Fact is, these are notoriously liberal states who, in typical liberal fashion, want to pass legislation that protects people from themselves. (Big Brother knows better than you what behavior is "safe!")
Actually, I think these laws are designed to protect me from YOU on your cellphone, not from myself.
Whether or not its all just a part of the Big Liberal Conspiracy is a different debate;-)
Hmmm, just had this thought. If you really knew how to break into the system that was the focus of the $1,000,000 challenge, your best bet would be:
1) Confirm that your hack/exploit really works, but DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING 2) Wait until the contest ends and the system is declared "uhackable" 3) Wait a bit longer until the "unhackable" sytem is adopted by a bunch of big businesses 4) Make a lot more than the original prize fee by pillaging the "unhackable" systems.
In a related story, 500,000 members of the Red Cross Movement gathered in protest to demand the death of the game developers responsible for the misuse of the symbol and legislation to prevent the symbol from ever being misused again.
Would it be possible for the new sectional article header feature default to off for non-logged-in readers? ie opt-in rather than opt-out?;-)
Currently when I browse, I'm usually not logged in. All I want to see are the top stories and the top-modded comments. If I'm particularly interested in a story and want to see deeper into the comment stack, or if I want to see the additional stories and sectional content, I log in.
We'll be watching for others to take the content and redo it, and then we'll be able to use that content as well for our own gain.
My NaL understanding is that if I record a public domain song, the recording thereof would be covered by copyright. The underlying composition (the song) is still in the public domain, and I don't have to pay royalties to anyone, but my recording would fall under copyright law. Anyone wanting to exploit my recording of the PD song would owe me mechanical royalties, but not songwriting royalties.
Similarly, if I create a derivitave work from a public domain song, my derivitave work would also be covered by copyright. How again will you be using other peoples' content for your gain?
Note that I'm not dismissing your basic premise; it is interesting and I'll be curious to know how it works out. Just curious about this one point. Maybe I'm just an idiot about copyright law... I'm sure if that is the case it will be pointed out ever so gently in the next 5 minutes.
CDBaby is really easy to work with, IMHO. They sell both physical CDs (which you ship to them, they warehouse and fulfill orders for) AND make your music available to most of the online digital services. You get paid both ways.
Yes, they take a chunk off the top of each sale ($4) and each digital download (9% of what they get from the digital vendor). There is also a fee to set a new recording up in their system ($35).
There are similar sites to CDBaby that charge a bit more or a bit less, take a bigger or smaller % of the proceeds, but personally I have found them easy to deal with, helpful if you have questions, and you can actually email or call a Real Person (tm) if you want.
I thought cancer cells die just like regular cells; however their vastly increased reproduction rates, over time, cause the "cancer" effect and runaway growth?
What we need now is a MAJOR artist to break away and go it his or her or their own. Someone like Neil Young, or Dylan or the Stones or U2. A major musical act. They have the money to break away, and they can show that it CAN be done. Cut out the middle man, that's all these record companies are. They're unneeded in today's world.
A major established artist breaking away from the labels and successfully going it alone would be interesting, and would definitely cause the labels some stress. They would be forced to be more flexible with their existing artists to "keep they happy". However, the RIAA would remain.
A totally unknown artist BECOMING hugely successful, solely through the available tools in this "new age of music and songs and publishing" would be a backbreaker for the RIAA labels. Just one artist that is good enough to use self-recording, self-promotion, touring and merchandising, digital sales via iTunes and others to become a star on the level of U2, the Stones, etc.
Why would any artist after that point sign with any RIAA label? That's what it will take to get rid of the RIAA.
RayOz: What are we going to do, we've got nothing to sell here... BillG: I'll tell you what we're gonna have to do... RayOz: What? BillG: Jazz odyssey! RayOz: We're not going about to do a free-form jazz, uh, exploration in front of a festival crowd!
--- Microsoft Mark II performs Jazz Odyssey --- BillG: You are witnesess at the new birth of Microsoft Mark II, hope you enjoy our new direction...
Seriously though, it's pretty obvious if you study the theory that it really does have a lot of areas where uncertainty reigns.
So?
That doesn't mean that an intelligent designer did it. The "God of the Gaps" argument holds no H2O.
All it means is that there are areas where uncertainly reigns. That's what science is supposed to DO... clear up our 'areas of uncertainty' with respect to the physical universe.
Slashdot Mirror
Fact is, these are notoriously liberal states who, in typical liberal fashion, want to pass legislation that protects people from themselves. (Big Brother knows better than you what behavior is "safe!")
;-)
Actually, I think these laws are designed to protect me from YOU on your cellphone, not from myself.
Whether or not its all just a part of the Big Liberal Conspiracy is a different debate
I know, I know ... Jack Valenti. But he did have a point.
Even a blind squirrel occasionaly finds a nut.
It is left as an exercise for the reader to determine if Mr. Valenti is the squirrel or the nut.
Hmmm, just had this thought. If you really knew how to break into the system that was the focus of the $1,000,000 challenge, your best bet would be:
1) Confirm that your hack/exploit really works, but DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING
2) Wait until the contest ends and the system is declared "uhackable"
3) Wait a bit longer until the "unhackable" sytem is adopted by a bunch of big businesses
4) Make a lot more than the original prize fee by pillaging the "unhackable" systems.
oh.... I suppose it should have read
4) Profit!
So you are spending close to $2000 so you can have slightly better graphics in WarCraft? ;)
You must be new here.
So we don't know which way we're driving, all we know is we're driving quickly.
Gotta love that Heisenberg!
In a related story, 500,000 members of the Red Cross Movement gathered in protest to demand the death of the game developers responsible for the misuse of the symbol and legislation to prevent the symbol from ever being misused again.
I've always thought that if you get far enough out the left or right wings the tips touch.
...it could be one of those that swims up your organic tube and when snug as a bug.... POOF! Blows up and stays in there.
(/me watches as half the slashdotters in here crosses legs)
Waaaaaay more than half.
Would it be possible for the new sectional article header feature default to off for non-logged-in readers? ie opt-in rather than opt-out? ;-)
/. this way.
Currently when I browse, I'm usually not logged in. All I want to see are the top stories and the top-modded comments. If I'm particularly interested in a story and want to see deeper into the comment stack, or if I want to see the additional stories and sectional content, I log in.
Eh, maybe I'm the only one that reads
(Score:2, Offtopic)
I wish I could mod the moderation of the parent as Funny.
We'll be watching for others to take the content and redo it, and then we'll be able to use that content as well for our own gain.
... I'm sure if that is the case it will be pointed out ever so gently in the next 5 minutes.
My NaL understanding is that if I record a public domain song, the recording thereof would be covered by copyright. The underlying composition (the song) is still in the public domain, and I don't have to pay royalties to anyone, but my recording would fall under copyright law. Anyone wanting to exploit my recording of the PD song would owe me mechanical royalties, but not songwriting royalties.
Similarly, if I create a derivitave work from a public domain song, my derivitave work would also be covered by copyright. How again will you be using other peoples' content for your gain?
Note that I'm not dismissing your basic premise; it is interesting and I'll be curious to know how it works out. Just curious about this one point. Maybe I'm just an idiot about copyright law
"The mentality was we need to get these guys, and we're going to do whatever it takes to get them."
Like that's a bad thing.
Someone in NYC is a terrorist, so we're doing whatever it takes to get them. Are the nukes ready?
'Whatever it takes' thinking IS a bad thing.
You know it is not worth reading. Yet more pseudoscience combined with conspiracy theories...... how boring.
:-)
imho you're reading it all wrong. This:
"I have invested over 30 years researching the vast history of giants."
is some funny stuff
Heck, this was even on /. around the same time 13 Things That Do Not Make Sense
Well, that at least makes PERFECT sense.
Tyler? Is that you?
You KNOW you just broke the first two rules, right?
ditto emusic.com
Everything I've bought there plays just fine on my iPod. straight mp3, no DRM. gee, imagine that.
I never trusted that damn Snuffleupagus! Its obvious he's behind the whole thing. "Camsnuffling" indeed.
how many stories has Slashdot lifted from other tech sites?
itself included?
Don't root Texas.
CDBaby is really easy to work with, IMHO. They sell both physical CDs (which you ship to them, they warehouse and fulfill orders for) AND make your music available to most of the online digital services. You get paid both ways.
Yes, they take a chunk off the top of each sale ($4) and each digital download (9% of what they get from the digital vendor). There is also a fee to set a new recording up in their system ($35).
There are similar sites to CDBaby that charge a bit more or a bit less, take a bigger or smaller % of the proceeds, but personally I have found them easy to deal with, helpful if you have questions, and you can actually email or call a Real Person (tm) if you want.
I thought cancer cells die just like regular cells; however their vastly increased reproduction rates, over time, cause the "cancer" effect and runaway growth?
What we need now is a MAJOR artist to break away and go it his or her or their own. Someone like Neil Young, or Dylan or the Stones or U2. A major musical act. They have the money to break away, and they can show that it CAN be done. Cut out the middle man, that's all these record companies are. They're unneeded in today's world.
A major established artist breaking away from the labels and successfully going it alone would be interesting, and would definitely cause the labels some stress. They would be forced to be more flexible with their existing artists to "keep they happy". However, the RIAA would remain.
A totally unknown artist BECOMING hugely successful, solely through the available tools in this "new age of music and songs and publishing" would be a backbreaker for the RIAA labels. Just one artist that is good enough to use self-recording, self-promotion, touring and merchandising, digital sales via iTunes and others to become a star on the level of U2, the Stones, etc.
Why would any artist after that point sign with any RIAA label? That's what it will take to get rid of the RIAA.
RayOz: What are we going to do, we've got nothing to sell here...
BillG: I'll tell you what we're gonna have to do...
RayOz: What?
BillG: Jazz odyssey!
RayOz: We're not going about to do a free-form jazz, uh, exploration in front of a festival crowd!
--- Microsoft Mark II performs Jazz Odyssey ---
BillG: You are witnesess at the new birth of Microsoft Mark II, hope you enjoy our new direction...
(with due respects to Spinal Tap)
Seriously though, it's pretty obvious if you study the theory that it really does have a lot of areas where uncertainty reigns.
... clear up our 'areas of uncertainty' with respect to the physical universe.
So?
That doesn't mean that an intelligent designer did it. The "God of the Gaps" argument holds no H2O.
All it means is that there are areas where uncertainly reigns. That's what science is supposed to DO
you are SO sleeping on the couch tonight...