If 100 people grab a DVD rip of Men in Black 2, the movie studio only gets the income from the one original copy, versus if 100 people buy it second-hand they still get their income off the original 100 sales.
If one DVD is resold 100 times...
However, I was comparing two entirely legal (at least we're allowed to resell DVDs, unlike some software) methods. So I fail to see your point.
I don't think the equipment should be banned. I just think that the copyright owner's have the right to say, please don't copy our programs, you're depriving us of our income.
"Depriving someone of [potential] income" isn't a crime in itself, especially when you're not purchasing something they want to sell. For example, if I decide to wait till I can buy the DVD second hand for $2, I'm equally depriving them of the income they would have got if I'd bought it earlier.
That's not to say copying is fine in all circumstances, just that this particular argument isn't convincing.
Funny thing, Wikipedia has the.com redirect to the.org, yet you still see many news articles continue to reference the.com. My guess is that people are lazy, they remember the first part, and then they add.com (or maybe IE automatically does that).
It's even worse if you have a national domain. A company I worked for in Hong Kong had the proper.com.hk name, yet even in the local press most of the time if it was quoted they amitted the.hk, and the.com site in the US was occupied by a single page site that was never updated and so people often complained about the lack of content on our site. And even funnier was a Chinese news site who sent us stories mentioning local sites, often omitting the.cn TLD, and thus several times poinitng to.com porn sites.
It seems like some of the Bush campaign staffers have accidentally sent emails to colleagues at name@georgewbush.ORG instead of the correct name@georgewbush.COM.
An illustration of how everyone wants ".com", no matter how appropriate. I could joke about how politicians are for sale and thus should be in.com, but really, it's just dumbing down the whole naming system. Another I've noticed is "moneyfactory.com" for the mint; which I believe is rather definitely part of the government and thus should be a.gov. By all means, get the.com too (it's only $10) before it gets squatted by a porn site, but set it to redirect to the real.org site.
But I realise this has as much hope as Linux being called "GNU/Linux", or media differentiating between hackers and crackers.
Some accounts say he studied engineering at university, so it's likely. Anyway, if he can't read the warning he can't read the text he's not supposed to either.
perhaps what is needed is language giving copyrights extensions but with a high fee(much more than the $25 it currently cost to get a copyright), that way items that have been forgotten about or no current holder intrest can pass into public domain.
Who has to pay $25? -- copyright is free, though I understand some registrars charge you to document it. Aside from that, I don't think you need a high fee -- a nominal charge for an extension beyond an initial period (say 20 years) would shake out a lot of stuff that's currently in limbo because no one knows who or where the current owners of the copyright are, meaning that even if you're willing to negotiate a fee, you can't republish an old work. That's the real downside of indefinite copyright, stuff goes out of print and becomes unavailable and lost through neglect.
During the Olympics, North America ip addresses were blocked from watching much of what was available to Europeans. This was done so that NBC could retain there rights. This seems to be something that could easily be considered for links to works that are not 'legal' everywhere.
Very bad precedent; once you start doing that, you will soon find you are obliged to, and are liable if you don't. And anyway, as we all know, proxies make it easy to circumvent. If anything, just use the same kind of disclaimer that they have on cryptography pages: "If you are Osama bin Laden you are not allowed to look at his."
Like providing drug dealers an untraceable line to conduct dealings?
You forget to mention TERRORISTS. And while we're at it, we should ban email, personal ads, and the Post Office is a proven mode of delivery for anthrax. Anyone speaking in a foreign language had better not try that in public either.
But you could also argue that since slashdot has become such a major player in internet news, that it should think about playing to higher journalistic standards.
Like spellchecking? In the few hundred words the editors publish each day, it's a rare day when there aren't several basic spelling, and many grammatical and punctuation, errors. Stuff a primary school kid should know are wrong. Not to mention the equally easy-to-avoid dupes. Three seconds to run a spellcheck, 20 to search their archive for similar recent stories, are just too much work. Slashdot has a long way to go before it'd meet the standards of a high school essay, let alone anything professional.
There's no region coding for CDs. If they sell a disc for $1 somewhere, they will have to sell it for $1 everywhere.
But there is a difference in labelling and packaging. Though you might buy a cheap legal Russian pressing of an album you know, it might be disconcerting if the liners and labels were all in Russian, Arabic, or Chinese, say.
I truly can't understand why a blockbuster Hollywood movie.. costs about $15, while a CD,...costs the same amount. *What is up with that?!*
Well, though music is priced much too high, a movie has a lot of other ways to earn money than the DVD sale. Cinema and TV broadcast (cable and free), DVD rental. And this is an income stream that should last a few years at least, where most CDs are dead and gone in a few months. So the costs of the movie are not just carried by the disc sales.
What's the product you ask? Machine guns. Specifically, Kalashnikov design that had a world copyright (AK-47).
???
Please explain how you copyright a gun, and what is a "world copyright" anyway?
I imagine you're thinking of patents, but who knows.
Re:Now if hackers could just learn to hack the gov
on
Good Bad Attitude
·
· Score: 1
"You can see this at work in real life, when you notice that geeks make bad business men." >I think you are generalizing. If you look at the present list of >billionaires quite a few of them seem fairly geeky to me. Two >examples? >Mr. Gates, Mr. Dell
It was obviously a genersalisation, and I agree with it. Two or three counter examples don't make it invalid. Look at the countless tech firms headed by geeks that go down the toilet. The classic pattern is geeks invent something, start a company to sell it, and if it starts to take off they are replaced, willingly or not, by less geeky businessmen. Those that stubbornly hold on to power rarely succeed. And if they do, good luck to them, but they usually have to give up being a geek to do so.
I think in this case, when he isn't referring to the original political movement, that a capital isn't needed. Like other words derived from names of people or places, (eg sandwich, boycott), after they become a general noun or adjective they generally lose their capital.
Actually, Dell will be more than happy to remove spyware for you. I have a friend who ran into this exact situation the other day, but Dell wanted to charge him $40+ to remove it,
We've already got Doctor Who and Hitchhiker's Guide reanimated this year. (And unfortunately, Battlestar Galactica.) Maybe we can pitch for The Lone Gunmen.
nothing to do with downloading third party software
Bill is right, in the same way that Clinton was when he said he "never had sex" with Monica. I guess Bill is defining "download" in the quite correct sense of data arriiving on your PC via network. What most people think though is of software they choose to download and install, not stuff that exploits OS or browser holes or even user gullibility (clicking something with a deceptive label).
Because ther isn't the slightest shred of evidence that this "hacking army" exists, or that any country, let alone Australia, is a "target". The original story came from South Korea, which is still officially at war with the North; this one came from some Australian rent-a-quote "security expert" who was probably asked hypothetical questions by a reporter trying to beat up a story on a slow news day (and our own Slashdot editors followed suit).
If you RTFA, it talks about monitoring surveillance devices inside containers:
A terahertz (THz) detection system that can be deployed inside cargo containers is central to the project. Already under study at NJIT, THz electromagnetic radiation can be used to detect and identify explosives and biological agents even concealed in sealed packages, since THz radiation is readily transmitted through plastics, clothing and other non-metals.
Also of course, it'd cover a pretty big direct line-of-sight area for other sensors.
Anyway, I'm pretty gung ho for airship development, I hope this leads to transport and not just stationary platforms.
>>It's very easy to resize a PDF. Just select "fit to page". >sure, if the size you want to refit it to happens to have the same proportions. Otherwise you will get borders.
So what? But you probably mean you want to reflow the text. That of course can't be done (easily) in a PDF.
>>>and about the commercial apps: They have to rely on OCR-like features >>No, you can ger the text directly (in most cases), unless the publisher has deliberately obfuscated it. >I am not talking about plain text.
Then what? Formulae? There isn't any good general system for that.
>Sure, if I want to simply print 2to4 or something like this, I can do this with any sort of document, even with gifs. But what if I want to print it in a slightly smaller font size? or remove the 6 cm footer that is for some reason at the bottom of each page? or print it without the huge photos that the publisher choose to include on every second page, even thought they serve no purpose?
Easy in Acrobat, use the "Touch up" tools. Or print at 90% to resize text (again, no reflow though).
>It is just my opinion that a proper format specification (and lots of other documents)should contain meta-data. Otherwise they are unsuitable for anything besides printing of viewing it exactly as they were created. And the orginal document most likely did contain this meta-data, so why throw it away?
Actually, it's a lot of work to do meta-data right. Most likely there wasn't any, just some text and graphics that were handed to a layout guy who only dimly understands what it's about, but knows how to make it look good.
Slashdot Mirror
If one DVD is resold 100 times...
However, I was comparing two entirely legal (at least we're allowed to resell DVDs, unlike some software) methods. So I fail to see your point.
"Depriving someone of [potential] income" isn't a crime in itself, especially when you're not purchasing something they want to sell. For example, if I decide to wait till I can buy the DVD second hand for $2, I'm equally depriving them of the income they would have got if I'd bought it earlier.
That's not to say copying is fine in all circumstances, just that this particular argument isn't convincing.
It's even worse if you have a national domain. A company I worked for in Hong Kong had the proper .com.hk name, yet even in the local press most of the time if it was quoted they amitted the .hk, and the .com site in the US was occupied by a single page site that was never updated and so people often complained about the lack of content on our site. And even funnier was a Chinese news site who sent us stories mentioning local sites, often omitting the .cn TLD, and thus several times poinitng to .com porn sites.
An illustration of how everyone wants ".com", no matter how appropriate. I could joke about how politicians are for sale and thus should be in .com, but really, it's just dumbing down the whole naming system. Another I've noticed is "moneyfactory.com" for the mint; which I believe is rather definitely part of the government and thus should be a .gov. By all means, get the .com too (it's only $10) before it gets squatted by a porn site, but set it to redirect to the real .org site.
But I realise this has as much hope as Linux being called "GNU/Linux", or media differentiating between hackers and crackers.
That's what I meant; but regardless of registration, the copyright exists, and if you infringe it you can be sued.
Some accounts say he studied engineering at university, so it's likely. Anyway, if he can't read the warning he can't read the text he's not supposed to either.
Who has to pay $25? -- copyright is free, though I understand some registrars charge you to document it. Aside from that, I don't think you need a high fee -- a nominal charge for an extension beyond an initial period (say 20 years) would shake out a lot of stuff that's currently in limbo because no one knows who or where the current owners of the copyright are, meaning that even if you're willing to negotiate a fee, you can't republish an old work. That's the real downside of indefinite copyright, stuff goes out of print and becomes unavailable and lost through neglect.
Very bad precedent; once you start doing that, you will soon find you are obliged to, and are liable if you don't. And anyway, as we all know, proxies make it easy to circumvent. If anything, just use the same kind of disclaimer that they have on cryptography pages: "If you are Osama bin Laden you are not allowed to look at his."
Australia.
You forget to mention TERRORISTS. And while we're at it, we should ban email, personal ads, and the Post Office is a proven mode of delivery for anthrax. Anyone speaking in a foreign language had better not try that in public either.
Like spellchecking? In the few hundred words the editors publish each day, it's a rare day when there aren't several basic spelling, and many grammatical and punctuation, errors. Stuff a primary school kid should know are wrong. Not to mention the equally easy-to-avoid dupes. Three seconds to run a spellcheck, 20 to search their archive for similar recent stories, are just too much work. Slashdot has a long way to go before it'd meet the standards of a high school essay, let alone anything professional.
It's about a real person, Willaim Shatner, not James T Kirk, and a real spaceship. Some science, no fiction.
But there is a difference in labelling and packaging. Though you might buy a cheap legal Russian pressing of an album you know, it might be disconcerting if the liners and labels were all in Russian, Arabic, or Chinese, say.
Well, though music is priced much too high, a movie has a lot of other ways to earn money than the DVD sale. Cinema and TV broadcast (cable and free), DVD rental. And this is an income stream that should last a few years at least, where most CDs are dead and gone in a few months. So the costs of the movie are not just carried by the disc sales.
???
Please explain how you copyright a gun, and what is a "world copyright" anyway?
I imagine you're thinking of patents, but who knows.
"You can see this at work in real life, when you notice that geeks make bad business men."
>I think you are generalizing. If you look at the present list of
>billionaires quite a few of them seem fairly geeky to me. Two
>examples?
>Mr. Gates, Mr. Dell
It was obviously a genersalisation, and I agree with it. Two or three counter examples don't make it invalid. Look at the countless tech firms headed by geeks that go down the toilet. The classic pattern is geeks invent something, start a company to sell it, and if it starts to take off they are replaced, willingly or not, by less geeky businessmen. Those that stubbornly hold on to power rarely succeed. And if they do, good luck to them, but they usually have to give up being a geek to do so.
I think in this case, when he isn't referring to the original political movement, that a capital isn't needed. Like other words derived from names of people or places, (eg sandwich, boycott), after they become a general noun or adjective they generally lose their capital.
I bet what this entails is a clean reinstall.
We've already got Doctor Who and Hitchhiker's Guide reanimated this year. (And unfortunately, Battlestar Galactica.) Maybe we can pitch for The Lone Gunmen.
If you look in China or Hong Kong, $10 per series. Excellent quality. Now I've just got to find 100 hours to watch them.
Bill is right, in the same way that Clinton was when he said he "never had sex" with Monica. I guess Bill is defining "download" in the quite correct sense of data arriiving on your PC via network. What most people think though is of software they choose to download and install, not stuff that exploits OS or browser holes or even user gullibility (clicking something with a deceptive label).
He's only 18; surely a brilliant programmer but otherwise a naive kid. Also he can't spell, see the screenshots and config files in TFA.
Because ther isn't the slightest shred of evidence that this "hacking army" exists, or that any country, let alone Australia, is a "target". The original story came from South Korea, which is still officially at war with the North; this one came from some Australian rent-a-quote "security expert" who was probably asked hypothetical questions by a reporter trying to beat up a story on a slow news day (and our own Slashdot editors followed suit).
If you RTFA, it talks about monitoring surveillance devices inside containers:
Also of course, it'd cover a pretty big direct line-of-sight area for other sensors.Anyway, I'm pretty gung ho for airship development, I hope this leads to transport and not just stationary platforms.
>>It's very easy to resize a PDF. Just select "fit to page".
>sure, if the size you want to refit it to happens to have the same proportions. Otherwise you will get borders.
So what? But you probably mean you want to reflow the text. That of course can't be done (easily) in a PDF.
>>>and about the commercial apps: They have to rely on OCR-like features
>>No, you can ger the text directly (in most cases), unless the publisher has deliberately obfuscated it.
>I am not talking about plain text.
Then what? Formulae? There isn't any good general system for that.
>Sure, if I want to simply print 2to4 or something like this, I can do this with any sort of document, even with gifs. But what if I want to print it in a slightly smaller font size? or remove the 6 cm footer that is for some reason at the bottom of each page? or print it without the huge photos that the publisher choose to include on every second page, even thought they serve no purpose?
Easy in Acrobat, use the "Touch up" tools.
Or print at 90% to resize text (again, no reflow though).
>It is just my opinion that a proper format specification (and lots of other documents)should contain meta-data. Otherwise they are unsuitable for anything besides printing of viewing it exactly as they were created. And the orginal document most likely did contain this meta-data, so why throw it away?
Actually, it's a lot of work to do meta-data right. Most likely there wasn't any, just some text and graphics that were handed to a layout guy who only dimly understands what it's about, but knows how to make it look good.