to make yourself feel worthwhile. But that's your choice.
|Read|
Cisco is the very definition of not giving a shit.
WTF is Tivoli? You mean IBM Tivoli? Are you trying to say IBM doesn't filter? Are you kidding me?
Honestly, I've never worked anywhere that blocked Slashdot. If I did, I'd demand its immediate unblocking and quit if they didn't.
Hehe.. clearly you have never consulted a dominatrix.
:)
I worked at a company of about 40 men and 2 women. One of the women was the owner's wife, the other was the receptionist.
The receptionist was a "geek girl" and hung out on some overclocker forums, and so did a bunch of the guys. This girl decides it would be fun to post naked pictures of herself on this forum. The guys totally fell for the bait and started inviting guys who were not on this forum to come over to their computer and have a look. This went on for a few days and eventually my supervisor happened to get invited to take a peek.
No-one really considered that my supervisor was a part owner in the company. I mean, they knew, but they never really thought that he would be more interested in protecting his stake in the company than being "one of the boys". He was shocked that these idiots were passing around naked pictures of a fellow employee (they weren't but hey, close enough) so he went straight to the boss. The forum was blocked.
Everyone who had looked at the pictures was suspended for a week without pay. One of them complained about this, saying that they didn't put the pictures on the site, that this girl did, and why wasn't she being suspended? He was told to drop it, wouldn't, so he was fired.
Later, they had a quiet word with the girl and recommended she not come back after xmas.. and she agreed.
Thankfully the courts were not involved.
Sexual harassment laws make hostile workplaces.
Who's network do you use?
You might want to invest in a 3G plan.. and a tinfoil hat.
Bah. Those sites are banned because:
1) it clearly isn't work related.
2) everyone is afraid of sexual harassment laws.
and, let's not forget:
3) people will accept just about any conditions of employment.
Cause we're all slaves.
It's only a misdemeanor when money changes hands. Solicitation of prostitution is a misdemeanor no matter how kinky the sex.
As for why solicitation of prostitution is a misdemeanor.. dude, it's the USA.. they're puritans.
No.. you just didn't RTFA. The jury was presented with the law and most likely told what all juries are told "don't think for yourself, just blindly apply the law as written". The law specifically says that if you're using a computer for activity that you haven't been authorized to use it for then you're committing a felony. The thing that really should get him off is that they never published an acceptable use policy.
Umm.. corporates justify filtering by saying "if we don't do this we could be sued". They justify *everything* like that. And yeah, maybe you can stay working in little shops where they just don't give a shit.
No company. He was working for the state, the "Shelby City Wastewater Treatment Plant".
Every geek worth his geek-badge has bypassed the company web-filter. According to this law, that's hacking. That whole "theft of services from office" part was overturned but only because they couldn't show his work had actually suffered from his actions.. whereas if all you do at work is post on Slashdot and your work suffers, you could be charged with a crime.
So yeah, basically, if you have an employer who is a big enough dick, most of us are criminals.
I've noticed a lot of sites lately (I stumble) that feed non-advertising images from the same urls as adverts. The result is that adblock+ blocks them.. and without those images the article is worthless. I expect this will continue and any article where the point is "hey, look at this" will require a temporary disabling of adblock+ and the display of ads.
Ahh, that reminds me. Few years back I did some reverse engineering of Commander Keen using DOSBox.
I tapped the emulation loop and wrote replacement functions for each address. So, for example, whenever address 0x1713 of the Keen segment was executed the function add_monster_1() would be called. It would do its thing and, if I had translated it correctly, the game would appear unchanged. I did this for a lot of functions:
http://www.quantumg.net/keen1.c.txt
The result was much more enlightening than reading asm code. For example, John Carmack used the same code for doors in the game as he did for monsters. In a sense, doors *were* monsters, they just didn't have as complex "thinking" as some of the other monsters in the game. I could also confirm that there were no more "cheat keys" or secret levels in the game than the ones that had already been advertised :)
I later tried to convert this to compilable source code using libSDL for the graphics but that project has been lost to me.. it's probably floating around on one of my old linux machines.
classic 4 eva.
It'll never die.
You Are Not A Lawyer, and you should warn people before posting legal advice
If you live in a highly litigious society like the US. The rest of us think you're a fucking moron if you get your legal advice from Slashdot and deserve anything that results from such.
Yeah, you're not getting it. Because we can't synthesize really long DNA strands with any sort of accuracy yet, DNA Origami was invented. You take some long single strand of DNA that you can get via other means and for which you know the sequence. You then synthesize short DNA fragments that will bind to the sequence as specific points. This causes the DNA to fold up into a mostly predictable shape. The problem is that the most ready supply of long single strands of DNA with known sequence is viruses. Making anything out of virus DNA kinda makes it a little dangerous for, oh, say, drug delivery in the human body.