Why the hell would who care? If your question is, why would people who worked for years and years on a project be a little sad if they had their project taken down and the only way they could put it back up was to put a legal fight.. I think maybe you're capable of figuring that out for yourself. If you mean, why would a court care that they were using pseudonyms and not their real names? Because that's the thing about pseudonyms, anyone can claim to be the owner of them and the court can't tell who is lying.
I've seen a bunch of "open source" game projects where the developers use pseudonyms to contribute. A few of these projects don't even have any contact information to get in touch with the developers. This basically makes their licensing pointless. Anyone can slap the GPL or a BSD-alike license on a bit of code, but it doesn't mean anything unless someone is willing to stand up and claim copyright on the code.. and that means a real human with a legal name. Throwing some code, that you value, out into the world without your name on it isn't philanthropy, it's just stupidity. If someone wants to shut down one of these projects, all they have to do is claim that they wrote it. They then can write up a DCMA takedown notice and the actual authors have no way to prove that they are the legitimate copyright owners.
Why? Eve Online is one of the few games I've used where they have gotten DirectX to play nicely with the rest of the window management. Run Eve in a window and you can move your mouse around from it's window to every other window, including your web browser, and there's no problem. It even goes into the task bar as a normal window. I, personally, play Eve on a second computer which I have connected up to my primary computer via Synergy. I play it full screen, and yet, moving the mouse from my main machine to the machine running Eve is perfect. It's seamless. It's like they actually tested their shit before they threw it onto the market.
So yeah, they'd be better off dumping their broken in-game browser, but not to replace it, just because there's no need for it anymore.
"segregated" and "dedesegregated" do not mean the same thing. There's a history which is captured by the second word which is not captured by the first. Although "dedesegregated" and "resegregated" have much the same meaning.
uh huh. Ya know why the unix dictionary file doesn't contain every word in the english language? Because it can't. It's a productive system. There's an infinite number of words.
For example, 'desegregated' means something like: something was segregated and now it isn't. And segregated means that, some time in the past, someone decided to segregate. If they decide to do that again, well then it's resegregated. And what happens to it when you undo that segregation? You get deresegregated. What happens if they decide to segregate again? reresegregated? then dereresegregated? Is there a limit? No. Language is awesome.
So long as they knew that this was the system before accepting the contract, that's fine. And, ya know, they're free to quit if they change their mind later.
I don't doubt you're right.. I just find it amusing that you're so high and mighty about the "facts" when all you have to back up your argument is a study from 2001 that says the opposite of what you're claiming.
"if you don't like it leave" is the catch cry of the nationalist "my country, right or wrong" crowd. "if you don't like it, fix it" is the right attitude but it requires you to first accept that our country isn't perfect.
Then get out of your little self-constructed world and listen. Turn on 4KQ or any of the other "mainstream" talk radio stations. Note: youth radio doesn't count. Have a talk to people who use words like "Americanized" with a straight face. There's plenty of people out there who think "decency" exists and should be protected. These are the crazies that populate our country. Just because you and I are hip cosmopolitans doesn't mean Australia is no longer a backwater. For fuck sake, gays still get their cars egged by their neighbours.
Obesity and diabetes are becoming major health problems in our society and we need to get them down.
And the professionalization of sport is no way to do that. When I was a kid we went out and played sport for fun - typically with little or no adult supervision. Now kids can't even kick a football around without some overzealous phys-ed teacher taking an unnatural interest in what could be their next big score. Even the once purely recreational codes such as "touch" football and indoor soccer/cricket have since become serious codes with commercial and nationalist interests.
I believe what we tell our kids these days is that students go to uni to get HECS debt when they could be earning big bucks doing trade jobs with just a high school education.. the suckers. The whole university = occupational training equation has been drummed into them so much that the current generation of university administrators believe it too. Our institutes of higher learning will soon be TAFE colleges.
Here's a poll for you, it's called voting. We've never made censorship an election issue. Maybe our next election will change that, but until it does, we've made our position pretty clear.
I don't base it on "nothing". I base it on living here. The closest we've ever had to a protest against the banning of books, films and other media is when Margaret Pomeranz from The Movie Show attempted to screen a DVD that had been refused classification and the police intervened, and she complied. The protest subsequently fizzled. That's it. That's the most successful protesting that has been done regarding film censorship in this country. It's pretty obvious that people either don't care or are in support of the legislation.
I am speaking to the politicians of course, not the regular people.
You fail. The voices of reason that you have been hearing here on Slashdot are the minority. The vast majority of Australians think the Internet needs filtering. They actually like the fact that certain films are banned in Australia. These are the people who had police intervene earlier this year to prevent a Bill Henson exhibition from showing images that were later given a PG rating by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. Had the classification board bowed to public pressure, Henson and the gallery could have been facing criminal charges.
We have exactly the government that we deserve. For those of us who want better, we have to get out there and do something. No-one will do it for us.
Similarly, and to bring this back on-topic, the space activities sponsored by our government are a direct result of the work put in by academics to make the case that it is to the benefit of our country to do so.
Well, in the case of Yahoo, sure, they've already gone public. But for startups? Getting acquired is the dream. You don't have to deal with those bastard accountants, and everyone gets a payout.
Slashdot Mirror
Why the hell would who care? If your question is, why would people who worked for years and years on a project be a little sad if they had their project taken down and the only way they could put it back up was to put a legal fight.. I think maybe you're capable of figuring that out for yourself. If you mean, why would a court care that they were using pseudonyms and not their real names? Because that's the thing about pseudonyms, anyone can claim to be the owner of them and the court can't tell who is lying.
I've seen a bunch of "open source" game projects where the developers use pseudonyms to contribute. A few of these projects don't even have any contact information to get in touch with the developers. This basically makes their licensing pointless. Anyone can slap the GPL or a BSD-alike license on a bit of code, but it doesn't mean anything unless someone is willing to stand up and claim copyright on the code.. and that means a real human with a legal name. Throwing some code, that you value, out into the world without your name on it isn't philanthropy, it's just stupidity. If someone wants to shut down one of these projects, all they have to do is claim that they wrote it. They then can write up a DCMA takedown notice and the actual authors have no way to prove that they are the legitimate copyright owners.
Why? Eve Online is one of the few games I've used where they have gotten DirectX to play nicely with the rest of the window management. Run Eve in a window and you can move your mouse around from it's window to every other window, including your web browser, and there's no problem. It even goes into the task bar as a normal window. I, personally, play Eve on a second computer which I have connected up to my primary computer via Synergy. I play it full screen, and yet, moving the mouse from my main machine to the machine running Eve is perfect. It's seamless. It's like they actually tested their shit before they threw it onto the market.
So yeah, they'd be better off dumping their broken in-game browser, but not to replace it, just because there's no need for it anymore.
Please.
People manage to sell plenty of CAVE systems too.
"segregated" and "dedesegregated" do not mean the same thing. There's a history which is captured by the second word which is not captured by the first. Although "dedesegregated" and "resegregated" have much the same meaning.
Antidisestablishmentarianists.
But it's not all with the left hand.
uh huh. Ya know why the unix dictionary file doesn't contain every word in the english language? Because it can't. It's a productive system. There's an infinite number of words.
For example, 'desegregated' means something like: something was segregated and now it isn't. And segregated means that, some time in the past, someone decided to segregate. If they decide to do that again, well then it's resegregated. And what happens to it when you undo that segregation? You get deresegregated. What happens if they decide to segregate again? reresegregated? then dereresegregated? Is there a limit? No. Language is awesome.
So long as they knew that this was the system before accepting the contract, that's fine. And, ya know, they're free to quit if they change their mind later.
I get paid to post on Slashdot.
I don't doubt you're right.. I just find it amusing that you're so high and mighty about the "facts" when all you have to back up your argument is a study from 2001 that says the opposite of what you're claiming.
What facts? The only evidence you presented supported my assertion.
"if you don't like it leave" is the catch cry of the nationalist "my country, right or wrong" crowd. "if you don't like it, fix it" is the right attitude but it requires you to first accept that our country isn't perfect.
I knew it was only a matter of time before you became all nationalist.
Dude. The majority of Australians don't even have internet access. Obviously the comments on a web site are going to be pro-internet.
Then get out of your little self-constructed world and listen. Turn on 4KQ or any of the other "mainstream" talk radio stations. Note: youth radio doesn't count. Have a talk to people who use words like "Americanized" with a straight face. There's plenty of people out there who think "decency" exists and should be protected. These are the crazies that populate our country. Just because you and I are hip cosmopolitans doesn't mean Australia is no longer a backwater. For fuck sake, gays still get their cars egged by their neighbours.
Obesity and diabetes are becoming major health problems in our society and we need to get them down.
And the professionalization of sport is no way to do that. When I was a kid we went out and played sport for fun - typically with little or no adult supervision. Now kids can't even kick a football around without some overzealous phys-ed teacher taking an unnatural interest in what could be their next big score. Even the once purely recreational codes such as "touch" football and indoor soccer/cricket have since become serious codes with commercial and nationalist interests.
I believe what we tell our kids these days is that students go to uni to get HECS debt when they could be earning big bucks doing trade jobs with just a high school education.. the suckers. The whole university = occupational training equation has been drummed into them so much that the current generation of university administrators believe it too. Our institutes of higher learning will soon be TAFE colleges.
Here's a poll for you, it's called voting. We've never made censorship an election issue. Maybe our next election will change that, but until it does, we've made our position pretty clear.
I don't base it on "nothing". I base it on living here. The closest we've ever had to a protest against the banning of books, films and other media is when Margaret Pomeranz from The Movie Show attempted to screen a DVD that had been refused classification and the police intervened, and she complied. The protest subsequently fizzled. That's it. That's the most successful protesting that has been done regarding film censorship in this country. It's pretty obvious that people either don't care or are in support of the legislation.
Yes, it's a dream for the shareholders. Ya know, the people the company exists to serve?
You're a troll but I'm going to feed you.
I am speaking to the politicians of course, not the regular people.
You fail. The voices of reason that you have been hearing here on Slashdot are the minority. The vast majority of Australians think the Internet needs filtering. They actually like the fact that certain films are banned in Australia. These are the people who had police intervene earlier this year to prevent a Bill Henson exhibition from showing images that were later given a PG rating by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. Had the classification board bowed to public pressure, Henson and the gallery could have been facing criminal charges.
We have exactly the government that we deserve. For those of us who want better, we have to get out there and do something. No-one will do it for us.
Similarly, and to bring this back on-topic, the space activities sponsored by our government are a direct result of the work put in by academics to make the case that it is to the benefit of our country to do so.
Well, in the case of Yahoo, sure, they've already gone public. But for startups? Getting acquired is the dream. You don't have to deal with those bastard accountants, and everyone gets a payout.
It was a simple question.
Why did you reply to me as if I was the PhD student in question?
Was it just a mistake?
You're like the second person to reply to me as if I was the dipshit who posted this Ask Slashdot. I'm not.
Or is the new comment system so fucked that people can't tell who they are replying to now.
Episode I scale fail. Let's hope it doesn't evolve into Episode III scale fail.