Actually, when referring to "Socialist," I was referring to FDR and other big government presidents. I did not refer to Bush.
And, as far as assumptions go, I do not intend to practice law. I plan on returning to IT. However, lawyers do not exist as a part of government, although they do interact with it. So, you can have lawyers without big government. Just look at the American Colonial period.
"Just this week, Bush signed into law a bill that was not Constitutional, because it had not been agreed in the same terms by both Senate and House of Representatives."
Oh, yes. I'm in law school right now. We were talking about how *common* it is for the bill that finally makes it to the Executive is not "agreed to in the same terms." This happens all the time without it being "unconstitutional."
Hell, even when they use the same word, they may not think they mean the same thing. Sort of like the word "ring." Now, when you read that do you think of the thing around your finger, your ear or nose, or where boxers fight? I was talking about what one would to with a bell by striking it.
Stop complaining about "unconstitutional" this and "unconstitutional" that. Half the friggin' Executive Branch should be unconstitutional as it opperates as both the friggin' Legislative and Judicial branches. But, this is what the "government is good" Socialist crowd wants. Don't complain when you get it.
I attend law school, which not only allows laptops in class, but has wifi. I traditionally sit in the nosebleed rows and so I have the opportunity to see what most students do with that wonderful combination. Most surf the web, a few play Yahoo! games, and still others play Solitare. Few ever too producitve notes. I myself brought a laptop to classes.
This semester, I started weaning myself off of the laptop. I started with a mostly lecture class with a high informantion density. I found my understanding of the material was improved by actuall jotting down notes into a cheap moleskine knock-off. So, after a week I stopped using the laptop in another class. Now, I'm down to only using the laptop in one class. I tried to wean off of that, but the information density in the class is essentially a vacuum.
The result? Much better understanding of the material. I'm more invested in the class because I'm trapped in the professor's world. That said, this semester I did a much better job than in past semesters with taking notes on the laptop, but the overall quality of my notes spiked after I stopped.
I do not believe a laptop materially adds to the classroom.
Having given presentations in such classes where laptops are in use, I can say that it is also obvious who is paying attention and who is not.
May not win on this as there is denial. What they could do instead is charge a $10 per item tax on top, require the shops be five miles from any habitation, and only be able to sell products from midnight to 5a.
If Comcast is hamstringing Vonage users to foster growth of their own VOIP, that would be tortous interference in a major way. The first VOIP-war would likely end up in court really soon. It would be pretty easy for Vonage to show how only Comcast users have a problem by IP.
I have watched people in first class (and back with me in the cheap seats) jabbering away on cell phones. It was irritating once because the rather large woman was also quite loud and spent the entire flight engaged in a conversation that was probably not suitable for the public. I was six rows away and heard her--which you probably know is no small feat.
Oddly enough, the plane still managed to find its way.
"43 Multiply line 42 by the total of lines 28, 36, 38, 39. This is your refund."
Of course, the form does not explain whether 1 or 10 is highest for blank 42, which requires a several page instruction sequence including demonstrations. Any score above 6 requires completing the IRS Form 1981-R37 which explores your opinion of the greatness of the President in detail to ensure you aren't just screwing with the IRS to get a higher refund. IRS Form 1066-D49, on the other hand, explores why you think the President is a clod (i.e., score below 4), because nobody would be that stupid to intentionally reduce their refund.
Alternatively, during Democrat Administrations, IRS Form 1984-D87 and IRS Form 1933-R10 are used, respectively. On the off chance a non-Dem, non-Rep is elected, then IRS Form 1984URN-ID10T is used in both cases.
"It is a Trojan and those have existed since the first rm -rf / script."
I don't get it. I tried running the "rm -rf/" script, and got nothing. I tried it again as root. It just sat there and worked patiently for a few minutes before returning a prompt. Was it supposed to do something cool? If so, maybe I should have run it on a desktop instead of the production server? Any hints at what I did wrong?
Maybe I should try it on my Windows machine next? Shouldn't I type "C:\" instead? Or, is this script not that portable?
I have a feeling Microsoft never bought into the whole Dale Carnegie bit about winning friends. In the US, I opine MS could face sanctions. Be interesting to see what happens here.
"History will show that this election was a coup d'état [wikipedia.org], and that we were the fools who let it happen."
Okay, why do you need to share with the class what the proper meaning of a coup is? I think most readers know what you mean. This incessant referring to the Wikipedia for mundane things has got to stop.
Yes, you are.:-) After all, that is set in the future.
I actually thought that the explosion of the Death Star, which occurred "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away" would have just about reached us by now. Watch for a second similar "mystery" explosion in about ten years.
"'The city's arguments here are of a policy rather than a legal character, and are more appropriately addressed to the Indiana Legislature rather than to this court," Murray wrote. "The courts cannot fill gaps in a statutory scheme designed by the legislature.'"
This judge chose not to "legislate from the bench," but instead deferred to the people, via the legislature, to determine public policy. So, for this coup we have to thank a non-activist judge.
"Oracle's latest 'purchases' of these Open Source projects will not threaten MySQL at all. You can't apply for-profit, closed source takeover pressure to OSS code. The GPL prevents exactly this by keeping the source freely available and open."
No true, Oracle can rescend the license. The GPL is a license given by the copyright owner that allows you to use the intellectual property. That license can be rescended and all future versions of that software are closed. If you are not already working on a fork of the GPL'd code, then you may have a harder time enforcing the license. When you have built off a GPL'd license, you can probably use equitable estoppel to prevent your license from being terminated. GPL is not public domain, and the copyright holder should be able to control his own product and say "any further use of this property is denied."
This is a case of smothering. MySQL is caught in a bind that reduces its creditiblity at a critical time. Very strategic move on Oracle's part because MySQL is clearly on the rout. The message is "if you do not own the critical element of your enterprise, then you are at a marked disadvantage." Of course, this is practially Business 101--own it, before your competition does.
That said, I support OSS fully, and advocate it when possible. I'm sure MySQL will rebound.
"Is this really due to the brain 'working on' problems in your sleep?"
I've suffered from this problem. I would have a hard time coding a solution at work, something that really plumbed the depths of my understanding--which probably isn't too difficult a feat. Then, I'd go home and sleep. During the night, I would dream myself coding the solution--read the code, then wake up. I would then pseudocode the solution and go back to sleep. Next day, *poof* coding was a breeze.
So, at least sometimes my mind is providing answers while I sleep. Other times, it's just screwing around. Damn loafer. Get back to work!
"If this was true, there would never have been a SCO lawsuit. There would never have been a file sharing lawsuit, either, since the people uploading MP3s wouldn't be financially gaining from their actions (and, it follows, the people providing the services wouldn't have been supporting or encouraging an illegal activity). Copyright infringement rules say nothing whatsoever about gain."
Not quite. Copyright infringement also occurs when one publishes anothers intellectual property without their permission. That is, to transmit to others without permission is infringement. However, copying for one's own use is Fair Use as there is no "economic gain" involved. There are other categories of Fair Use, but I would not want to bore you. It's in the law.
Back at cha. I agree your reply was well-intended dialog.:-) However, in response:
Civil disobedience is constructive violation of grossly immoral laws. This is is in response to your comment of the civil rights struggle of the Sixties. What you described in your comment were examples of civil disobedience.
I would point out that what happened was no less a revolution. There was significant social upheaval during the Sixties, which effected positive change. However, the MLKj and Rosa Parks approach was via a less-distructive approach. I do not see how this compares to illegal theft of one's intellectual property. The purpose behind the disobedience was to effect change. The reason for theft of intellectual property is to enrich one's self by not paying for entertainment. The first is inherently selfless--willing to go to jail to underscore abject injustice. The second is inherently selfish--obtaining means of gratification.
I do see the potential long-term effects of the entertainment industry. However, rather than steal a few songs as you admit to, I have chosen instead to send myself to law school (to the detriment of my family and loss of a social life) to better understand the problem. I have also suggested a productive response: take the fight to the aisles of Congress via anti-entertainment industry lobbying. Openly defying the law gives the other side fodder. They can pick pirates off one-by-one and nail some major cases--and in the process fuel their argument for tighter controls. The first rule to fighting a fire is to starve it. Fight these guys by not giving them the excuse to push for legislation.
I come here not to praise the industry, but to hobble it.
I fight the system personally by only buying used CDs--so the industry has reaped all the profits it will get. Although, I also use Netflix to avoid the high price of movie tickets. I don't attend concerts, and I have the barest of Cable (I want to drop, wife says no).
Copyright infringement occurs only when you reproduce another's intellectual property for economic gain. The classic example is when you download free music from a peer-to-peer, or copy a friend's CD so you don't have to buy your own. Basically, if you acquire the music without paying for it originally, then you're infringing. Whether one think's "sticking it to the man" is the morally right thing to do really is not relevant. There are many things which are legal which aren't moral, and vice versa. However, in a nation presumably governed by the rule of law, we are obliged to follow the law to the best of our ability. Don't like it, work for a change in the law via legal means.
I have to say that there are some on Slashdot who figure that because the industry makes too much money, or because they complain of piracy, that it's okay to become a pirate by illegally acquiring music. This is Robin Hood mentality, IMO.
Conversely, if I buy a copy of a CD, then I can do whatever I like with the contents therein. I can barbeque it, chop it, saute it, rip it, make a tape copy. That is "Fair Use," which is reproducing copies for non-economic gain. And, making a copy to give to a friend does not qualify. Buying the music and making a reasonable backup is legitimate, IMO.
Before we go tilting after the windmill of the RIAA, we should first get our house in order.
And, for those who complain that the entertainment industry has too much influence over government, try this two-edged sword approach. First, give up any entertainment expenses--get rid of cable, stop buying music (without stealing), and don't go to any more movies (watch what comes on the antenna). That will cut their revenue. Second, the money that you save by these expense cuts should be put into a common kitty to hire your own lobbyists. If several hundred thousand or a few million people do this, then the anti-entertainment lobby group will have the resources to put the entertainment industry in retreat. Fight fire with fire. Stop bitching "one dollar, one vote," and put your money where your mouth is.
If you want change in the system, you have to do so according to the system. The only other alternative is revolution, which is a little extreme for cheaper access to Prince and the Revolution, or the Matrix Trilogy.
Intel is merely capitalizing on Apple's move to their chipset. After all, since the CPU is the center of the computer, the new Intel processors will be the "Apple's Core!" Ha! Hah!
Thank you! I'll be here all weekend. Don't forget to tip your waitress.
What Netflix should do is change the process a bit. For those who view over 12 movies per week, charge them $1 for each additional video. That will allow them to honor the 3 movie at a time crowd who cycles through each movie each week (3 X 4= 12), without being raped by higher cost of shipping.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, when referring to "Socialist," I was referring to FDR and other big government presidents. I did not refer to Bush.
And, as far as assumptions go, I do not intend to practice law. I plan on returning to IT. However, lawyers do not exist as a part of government, although they do interact with it. So, you can have lawyers without big government. Just look at the American Colonial period.
"Just this week, Bush signed into law a bill that was not Constitutional, because it had not been agreed in the same terms by both Senate and House of Representatives."
Oh, yes. I'm in law school right now. We were talking about how *common* it is for the bill that finally makes it to the Executive is not "agreed to in the same terms." This happens all the time without it being "unconstitutional."
Hell, even when they use the same word, they may not think they mean the same thing. Sort of like the word "ring." Now, when you read that do you think of the thing around your finger, your ear or nose, or where boxers fight? I was talking about what one would to with a bell by striking it.
Stop complaining about "unconstitutional" this and "unconstitutional" that. Half the friggin' Executive Branch should be unconstitutional as it opperates as both the friggin' Legislative and Judicial branches. But, this is what the "government is good" Socialist crowd wants. Don't complain when you get it.
I attend law school, which not only allows laptops in class, but has wifi. I traditionally sit in the nosebleed rows and so I have the opportunity to see what most students do with that wonderful combination. Most surf the web, a few play Yahoo! games, and still others play Solitare. Few ever too producitve notes. I myself brought a laptop to classes.
This semester, I started weaning myself off of the laptop. I started with a mostly lecture class with a high informantion density. I found my understanding of the material was improved by actuall jotting down notes into a cheap moleskine knock-off. So, after a week I stopped using the laptop in another class. Now, I'm down to only using the laptop in one class. I tried to wean off of that, but the information density in the class is essentially a vacuum.
The result? Much better understanding of the material. I'm more invested in the class because I'm trapped in the professor's world. That said, this semester I did a much better job than in past semesters with taking notes on the laptop, but the overall quality of my notes spiked after I stopped.
I do not believe a laptop materially adds to the classroom.
Having given presentations in such classes where laptops are in use, I can say that it is also obvious who is paying attention and who is not.
Granted, this is my experience, YMMV.
May not win on this as there is denial. What they could do instead is charge a $10 per item tax on top, require the shops be five miles from any habitation, and only be able to sell products from midnight to 5a.
Best to watch the whole thing with Mercury as the center, not the Sun. Much more entertaining.
If Comcast is hamstringing Vonage users to foster growth of their own VOIP, that would be tortous interference in a major way. The first VOIP-war would likely end up in court really soon. It would be pretty easy for Vonage to show how only Comcast users have a problem by IP.
I have watched people in first class (and back with me in the cheap seats) jabbering away on cell phones. It was irritating once because the rather large woman was also quite loud and spent the entire flight engaged in a conversation that was probably not suitable for the public. I was six rows away and heard her--which you probably know is no small feat.
Oddly enough, the plane still managed to find its way.
"43 Multiply line 42 by the total of lines 28, 36, 38, 39. This is your refund."
Of course, the form does not explain whether 1 or 10 is highest for blank 42, which requires a several page instruction sequence including demonstrations. Any score above 6 requires completing the IRS Form 1981-R37 which explores your opinion of the greatness of the President in detail to ensure you aren't just screwing with the IRS to get a higher refund. IRS Form 1066-D49, on the other hand, explores why you think the President is a clod (i.e., score below 4), because nobody would be that stupid to intentionally reduce their refund.
Alternatively, during Democrat Administrations, IRS Form 1984-D87 and IRS Form 1933-R10 are used, respectively. On the off chance a non-Dem, non-Rep is elected, then IRS Form 1984URN-ID10T is used in both cases.
"It is a Trojan and those have existed since the first rm -rf / script."
/" script, and got nothing. I tried it again as root. It just sat there and worked patiently for a few minutes before returning a prompt. Was it supposed to do something cool? If so, maybe I should have run it on a desktop instead of the production server? Any hints at what I did wrong?
I don't get it. I tried running the "rm -rf
Maybe I should try it on my Windows machine next? Shouldn't I type "C:\" instead? Or, is this script not that portable?
I have a feeling Microsoft never bought into the whole Dale Carnegie bit about winning friends. In the US, I opine MS could face sanctions. Be interesting to see what happens here.
". . . the amount of paperwork I have to go through to move even simple projects through work is ridiculous."
Um, did you forget to put the TPS cover sheet on again?!
"History will show that this election was a coup d'état [wikipedia.org], and that we were the fools who let it happen."
Okay, why do you need to share with the class what the proper meaning of a coup is? I think most readers know what you mean. This incessant referring to the Wikipedia for mundane things has got to stop.
And remember, Clinton was by plurality, too.
Yes, you are. :-) After all, that is set in the future.
I actually thought that the explosion of the Death Star, which occurred "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away" would have just about reached us by now. Watch for a second similar "mystery" explosion in about ten years.
"'The city's arguments here are of a policy rather than a legal character, and are more appropriately addressed to the Indiana Legislature rather than to this court," Murray wrote. "The courts cannot fill gaps in a statutory scheme designed by the legislature.'"
This judge chose not to "legislate from the bench," but instead deferred to the people, via the legislature, to determine public policy. So, for this coup we have to thank a non-activist judge.
Even so. I think Apple's trying to corner the market on 'i' named items so when we get robots it can claim 'iRobot.' :-)
"It would be nice if they got the hint, but I seriously doubt it until somebody else comes along with a good product (apple perhaps?)."
Um, Alex, that would be the "iRead"(r) by Apple, and it will accept ASCII2.
"Oracle's latest 'purchases' of these Open Source projects will not threaten MySQL at all. You can't apply for-profit, closed source takeover pressure to OSS code. The GPL prevents exactly this by keeping the source freely available and open."
No true, Oracle can rescend the license. The GPL is a license given by the copyright owner that allows you to use the intellectual property. That license can be rescended and all future versions of that software are closed. If you are not already working on a fork of the GPL'd code, then you may have a harder time enforcing the license. When you have built off a GPL'd license, you can probably use equitable estoppel to prevent your license from being terminated. GPL is not public domain, and the copyright holder should be able to control his own product and say "any further use of this property is denied."
This is a case of smothering. MySQL is caught in a bind that reduces its creditiblity at a critical time. Very strategic move on Oracle's part because MySQL is clearly on the rout. The message is "if you do not own the critical element of your enterprise, then you are at a marked disadvantage." Of course, this is practially Business 101--own it, before your competition does.
That said, I support OSS fully, and advocate it when possible. I'm sure MySQL will rebound.
"Is this really due to the brain 'working on' problems in your sleep?"
I've suffered from this problem. I would have a hard time coding a solution at work, something that really plumbed the depths of my understanding--which probably isn't too difficult a feat. Then, I'd go home and sleep. During the night, I would dream myself coding the solution--read the code, then wake up. I would then pseudocode the solution and go back to sleep. Next day, *poof* coding was a breeze.
So, at least sometimes my mind is providing answers while I sleep. Other times, it's just screwing around. Damn loafer. Get back to work!
"If this was true, there would never have been a SCO lawsuit. There would never have been a file sharing lawsuit, either, since the people uploading MP3s wouldn't be financially gaining from their actions (and, it follows, the people providing the services wouldn't have been supporting or encouraging an illegal activity). Copyright infringement rules say nothing whatsoever about gain."
Not quite. Copyright infringement also occurs when one publishes anothers intellectual property without their permission. That is, to transmit to others without permission is infringement. However, copying for one's own use is Fair Use as there is no "economic gain" involved. There are other categories of Fair Use, but I would not want to bore you. It's in the law.
Back at cha. I agree your reply was well-intended dialog. :-) However, in response:
Civil disobedience is constructive violation of grossly immoral laws. This is is in response to your comment of the civil rights struggle of the Sixties. What you described in your comment were examples of civil disobedience.
I would point out that what happened was no less a revolution. There was significant social upheaval during the Sixties, which effected positive change. However, the MLKj and Rosa Parks approach was via a less-distructive approach. I do not see how this compares to illegal theft of one's intellectual property. The purpose behind the disobedience was to effect change. The reason for theft of intellectual property is to enrich one's self by not paying for entertainment. The first is inherently selfless--willing to go to jail to underscore abject injustice. The second is inherently selfish--obtaining means of gratification.
I do see the potential long-term effects of the entertainment industry. However, rather than steal a few songs as you admit to, I have chosen instead to send myself to law school (to the detriment of my family and loss of a social life) to better understand the problem. I have also suggested a productive response: take the fight to the aisles of Congress via anti-entertainment industry lobbying. Openly defying the law gives the other side fodder. They can pick pirates off one-by-one and nail some major cases--and in the process fuel their argument for tighter controls. The first rule to fighting a fire is to starve it. Fight these guys by not giving them the excuse to push for legislation.
I come here not to praise the industry, but to hobble it.
I fight the system personally by only buying used CDs--so the industry has reaped all the profits it will get. Although, I also use Netflix to avoid the high price of movie tickets. I don't attend concerts, and I have the barest of Cable (I want to drop, wife says no).
Copyright infringement occurs only when you reproduce another's intellectual property for economic gain. The classic example is when you download free music from a peer-to-peer, or copy a friend's CD so you don't have to buy your own. Basically, if you acquire the music without paying for it originally, then you're infringing. Whether one think's "sticking it to the man" is the morally right thing to do really is not relevant. There are many things which are legal which aren't moral, and vice versa. However, in a nation presumably governed by the rule of law, we are obliged to follow the law to the best of our ability. Don't like it, work for a change in the law via legal means.
I have to say that there are some on Slashdot who figure that because the industry makes too much money, or because they complain of piracy, that it's okay to become a pirate by illegally acquiring music. This is Robin Hood mentality, IMO.
Conversely, if I buy a copy of a CD, then I can do whatever I like with the contents therein. I can barbeque it, chop it, saute it, rip it, make a tape copy. That is "Fair Use," which is reproducing copies for non-economic gain. And, making a copy to give to a friend does not qualify. Buying the music and making a reasonable backup is legitimate, IMO.
Before we go tilting after the windmill of the RIAA, we should first get our house in order.
And, for those who complain that the entertainment industry has too much influence over government, try this two-edged sword approach. First, give up any entertainment expenses--get rid of cable, stop buying music (without stealing), and don't go to any more movies (watch what comes on the antenna). That will cut their revenue. Second, the money that you save by these expense cuts should be put into a common kitty to hire your own lobbyists. If several hundred thousand or a few million people do this, then the anti-entertainment lobby group will have the resources to put the entertainment industry in retreat. Fight fire with fire. Stop bitching "one dollar, one vote," and put your money where your mouth is.
If you want change in the system, you have to do so according to the system. The only other alternative is revolution, which is a little extreme for cheaper access to Prince and the Revolution, or the Matrix Trilogy.
"Superdome during Katrina would look like a playground scuffle."
As opposed to typical gangland activity that it was?
That is why God gave us emoticons! :-) So people would know what our mood or tone is.
Intel is merely capitalizing on Apple's move to their chipset. After all, since the CPU is the center of the computer, the new Intel processors will be the "Apple's Core!" Ha! Hah!
Thank you! I'll be here all weekend. Don't forget to tip your waitress.
What Netflix should do is change the process a bit. For those who view over 12 movies per week, charge them $1 for each additional video. That will allow them to honor the 3 movie at a time crowd who cycles through each movie each week (3 X 4= 12), without being raped by higher cost of shipping.