Maybe the EU saying no to software patents will have some sort of influence on the US. Especially if people in Europe could make it a point of contention.
You could even make them wander around for a few days if their head was crushed, just to wierd people out.
They mention primarily animal-based robots, why don't they try combining the better aspects of multiple creatures into one robot and have, maybe, a crobster or a finchroach?
It is interesting either way.
Copyright was designed to give the creators of some kind of intellectual property a reasonable amount of time to profit from their creation before opening it to the rest of society for use in derivative works, not to tightly control use of one's works, even long after they may have been dead.
Its bad enough Taiwan's copyright duration was increased so much...10 years does seem a little short, but 50 seems too much, its still better than 70 or 99 though. It's good to see a country not give in to what was most likely pressure from the media.
Re:Flash-only unfortunate?
on
Fahrenheit
·
· Score: 1
Unless your a hardcore Lynx user, then you might be out of luck...
Just doesn't seem useful enough idea to spend god know how much money on.
Like someone already said, we have drivers' licenses. Funny also that the sun microsystems guy was in attendence as if to say, "Sun servers would be perfrect for handling such great amounts of data such as this." Might not be too bad if they were truly optional, cause only people who were for crypto backdoors and such would get them.
Still its far too easy to look into the 'getting groceries is optional' part a little harder and see id card scanners inside our houses we need to swipe our ID cards through to leave our house.
This would be a semi-great alternative for people who have no need to drive or choose not to drive but still want a viable ID to use for writing checks or something...
On a complete opposite end of that though, but still of a dubious nature, they could be disabled remotely so that people highly suspect in a crime could be unable to leave buildings, this however, combined with someting like the SSSCA and DMCA could lock you in your house for inviting a friend over to listen to a new mp3 you somehow got from somewhere. Scary and not likely, but I doubt that noone of an opposite viewpoint never thought of it first.
"To allay the fears of some House members that the hastily drafted bill could have unforeseen consequences, particularly with regard to privacy, members of the House Judiciary Committee agreed that those provisions would expire in 2003."
2003 is a long time, but atleast they are thinking ahead and not just implementing a bill that can be widely interpreted. If they are concerned about privacy, they may have gotten some of our messages after all. The next big test will be to see how authorties will test the limits of the bill and/or what the bill allows. I have not read all of the articles or looked at the bills' text but from what i have read, i have not seen anything about having authorization to do surveillence, or just cause...can they spy on someoe who simply 'hasn't got a good look to them'?
Hopefully, they will think a bit before trying installing cameras in our homes, cars, offices, etc.
"One sought to amend a provision -- aimed at preventing cyber-attacks by terrorists -- that would permit surveillance of anyone who accesses a computer 'without authorization.'"
It is these people who scare me, whose senator made this day-brightening, wonderful statement?
By saying that they want backdoors in encryption, they are basically saying that if this gets passed that there are atleast two ways in...and knowing that, i think many more people would try to crack it knowing that their odds of success have just doubled. Theres no feasable way to enforce this either unless they have something set up to decrypt everyones transmissions (using this backdoor) and flag those messages that cannot be decrypted. This would not only mean that they had the ability to read whatevery you send, but that they may actually be doing it in one form or another to all things! And this would be unlikable.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe the EU saying no to software patents will have some sort of influence on the US. Especially if people in Europe could make it a point of contention.
You could even make them wander around for a few days if their head was crushed, just to wierd people out.
They mention primarily animal-based robots, why don't they try combining the better aspects of multiple creatures into one robot and have, maybe, a crobster or a finchroach? It is interesting either way.
Do lengthy loading screens really need to click?
Its bad enough Taiwan's copyright duration was increased so much...10 years does seem a little short, but 50 seems too much, its still better than 70 or 99 though. It's good to see a country not give in to what was most likely pressure from the media.
Unless your a hardcore Lynx user, then you might be out of luck...
if this were to pass (which pray it will not, but still...) would it be a violation of the DMCA to have your firewall/router deny their packet floods?
it dose not seem to different from videotape, you can just replicate it easier.
Just doesn't seem useful enough idea to spend god know how much money on.
Like someone already said, we have drivers' licenses. Funny also that the sun microsystems guy was in attendence as if to say, "Sun servers would be perfrect for handling such great amounts of data such as this." Might not be too bad if they were truly optional, cause only people who were for crypto backdoors and such would get them.
Still its far too easy to look into the 'getting groceries is optional' part a little harder and see id card scanners inside our houses we need to swipe our ID cards through to leave our house.
This would be a semi-great alternative for people who have no need to drive or choose not to drive but still want a viable ID to use for writing checks or something...
On a complete opposite end of that though, but still of a dubious nature, they could be disabled remotely so that people highly suspect in a crime could be unable to leave buildings, this however, combined with someting like the SSSCA and DMCA could lock you in your house for inviting a friend over to listen to a new mp3 you somehow got from somewhere. Scary and not likely, but I doubt that noone of an opposite viewpoint never thought of it first.
"To allay the fears of some House members that the hastily drafted bill could have unforeseen consequences, particularly with regard to privacy, members of the House Judiciary Committee agreed that those provisions would expire in 2003."
2003 is a long time, but atleast they are thinking ahead and not just implementing a bill that can be widely interpreted. If they are concerned about privacy, they may have gotten some of our messages after all. The next big test will be to see how authorties will test the limits of the bill and/or what the bill allows. I have not read all of the articles or looked at the bills' text but from what i have read, i have not seen anything about having authorization to do surveillence, or just cause...can they spy on someoe who simply 'hasn't got a good look to them'?
Hopefully, they will think a bit before trying installing cameras in our homes, cars, offices, etc.
"One sought to amend a provision -- aimed at preventing cyber-attacks by terrorists -- that would permit surveillance of anyone who accesses a computer 'without authorization.'"
It is these people who scare me, whose senator made this day-brightening, wonderful statement?
Turn off the volume so that they cant get you for doing a public performance of a copyrighted work.
Is it just me or have there been many more 4's and 5's today than in quite a while.
You do have to admit that a lobster named Hippo is pretty funny.
What about Doraemon.
By saying that they want backdoors in encryption, they are basically saying that if this gets passed that there are atleast two ways in...and knowing that, i think many more people would try to crack it knowing that their odds of success have just doubled. Theres no feasable way to enforce this either unless they have something set up to decrypt everyones transmissions (using this backdoor) and flag those messages that cannot be decrypted. This would not only mean that they had the ability to read whatevery you send, but that they may actually be doing it in one form or another to all things! And this would be unlikable.