There's plenty of fissionable material, especially if you include the recyclable secondary material
And there's the key. The US stopped reprocessing under Carter, which greatly reduces the magnitude of fuel available while simultaneously massively increasing the waste stream.
You can put it back up after a counterclaim is made, but I don't expect the proper counterclaim to be filed.
Sure, because a proper counterclaim says "Please send your lawyers to kick me in the gonads repeatedly." The counternotification process is ridiculous.
I know your post is a joke, but on a serious note...anybody with a computer science background knows at least one female programmer. Matter of fact, she's the first programmer ever -- Lady Lovelace.
I understand there's a lady named Hopper who was well-known for debugging. She was an admiral, too.
The seven takedowns themselves are unimportant. The AP is clearly trying to produce a chilling effect preventing people from posting excerpts at all with this sort of thing. Unfortunately for them, they can't really do it. The blog owner won't play ball, and the original posters are unthreatened by the notices.
Amusingly, most males today will glance at some portion of the female population around the age of 13. Not persistently, but they'll take a second look.
Likely true, if you mean that portion of the female population around the age of 13 who already exhibit mature secondary sexual characteristics. Placing the age of "childhood" at 18 is against human nature...
Look, I understand the reasoning. Once private businesses start blocking certain highly illegal things, then it's only a matter of time before warrantless arrests, total surveillance, slavery of the whole human race, and Hitler rising from the dead. I just don't think it works that way.
You're quite right. It's warrantless arrests, total surveillance, THEN private businesses blocking whatever the government suggests (without bothering to pass a law), then Hitler's resurrection, then slavery of the whole human race.
Hitler was no Stalin. He was not out to replace corporate executives with his own cronies, and he most certainly didn't. He knew that those already at the top were in a far better position to make industry thrive and help rebuild the German economy than anyone the NSDAP could come up with.
Indeed. That's one of the key differences in practice between fascism and communism. In communism, you shoot the industrialists as part of your takeover (or shortly after). In fascism you shoot them only if they won't play ball.
I don't know about the particular tool mentioned in the article, but I do know a bit about developer tools in general, from when there was a bigger market for them
1) They tended to be expensive. Very expensive. Like hundreds to thousands of dollars per seat expensive. Know what the signing authority of your average SW developer is? Right, $0.
2) They really didn't work that well. Consider commercial revision control systems. PVCS and Clearcase do more than CVS, but they were clunky, slow (Clearcase before snapshot views... shudder!), and crash-prone.
3) Often times they came with nasty DRM, either some sort of host-locked license or a network licensing system that was less than 100% reliable.
So, to the subject of the article -- if you're a blacksmith and some company is selling a fancy hammer for what you consider to be a high price, and while it works better than what you've got it's got problems of its own, what can you do? Well, you're a blacksmith -- you can make your own better hammer. Same with software developers. If the tools cost too much or are inferior, we're perfectly capable of making our own tools. That makes us a risky market to begin with.
Add in the inescapable fact that the cost of making copies is darn near zero, and just what do you expect to happen?
FlexLM is a license manager that's been around for 20 years. You'll typically see it in corporate environments. It's horrible.
No, it's great. You see, it has a well-defined API. And companies TRUST it. Even companies which make software so expensive it makes your head spin. They trust it to the point they'll give away time-limited copies of the software to anyone who asks, safe in the knowledge that FlexLM will protect them from those scurvy pirates.
My point is not to defend DRM -- I am with the/. crowd in hating it. My point is, it's easy to see why it exists when you pause to consider the 'other' side's perspective, and that's why it's unlikely to ever go away completely. Now that being the case, it's important for the courts or the govt. to step in and define our rights clearly so that companies don't trample on our rights while trying to protect theirs.
It had gone away, not completely but darn near. Know what brought it back? The government stepped in and defined our rights away to protect theirs, by passing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which made it illegal to break the copy protection.
The reason this doesn't mean anything for copyright freedom (at least in the way the summary suggests) is that the "licensed vs sold" distinction isn't as great as it might seem. You own the physical copy you buy, but you have to have a license to make copies of that. When you run software in (or install software on) a computer the computer makes copies, and you need a licence to do that. This is really not legally controversial.
You're right, it's not, not in the US. 17 USC 117(a) states specifically that if you own a copy of a piece software, further copies you make in order to use that software do not require a license.
Wow, I'd blame the summary but it's the article that screwed this up. There's nothing earth-shatteringly significant about a reference to Article II; it's the section defining the power of the executive branch. So basically Holtz-Eakin said almost nothing in many words (and specified "foreign threats", not domestic, besides), and Wired invented the rest from whole cloth.
You think Ichann, or any of the bank managers, mutual fund managers, hedge fund managers, etc. that have holdings in Yahoo are being run by people running to take out payday loans?
No, but they may be run by people who issued sub-prime variable mortgages to people they knew or should have known wouldn't be able to pay if interest rates increased a bit and real-estate prices didn't continue to increase.
That was certainly my thought when I saw "it's time for the US to align its corporations to the interests of the nation".
Though a cynic might argue that aligning the interests of the nation to that of its corporations is what is going on now, and that that is merely a different form of fascism.
Slashdot Mirror
Just drop them over the falls; I'll catch them at the bottom.
There is such a thing as a tesseract
http://inliquid.com/artist/canfield_sarah/canfield.php -- image 2
The seven takedowns themselves are unimportant. The AP is clearly trying to produce a chilling effect preventing people from posting excerpts at all with this sort of thing. Unfortunately for them, they can't really do it. The blog owner won't play ball, and the original posters are unthreatened by the notices.
To paraphrase Professor Frink: "Oh, well to be honest, the technology only has evil applications"
Likely true, if you mean that portion of the female population around the age of 13 who already exhibit mature secondary sexual characteristics. Placing the age of "childhood" at 18 is against human nature...
Indeed. That's one of the key differences in practice between fascism and communism. In communism, you shoot the industrialists as part of your takeover (or shortly after). In fascism you shoot them only if they won't play ball.
A good encryption algorithm is not breakable even if you know both plaintext and ciphertext. (which is why one-time-pad GOOD, TWO-time-pad BAD)
I don't know about the particular tool mentioned in the article, but I do know a bit about developer tools in general, from when there was a bigger market for them
1) They tended to be expensive. Very expensive. Like hundreds to thousands of dollars per seat expensive. Know what the signing authority of your average SW developer is? Right, $0.
2) They really didn't work that well. Consider commercial revision control systems. PVCS and Clearcase do more than CVS, but they were clunky, slow (Clearcase before snapshot views... shudder!), and crash-prone.
3) Often times they came with nasty DRM, either some sort of host-locked license or a network licensing system that was less than 100% reliable.
So, to the subject of the article -- if you're a blacksmith and some company is selling a fancy hammer for what you consider to be a high price, and while it works better than what you've got it's got problems of its own, what can you do? Well, you're a blacksmith -- you can make your own better hammer. Same with software developers. If the tools cost too much or are inferior, we're perfectly capable of making our own tools. That makes us a risky market to begin with.
Add in the inescapable fact that the cost of making copies is darn near zero, and just what do you expect to happen?
No, it's great. You see, it has a well-defined API. And companies TRUST it. Even companies which make software so expensive it makes your head spin. They trust it to the point they'll give away time-limited copies of the software to anyone who asks, safe in the knowledge that FlexLM will protect them from those scurvy pirates.
It had gone away, not completely but darn near. Know what brought it back? The government stepped in and defined our rights away to protect theirs, by passing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which made it illegal to break the copy protection.
You're right, it's not, not in the US. 17 USC 117(a) states specifically that if you own a copy of a piece software, further copies you make in order to use that software do not require a license.
ProCD is irreconcilable with Softman.
Wow, I'd blame the summary but it's the article that screwed this up. There's nothing earth-shatteringly significant about a reference to Article II; it's the section defining the power of the executive branch. So basically Holtz-Eakin said almost nothing in many words (and specified "foreign threats", not domestic, besides), and Wired invented the rest from whole cloth.
It's not explicitly legal to make a backup of a movie. That section of the law only applies to computer software, not audiovisual works.
That was certainly my thought when I saw "it's time for the US to align its corporations to the interests of the nation".
Though a cynic might argue that aligning the interests of the nation to that of its corporations is what is going on now, and that that is merely a different form of fascism.