What most people fail to notice are the little abbreviations: AP and UPI. Those guys dominated the news scene for decades. Turner's own conglomeration helped shake that up by having CNN everywhere.
I think what he's really complaining about is that his conglom. doesn't control more than it does. You've got different news companies now (e.g. News Corp.) who offer a different point of view.
Last Summer, after the *first* hack job occurred at Acxiom, my wife went to interview as software developer for Acxiom, here in Conway, Arkansas. The job she had at the time was for a local post-secondary-based non-profit organization. At the non-profit, all public servers had telnet *only* installed, and they routinely logged in remotely as root (not that it matters). There was no SSH. Okay, so public servers on a college LAN means?
With that context, what bothered her about her Acxiom interview was the lack of concern about security among her interviewers, and her impression that security at her former job was tighter than at Acxiom! Needless to say, she kept looking. She thought the job at that company was a train wreck waiting to happen. Seems she was right.
Windows 3 is more than an update. In many respects it's an entirely new environment... To really take advantage of Windows, you'll want either a fast 286 or a 386 machine, preferably with at least 2MB of RAM. Enhanced mode allows you to run multiple DOS applications.
So, why can't Microsoft duplicate this feat with Win2k3? I'd like to see them fit it into a 2 MB footprint, or 20 MB.
Reminds me that I stepped into the x86 world in July of '93. I bought an AST 486/25 SX with one meg. on-board and a 180 Mb HHD (compressed). What we have today was hard for me to imagine then.
Now, see, I'm not complaining about the basic services. I'm talking about social services where people are allowed to benefit from my earnings without providing anything in return. I've always thought that social services was a way for some former government to assuage the risks incurred by allowing a formerly deprived bloc of our nation being given equal access to resources. Play to man's baser preference to not work to build a new class of dependents who don't threaten the status quo pro ante.
When I pay taxes for new highways, fire and police services, and schools, I can accept that. When I am paying for services that pay wages, I agree. When I am paying for people who refuse to work, then I disagree. Although, in my school district it could be debated if I'm really paying for a service that benefits (i.e., teachers seem to prefer to threaten strikes than teach).
However, I should point out to you that I *pay* for the services of water, sewage, solid waste disposal, etc. On top of that, I pay a tax. So, not only am I being charged by the city government to handle my services, I'm paying them a tax as well. Go figure.
Okay, but what about Metallica's album where there is an orchestra playing along to their hits? Would this be the sort of music listened to by the developer who wants to be an IT manager?
Re:How many licenses can fit on the head of a pin?
on
PHP Not Moving To The GPL
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
. . . debian (sic) is a democracy.
Who said democracy is freedom? There are those who claim that I live in a democracy, but am I free to take all the fruit of my earnings and dispose of it as I see fit? No, my democracy is a kleptocracy. They take their share from me to distribute amongst my fellow Americans, then give me the remainder and tell me to say thank you. I'd rather live in an autocracy where an aquatic ceremony bestows supreme rule to one man. At least then I'd know where I stood. No, I am not free from the majority will of the unwashed, unedjumakated masses.
Copyright is a property law issue. Property law is about an owner's right to posess a thing, the right to dispose of that thing, and the right to prevent others from posessing and disposing of that thing. At least, that's what I'm being told in my legal studies. I'm not a lawyer, but I am a law student.
Now, if I write something and do not distribute it. How long before what I wrote falls into the public domain?
Life of the author plus 70 years, according to the US Copyright Law.
Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright.
So, if copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created, then distribution is not a factor, since creation must occur before distribution. I can never distribute but retain copyright.
In your example, the "EMS person" would be DISTRIBUTING your work. Then copyright law would kick in.
No, on two levels. First, the EMS person is claiming copyright himself, which the quote above states is actionable in and of itself, even if distribution is not at issue. His move to publish indicates he is claiming authorship, and therefore, copyright. Notice, I said publish. It could be any publishing company who is distributing. I would bring suit against him for publishing, then when I won I would bring suit against the distributor--because then I would have established my right to own. If I initially sue the distributor, they can defend claiming the one who published was the copyright holder. I'd rather secure that by law against a pip-squeak than BFP. So distribution is not at issue, claiming ownerhsip is.
In my example, the EMS person is denying the owner's rights to dispose of my property as the owner (my heirs) see fit. It has nothing to do with distribution, per se. The EMS person is converting the property by distributing it, which allows the true owner to take legal action. The copyright law is always in effect, but in this example, the EMS person's actions are not actionable until he attempts to convert it.
What if the EMS person holds the only manuscript, which is the hypothetical I provided, but instead refuses to return that manuscript to my heirs? Since my copyrights passed to them, then they have a greater right to the manuscript than he. Since he refuses to return the manuscript, then it is also actionable. Why? Because as the owners, my heirs have a right to posess it. By the EMS person refusing to return it to them, he is denying them that right. So, even without distribution, copyright is involved.
Or, in another realm. Look at the Gutenberg Project. They are hindered from digitizing over a generation of out-of-print works. Nobody is economically benefiting from the books being suppressed from the Public Domain. Society might be repressed from benefiting from the knowledge.
I know I'm belaboring the point. How many works could be irrevocably lost because the copyright was too long? If the work is lost, is this not akin to building a bonfire and hurling them in?
Isn't copyright a means of seeking a balance between the creator's right to enjoy the fruits of his labor and society's ability to build upon that work?
Compare copyright to patents. Why is a patent (in the US) limited to 20-odd years? Because society stands to benefit from the short terms of the patent. Many generic drugs (Ibuprophen, for example) are so commonly available because the patent expired. What if the patent terms were 90 years? How much more would we pay?
[Perhaps we would not pay as much as we do for intra-patent drugs because the drug makers would have a longer timeline to recoop their investment?]
Let's expand this discussion a bit wider. What if the Colt revolver enjoyed a 90 year patent instead of a 20 year patent? Why, Colt could rest on his laurels for the rest of his life while the rest of the century paid him a premium price for an innovative-but-flawed design. Or, the invention of the steam locomotive. What if that patent had prevented improvements on the design, and derivative developments? Or, the invention of the telegraph had been extended such that the telephone (voice-over-telegraph) wasn't invented until the early 20th Century? Would we even have an Internet today, or a Slashdot to *freely* exchanged these ideas?
Patents and copyrights are a legalized monopoly to reward innovators. They are meant to be short-term because innovation feeds itself. Society is benefited by innovation. Overlong rights stifles innovation.
I've read discussions of the economic benefit to be had by allowing BFPs (Big Publishers) have multi-generational copyrights. I'm a BFP, so my ability to create an industry off of generation's old creativity and then strangle any competition is a societal economic benefit? How long can I prevent somebody from reproducing stuffed rats?
Or, in another realm. Look at the Gutenberg Project. They are hindered from digitizing over a generation of out-of-print works. Nobody is economically benefiting from the books being suppressed from the Public Domain. Society might be repressed from benefiting from the knowledge.
I mean, if the GP is able to take a rare out-of-print book and make it available to the masses via their on-line archival, is this not benefiting society? What if I download an old book from their archival, and reading it spurs me to write the Great American Novel--spinning off a whole deluge of movies and mini-series, book tours, etc? As a member of society, isn't this an economic boon that is stifled by too-long copyrights?
Wouldn't it be great if the USG bothered to fund the GP in such an effort?
No, copyright protects every work. If I write the Great American Novel then have a heart attack and die, the EMS person cannot take my work and publish it as his. In this case, the work is not distributed, but somebody else is usurping my copyright. So, be careful when chiding somebody for misunderstanding copyright, please.
What if the copyright term was "life of author?" Could we then expect authors of quality works to start knocking off under misterious circumstances?
"Ms. Rowling, would you sell BFP the rights to Harry Potter?"
"No, I would never do such a thing.
"Too bad. Here, have more tea."
"Erg! Gasp!" the author expires.
"Well, I suppose her work has now passed into Public Domain."
For GPS. At least when Magnetic North is Houston, TX we will still know which way is up. Then again, cartographers will have a field day updating the magnetic declination every odd year.
You need to either have your sense of bad humor examined, or read my entire comment before posting a reply. I was playing loose with the fact that the phrase "c/c++" is a valid formula in C, but I was being looser with output of that formula. Regardless of if it is c/c++ or c/++c, the result will be 1. try it out in you favorite C compiler.
As I recall, one reason why the name for C++ was because it was supposed to be better than C. If C = 1, then C++ is 2.
Then again, C# is a half step between C and D, musically. So, considering the reason above, C# is slightly worse than C++, and only slightly better than C. Leave Microsoft to miss the distinction.
Actually, C/C++ is a language. Where C++ is an incremental improvement over C, C/C++ is a mere fraction of C. (If C were 3 then C++ would be 4, thus 3/4.)
Speed traps are not about "stopping speeding". They are about "revenue enhancement". (sic)
I'll chime to that. As I understand it, the points that show up on your driving record are a result of the "criminality" of the offense. Next time you get a speeding ticket, contact the local district attorney and ask the charges be dropped to a civil charge. This means you pay the fine but do not have the points show up on your record. My brother has done this a few times successfully--every time he has tried. The fact that the DA would allow this to happen shows how all they want is your money. Of course, YMMV and IANALY.
Hate to tell you that most of that is not patentable. Even if the original creator of the ideas you cite wanted to secure a patent, it would be too late because his ideas are in the mainstream. This type of protection is the same as when an individual holds a patent but decides not to enforce it until the concept gains market share. I'm more surprised you garnered a 4-insightful.
And, I believe architectural plans are copyright, not patent.
The "how" is easy. Every camcorder manufactured after the enactment of this law will be required to have a GPS-enabled system that will report where you are. If you are within the geocoords of a movie theater, then a crack squad of highly-trained federalized ushers will storm the theater and force everybody to be strip searched in plain sight. Older camcorders will be retro-fitted with the GPS-enabled system. They will sneak the unit into the battery, so when yours dies you'll go buy a battery with the unit inside.
I saw on the History channel that the Panama Canal would not be possible today due to the environmental groups and issues. Many of yesterday's engineering feats would be stymied today because of all the environmental litigation and resistance by environmental groups. Consider, as well, the rhetoric stating that our inability to improve our energy production (i.e., electricity power plants) over the past couple of decades is for similar reasons. Even 'clean' means of producing electricity has fallen into the angst of some groups (e.g. wind-generated electricity now bad because it kills birds).
How is that any different than the issue we have at hand? The government is imposing regulations that are making a hobby more difficult, so people are leaving the hobby. I see this as a similar issue, so I don't see why we complain about one but not the other.
e is not sponsoring legislation to make sure that computer programmers get copyrights
Maybe that's because the present legislation and case law already support this? I mean, when I write an email or post to Slashdot, I have a de facto copyright. I don't need special legislation. Same goes for programs. So, you're complaining about nothing.
No, we didn't. Some people thought it would be a cool prank to spend billions of US dollars to set up a sound stage in Nevada and fake it. They hint at this during Diamonds Are Forever and other sources.
Slashdot Mirror
Except, water is 8 pounds per gallon. Unless you're talking about the new lower calorie version.
And, especially when you're a grunt in combat situations, most of your water waste is via sweat, not urine.
Eventually, all the water we consume we excrete. Otherwise, we wouldn't need so much of it. I mean, are we capable of destroying matter in our body?
. . . the large media companies own plenty . . .
What most people fail to notice are the little abbreviations: AP and UPI. Those guys dominated the news scene for decades. Turner's own conglomeration helped shake that up by having CNN everywhere.
I think what he's really complaining about is that his conglom. doesn't control more than it does. You've got different news companies now (e.g. News Corp.) who offer a different point of view.
What in the parent made this a troll?!
Last Summer, after the *first* hack job occurred at Acxiom, my wife went to interview as software developer for Acxiom, here in Conway, Arkansas. The job she had at the time was for a local post-secondary-based non-profit organization. At the non-profit, all public servers had telnet *only* installed, and they routinely logged in remotely as root (not that it matters). There was no SSH. Okay, so public servers on a college LAN means?
With that context, what bothered her about her Acxiom interview was the lack of concern about security among her interviewers, and her impression that security at her former job was tighter than at Acxiom! Needless to say, she kept looking. She thought the job at that company was a train wreck waiting to happen. Seems she was right.
From the article
Windows 3 is more than an update. In many respects it's an entirely new environment ... To really take advantage of Windows, you'll want either a fast 286 or a 386 machine, preferably with at least 2MB of RAM. Enhanced mode allows you to run multiple DOS applications.
So, why can't Microsoft duplicate this feat with Win2k3? I'd like to see them fit it into a 2 MB footprint, or 20 MB.
Reminds me that I stepped into the x86 world in July of '93. I bought an AST 486/25 SX with one meg. on-board and a 180 Mb HHD (compressed). What we have today was hard for me to imagine then.
Or, more accurately: "Einstein estimated that there were only two people in the world who understood general relativity, and he was none of them."
Now, see, I'm not complaining about the basic services. I'm talking about social services where people are allowed to benefit from my earnings without providing anything in return. I've always thought that social services was a way for some former government to assuage the risks incurred by allowing a formerly deprived bloc of our nation being given equal access to resources. Play to man's baser preference to not work to build a new class of dependents who don't threaten the status quo pro ante. When I pay taxes for new highways, fire and police services, and schools, I can accept that. When I am paying for services that pay wages, I agree. When I am paying for people who refuse to work, then I disagree. Although, in my school district it could be debated if I'm really paying for a service that benefits (i.e., teachers seem to prefer to threaten strikes than teach). However, I should point out to you that I *pay* for the services of water, sewage, solid waste disposal, etc. On top of that, I pay a tax. So, not only am I being charged by the city government to handle my services, I'm paying them a tax as well. Go figure.
Somebody said that Debian was a democracy and therefore there was freedom. You've just supported my primary point.
Okay, but what about Metallica's album where there is an orchestra playing along to their hits? Would this be the sort of music listened to by the developer who wants to be an IT manager?
. . . debian (sic) is a democracy.
Who said democracy is freedom? There are those who claim that I live in a democracy, but am I free to take all the fruit of my earnings and dispose of it as I see fit? No, my democracy is a kleptocracy. They take their share from me to distribute amongst my fellow Americans, then give me the remainder and tell me to say thank you. I'd rather live in an autocracy where an aquatic ceremony bestows supreme rule to one man. At least then I'd know where I stood. No, I am not free from the majority will of the unwashed, unedjumakated masses.
Copyright is all about DISTRIBUTION.
Copyright is a property law issue. Property law is about an owner's right to posess a thing, the right to dispose of that thing, and the right to prevent others from posessing and disposing of that thing. At least, that's what I'm being told in my legal studies. I'm not a lawyer, but I am a law student.
Now, if I write something and do not distribute it. How long before what I wrote falls into the public domain?
Life of the author plus 70 years, according to the US Copyright Law. US Copyright LawSo, if copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created, then distribution is not a factor, since creation must occur before distribution. I can never distribute but retain copyright.
In your example, the "EMS person" would be DISTRIBUTING your work. Then copyright law would kick in.
No, on two levels. First, the EMS person is claiming copyright himself, which the quote above states is actionable in and of itself, even if distribution is not at issue. His move to publish indicates he is claiming authorship, and therefore, copyright. Notice, I said publish. It could be any publishing company who is distributing. I would bring suit against him for publishing, then when I won I would bring suit against the distributor--because then I would have established my right to own. If I initially sue the distributor, they can defend claiming the one who published was the copyright holder. I'd rather secure that by law against a pip-squeak than BFP. So distribution is not at issue, claiming ownerhsip is.
In my example, the EMS person is denying the owner's rights to dispose of my property as the owner (my heirs) see fit. It has nothing to do with distribution, per se. The EMS person is converting the property by distributing it, which allows the true owner to take legal action. The copyright law is always in effect, but in this example, the EMS person's actions are not actionable until he attempts to convert it.
What if the EMS person holds the only manuscript, which is the hypothetical I provided, but instead refuses to return that manuscript to my heirs? Since my copyrights passed to them, then they have a greater right to the manuscript than he. Since he refuses to return the manuscript, then it is also actionable. Why? Because as the owners, my heirs have a right to posess it. By the EMS person refusing to return it to them, he is denying them that right. So, even without distribution, copyright is involved.
Or, in another realm. Look at the Gutenberg Project. They are hindered from digitizing over a generation of out-of-print works. Nobody is economically benefiting from the books being suppressed from the Public Domain. Society might be repressed from benefiting from the knowledge.
I know I'm belaboring the point. How many works could be irrevocably lost because the copyright was too long? If the work is lost, is this not akin to building a bonfire and hurling them in?
Isn't copyright a means of seeking a balance between the creator's right to enjoy the fruits of his labor and society's ability to build upon that work?
Compare copyright to patents. Why is a patent (in the US) limited to 20-odd years? Because society stands to benefit from the short terms of the patent. Many generic drugs (Ibuprophen, for example) are so commonly available because the patent expired. What if the patent terms were 90 years? How much more would we pay?
[Perhaps we would not pay as much as we do for intra-patent drugs because the drug makers would have a longer timeline to recoop their investment?]
Let's expand this discussion a bit wider. What if the Colt revolver enjoyed a 90 year patent instead of a 20 year patent? Why, Colt could rest on his laurels for the rest of his life while the rest of the century paid him a premium price for an innovative-but-flawed design. Or, the invention of the steam locomotive. What if that patent had prevented improvements on the design, and derivative developments? Or, the invention of the telegraph had been extended such that the telephone (voice-over-telegraph) wasn't invented until the early 20th Century? Would we even have an Internet today, or a Slashdot to *freely* exchanged these ideas?
Patents and copyrights are a legalized monopoly to reward innovators. They are meant to be short-term because innovation feeds itself. Society is benefited by innovation. Overlong rights stifles innovation.
I've read discussions of the economic benefit to be had by allowing BFPs (Big Publishers) have multi-generational copyrights. I'm a BFP, so my ability to create an industry off of generation's old creativity and then strangle any competition is a societal economic benefit? How long can I prevent somebody from reproducing stuffed rats?
Or, in another realm. Look at the Gutenberg Project. They are hindered from digitizing over a generation of out-of-print works. Nobody is economically benefiting from the books being suppressed from the Public Domain. Society might be repressed from benefiting from the knowledge.
I mean, if the GP is able to take a rare out-of-print book and make it available to the masses via their on-line archival, is this not benefiting society? What if I download an old book from their archival, and reading it spurs me to write the Great American Novel--spinning off a whole deluge of movies and mini-series, book tours, etc? As a member of society, isn't this an economic boon that is stifled by too-long copyrights?
Wouldn't it be great if the USG bothered to fund the GP in such an effort?
Copyright only protects work that is distributed.
No, copyright protects every work. If I write the Great American Novel then have a heart attack and die, the EMS person cannot take my work and publish it as his. In this case, the work is not distributed, but somebody else is usurping my copyright. So, be careful when chiding somebody for misunderstanding copyright, please.
What if the copyright term was "life of author?" Could we then expect authors of quality works to start knocking off under misterious circumstances?
"Ms. Rowling, would you sell BFP the rights to Harry Potter?"
"No, I would never do such a thing.
"Too bad. Here, have more tea."
"Erg! Gasp!" the author expires.
"Well, I suppose her work has now passed into Public Domain."
then watch as they slip a condom over their mouse and hope for the best
Which remindes me of some medical training I've received. What are the three major kinds of shock? (I know there must be more, but follow)
For GPS. At least when Magnetic North is Houston, TX we will still know which way is up. Then again, cartographers will have a field day updating the magnetic declination every odd year.
Hmm, when I enter secured areas, I turn my cell phone off and make sure my PDA can't access data, like the regs at the DIA tell me.
You need to either have your sense of bad humor examined, or read my entire comment before posting a reply. I was playing loose with the fact that the phrase "c/c++" is a valid formula in C, but I was being looser with output of that formula. Regardless of if it is c/c++ or c/++c, the result will be 1. try it out in you favorite C compiler.
As I recall, one reason why the name for C++ was because it was supposed to be better than C. If C = 1, then C++ is 2.
Then again, C# is a half step between C and D, musically. So, considering the reason above, C# is slightly worse than C++, and only slightly better than C. Leave Microsoft to miss the distinction.
Actually, C/C++ is a language. Where C++ is an incremental improvement over C, C/C++ is a mere fraction of C. (If C were 3 then C++ would be 4, thus 3/4.)
Speed traps are not about "stopping speeding". They are about "revenue enhancement". (sic)
I'll chime to that. As I understand it, the points that show up on your driving record are a result of the "criminality" of the offense. Next time you get a speeding ticket, contact the local district attorney and ask the charges be dropped to a civil charge. This means you pay the fine but do not have the points show up on your record. My brother has done this a few times successfully--every time he has tried. The fact that the DA would allow this to happen shows how all they want is your money. Of course, YMMV and IANALY.
Hate to tell you that most of that is not patentable. Even if the original creator of the ideas you cite wanted to secure a patent, it would be too late because his ideas are in the mainstream. This type of protection is the same as when an individual holds a patent but decides not to enforce it until the concept gains market share. I'm more surprised you garnered a 4-insightful.
And, I believe architectural plans are copyright, not patent.
The "how" is easy. Every camcorder manufactured after the enactment of this law will be required to have a GPS-enabled system that will report where you are. If you are within the geocoords of a movie theater, then a crack squad of highly-trained federalized ushers will storm the theater and force everybody to be strip searched in plain sight. Older camcorders will be retro-fitted with the GPS-enabled system. They will sneak the unit into the battery, so when yours dies you'll go buy a battery with the unit inside.
I saw on the History channel that the Panama Canal would not be possible today due to the environmental groups and issues. Many of yesterday's engineering feats would be stymied today because of all the environmental litigation and resistance by environmental groups. Consider, as well, the rhetoric stating that our inability to improve our energy production (i.e., electricity power plants) over the past couple of decades is for similar reasons. Even 'clean' means of producing electricity has fallen into the angst of some groups (e.g. wind-generated electricity now bad because it kills birds).
How is that any different than the issue we have at hand? The government is imposing regulations that are making a hobby more difficult, so people are leaving the hobby. I see this as a similar issue, so I don't see why we complain about one but not the other.
e is not sponsoring legislation to make sure that computer programmers get copyrights
Maybe that's because the present legislation and case law already support this? I mean, when I write an email or post to Slashdot, I have a de facto copyright. I don't need special legislation. Same goes for programs. So, you're complaining about nothing.
No, we didn't. Some people thought it would be a cool prank to spend billions of US dollars to set up a sound stage in Nevada and fake it. They hint at this during Diamonds Are Forever and other sources.