we do enjoy our ping times.:) I'm enrolled at IUPUI, which has the I2/Abilene NOC. Quite an interesting place. In fact, the only thing that slows down our connections is when we ahve to get on the "regular" internet. All kidding aside, I don't think students have access to I2 simply through their connections, though I do know that connections to other I2 nodes goes through the I2 network, which greatly increases speeds for those connections. Usually, only people doing research need to connect to other universities... but sometimes you run across some interesting servers passing traffic along I2;)
Despite your assertions, books do not normally bring riches to the author immediately upon publication. Indeed, I believe something like 1/3 of published authors don't even make minimum wage for their book (if your presume they work 40 hours a week in the number of weeks it took to finish the book). A lifelong copyright means that an author won't be slighted if his book becomes popular 10 or 20 years later.
Don't think this can happen? It did to Tolkien. While LotR wasn't exactly a bomb, it was fairly below the radar in terms of astronomical sales until a resurgence in the United States in the mid-to-late Sixties. Ace books published a version due to a problem with the US copyright, which forced a revision and the "Authorized Edition" that most of us are familiar with. So this was a case of an author who was being left out of the commerce of something he created, which is exactly what a 5 year copyright law would have done.
The point isn't that Stephen King needs to keep making money from the sale of copies of "Carrie" (which is now nearly 30 years old). The point is that it isn't right that someone *else* make money off the sale of Carrie(used books nonwithstanding), unless SK has given them the right (through a publishing contract)
Quoting CD: "I'd imagine they don't want us to go to our local used book stores either? This is the second time they've tried to call Amazon to task for this."
The problem isn't used books. Authors know that used books are useful in spreading their works around, and even though they would like each reader copy to be a fresh purchase, they know their are intangible benefits to used bookstores and libaries.
However, what amazon does is place a used book right next to a new one. Now, I know for most of us the difference is pretty obvious, but for most average users, they simply see a lower a price, and don't think anything more about it. This would be like your local Borders or Barnes and Noble putting a half-priced used book right next to a brand new copy. Given the choice, wouldn't you pick the half-priced book, if it had a fairly new condition? Indeed, used bookstores can often have many mint-condition books.
The point is, there is a reason these are separated, because consumers expect only unused books when the go into a Barnes & Noble, and likewise expect previously owned books when they go to a Half-Price Books.
I don't personally object to amazon having a used bookstore, I just think they need to make it more clear (for instance, having a separate used book listing, where you could search only among the list of used books.) I, for one, have never even checked out the used book section of amazon, because if I can't physically inspect a non-new book, I don't want to buy it.
And, in case anyone mentions it, those discounted books at the front of your store are entirely different matter. They are remainders, book copies that don't sell upon initial publication. These are usually returned to the publisher, but if the store feels the copy could sell as a remainder, the publisher will let the store sell it that way. This way, the publisher doesn't have to pay for a return, and the store still gets some profit out of it. Authors hate it, mostly, (because shoppers in a new bookstore are probably likely to buy their book at full price) but users are, at least, still getting an unused copy.
I think all of these latest innovations in handwriting recognition and "Tablet" PCs are basically aimed at an older market that doesn't have typing ability. Handwriting is a step *back* from typing. I would love to be able to use a keyboard to take tests in college, because my hand cramps up so much... simply replacing the paper with a PDA or Tablet is utterly useless to me.
It took me nearly 30 seconds to figure out this one was a joke. After every other story today was a joke too... well, at least the slashdot crowd hasn't actually pulled one on us... they've just been reporting other april fool's jokes. A slashdot-centred joke would be: windows.slashdot.org.
1. Laws passed by Congress are in no way "limited amendments" to the Constitituion. Laws are laws, amendments are amendments. In fact, according to the Constitution, laws passed by the Congress are *third* in the heirarchy of statutes that govern this land (the Constituion is first, foriegn treaties are second.) To call every law passed by Congress a "constitutional right" is absurd, because you could easily pass a law completely counter that would still be Constitutionally valid... it's vague enough that way.
2. This is indeed a difficult one. Some could (rightfully) argue that the federal government has way too much power. Most of this comes from either limited or wide-range interpretation of the rights of Congress. The responsibilites of Congress are spelled out explicitely... but their is one little line about extending their powers to "necessary and proper" things outside of this core that are required to properly conduct their core responsibilities. What this means is that Congress has a Constitutional directive to pass laws that "promote the progress of Science and useful Arts", and that they have the power to pass ancillary laws to protect that Copyright (which is why I think the DMCA could be able to stand up as Constitutionally valid.)
3. I answered this one in 2.
4. Fair use is indeed something the Congress can extend to the people in regards to Copyright and the Consitution. It does not necessarily follow that they *must* extend that right. Indeed, the founders would have been better off specifying the time allotted rather than saying "limited," which leaves the issue far too vague. Indeed, I think "limited" should define a scope of years, or the author's lifetime, whichever is longer.
Need I remind anyone that the *extension* of copyright (which is technically illegal, since it changes previous copyrights as well) was done to make the US in line with what Europe already does?
I personally think authors should be able to do what they want with their copyrights (like now, when they usually sell them to a publisher) but on their death (and not 70 years later) it reverts to their family, so they can do with it what they wish.
I believe that the software companies should be liable *up to the point that they release a patch that fixes the problems.* Then the owner becomes responsible. This does 3 things.
First, it makes the software company more dilligent about getting all bugs out of software, and worry more about security concerns (which are, shockingly, rarely "bugs" in the software)
Second, it makes the software company work harder at producing a patch that fixes the problem.
Third (and most importantly in my book) it forces system admins to work faster at patching software.
1. World Wide Web Consortium is thy God. Thou shalt have no other gods. 2. Flash is evil, and of the devil. Flash is blaspemy. 3. Javascript can be useful for on-page functions that don't necessarily require a server call, but remember your page still still fundamentally work with no javascript enabled. 4. Images should be used for illustrative purposes, not to show you found a neat image and *never* as a background. 5. Images should be small and reduced to webpage resolutions. 6. Content shouldn't be laborous to read. Black on white text is the best, but at least always make sure to use contrasting colors. 7. Style sheets should always be used (see number 1) but make sure that necessary style pairings (such as colored tables and the text within) are defined in the same scope. A page-declared table color and text/css file declared table text color could cause problems if your style sheet file doesn't load. 8. Design for non-compliant brower protocols *only* if your business depends on it. Private sites should *always* be written to the HTML specs (see #1) all browsers be damned. 9. Do not covet they neighbors hyperlinks. Links should be used in *context* and not in a random listing. Don't say "you can find a link about greyhound adoption *here*." Instead, write either "There is a lot of information about *greyhound adoption*" or "*Greyhound Puppies Inc* has a lot of information about greyhound adoption." All of this results in a page more useable by non-traditional browsers. (see number 1) 10. If you change the color of links, you should make sure that the default colors (blue, purple, red) will show up on your site. Another reason not to use picture backgrounds. Also, don't ever *ever* reverse the color scheme... cool (blue-like) colors for unvisited links, purple or red-like (hot) colors for visited links.
The client is quite different from the corporate system. Granted, I could get paid more in a corporation, but working at a University has several benefits.
1. There is no real pressure to *make money* when directing a project. In the technology sections, the point is generally to make things more efficient, more stable, and more cost-effective. This means upper management decisions are slightly less inane.
2. Easy access to education. I'm one of those people who think when you stop learning, you're dead. Now, this doesn't require formal education, but 3 free credit hours doesn't hurt.
3. Easy job mobility. If I get tired of my job, I can just move to another position, another department, or another line of work entirely. All of this, while still keeping the same health,retirement,etc benefits.
Mainly, that it *takes away* the previously established right to make a single copy for backup purposes. It clearly states that circumventing copy protection is grounds to be in violation of the DMCA. And don't blather on about constitutionality... the right to make a single backup for archive purposes is only spelled out in the 1971 Copyright Act.
Granted, I don't agree with the DMCA, but this device is *very clearly* a violation of it. It's not that it's *used* to make copies of protected material, but that it's *designed* to make copies of protected materials.
Move Futurama and The Family Guy to the soon-to-be vacated 9:00 sunday night slot. Just more proof that entertainment-by-committee just doesn't work.
Completely and utterly missing the point
on
Read the Fine Print
·
· Score: 1
One of the major features of WinXP is its auto-update feature. This is not a feature that most of us on slashdot would use, but for novice home users it's critical that the software (read: bug) updates that are posted be installed as automatically as possible. The whole reason that the problems with MS happened last year was because end users are idiots and both don't know how to properly use email and don't upgrage their software. This is a Good Thing {tm}. Those of us that don't want features like this can always turn them off.
The Afghan drug (and food) crops dried up in a drought, and the Taliban forbade the growing of drug crops to give more useful farmland over to the growth of food. I think this was in 1999 or 2000, but I'm not sure.
but who can take seriously any person who still lives at home with mommy? He has no conception of what it means to be an adult, so I can't imagine how I'm supposed to take him seriously as a source of political information. I'm not saying people who live with their parents shouldn't have political leanings and causes, but I have trouble taking him seriously if doesn't even have to earn a living. (Which i guess gives him time to run this website, so maybe this is the way to go).
Then again, I'm pretty much in agreement with his comments about the current climate for those of thus dislike the actions of the United States. I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of this as days pass.
just because it says "news for nerds" doesn't mean "news for l33t kernel hackers only." It also doesn't even say "news for hackers." Each of us lays his or her own claim to nerdishness... programming, fantasies about sci-fi characters, melting down Pentiums, or putting $4000 worth of computer equipment into a $200 car to make it "state-of-the-art."
I think slashdot is particularly well suited to "shepherding naive kernel-hacker wannabees," simply for the fact that each of us brings unique viewpoints to each subject. (For instance, I've never even seen the kernel code for Linux, and yet I'm responding to this post.:)
It seems to me that the season ending kiss between mulder and scully at the end of last season would have been a fine farewell for the show... instead, they had to drag us through a season of "Bobby Ewing" (if you don't get that reference, think TV's "Dallas")
You absolutely don't have the right to "share" things you videotape from the TV. In fact, the only acceptable use of VCRs for broadcast TV is something called "time-delayed viewing"... which basically legally means you can tape it to watch later, but that's it... you can't store it forever to watch over and over, nor can you give it out to friends
"Fair Use" doesn't mean "what I think is fair"...
The reason why copying replay files to computers isn't allowed is because the "time-delay" feature is a part of DVR systems.
The reason that studios don't want to allow this is because once you run a whole series in reruns and it's recorded into dvd quality files that can be freely shared, then you have no reason to go to the store and buy their DVDs.
A bunch of lazy parents who don't know how to raise their children bitch to the government. It's usually republicans who seem to want to keep the government at bay unless it's to further their own fundamentalist agenda.
Slashdot Mirror
we do enjoy our ping times. :) I'm enrolled at IUPUI, which has the I2/Abilene NOC. Quite an interesting place. In fact, the only thing that slows down our connections is when we ahve to get on the "regular" internet. All kidding aside, I don't think students have access to I2 simply through their connections, though I do know that connections to other I2 nodes goes through the I2 network, which greatly increases speeds for those connections. Usually, only people doing research need to connect to other universities... but sometimes you run across some interesting servers passing traffic along I2 ;)
It's one thing to have banner and box ads. It's quite another to have *article* ads for someone's book. ug.
Despite your assertions, books do not normally bring riches to the author immediately upon publication. Indeed, I believe something like 1/3 of published authors don't even make minimum wage for their book (if your presume they work 40 hours a week in the number of weeks it took to finish the book). A lifelong copyright means that an author won't be slighted if his book becomes popular 10 or 20 years later.
Don't think this can happen? It did to Tolkien. While LotR wasn't exactly a bomb, it was fairly below the radar in terms of astronomical sales until a resurgence in the United States in the mid-to-late Sixties. Ace books published a version due to a problem with the US copyright, which forced a revision and the "Authorized Edition" that most of us are familiar with. So this was a case of an author who was being left out of the commerce of something he created, which is exactly what a 5 year copyright law would have done.
The point isn't that Stephen King needs to keep making money from the sale of copies of "Carrie" (which is now nearly 30 years old). The point is that it isn't right that someone *else* make money off the sale of Carrie(used books nonwithstanding), unless SK has given them the right (through a publishing contract)
Quoting CD: "I'd imagine they don't want us to go to our local used book stores either? This is the second time they've tried to call Amazon to task for this."
The problem isn't used books. Authors know that used books are useful in spreading their works around, and even though they would like each reader copy to be a fresh purchase, they know their are intangible benefits to used bookstores and libaries.
However, what amazon does is place a used book right next to a new one. Now, I know for most of us the difference is pretty obvious, but for most average users, they simply see a lower a price, and don't think anything more about it. This would be like your local Borders or Barnes and Noble putting a half-priced used book right next to a brand new copy. Given the choice, wouldn't you pick the half-priced book, if it had a fairly new condition? Indeed, used bookstores can often have many mint-condition books.
The point is, there is a reason these are separated, because consumers expect only unused books when the go into a Barnes & Noble, and likewise expect previously owned books when they go to a Half-Price Books.
I don't personally object to amazon having a used bookstore, I just think they need to make it more clear (for instance, having a separate used book listing, where you could search only among the list of used books.) I, for one, have never even checked out the used book section of amazon, because if I can't physically inspect a non-new book, I don't want to buy it.
And, in case anyone mentions it, those discounted books at the front of your store are entirely different matter. They are remainders, book copies that don't sell upon initial publication. These are usually returned to the publisher, but if the store feels the copy could sell as a remainder, the publisher will let the store sell it that way. This way, the publisher doesn't have to pay for a return, and the store still gets some profit out of it. Authors hate it, mostly, (because shoppers in a new bookstore are probably likely to buy their book at full price) but users are, at least, still getting an unused copy.
I think all of these latest innovations in handwriting recognition and "Tablet" PCs are basically aimed at an older market that doesn't have typing ability. Handwriting is a step *back* from typing. I would love to be able to use a keyboard to take tests in college, because my hand cramps up so much... simply replacing the paper with a PDA or Tablet is utterly useless to me.
It took me nearly 30 seconds to figure out this one was a joke. After every other story today was a joke too... well, at least the slashdot crowd hasn't actually pulled one on us... they've just been reporting other april fool's jokes. A slashdot-centred joke would be: windows.slashdot.org.
1. Laws passed by Congress are in no way "limited amendments" to the Constitituion. Laws are laws, amendments are amendments. In fact, according to the Constitution, laws passed by the Congress are *third* in the heirarchy of statutes that govern this land (the Constituion is first, foriegn treaties are second.) To call every law passed by Congress a "constitutional right" is absurd, because you could easily pass a law completely counter that would still be Constitutionally valid... it's vague enough that way.
2. This is indeed a difficult one. Some could (rightfully) argue that the federal government has way too much power. Most of this comes from either limited or wide-range interpretation of the rights of Congress. The responsibilites of Congress are spelled out explicitely... but their is one little line about extending their powers to "necessary and proper" things outside of this core that are required to properly conduct their core responsibilities. What this means is that Congress has a Constitutional directive to pass laws that "promote the progress of Science and useful Arts", and that they have the power to pass ancillary laws to protect that Copyright (which is why I think the DMCA could be able to stand up as Constitutionally valid.)
3. I answered this one in 2.
4. Fair use is indeed something the Congress can extend to the people in regards to Copyright and the Consitution. It does not necessarily follow that they *must* extend that right. Indeed, the founders would have been better off specifying the time allotted rather than saying "limited," which leaves the issue far too vague. Indeed, I think "limited" should define a scope of years, or the author's lifetime, whichever is longer.
What trolls? The fellowship encounters nothing but the cave troll, and that was included in the movie.
The last thing you need to do is read FotR!!! You will enjoy the movie much more if you don't know how badly the fucked with the book.
Need I remind anyone that the *extension* of copyright (which is technically illegal, since it changes previous copyrights as well) was done to make the US in line with what Europe already does?
I personally think authors should be able to do what they want with their copyrights (like now, when they usually sell them to a publisher) but on their death (and not 70 years later) it reverts to their family, so they can do with it what they wish.
Then again, some of us don't have time to bother with HTML markup every time we write a post, so we always post in Plain Old Text
I believe that the software companies should be liable *up to the point that they release a patch that fixes the problems.* Then the owner becomes responsible. This does 3 things.
First, it makes the software company more dilligent about getting all bugs out of software, and worry more about security concerns (which are, shockingly, rarely "bugs" in the software)
Second, it makes the software company work harder at producing a patch that fixes the problem.
Third (and most importantly in my book) it forces system admins to work faster at patching software.
1. World Wide Web Consortium is thy God. Thou shalt have no other gods.
2. Flash is evil, and of the devil. Flash is blaspemy.
3. Javascript can be useful for on-page functions that don't necessarily require a server call, but remember your page still still fundamentally work with no javascript enabled.
4. Images should be used for illustrative purposes, not to show you found a neat image and *never* as a background.
5. Images should be small and reduced to webpage resolutions.
6. Content shouldn't be laborous to read. Black on white text is the best, but at least always make sure to use contrasting colors.
7. Style sheets should always be used (see number 1) but make sure that necessary style pairings (such as colored tables and the text within) are defined in the same scope. A page-declared table color and text/css file declared table text color could cause problems if your style sheet file doesn't load.
8. Design for non-compliant brower protocols *only* if your business depends on it. Private sites should *always* be written to the HTML specs (see #1) all browsers be damned.
9. Do not covet they neighbors hyperlinks. Links should be used in *context* and not in a random listing. Don't say "you can find a link about greyhound adoption *here*." Instead, write either "There is a lot of information about *greyhound adoption*" or "*Greyhound Puppies Inc* has a lot of information about greyhound adoption." All of this results in a page more useable by non-traditional browsers. (see number 1)
10. If you change the color of links, you should make sure that the default colors (blue, purple, red) will show up on your site. Another reason not to use picture backgrounds. Also, don't ever *ever* reverse the color scheme... cool (blue-like) colors for unvisited links, purple or red-like (hot) colors for visited links.
The client is quite different from the corporate system. Granted, I could get paid more in a corporation, but working at a University has several benefits.
1. There is no real pressure to *make money* when directing a project. In the technology sections, the point is generally to make things more efficient, more stable, and more cost-effective. This means upper management decisions are slightly less inane.
2. Easy access to education. I'm one of those people who think when you stop learning, you're dead. Now, this doesn't require formal education, but 3 free credit hours doesn't hurt.
3. Easy job mobility. If I get tired of my job, I can just move to another position, another department, or another line of work entirely. All of this, while still keeping the same health,retirement,etc benefits.
Mainly, that it *takes away* the previously established right to make a single copy for backup purposes. It clearly states that circumventing copy protection is grounds to be in violation of the DMCA. And don't blather on about constitutionality... the right to make a single backup for archive purposes is only spelled out in the 1971 Copyright Act.
Granted, I don't agree with the DMCA, but this device is *very clearly* a violation of it. It's not that it's *used* to make copies of protected material, but that it's *designed* to make copies of protected materials.
Wired has already posted an article about this. I wonder if it will make the NY Times? ;)
Move Futurama and The Family Guy to the soon-to-be vacated 9:00 sunday night slot. Just more proof that entertainment-by-committee just doesn't work.
One of the major features of WinXP is its auto-update feature. This is not a feature that most of us on slashdot would use, but for novice home users it's critical that the software (read: bug) updates that are posted be installed as automatically as possible. The whole reason that the problems with MS happened last year was because end users are idiots and both don't know how to properly use email and don't upgrage their software. This is a Good Thing {tm}. Those of us that don't want features like this can always turn them off.
The Afghan drug (and food) crops dried up in a drought, and the Taliban forbade the growing of drug crops to give more useful farmland over to the growth of food. I think this was in 1999 or 2000, but I'm not sure.
but who can take seriously any person who still lives at home with mommy? He has no conception of what it means to be an adult, so I can't imagine how I'm supposed to take him seriously as a source of political information. I'm not saying people who live with their parents shouldn't have political leanings and causes, but I have trouble taking him seriously if doesn't even have to earn a living. (Which i guess gives him time to run this website, so maybe this is the way to go).
Then again, I'm pretty much in agreement with his comments about the current climate for those of thus dislike the actions of the United States. I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of this as days pass.
just because it says "news for nerds" doesn't mean "news for l33t kernel hackers only." It also doesn't even say "news for hackers." Each of us lays his or her own claim to nerdishness... programming, fantasies about sci-fi characters, melting down Pentiums, or putting $4000 worth of computer equipment into a $200 car to make it "state-of-the-art."
:)
I think slashdot is particularly well suited to "shepherding naive kernel-hacker wannabees," simply for the fact that each of us brings unique viewpoints to each subject. (For instance, I've never even seen the kernel code for Linux, and yet I'm responding to this post.
It seems to me that the season ending kiss between mulder and scully at the end of last season would have been a fine farewell for the show... instead, they had to drag us through a season of "Bobby Ewing" (if you don't get that reference, think TV's "Dallas")
Let's see.
Cable - $39.99
Cable Modem - $49.99 ($39.99 if you have cable)
Phone - $14 - $39, depnding on extra services, without Long Distance.
Hmmm.. at most that's $130... So where does $230 exactly come from?
You absolutely don't have the right to "share" things you videotape from the TV. In fact, the only acceptable use of VCRs for broadcast TV is something called "time-delayed viewing"... which basically legally means you can tape it to watch later, but that's it... you can't store it forever to watch over and over, nor can you give it out to friends
"Fair Use" doesn't mean "what I think is fair"...
The reason why copying replay files to computers isn't allowed is because the "time-delay" feature is a part of DVR systems.
The reason that studios don't want to allow this is because once you run a whole series in reruns and it's recorded into dvd quality files that can be freely shared, then you have no reason to go to the store and buy their DVDs.
A bunch of lazy parents who don't know how to raise their children bitch to the government. It's usually republicans who seem to want to keep the government at bay unless it's to further their own fundamentalist agenda.