Look, both sides of the border need to get it through their pointy heads that "them over there" really _are_ very different. And for good reason. Most Canadians may speak english and watch mostly US-produced TV but that's it!
Americans of all strips are deeply skeptical of all large organizations, including especially their governments. Some Canadians are, but many more trust these organizations to at least look out for their long-term interests. There is an understanding, acceptance and even hono[u]ring of authority. Civil servants aren't pariahs. Many people aspire to Cdn civil service jobs.
There is a certain public spirit in Canada that transcends the profit motive in many cases. And an utter horror [naivete] when the public trust is betrayed, rather than a cynical "what did you expect"?
Not just companies: All litigants tend to interpret their rights in the light most favorable to them. Think "unlimited service". No-one wants to go to court with a weak arguments.
AT&T would have an uphill battle if it disconnected a customer simply for non-libellous criticism. For one thing, the agreement likely would be considered as a "contact of adhesion" and construed very narrowly against AT&T. So the criticism might well be found not to injure the reputation of AT&T, since it was the criticised action which was injurious, not the publication thereof. Or a court might simple sever that portion from the contract as its' enforcement would be against public policy. Depending on the exact facts and how adventurous the court felt that day.
Sorry, no. I hold the US govt to a higher std than AT&T. The USG is intended to represent everyone and protect all fairly. AT&T has no such pretention and only has to satisfy it's shareholders, mostly by making money.
That said, both have used unnecessarly ambiguous language that generates fear and exposes them to predictable criticism. There is a serious probability the fear is intentional in which case it can be considered deliberate intimidation (which is evil).
Yes, you bring up a very good point of the courts [powers] being misused this way. It probably doesn't happen very often, but it doesn't need to in order to have a strong chilling effect.
While the courts naturally have a tendency to see litigants agree and save them the burden of deciding, perhaps there are cases where such laxness is not in the public interest. IMHO, courts ought to approval all settlements (including withdraw/dismissals). Once the sword of public justice has been unsheathed, the public has an interest in how it was used.
Plaintiffs ought to be a bit afraid that they will be chastised if their case is frivolous or otherwise abusive. Smark defendants will lock the plaintiffs down by cross-filing, but this does not protect third parties who have no standing. So the judge ought to consider amicus briefs.
Yes, this _sounds_ bad. But perhaps is is more aimed at net nuisances such as spammers and botnets. Those certainly harm the name of AT&T. Could get its' domains blacklisted. Still, AT&T has no shortage of highly-paid lawyers. They ought to have developed less-inflammatory wording.
As a practical matter, I would expect to see these terms on business accounts (where free speech is arguable) and less on home accounts (where it is not).
Vendors used to provide special-purpose slide valves to assist in sizing their euqipment. I still have one from Mason-Neilan for valve sizing that I used at least weekly.
Especially when I need to check the valve sizes a jr.engineer gets the GIGO fancy pgm to spit out to 10 decimals.
It is easy to slip decimals in general calcs on slide rules, so we used to be very careful about magnitudes. Electronic calculators keep everything very neatly, so we now lose a feel for magnatudes. The crutch becomes crippling.
Agreed on the PCs, especially those in business settings. Many of those are forbidden or otherwised blocked from the Internet. And would exist and be run without the Internet. Their predecessors were.
Furthermore, a large fraction of the remaining 1/3rd of power is servers. Many of them would be run even without the internet, most probably as internal servers for 1-800 phone reps.
The actual power attributable to the Internet is probably quite small. And certainly less than the gasoline and other motor fuels used in personal shopping/research/entertainment trips reduced by the Ineternet.
Please look at the total picture. Not some sensational part.
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying. All journalists receive hatemail. Part of the job. Bringing it up is rather more an effort at self-publicity. Rather like the Danish imam taking the cartoons to S.Arabia.
The fundamental problem is that journalists are not so much reporting the news as creating it. The spin they put changes peoples' minds. Not entirely their fault (although this must attract the manipulative personalities). People expect to believe what they read. Silly rabbits! News is for alerting you what might bear closer scrutiny.
Do the math. If the platform/building/Paris is 6 inches further away from the Earth's center of gravitation, that makes for 50 ug/kg less gravitational force.
There may be some effect of magma density and or local buildings.
I think I know what Theo is saying (always a question with him): the changes to the Altheros wireless drivers from OpenBSD to Linux are not substantial enough to meet the criterion of creating a derivative work.
OK, fine. That's one opinion, particularly valid from the PoV of a code-writer. But the PoV of a code-reader/user is very different: either the code crashes or it does not. Any change, even trivial in terms of creative effort, has enormous impact on the value of the work.
Or put another way, deRaad doesn't think debugging has enough value to be granted the rights of creating a derivative work.
I might agree adding a comma or changing a word on page XX in a novel does NOT create a derivative work. However, code is very fussy and utilitairian. Unless the code will run _exactly_ as-is, any mod is a derivative work.
Ethics is controversial. That's why it throws off dilemmae. Something uncontroversial and fixed (like gravity) doesn't generate dilemmae.
The example given is particularly complex since the US netadmin spotting German pr0n-surfing highlights different social standards. A lot might depend on where the German was sitting. K1dd1e pr0n is highly illegal under US law, but AFAIK not so under German law. Snooping on employees is generally acceptable under US law (with proper notices), but may be illegal under Germany/EU privacy codes. Either one could go to jail. I'm a little surprised the USian regretting not going to the FBI. Does s/he feel a responsibility to protect Asians? Isn't that the locals job? or maybe mgmt? Why so personal?
Sorry, I disagree. I fully expect that Linus informally asked NVidia and was given satisfactory answers why they wouldn't release their GPU code, compiler, etal.
I don't know those reasons, and don't expect them to be announced. But I can imagine the NVidia isn't entirely free to release code: for one thing, they might be paying royalties to others and be bound by those agreements. Or they may have tricks they think ATI/Intel doesn't know about. NVidia's managers have an obligation to safeguard shareholder's property.
For another, the GPUs are incredibly powerful computing machines that could be used for nuke simulations. The GPU mfrs may have an understanding with the US Dept of State that so long as the GPU isn't generally programmable, they escape the ITAR limits on export of computing power.
Or there may be other reasons. I don't assume pigheadedness. It has to be proven to me.
RMS has always been a purist/zealot. He has been angry at Linus for years for not pursuing NVidia to release source for their graphics module. It arguably is a derivative work of the GPL kernel. NVidia stub is already released, but the GPU driver is a binary lump. RMS is especially angry because this is exactly the situation he faced with the Xerox printer driver that caused him to start the FSF and GPL.
Linus belongs much more closely to the "Open Source" movement [ESR] than to "Free Software" [RMS]. Although I hesitate to classify Linus in any way. He does his own thing.
I think 2clix have been reading too much US business news.
Courts in AU don't work the same way: harder to get a jury trial, judges still determine awards _and_ allocate costs. They'd better watch "paid into court". Lawyers are also "officers of the court" and IIRC forbidden to take %age contingency fees.
How you choose to protect a product must depend very much on what it is and how it is sold. Some schedulers are only worth $50/seat. More specialized/detailed ones may be worth $50k/seat. Obviously you don't protect one like the other.
Second, have you decided how you intend to licence the product? Per seat or per company? There is a fairly high risk of intra-company copying, but you should decide whether you wish to stop this or consider it marketing.
In short, there is no one answer. Thinking there is is not thinking at all.
Of course the Great Firewall of China is a fraud. It cannot be otherwise. All filters are subject to alpha and beta error (false negatives and false positives). Tighten up on one and you blow the other.i(Spam fighters gotta learn). The firewall bureaucrats probably only need to show the other bureaucrats that they are making reasonable efforts.
The test is also a fraud, or at least highly deceptive since the GFWoC or prior-restraint panopticon would be most highly tuned to outbound requests rather than unsolicited inbound (like email). The former are culpable and actionable. The latter have some deniability.
Even if we think someone (the Chinese govt) is totalitairian, unjust or other unpleasant thing, do not think they agree. Most likely they see themselves as perfectly reasonable. And so one must expect them to do many reasonable things mixed in with their villainy.
One of the standard things I do when I'm forced to work on an MS-Windows box is hit CAD, bring up the TaskMangler and kill explorer.exe and all its b@st@rd children (I know, redundant). Half or more of the poxy processes disappear from the list. Icons and taskbar gone. Then I go to File->New Task(Run) and type in explorer.exe.
Absolutely correct. The worst problems start when you don't have that layer of paper or aluminum. Like inside your body. The majority of radiation hazard is from ingestion/inhalation. Whence the Tyvek suits.
As written this is almost certainly bunk: Alpha, beta, gamma rays and high energy photons aren't easy to absorb. However, there does exist a class of minerals that absorb ions: clays and zeolytes. But no known material discriminates between isotopes to any easily significant extent. Isotope separation is well-known to be very difficult.
It may be that a new mineral has been found with strong absorbtive powers for heavy cations. Zeolytes are used currently in the application.
Yes, I fully agree. Circuits are priced by bandwidth, not transfer. However, carry that a little further: $10/Mbps per month (I presume) works out to $0.30/GB at 100% line occupancy. Multiply by some load factor. Higher for RT like YouTube, lower for deferable like 'torrent.
Maybe SBC is gouging. Maybe not. Maybe the ZA govt is fixing prices "too low". The truth will be hard to find, and I'm just not that interested in finding out.
Fortunately, I don't need to: I've observed that the only people who use exaggered rhetoric and vilification do so to support a weak position. (Godwin's Law) They would know. I take them at their word.
Slashdot Mirror
Americans of all strips are deeply skeptical of all large organizations, including especially their governments. Some Canadians are, but many more trust these organizations to at least look out for their long-term interests. There is an understanding, acceptance and even hono[u]ring of authority. Civil servants aren't pariahs. Many people aspire to Cdn civil service jobs.
There is a certain public spirit in Canada that transcends the profit motive in many cases. And an utter horror [naivete] when the public trust is betrayed, rather than a cynical "what did you expect"?
AT&T would have an uphill battle if it disconnected a customer simply for non-libellous criticism. For one thing, the agreement likely would be considered as a "contact of adhesion" and construed very narrowly against AT&T. So the criticism might well be found not to injure the reputation of AT&T, since it was the criticised action which was injurious, not the publication thereof. Or a court might simple sever that portion from the contract as its' enforcement would be against public policy. Depending on the exact facts and how adventurous the court felt that day.
That said, both have used unnecessarly ambiguous language that generates fear and exposes them to predictable criticism. There is a serious probability the fear is intentional in which case it can be considered deliberate intimidation (which is evil).
While the courts naturally have a tendency to see litigants agree and save them the burden of deciding, perhaps there are cases where such laxness is not in the public interest. IMHO, courts ought to approval all settlements (including withdraw/dismissals). Once the sword of public justice has been unsheathed, the public has an interest in how it was used.
Plaintiffs ought to be a bit afraid that they will be chastised if their case is frivolous or otherwise abusive. Smark defendants will lock the plaintiffs down by cross-filing, but this does not protect third parties who have no standing. So the judge ought to consider amicus briefs.
As a practical matter, I would expect to see these terms on business accounts (where free speech is arguable) and less on home accounts (where it is not).
Especially when I need to check the valve sizes a jr.engineer gets the GIGO fancy pgm to spit out to 10 decimals.
It is easy to slip decimals in general calcs on slide rules, so we used to be very careful about magnitudes. Electronic calculators keep everything very neatly, so we now lose a feel for magnatudes. The crutch becomes crippling.
Furthermore, a large fraction of the remaining 1/3rd of power is servers. Many of them would be run even without the internet, most probably as internal servers for 1-800 phone reps.
The actual power attributable to the Internet is probably quite small. And certainly less than the gasoline and other motor fuels used in personal shopping/research/entertainment trips reduced by the Ineternet.
Please look at the total picture. Not some sensational part.
The fundamental problem is that journalists are not so much reporting the news as creating it. The spin they put changes peoples' minds. Not entirely their fault (although this must attract the manipulative personalities). People expect to believe what they read. Silly rabbits! News is for alerting you what might bear closer scrutiny.
Worse if it hits a guano site, town dump or septic landfarm.
There may be some effect of magma density and or local buildings.
OK, fine. That's one opinion, particularly valid from the PoV of a code-writer. But the PoV of a code-reader/user is very different: either the code crashes or it does not. Any change, even trivial in terms of creative effort, has enormous impact on the value of the work.
Or put another way, deRaad doesn't think debugging has enough value to be granted the rights of creating a derivative work.
I might agree adding a comma or changing a word on page XX in a novel does NOT create a derivative work. However, code is very fussy and utilitairian. Unless the code will run _exactly_ as-is, any mod is a derivative work.
The example given is particularly complex since the US netadmin spotting German pr0n-surfing highlights different social standards. A lot might depend on where the German was sitting. K1dd1e pr0n is highly illegal under US law, but AFAIK not so under German law. Snooping on employees is generally acceptable under US law (with proper notices), but may be illegal under Germany/EU privacy codes. Either one could go to jail. I'm a little surprised the USian regretting not going to the FBI. Does s/he feel a responsibility to protect Asians? Isn't that the locals job? or maybe mgmt? Why so personal?
In any case, I'm reasonably certain this decision was reasonably studied by nVidia, and not some knee-jerk reaction.
I don't know those reasons, and don't expect them to be announced. But I can imagine the NVidia isn't entirely free to release code: for one thing, they might be paying royalties to others and be bound by those agreements. Or they may have tricks they think ATI/Intel doesn't know about. NVidia's managers have an obligation to safeguard shareholder's property.
For another, the GPUs are incredibly powerful computing machines that could be used for nuke simulations. The GPU mfrs may have an understanding with the US Dept of State that so long as the GPU isn't generally programmable, they escape the ITAR limits on export of computing power.
Or there may be other reasons. I don't assume pigheadedness. It has to be proven to me.
Linus belongs much more closely to the "Open Source" movement [ESR] than to "Free Software" [RMS]. Although I hesitate to classify Linus in any way. He does his own thing.
Courts in AU don't work the same way: harder to get a jury trial, judges still determine awards _and_ allocate costs. They'd better watch "paid into court". Lawyers are also "officers of the court" and IIRC forbidden to take %age contingency fees.
Second, who is to say an EU IP uses an EU search engine?
This looks like bureaucratic window-dressing to me. Brussels is trying to be worse than Washington. Stiff competition.
Second, have you decided how you intend to licence the product? Per seat or per company? There is a fairly high risk of intra-company copying, but you should decide whether you wish to stop this or consider it marketing.
In short, there is no one answer. Thinking there is is not thinking at all.
The test is also a fraud, or at least highly deceptive since the GFWoC or prior-restraint panopticon would be most highly tuned to outbound requests rather than unsolicited inbound (like email). The former are culpable and actionable. The latter have some deniability.
Even if we think someone (the Chinese govt) is totalitairian, unjust or other unpleasant thing, do not think they agree. Most likely they see themselves as perfectly reasonable. And so one must expect them to do many reasonable things mixed in with their villainy.
One of the standard things I do when I'm forced to work on an MS-Windows box is hit CAD, bring up the TaskMangler and kill explorer.exe and all its b@st@rd children (I know, redundant). Half or more of the poxy processes disappear from the list. Icons and taskbar gone. Then I go to File->New Task(Run) and type in explorer.exe .
Bingo! Fresh, less poxy desktop.
It may be that a new mineral has been found with strong absorbtive powers for heavy cations. Zeolytes are used currently in the application.
It's a figure I remember. But have a look at webhosting agreements such as this
Fortunately, I don't need to: I've observed that the only people who use exaggered rhetoric and vilification do so to support a weak position. (Godwin's Law) They would know. I take them at their word.