Who is worse, the people who abuse privileges/freedoms, or the people who limit the privileges/freedoms to curb the abuse.
First of all it is impossible to abuse a freedom (as opposed to a privilege). But that's besides the point. The real point is that copyright itself is a privilege that has been greatly abused. Furthermore, the central concept of a Democracy is "millions of people can't be wrong" (or rather, "a majority can't be wrong"). The very fact that so many people do it means that the behavior is not radically antisocial. At lease according to the Democratic philosophy.
On another note, Democracy and Freedom are not synonymous. Remember folks, the majority must be in favor of freedom, which it obviously isn't in this case (for good or ill).
This generator could for example be useful in the chemical industry where many production processes generate a lot of excess heat that normally is simply lost.
Not to mention all the heat lost in even more common things such automobile engines.
It's not totally clear if the permits were valid, but if this is true, then they were totally legal.
maybe. I'm not an expert on NYC Law, but in my home town the concept of a permit is built into the each law itself.. (i.e. don't do this, don't do that, and never do this other thing unless you have a permit). For instance the city (or state) cannot issue you a permit for drunk driving.
but on another note, I can just imagine some guy on a street corner: "PSSSST! microsoft... wanna buy some permits? I'll throw in a nice rolex. Just don't mention where you got them."
Actually, now that I think about it, that sounds like something a polititian might actually say.:)
It is considered vandalization for a kid to spray paint his name onto the subway wall, even though this doesn't damage the wall. So yes, "vandalizes" is the correct term for microsoft attaching little butterflies all over publicly owned property.
from the article: The law, Section 19-138 of the New York City administrative code, states: "It shall be unlawful for any person to deface any street by painting, printing or writing thereon, or attaching thereto, in any manner, any advertisement or other printed matter."
Actually, the seem to be selling for only $5. It is empirically evident that the people buying your classes for $5 are not in fact willing to pay much more than that. That's why they call it an auction. If they were being sold via some other forum at a fixed price of $5, then you might have a sound argument.
On the other hand, maybe the RODs will turn on each other and fight it out.. maybe even in some sort of staged arena, which may perhaps be equiped with various natural hazzards....:)
But you do have to know about it to be willfully infringing, which means they can't hit you as hard. In fact, I think mostly all they can do in that case is tell you to stop, though I'm not sure. If you don't stop, or in some way already know you're infringing on the patent, THEN they can stick it to you, but not until then. Of course I could be totally wrong.
An ISP that blocks or restricts RIAA use of the net is legitimizing the practice they purport to oppose.
Sorry, this is like saying any homeowner that puts a lock on his door is legitimizing the practice of burgurlary. In both cases they are protecting themselves (and clients) from illeagal actions that they know some people are trying to perform. Also, in this matter the RIAA is not "restricting Internet use," they are gaining unauthorized access to peoples computers for the purpose of prosecuting those people based on the information they find there!
I mean really. That's illegal in so many ways it's not even funny.
It seems to me the the "space race" should be humankind against itself, not each country against the other.
Uhh.. so we have country A, with humans in it, and country B, also with humans, racing to get to the moon. Sounds pretty much like humankind against itself to me.
The article states:
Estimates of when this common ancestor might have existed have been based on DNA comparisons between humans and chimps, and put at between five and seven million years ago.
Can anyone out there explain to a laymen how this particular ageing process works? I just don't get it. Since they don't explain the method here, I can't really say anything, but it sounds pretty shaky to me. I imagine that trying to get an age based on any DNA comparison would have a honkin' big margin of error.
Capitalism is no excuse for the privatisation of the commons.
True, but how does this have anything to do with capitalism? Remember folks, people trying to get ahead by doing unethical things is not exclusive to a particular economic system. In fact, I dare say that somewhat less than <gasp> 90% of all unethical things are done because of capitalism.
At least that way, myself and the rest of the unwashed masses would be able to form our own opinions first, rather than having it shoved down our throats.
Obviously you have indeed been rendered incapable forming your own opinion... uhh..did I miss something?
Blaiming people for making you incapable of forming your own opinion is just stupid. It's rediculous.
Slashdot Mirror
In a related story, 50% of all slashdotters are unable to recognize a joke when bitten on the ass by one.
Some of these replies are amazingly dense.
Who is worse, the people who abuse privileges/freedoms, or the people who limit the privileges/freedoms to curb the abuse.
First of all it is impossible to abuse a freedom (as opposed to a privilege). But that's besides the point. The real point is that copyright itself is a privilege that has been greatly abused. Furthermore, the central concept of a Democracy is "millions of people can't be wrong" (or rather, "a majority can't be wrong"). The very fact that so many people do it means that the behavior is not radically antisocial. At lease according to the Democratic philosophy.
On another note, Democracy and Freedom are not synonymous. Remember folks, the majority must be in favor of freedom, which it obviously isn't in this case (for good or ill).
This generator could for example be useful in the chemical industry where many production processes generate a lot of excess heat that normally is simply lost.
Not to mention all the heat lost in even more common things such automobile engines.
It's not totally clear if the permits were valid, but if this is true, then they were totally legal.
maybe. I'm not an expert on NYC Law, but in my home town the concept of a permit is built into the each law itself.. (i.e. don't do this, don't do that, and never do this other thing unless you have a permit). For instance the city (or state) cannot issue you a permit for drunk driving.
but on another note, I can just imagine some guy on a street corner: "PSSSST! microsoft... wanna buy some permits? I'll throw in a nice rolex. Just don't mention where you got them."
Actually, now that I think about it, that sounds like something a polititian might actually say.:)
It is considered vandalization for a kid to spray paint his name onto the subway wall, even though this doesn't damage the wall. So yes, "vandalizes" is the correct term for microsoft attaching little butterflies all over publicly owned property.
from the article: The law, Section 19-138 of the New York City administrative code, states: "It shall be unlawful for any person to deface any street by painting, printing or writing thereon, or attaching thereto, in any manner, any advertisement or other printed matter."
Did you read the article? hmm??
For super-geeks, here is is a more thorough discussion of the Poincaré Conjecture.
t ml
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PoincareConjecture.h
Possibly blown off course by a hurricane.
:)
heh. blown 10000 miles off course? that's one heck of a hurricane.
My classes sell for between $25.00 to $75.00
Actually, the seem to be selling for only $5. It is empirically evident that the people buying your classes for $5 are not in fact willing to pay much more than that. That's why they call it an auction. If they were being sold via some other forum at a fixed price of $5, then you might have a sound argument.
On the other hand, maybe the RODs will turn on each other and fight it out.. maybe even in some sort of staged arena, which may perhaps be equiped with various natural hazzards.... :)
hmm.. I think I'll go patent that idea.
Does anyone (except porn sites) actually use them anymore?
...."
:)
Isn't this a bit like saying "all trees (except those with leaves)
So with 1 billion $ you could do 2000 chicks at the same time.. right?...
Wow, you have ~$345 to save on lunch money every day? Can I be your friend?
New Windows EULA:
.... Microsoft reserves the right to cancel votes for a particular candidate as it sees fit...
New Sun Java API:
public interface Voter { public void vote(int numberOfTimes); }
But you do have to know about it to be willfully infringing, which means they can't hit you as hard. In fact, I think mostly all they can do in that case is tell you to stop, though I'm not sure. If you don't stop, or in some way already know you're infringing on the patent, THEN they can stick it to you, but not until then. Of course I could be totally wrong.
http://www.ximian.com/products/connector/
Evolution w/ connector allows me to get full use out of my company's Exchange server, including mailing lists, address books and especially Calendar.
enjoy
It has been my personal observation that Insightful gets much more heated arguments than Flamebait.
An ISP that blocks or restricts RIAA use of the net is legitimizing the practice they purport to oppose.
Sorry, this is like saying any homeowner that puts a lock on his door is legitimizing the practice of burgurlary. In both cases they are protecting themselves (and clients) from illeagal actions that they know some people are trying to perform. Also, in this matter the RIAA is not "restricting Internet use," they are gaining unauthorized access to peoples computers for the purpose of prosecuting those people based on the information they find there!
I mean really. That's illegal in so many ways it's not even funny.
It seems to me the the "space race" should be humankind against itself, not each country against the other. Uhh.. so we have country A, with humans in it, and country B, also with humans, racing to get to the moon. Sounds pretty much like humankind against itself to me.
The article states:
Estimates of when this common ancestor might have existed have been based on DNA comparisons between humans and chimps, and put at between five and seven million years ago.
Can anyone out there explain to a laymen how this particular ageing process works? I just don't get it. Since they don't explain the method here, I can't really say anything, but it sounds pretty shaky to me. I imagine that trying to get an age based on any DNA comparison would have a honkin' big margin of error.
Capitalism is no excuse for the privatisation of the commons.
True, but how does this have anything to do with capitalism? Remember folks, people trying to get ahead by doing unethical things is not exclusive to a particular economic system. In fact, I dare say that somewhat less than <gasp> 90% of all unethical things are done because of capitalism.
La la la la la la shok shok la la
Sorry man, this tune is also copyrighted.
At least that way, myself and the rest of the unwashed masses would be able to form our own opinions first, rather than having it shoved down our throats.
Obviously you have indeed been rendered incapable forming your own opinion... uhh..did I miss something?
Blaiming people for making you incapable of forming your own opinion is just stupid. It's rediculous.
Well, that's no fun is it? Their network MUST be insecure, it's more entertaining that way.
heh, and let us gain insight into their current technologies?
Remember, one of their main stratagies is to force people to upgrades that are only superficially different.