A month ago, my department at work held a golf outing (I did not attend, but they are remarkably popular here). Over 70 people participated. Over the course of that Friday, three golf carts were rolled, one badly enough that the driver ended up with a broken arm and had to be carted to the ER.
Several engineers are now permanently banned from that course, and we may end up not having any more golf outings. So there is definitely a market for self-driving golf carts.
The downside, of course, is that they may well end up designed by the idiots who rolled them in the first place.
When lawyers do stupid things, it's largely because they are paid to do them. They represent the interests of their clients in regard to legal issues. Client says "we own slide to unlock," the lawyers they pay find ways to make that stick.
This doesn't make me any more fond of the tactics they use in representing those interests, but it's important to realize that they aren't usually the driving force behind it.
People like that nozzle Carreon notwithstanding....
/* may the addle-pated twit who wrote this abomination be covered in honey, fire ants, and Justin Bieber's spooge, run through Snooki's alimentary canal, then given to Dick Cheney as a hunting buddy */
That's modded funny, but it's 100% correct. That happened to Gary Fisher (of bicycling fame) some years ago. He's a bit annoyed that he can't get he company to quit putting his name on bikes he thinks aren't that good.
You'll probably getted tagged 'troll' for that, but I'll bite.
It's not that open source is not susceptible to these things (all software is). But with open source, these things are usually found more quickly, and are generally patched/fixed more quickly. I don't have statistics to support a statement that critical errors like this happen less often with open source, but I would have no trouble believing that.
Open source is usually more transparent about the problem, too. Many closed source vendors hide these things, so you never know you're vulnerable and thus can't adjust for it.
They are setting up shop in Missippi, the Florida panhandle, and other surrounding areas. Unfortunately, there are still issues and logistics problems involved in getting operators to NOLA itself. The area needs to be secured first. One ham I know was specifically told not to enter the area with his truck carrying 200 gallons of fuel -- the fear was that he would be waylaid as he drove through the city.
I'm not sure it can be helped, really. Some situations cannot be definitively described. This is why much of the law depends on precedent (decisions made by courts) to provide interpretation of legislation. Legal systems never become less complex. There is a game called Nomic (or Agora or a number of other variants) that demonstrate this quite well.
And really, given the complete lack of knowledge some legislators display, we we really WANT them to try to draw a "bright line?" I'm sure that won't end well.
My mother had this idea that she was going to name me Robert Keith, but call me Keith. My dad asked why they couldn't just name me Keith Robert. Mom said that it "didn't sound as good." Dad asked what difference it made how it sounds if nobody would use it that way. Dad's Lesson Learned: Do Not Argue With Pregnant Women. I think he slept in the garage.
At my birth, Mom took one look at me and decided that I was the spitting image of her grandfather. She decided to name me after him, so she called me Robert Scott. Problem is, her grandpa's name was DAVID. For a long time, I thought it must have been the painkillers talking, but Grandpa David was born in Scotland, and so everyone called him Scotty.
He *hated that. He thought it was akin to calling someone Polack, or Czech-boy, or Canook. He probably spins like a gyroscope every time someone uses my name.
1) When a customer purchases an XBox (or any game system for that matter) are you intrinsically "signing" an end-user agreement in the purchase that makes modding the device illegal?
I haven't seen the packaging, but EULAs aren't that common on hardware purchased. In fact, the traditional business model is that you own the hardware you have purchased, although you do not own the rights to the design. I think MS would object if you were modding boxes and reselling them, however. (We can debate whether they have a legitimate gripe all day....)
2) Could a non-profit org setup an effort to have mod chips produced and "distributed" at the cost of production w/o legal repurcussions? (i.e. would not making a profit on XBox's hardware mods protect you from their wrath?)
I doubt it. First, this isn't about profit, it's about ownership of the design. Microsoft's beef with Lik is that they are infringing on MS proprietary assets. (There's a lot more going on, of course, being that they're MS.) Even a non-profit group is not allowed to ignore intellectual property laws, so there's no protection inherent in being non-profit.
Second, remember that "non-profit" doesn't necessarily mean "makes no money." Many non-profit companies thrive & make a ton of bucks (Underwriters Labs, for ex), but they do not distribute dividends to shareholders. "Profit" is reinvested in the company. (Business gurus, correct any inaccuracies here.) As such, NP companies aren't that much different. They're still making money and paying salaries.
3) I understand the whole DRM aspect of mod'ing for playing copied games, BUT, what about legit gray-hacks like the Mandrake Linux XBox project and such?
I'm not prepared to address this one right now. (I'm at work, and I could easily spend a day trying to analyze that situation.)
Short version is that MS wants to prevent distribution of a chip they believe infringes on their intellectual property. They aren't really upset with the people making the mods...yet....
If these people don't trust the reviewers, why give them the music at all? Don't give them the chance to make copies.
For that matter, if reviewers are that untrustworthy, why allow them to review the music? They might lie, if only just for spite. Especially if you torque them off by showing them what you think of their ethics.
I wonder if the RIAA will launch a DOS attack against anyone who talks about artists without being authorized to use their names. "We're sorry, New York Times, but we didn't want you to talk about Tori(c)...."
All seriousness aside, this is definitely a step away from the Pollyanna Principle: Machines should work, People should think. Have we collectively become so frelling dumb that we need specialized microcomputers to tell us how to assemble a chair? And will the chips be programmed by the same English-inept person who wrote the obscure instruction manual? The first "some assembly required" item I hear say "All your screws are belong to us" becomes kindling....
One might think that blocking the signals is a good idea, but consider that this would be a retrofit into existing aircraft. Such is always expensive, both in the cost of the retrofit itself and the downtime of the aircraft in question. It might not be reasonable even if one has the time and money, as the solution will likely add weight to the aircraft. This can matter greatly, even on a passenger jet.
The development of signal blockage techniques would also likely be expensive, as any technique would have to be thoroughly tested in situ (not in the lab, although lab testing would also be involved) to provide any faith that the solution actually solves the problem.
The primary goal of the aviation authorities is flight safety, and they do take that seriously (although they perhaps don't always get it right). Remember, these devices were interfering with collision avoidance systems, and the only reasonable short-term solution is to ban any device that can cause a problem.
Of course, the fat guys in suits will whine, but they tend to do that anyway.
And why do people play, knowing there is a house advantage? Because people play short-term, but the casino makes money long-term. The house advantage isn't large enough to cause concern for anyone out for a good time, but it's more than enough to rake in good profit for the operators.
Everyone knows the deal (pun intended) when they walk in, as Slepnir indicates. So people shouldn't whine about it. Card counting isn't cheating, but it certainly annoys the casino, and you should just exit gracefully (with your money) when you're asked to leave.
[Please]. The travesty in all this isn't that directors are fighting our ability to buy [pirated] copies of movies, it's that any[body] would try to take the [naughty bits] out of a film in the first place. Don't watch the [silly] movie if it offends you so much. While we're at it let's erase all the footage of Elvis Presley's [inappropriate moves] and file the [barnacles] off the Statue of Liberty. Some people just have no sense...
Slashdot Mirror
A month ago, my department at work held a golf outing (I did not attend, but they are remarkably popular here). Over 70 people participated. Over the course of that Friday, three golf carts were rolled, one badly enough that the driver ended up with a broken arm and had to be carted to the ER.
Several engineers are now permanently banned from that course, and we may end up not having any more golf outings. So there is definitely a market for self-driving golf carts.
The downside, of course, is that they may well end up designed by the idiots who rolled them in the first place.
Not an excuse, but a reminder that the lawyers aren't the only ones involved. Barking about only the lawyers won't be enough to fix these problems.
When lawyers do stupid things, it's largely because they are paid to do them. They represent the interests of their clients in regard to legal issues. Client says "we own slide to unlock," the lawyers they pay find ways to make that stick.
This doesn't make me any more fond of the tactics they use in representing those interests, but it's important to realize that they aren't usually the driving force behind it.
People like that nozzle Carreon notwithstanding....
/* may the addle-pated twit who wrote this abomination be covered in honey, fire ants, and Justin Bieber's spooge, run through Snooki's alimentary canal, then given to Dick Cheney as a hunting buddy */
But perhaps I'm just a cynical bastard.
"The art of accurate observation is often called 'cynicism' by those who do not possess it." -- G B Shaw
That's modded funny, but it's 100% correct. That happened to Gary Fisher (of bicycling fame) some years ago. He's a bit annoyed that he can't get he company to quit putting his name on bikes he thinks aren't that good.
You'll probably getted tagged 'troll' for that, but I'll bite.
It's not that open source is not susceptible to these things (all software is). But with open source, these things are usually found more quickly, and are generally patched/fixed more quickly. I don't have statistics to support a statement that critical errors like this happen less often with open source, but I would have no trouble believing that.
Open source is usually more transparent about the problem, too. Many closed source vendors hide these things, so you never know you're vulnerable and thus can't adjust for it.
I wonder if it can replace Slashdot's tagging beta....
They are setting up shop in Missippi, the Florida panhandle, and other surrounding areas. Unfortunately, there are still issues and logistics problems involved in getting operators to NOLA itself. The area needs to be secured first. One ham I know was specifically told not to enter the area with his truck carrying 200 gallons of fuel -- the fear was that he would be waylaid as he drove through the city.
gm
They gotta be....
I'm not sure it can be helped, really. Some situations cannot be definitively described. This is why much of the law depends on precedent (decisions made by courts) to provide interpretation of legislation. Legal systems never become less complex. There is a game called Nomic (or Agora or a number of other variants) that demonstrate this quite well.
And really, given the complete lack of knowledge some legislators display, we we really WANT them to try to draw a "bright line?" I'm sure that won't end well.
My mother had this idea that she was going to name me Robert Keith, but call me Keith. My dad asked why they couldn't just name me Keith Robert. Mom said that it "didn't sound as good." Dad asked what difference it made how it sounds if nobody would use it that way. Dad's Lesson Learned: Do Not Argue With Pregnant Women. I think he slept in the garage.
At my birth, Mom took one look at me and decided that I was the spitting image of her grandfather. She decided to name me after him, so she called me Robert Scott. Problem is, her grandpa's name was DAVID. For a long time, I thought it must have been the painkillers talking, but Grandpa David was born in Scotland, and so everyone called him Scotty.
He *hated that. He thought it was akin to calling someone Polack, or Czech-boy, or Canook. He probably spins like a gyroscope every time someone uses my name.
Scott
...and a good example of why geeks and lawyers shouldn't mate. :)
1) When a customer purchases an XBox (or any game system for that matter) are you intrinsically "signing" an end-user agreement in the purchase that makes modding the device illegal?
I haven't seen the packaging, but EULAs aren't that common on hardware purchased. In fact, the traditional business model is that you own the hardware you have purchased, although you do not own the rights to the design. I think MS would object if you were modding boxes and reselling them, however. (We can debate whether they have a legitimate gripe all day....)
2) Could a non-profit org setup an effort to have mod chips produced and "distributed" at the cost of production w/o legal repurcussions? (i.e. would not making a profit on XBox's hardware mods protect you from their wrath?)
I doubt it. First, this isn't about profit, it's about ownership of the design. Microsoft's beef with Lik is that they are infringing on MS proprietary assets. (There's a lot more going on, of course, being that they're MS.) Even a non-profit group is not allowed to ignore intellectual property laws, so there's no protection inherent in being non-profit.
Second, remember that "non-profit" doesn't necessarily mean "makes no money." Many non-profit companies thrive & make a ton of bucks (Underwriters Labs, for ex), but they do not distribute dividends to shareholders. "Profit" is reinvested in the company. (Business gurus, correct any inaccuracies here.) As such, NP companies aren't that much different. They're still making money and paying salaries.
3) I understand the whole DRM aspect of mod'ing for playing copied games, BUT, what about legit gray-hacks like the Mandrake Linux XBox project and such?
I'm not prepared to address this one right now. (I'm at work, and I could easily spend a day trying to analyze that situation.)
Short version is that MS wants to prevent distribution of a chip they believe infringes on their intellectual property. They aren't really upset with the people making the mods...yet....
If these people don't trust the reviewers, why give them the music at all? Don't give them the chance to make copies.
For that matter, if reviewers are that untrustworthy, why allow them to review the music? They might lie, if only just for spite. Especially if you torque them off by showing them what you think of their ethics.
I wonder if the RIAA will launch a DOS attack against anyone who talks about artists without being authorized to use their names. "We're sorry, New York Times, but we didn't want you to talk about Tori(c)...."
Instruction manual? What are those? :)
All seriousness aside, this is definitely a step away from the Pollyanna Principle: Machines should work, People should think. Have we collectively become so frelling dumb that we need specialized microcomputers to tell us how to assemble a chair? And will the chips be programmed by the same English-inept person who wrote the obscure instruction manual? The first "some assembly required" item I hear say "All your screws are belong to us" becomes kindling....
One might think that blocking the signals is a good idea, but consider that this would be a retrofit into existing aircraft. Such is always expensive, both in the cost of the retrofit itself and the downtime of the aircraft in question. It might not be reasonable even if one has the time and money, as the solution will likely add weight to the aircraft. This can matter greatly, even on a passenger jet.
The development of signal blockage techniques would also likely be expensive, as any technique would have to be thoroughly tested in situ (not in the lab, although lab testing would also be involved) to provide any faith that the solution actually solves the problem.
The primary goal of the aviation authorities is flight safety, and they do take that seriously (although they perhaps don't always get it right). Remember, these devices were interfering with collision avoidance systems, and the only reasonable short-term solution is to ban any device that can cause a problem.
Of course, the fat guys in suits will whine, but they tend to do that anyway.
gm
They can see that you frequent www.goatse.cx, but they can't see what you saw. They may have to go there themselves...
FBI Drone 1: Henry, did you check out that goatse.cx site yet?
FBI Drone 2: Yeah. It's just a picture of Fritz Hollings. No big deal.
I sued Verisign for accidentally transferring jonkatzfanclub.com to me, but since only the goatse.cx guy ever visited, I got only 65 cents.
And why do people play, knowing there is a house advantage? Because people play short-term, but the casino makes money long-term. The house advantage isn't large enough to cause concern for anyone out for a good time, but it's more than enough to rake in good profit for the operators.
Everyone knows the deal (pun intended) when they walk in, as Slepnir indicates. So people shouldn't whine about it. Card counting isn't cheating, but it certainly annoys the casino, and you should just exit gracefully (with your money) when you're asked to leave.
gm
Because there's no end to those pricks. Jeez....
Check the schedule...about three hours in 24 is actual music. (Most of that is probably advertising.)
because Miss Cleo told me not to answer these things. She's saved me a lot of money, let me tell you!
[Please]. The travesty in all this isn't that directors are fighting our ability to buy [pirated] copies of movies, it's that any[body] would try to take the [naughty bits] out of a film in the first place. Don't watch the [silly] movie if it offends you so much. While we're at it let's erase all the footage of Elvis Presley's [inappropriate moves] and file the [barnacles] off the Statue of Liberty. Some people just have no sense...
No. Some of us still get laid on occasion.