Then a year later what will the chinese consumer do? He could go out an buy a bootleg and re-install his system or he could buy a keycode and continue with his current system state. in many cases the idea of re-installing a system would be daunting enough to suddenly make the key code seem cheap.
Or he could download a bootleg key for free. In China software piracy is about 99%, unless it's an OEM install by a big company like Lenovo. This is not going to change anything.
Plus, any reasonably short copyright term tied to the author's lifetime is incentive to off the author.
Of course it isn't. The (original) publisher has exclusive rights to publish only as long as the copyright is good. When the copyright expires, it's public domain, and ANYONE can publish it. And if you were one of these public domain publishers, would you murder best-selling authors so you can publish cheap editions of their books, knowing that all the other publishers would equally be able to do so, without becoming liable for life sentences? A lot easier and safer to read the obituaries and pick off books by authors who died of natural causes.
There are very few authors, musicians, etc., who actually own the copyright to their work.
Wrong. Most writers certainly DO own the copyright to their work. Even journalists. The publisher has the right to publish it, and keeps most of the profit, but usually even those rights expire after the book goes out of print, or for journalists, a short time after the original publication (which is why columnists can publish books collecting or based on their columns).
Just look at the copyright notices on a book: almost always it lists the author's name.
What a horrible idea. Thank god it isn't the law in any sane country.
If it were, no one could take a photograph, anywhere, without getting releases from everyone in it. Newspapers and TV news could just shut up business. And remember, SHE IS DEAD. Dead people don't have many rights, and specifically, no right to privacy. Again, this is good.
. Wherever there's universal coverage, there's also usually long waits for specialized surgery
Of course there is. The alternative is no queue, and if you don't have the cash to pay for prvate treatment, you just go home and die. As for the 30% or so of the US which has no health insurance. The US has the world's best medical care, for their rich, and 4th-world level for their poor. And has the infant death rates to prove it.
Now if anyone can explain to me, how can this be so massively applauded and supported by the public?
Because, on the evidence of the last few decades, corporations are certainly not going to provide broadband for the entire population, or anyone outside profitable urban areas. Even when subsidised by governments, they eat up the subsidies and fail to provide a universal service. Eventually the US will work this out.
Though the way you reject universal health care because "it's socialist", allowing your poor to sicken and die, maybe I'm too optimistic.
In addition, Google is providing the content of the book to the world.
No it is not. Google provides a small snippet of the books it scans (exceot for old books out of copyright).
You can imagine some process to extract the full text by combining thousands of snippets, but it's not a trivial task, and much easier for anyone who wanted to to simply borrow the book from a library.
let's not forget that the Google cache would provide a way around the filtering for every single website
Not of images though. If you're blocking porn, as I'd guess woud be the major target of a "family safety filter", Google's cache won't help. (Though it's image search could give you thumbnails.)
we accidentally called Constantinople Byzantium, just slipping back about 800 years there accidentally
Byzantium was the name from ancient (abot 660 BC) times until about 330 AD, when it was named for Constantine I, as the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire.
And Constantinople became Istanbul in 1453 when it was conquered by the Ottoman Empire.
I don't know how "800 years" fits into any of that. He seems to have forgotten about modern Istanbul completely, if he ever knew. I hope his geography is better than his history or maths.
Of course, all these poor near illeterate immigrant women brought up in a strict male dominant hierarchy will know their rights and refuse to "appoint" these mullahs, imams, muftis as their arbitrator and seek the full protection from the agents of the crown.
May be true, I have no idea (do you, really?). The point is though that the British police will not hand then over to a sharia court to be judged, and that a shariah "arbitrator" does not have the power to send anyone to prison, let alone to be beaten or executed. If people don't exercise the rights they have, it's hard to force them to do so.
hasn't the British government been allowing Sharia courts to operate in Britain for some time?
Only in civil cases if BOTH parties agree to accept its judgement:
Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.
Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.
Obviously this could not apply to normal criminal matters (theft, violent crime, etc). So no hands chopped off for theft, no adulterers stoned to death. It's just arbitration, where the arbitrator happens to be Muslim.
They didn't censor the books, just removed them from the rankings. Since when do the authors have any ownership over the book rankings?
The issue is that Amazon is presenting rankings which do not represent the actual situation. They have had books arbitrarily excluded that would have ranked highly. And apparently there is no way to click "I'm a grown up, show me the real rankings" (as Google's "Safe search" can be disabled). They're just gone.
And it's important because Amazon is the dominant online bookshop. If a Site in Utah only wanted to be all "think of the children", and made it a selling point, that would be fine. But Amazon is so big that it excluding any titles will have devastating effect.
... the only major platform Spotify do not run on. It looks like the Spotify team is trying to be nice to the Linux community and hope some one will use there restricted binary-only library...
No, it's not life-or-death, but it IS AN EDITOR'S FUCKING JOB TO NOTICE AND FIX THINGS LIKE THIS.
IMHO building a following behind The Gimp, Inkscape, Blender, KinoDV and other open source apps on both Windows and Linux will help the war effort generally.
These kind of app -- whether the brand name Win/Mac or the Linux equivalents -- are irrelevant for netbooks. Trying to do DTP or video editing on a netbook (tiny screen, tiny keyboard, relatively underpowered and slow processor) is for masochists only. Netbooks just need to support the complete browsing experience. Including downloading and playing music and video in common formats (not that I would like to watch a movie or even a TV show on a 9" screen, but apparently some do) and Flash. People always mention games. Play Solitaire or get a console, is my view.
I guess some would like an office suite. If Open Office isn't enough for them, it's not hard to get MS Office running on Linux.
I read all the way through the summary, wondering why a nuclear fusion facility was interested in 4chan. Okay, now I know what they are, I'm wondering why a bureau that puts out "anti-terrorism" documents of this nature is called a "fusion center". Did they just think it sounded cool?
I had been a heavy coffee drinker for about 30 years, culminating when I worked at dotcom withe n Espresso machine in the kitchen , when I was putting away 8-10 cups of espresso a day.
Then the dotcom went bust and I was unemployed (but also suffering a lot less tension). I went to one cup of filter coffee a day. And a beer at lunch and some wine at dinner. Moderate alcohol plus a little caffeine is a reasonably healthy formula. And I enjoy that one cup of coffee a lot more than the ten, with no trembling after effects.
g you may find yourself having to explain your interest in Islamic training camps or extreme child porn.
Islamic sites: so what? It's not illegal to read those. "Extreme child porn": I've visited some pretty sleazy parts of the web in my 15 or so years online, I've NEVER come across anything of that nature. Contrary to popular mythology, they don't actively broadcast the URLS, and I suspect that you'd need at least a password to get access. Of course, someone might Joe-job you and somehow send you to a bunch of such sites, but if they can do that, you're screwed already.
Now someone widened the street so much that there are thousands of people who are there all the time and they all can see your balcony and you can't know who is looking at any given time. This changes the deal that you had when you bought the house - your use of the balcony is now more restricted,
Your "deal" to buy the house was not with the municipality or more generally with anyone who uses the road. The previous owner had no way to guarantee the view, and if you believed he did, that's a problem between you and him. No one else owes you a thing. If you want to stop people passing by your home, buy the land and make it private, if you can find a few million to offer the government.
And when I first posted, I was going on what I said, my grade school memories going back over half a century now
That's fine, but you didn't have any qualifications in your original post, which was in its entirety:
by zogger (617870) on Thu Apr 02, '09 12:49 PM (#27427015) Homepage Journal
OK comes from "okay" which comes from a native American language, Chocktaw, "okeh", meaning "it is so" or "thank you" depending on context and inflection.
You stated that as a fact, and at best it's one of several possibilities. And that's why I responded, perhaps I was a little hasty in classifying it as "bullshit", but "unproven minority view", certainly.
....he just didn't want to tote the bandwith bill any more
Come on, the site often got no more than a dozen posts in a day. It can't have been about the money.
No argument he had the right, but because he was pissed at some posters he treated EVERYONE who had contributed to the site with contempt. He could have just revoked the accounts of the jerks. I moderate a local forum and trolls are a fact of life online. You have to lay down the law occasionally.
Why worry... Why save anything... Why carry a spare tire... I find those ideas and that sort of mindset to be rather "nutty"
I could resent your implied description of those who don't follow your precepts as idiots and cowards who don't think about the future or take any responsibility for themselves. But anyway, that false dichotomy and hyperbole (on both sides, admittedly) was why a lot of threads degenerated on Technocrat. People justify their own beliefs and feel the need to denigrate those who disagree. And as that was the kind of thing that Technocrat was supposed to be above, I do understand Bruce's disappointment. Just the way he did it I found brutal.
That's just a mirror of Wikipedia, and really, you should know better than to cite that if you're trying to prove something. But while it appears some people believe your Indian etymology, it's not what scholars who compile dictionaries think is the most likely, and there are few if any records supporting it.
Anyway, you said unequivocally that "okay which comes from a native American language, Chocktaw", no "dispute" was mentioned. If you hadn't been so definite in stating this, I wouldn't have called you on it.
As to Technocrat, Bruce had posted previously to the takedown that he might have to do that, as it wasn't fitting his idea of what he wanted plus the cost of the site. It wasn't totally unexpected at all.
I didn't see anything like that myself. It was just all deleted overnight. He didn't have an obligation to support it indefinitely, but it was very abrupt. No chance for anyone to pick up old posts, contact each other. Not that I really miss all the survivalists, gun nuts and climate change deniers.... And I invested quite a lot of time in editing articles for it (not as much as you, of course). All gone without a trace, or a word of thanks (again, no legal obligation existed, but it lacked courtesy).
Slashdot Mirror
Or he could download a bootleg key for free. In China software piracy is about 99%, unless it's an OEM install by a big company like Lenovo. This is not going to change anything.
Of course it isn't. The (original) publisher has exclusive rights to publish only as long as the copyright is good. When the copyright expires, it's public domain, and ANYONE can publish it. And if you were one of these public domain publishers, would you murder best-selling authors so you can publish cheap editions of their books, knowing that all the other publishers would equally be able to do so, without becoming liable for life sentences? A lot easier and safer to read the obituaries and pick off books by authors who died of natural causes.
Wrong. Most writers certainly DO own the copyright to their work. Even journalists. The publisher has the right to publish it, and keeps most of the profit, but usually even those rights expire after the book goes out of print, or for journalists, a short time after the original publication (which is why columnists can publish books collecting or based on their columns).
Just look at the copyright notices on a book: almost always it lists the author's name.
Even worse, I'm not in the US, but I still get plenty of spam from them, and no way to opt out (pointless, thogh it is) or sue the assholes.
What a horrible idea. Thank god it isn't the law in any sane country. If it were, no one could take a photograph, anywhere, without getting releases from everyone in it. Newspapers and TV news could just shut up business. And remember, SHE IS DEAD. Dead people don't have many rights, and specifically, no right to privacy. Again, this is good.
I'd prefer ones that filtered out COBOL or FORTRAN myself.
Great level of debate. Fuck you too.
. Wherever there's universal coverage, there's also usually long waits for specialized surgery
Of course there is. The alternative is no queue, and if you don't have the cash to pay for prvate treatment, you just go home and die. As for the 30% or so of the US which has no health insurance. The US has the world's best medical care, for their rich, and 4th-world level for their poor. And has the infant death rates to prove it.
Because, on the evidence of the last few decades, corporations are certainly not going to provide broadband for the entire population, or anyone outside profitable urban areas. Even when subsidised by governments, they eat up the subsidies and fail to provide a universal service. Eventually the US will work this out.
Though the way you reject universal health care because "it's socialist", allowing your poor to sicken and die, maybe I'm too optimistic.
Not accordng to Spamhaus. Their ROKSO list of spammers is dominated by Americans.
And anecdotally, most of my spam is sellig American products. However they've routed the spam most originates in the US.
No it is not. Google provides a small snippet of the books it scans (exceot for old books out of copyright). You can imagine some process to extract the full text by combining thousands of snippets, but it's not a trivial task, and much easier for anyone who wanted to to simply borrow the book from a library.
Not of images though. If you're blocking porn, as I'd guess woud be the major target of a "family safety filter", Google's cache won't help. (Though it's image search could give you thumbnails.)
Byzantium was the name from ancient (abot 660 BC) times until about 330 AD, when it was named for Constantine I, as the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire.
And Constantinople became Istanbul in 1453 when it was conquered by the Ottoman Empire.
I don't know how "800 years" fits into any of that. He seems to have forgotten about modern Istanbul completely, if he ever knew. I hope his geography is better than his history or maths.
May be true, I have no idea (do you, really?). The point is though that the British police will not hand then over to a sharia court to be judged, and that a shariah "arbitrator" does not have the power to send anyone to prison, let alone to be beaten or executed. If people don't exercise the rights they have, it's hard to force them to do so.
Only in civil cases if BOTH parties agree to accept its judgement:
Obviously this could not apply to normal criminal matters (theft, violent crime, etc). So no hands chopped off for theft, no adulterers stoned to death. It's just arbitration, where the arbitrator happens to be Muslim.
The issue is that Amazon is presenting rankings which do not represent the actual situation. They have had books arbitrarily excluded that would have ranked highly. And apparently there is no way to click "I'm a grown up, show me the real rankings" (as Google's "Safe search" can be disabled). They're just gone.
And it's important because Amazon is the dominant online bookshop. If a Site in Utah only wanted to be all "think of the children", and made it a selling point, that would be fine. But Amazon is so big that it excluding any titles will have devastating effect.
No, it's not life-or-death, but it IS AN EDITOR'S FUCKING JOB TO NOTICE AND FIX THINGS LIKE THIS.
These kind of app -- whether the brand name Win/Mac or the Linux equivalents -- are irrelevant for netbooks. Trying to do DTP or video editing on a netbook (tiny screen, tiny keyboard, relatively underpowered and slow processor) is for masochists only. Netbooks just need to support the complete browsing experience. Including downloading and playing music and video in common formats (not that I would like to watch a movie or even a TV show on a 9" screen, but apparently some do) and Flash. People always mention games. Play Solitaire or get a console, is my view.
I guess some would like an office suite. If Open Office isn't enough for them, it's not hard to get MS Office running on Linux.
As I said, I know what they are (now). But I still think it's a stupid, misleading name.
I read all the way through the summary, wondering why a nuclear fusion facility was interested in 4chan. Okay, now I know what they are, I'm wondering why a bureau that puts out "anti-terrorism" documents of this nature is called a "fusion center". Did they just think it sounded cool?
I had been a heavy coffee drinker for about 30 years, culminating when I worked at dotcom withe n Espresso machine in the kitchen , when I was putting away 8-10 cups of espresso a day. Then the dotcom went bust and I was unemployed (but also suffering a lot less tension). I went to one cup of filter coffee a day. And a beer at lunch and some wine at dinner. Moderate alcohol plus a little caffeine is a reasonably healthy formula. And I enjoy that one cup of coffee a lot more than the ten, with no trembling after effects.
Islamic sites: so what? It's not illegal to read those. "Extreme child porn": I've visited some pretty sleazy parts of the web in my 15 or so years online, I've NEVER come across anything of that nature. Contrary to popular mythology, they don't actively broadcast the URLS, and I suspect that you'd need at least a password to get access. Of course, someone might Joe-job you and somehow send you to a bunch of such sites, but if they can do that, you're screwed already.
No, if you look at the submitted article, on the firehose link, it's fine, correctly formatted, if a bit verbose. It took a human to fuck it up.
Your "deal" to buy the house was not with the municipality or more generally with anyone who uses the road. The previous owner had no way to guarantee the view, and if you believed he did, that's a problem between you and him. No one else owes you a thing. If you want to stop people passing by your home, buy the land and make it private, if you can find a few million to offer the government.
That's fine, but you didn't have any qualifications in your original post, which was in its entirety:
You stated that as a fact, and at best it's one of several possibilities. And that's why I responded, perhaps I was a little hasty in classifying it as "bullshit", but "unproven minority view", certainly.
Come on, the site often got no more than a dozen posts in a day. It can't have been about the money.
No argument he had the right, but because he was pissed at some posters he treated EVERYONE who had contributed to the site with contempt. He could have just revoked the accounts of the jerks. I moderate a local forum and trolls are a fact of life online. You have to lay down the law occasionally.
Why worry ... Why save anything ... Why carry a spare tire ... I find those ideas and that sort of mindset to be rather "nutty"
I could resent your implied description of those who don't follow your precepts as idiots and cowards who don't think about the future or take any responsibility for themselves. But anyway, that false dichotomy and hyperbole (on both sides, admittedly) was why a lot of threads degenerated on Technocrat. People justify their own beliefs and feel the need to denigrate those who disagree. And as that was the kind of thing that Technocrat was supposed to be above, I do understand Bruce's disappointment. Just the way he did it I found brutal.
Anyway, you said unequivocally that "okay which comes from a native American language, Chocktaw", no "dispute" was mentioned. If you hadn't been so definite in stating this, I wouldn't have called you on it.
As to Technocrat, Bruce had posted previously to the takedown that he might have to do that, as it wasn't fitting his idea of what he wanted plus the cost of the site. It wasn't totally unexpected at all.
I didn't see anything like that myself. It was just all deleted overnight. He didn't have an obligation to support it indefinitely, but it was very abrupt. No chance for anyone to pick up old posts, contact each other. Not that I really miss all the survivalists, gun nuts and climate change deniers.... And I invested quite a lot of time in editing articles for it (not as much as you, of course). All gone without a trace, or a word of thanks (again, no legal obligation existed, but it lacked courtesy).