That Moz problem she mentioned has bugged me for a long time on every platform: the problem is that real player thinks a file with the extension.rpm is its territory. I wonder if Real will keep claiming "rpm" or give it up?
Not to feed the troll, but according to this, Norway has a per capita GDP of $31,800, a Gini index of.26, and $68 billion in exports vs. $37 billion in imports. Not too shabby for a bunch of fjord-huggers -- and they're Gini index sure kicks the US's ass (we're at something like.43)
Every time we buy a product that was advertised on TV, the cost of the TV advertisements is being passed on to us. Fortunately for Americans, thanks to the free market that money goes to corporate boards that aren't accountable to us, rather than to some silly "public broadcasting concern".
Hey, see that link in the article? That's right, the very first one?
Click it, and it leads to...
..wait for it...
That's right! The same old joke you just reposted! Tell him what he's won, Rod!
He's one a 5-day, 4-night stay in beautiful RTFALand! We'll fly him and a guest non stop to a room where he can sit and actually read the articles before posting ancient jokes we've all seen before that are referenced by the article itself!
how high would you need to fly at what lattitude and at what time of year to get out of earth shadow?
Any trig gurus please improve this for me:
Let T = radius of the earth Let L = given angle of latitutde Let X = "altitude" above the center of the earth to escape the earth's shadow Let A = altitude above the earth's surface.
Now assume it is an equinox (thus the sun's rays are tangent to the earth at the poles), we want to find:
A
A = X - T since radii of a circle are equal
X = T * sec(L) X is our hypotenuse thus
A = T * sec(L) - T or perhaps more attractively:
T * (sec(L) - 1)
Something tells me there's a way to simplify that but I can't remember it.
For days other than an equinox, recalculate a new lattitude from the point of tangency of the Sun's rays to the earth and convert to standard lattitude
Disclaimer: this doesn't entirely work because the sun's rays are not parallel, but it should be pretty close.
And, btw, tracing MAC addresses across the Internet is not "almost impossible" but "by definition impossible". Traffic on any internet (but especially The Internet) crosses routers (that's what the "inter" part refers to). Routers kill OSI Level 2 identifiers, like hardware addresses.
what about all the data that is lost forever because there is simply not enough paper to record it on
Well, from what I've read of Eco he would consider that one of paper's chief advantages. When preserving information is more difficult, you only record things worth recording, rather than the pointless dataglutting that we do today.
For example, Slashdot counts for something like 13 sites - the individual sections (like apple.slashdot.org - I'm not listing all of them)
What about boxes like the ones where I work that run many (dozens, hundreds even) domains on one physical server? That's where the real difference creeps in; it's how 60-whatever % of sites run on Linux while 60-whatever % of boxes running web servers run Windows. Lots of the Linux boxes run multiple sites (and I don't just mean www.foo.com and images.foo.com; I mean they run www.foo.com and www.bar.com and www.baz.com and www.qxt.com on the single box).
So, take one of my boxes at work: it currently hosts 53 second-level domains and about 200 subdomains from them. The one I'm thinking of has its own class C netblock, but we have similar ones that just have a single IP address for their dozens of sites. Do you want that counted as one server, as 53, or as 200? Netcraft says it's 200. Port80 says it's 1. I'd like to count it as 53. Netcraft's way tells you what people who make web hosting decisions like. Port80's way tells you what people who make hardware and software buying decisions like.
all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
This is why I distinguished between music and computer software upthread. Computer software enjoys additional copyright protections beyond that given to other content of electronic media.
Fair use allows backup copies. When you give away or sell the origional copy, those mp3s are no longer backup copies, and therefor they are infringing.
That would make more sense, wouldn't it?
However, that's not how copyright works. Copyright only matters when the actual reproduction occurs. A later change of ownership of the original media does not retroactively change the legality of a given copy. That works both ways -- if I duplicate a CD without authorization and then by the CD later, the earlier copy doesn't magically become legal.
Tell me again how this is legal? Simply because I own the physical media of my backups and there's no requirement for me to destroy it?
Yes, that's exactly why. You own the physical media of your backups, and there is no requirement for you to destroy its contents.
Does it sound unreasonable or illogical that the legality of giving you a CD depends on whether it was the copy or the original? It does to me, but that's still how the law stands.
To parent and uncle poster, yes, I am sure it is legal to give away or resell a CD you bought. You do not have to give up any backup media you created when you do that. What you can't do is give away the copy you made. Remember, it's not like software: you're not licensing anything. You're buying recording media holding some content with legal limitations on the content's redistribution.
Yes, it's ridiculous. But it's copyright law as it now stands.
You do know they just sent out notices to a whole bunch of people they saw sharing illegally, right? Do you expect them to go through all tens of thousands of people?
Ummm... yes, I do expect people to make sure they have the right person before they sue. Maybe I'm old-fashioned that way.
they're within their legal right to protect their copyrighted works.
Here's what's cute to me: if I rip and encode a cd and give you the resulting mp3s, that's illegal. But, if I rip and encode a cd, keep the mp3s and give or sell you the CD, that's legal. Something is wrong there.
Record distributers do not have a "right" to make money by distributing music, though they have a right to try. Musicians do not have a "right" to make money recording and performing music, though they have a right to try.
I'll be perfectly honest that I support "pirating" music (though I've never done it) because *anything* that makes big record studios lose money is GOOD. They have been nothing but a negative force in music since the 1930's.
We no longer need centralized A&R, production, or distribution. EVERY SINGLE THING a record studio does can be done more efficiently with commodity hardware, software, and communications. Anything that moves us closer to cutting out unneccessary middlemen, even if it tramples on the imagined "rights" of music rentiers, is good.
Depends on what declension we're pretending "virus" would be. If we go with second declension, it would be "viri", with 4th, it would be "virus" (long "u"). I like "vires" since the word comes from "vis". "virii" seems to come from the idea that it's an altered second declension like "vir", which is silly but no more silly than any other retro-latinization we do.
KDE 3.x is definatly professional grade. XFCE4 is definatly ready for the desktop.
Why is "definitely" so universally misspelled? I'm not busting this guy's balls or anything, I'm just curious why "definately" or "definatly" are how most people spell that word.
Would you call an unbounded line "infinate"?
Disclaimer:This post shall not be construed as an attack on acidtrip101, his family, his friends, nor an attempt to describe the marital status of his parents at the time of his conception. Nor is it a claim by the post's author to be able to avoid all errors of spelling and grammar.
Somebody mod this back up or metamod the idiots who called this flamebait. It's a perfectly valid criticism of WalMart. WalMart employees are paid so little they have to go on public assistance: the rest of us subsidize WalMart's profitability.
Isn't there at least a division between application software and OS software?
Depends on how good the lawyers involved are. The principle, at least, is that consumers should never be confused by product names; I think if you started calling your word processor "Apple OS X" you might not get very far, because frankly that would confuse consumers, even though "Apple OS X" is an operating system and you're making applications software.
Some other post mentioned OS-9. That's a good example of another principle I forgot to mention: the more it sounds like a serial number, the less likely you are to get trademark protection (consider that Intel named its 586 the "Pentium" because USPTO said they couldn't trademark numbers).
That falls into your 'made up' exemption - the telephony company could name its software Nero without any problems, but Nero Burning ROM is a coined phrase.
But "Nero" is not a made up word (well, maybe Claudia made it up in 15 AD, but it's certainly a common word by now). My point was that this hypothetical "Nero Telephony Suite" probably would not survive a challenge by Ahead Software, even though a CD burning suite and a telephony suite seem far enough apart that you wouldn't confuse the two; they're both close enough as far as USPTO has often been concerned.
Slashdot Mirror
That Moz problem she mentioned has bugged me for a long time on every platform: the problem is that real player thinks a file with the extension .rpm is its territory. I wonder if Real will keep claiming "rpm" or give it up?
Good catch, all. I forgot to look at the date.
Not to feed the troll, but according to this, Norway has a per capita GDP of $31,800, a Gini index of .26, and $68 billion in exports vs. $37 billion in imports. Not too shabby for a bunch of fjord-huggers -- and they're Gini index sure kicks the US's ass (we're at something like .43)
Well, this might be a good example of how they can prove they own the name. To quote the relevant part:
I believe that Specialized Systems Consultants is the "SSC" in question.Every time we buy a product that was advertised on TV, the cost of the TV advertisements is being passed on to us. Fortunately for Americans, thanks to the free market that money goes to corporate boards that aren't accountable to us, rather than to some silly "public broadcasting concern".
Hey, see that link in the article? That's right, the very first one?
Click it, and it leads to...
..wait for it...
That's right! The same old joke you just reposted! Tell him what he's won, Rod!
He's one a 5-day, 4-night stay in beautiful RTFALand! We'll fly him and a guest non stop to a room where he can sit and actually read the articles before posting ancient jokes we've all seen before that are referenced by the article itself!
Any trig gurus please improve this for me:
Let T = radius of the earth
Let L = given angle of latitutde
Let X = "altitude" above the center of the earth to escape the earth's shadow
Let A = altitude above the earth's surface.
Now assume it is an equinox (thus the sun's rays are tangent to the earth at the poles), we want to find:
Something tells me there's a way to simplify that but I can't remember it.
For days other than an equinox, recalculate a new lattitude from the point of tangency of the Sun's rays to the earth and convert to standard lattitude
Disclaimer: this doesn't entirely work because the sun's rays are not parallel, but it should be pretty close.
Modems don't have MAC addresses.
And, btw, tracing MAC addresses across the Internet is not "almost impossible" but "by definition impossible". Traffic on any internet (but especially The Internet) crosses routers (that's what the "inter" part refers to). Routers kill OSI Level 2 identifiers, like hardware addresses.
Well, from what I've read of Eco he would consider that one of paper's chief advantages. When preserving information is more difficult, you only record things worth recording, rather than the pointless dataglutting that we do today.
What about boxes like the ones where I work that run many (dozens, hundreds even) domains on one physical server? That's where the real difference creeps in; it's how 60-whatever % of sites run on Linux while 60-whatever % of boxes running web servers run Windows. Lots of the Linux boxes run multiple sites (and I don't just mean www.foo.com and images.foo.com; I mean they run www.foo.com and www.bar.com and www.baz.com and www.qxt.com on the single box).
So, take one of my boxes at work: it currently hosts 53 second-level domains and about 200 subdomains from them. The one I'm thinking of has its own class C netblock, but we have similar ones that just have a single IP address for their dozens of sites. Do you want that counted as one server, as 53, or as 200? Netcraft says it's 200. Port80 says it's 1. I'd like to count it as 53. Netcraft's way tells you what people who make web hosting decisions like. Port80's way tells you what people who make hardware and software buying decisions like.
Try US Code title 17 chapter 1 section 109 which covers the transfer of copies of phonorecords (and distinguishes phonorecords from computer programs).
This is why I distinguished between music and computer software upthread. Computer software enjoys additional copyright protections beyond that given to other content of electronic media.
That would make more sense, wouldn't it?
However, that's not how copyright works. Copyright only matters when the actual reproduction occurs. A later change of ownership of the original media does not retroactively change the legality of a given copy. That works both ways -- if I duplicate a CD without authorization and then by the CD later, the earlier copy doesn't magically become legal.
Don't look for common sense in copyright...
Yes, that's exactly why. You own the physical media of your backups, and there is no requirement for you to destroy its contents.
Does it sound unreasonable or illogical that the legality of giving you a CD depends on whether it was the copy or the original? It does to me, but that's still how the law stands.
To parent and uncle poster, yes, I am sure it is legal to give away or resell a CD you bought. You do not have to give up any backup media you created when you do that. What you can't do is give away the copy you made. Remember, it's not like software: you're not licensing anything. You're buying recording media holding some content with legal limitations on the content's redistribution.
Yes, it's ridiculous. But it's copyright law as it now stands.
Ummm... yes, I do expect people to make sure they have the right person before they sue. Maybe I'm old-fashioned that way.
Here's what's cute to me: if I rip and encode a cd and give you the resulting mp3s, that's illegal. But, if I rip and encode a cd, keep the mp3s and give or sell you the CD, that's legal. Something is wrong there.
Record distributers do not have a "right" to make money by distributing music, though they have a right to try. Musicians do not have a "right" to make money recording and performing music, though they have a right to try.
I'll be perfectly honest that I support "pirating" music (though I've never done it) because *anything* that makes big record studios lose money is GOOD. They have been nothing but a negative force in music since the 1930's.
We no longer need centralized A&R, production, or distribution. EVERY SINGLE THING a record studio does can be done more efficiently with commodity hardware, software, and communications. Anything that moves us closer to cutting out unneccessary middlemen, even if it tramples on the imagined "rights" of music rentiers, is good.
Depends on what declension we're pretending "virus" would be. If we go with second declension, it would be "viri", with 4th, it would be "virus" (long "u"). I like "vires" since the word comes from "vis". "virii" seems to come from the idea that it's an altered second declension like "vir", which is silly but no more silly than any other retro-latinization we do.
The same logic that gave us "virii" would yield "linuces". For that matter, I call the plural of "kleenex" "kleeneces".
The word "anti-Christ" does not appear anywhere in Revelation.
It appears only in John's letters, and there in the plural ("antichrists", referring to anyone who is not Christian).
Revelation is not about the anti-Christ. Revelation does not mention the anti-Christ. Try again, please.
Actually, you can fully disable RPC, it's just that COM and DAC and everything built on them goes with it.
There are a few projects, mostly towards the stable end of beta, that I've used without many hassles.
Why is "definitely" so universally misspelled? I'm not busting this guy's balls or anything, I'm just curious why "definately" or "definatly" are how most people spell that word.
Would you call an unbounded line "infinate"?
Disclaimer:This post shall not be construed as an attack on acidtrip101, his family, his friends, nor an attempt to describe the marital status of his parents at the time of his conception. Nor is it a claim by the post's author to be able to avoid all errors of spelling and grammar.
Somebody mod this back up or metamod the idiots who called this flamebait. It's a perfectly valid criticism of WalMart. WalMart employees are paid so little they have to go on public assistance: the rest of us subsidize WalMart's profitability.
...these guys allow me to upload any linux executable, which they will then execute in a gdb context?
Alfred, prepare the rootkit!
Depends on how good the lawyers involved are. The principle, at least, is that consumers should never be confused by product names; I think if you started calling your word processor "Apple OS X" you might not get very far, because frankly that would confuse consumers, even though "Apple OS X" is an operating system and you're making applications software.
Some other post mentioned OS-9. That's a good example of another principle I forgot to mention: the more it sounds like a serial number, the less likely you are to get trademark protection (consider that Intel named its 586 the "Pentium" because USPTO said they couldn't trademark numbers).
But "Nero" is not a made up word (well, maybe Claudia made it up in 15 AD, but it's certainly a common word by now). My point was that this hypothetical "Nero Telephony Suite" probably would not survive a challenge by Ahead Software, even though a CD burning suite and a telephony suite seem far enough apart that you wouldn't confuse the two; they're both close enough as far as USPTO has often been concerned.