No, not at all. It goes something more like this.
*Find holes in MS software.
*Publicise them frantically.
*Try to protect your knee caps and hide from the lawyers.
*Come to "an agreement."
You can't abandon a car, you'll eventually be tracked down and made to pay for proper disposal. Same thing with real property - you will be tracked down and hit with cleanup fees for any toxic wastes you left behind.
That's completely besides the point. Software doesn't have a "pulic" existance. If no one in particular is currently holding on to it then it ceases to exist. You can't dump you code on the street, you delete it.
A more appropriate question is are you allowed to give away your car? Software that has been put into the pulic domain is essentially software that you are offering to give away. The only real difference is that you don't cease to have the software after giving it away, which there is no real world analogy for. And that makes sense, because source code is knowledge, not property. Treating it like property is just imposing a foreign set of rules on it because we don't know how to treat knowlege that requires work to produce.
They never even had a good reason to argue the EULA in this case. There was no sale of Mythics property. Mythic owned the whatever (char, item, gold) before the transaction and they own it after. Only access to that thing was sold.
Does anyone know what can be done about this? If you told them you were not an expert but they credited you as one anyway they have a direct lie in the paper. Perhaps the BBB would have something to say about such a thing?
I don't know, it just seems that an institution whose primary business is knowlege knowingly printing a lie should be dealt with somehow.
Well, ICANN does need to be reigned in. Unfortunately giving the government control is the wrong solution, as it will just make it more of a political tool.
Perhaps they should just break up the current board and force a permanent democratic election process for board memebers. Of course, I don't know if it is within the power of the government to do so.
is some understanding of gravity. How backwards is it that so much time and effort is spent trying to manipulate something that we have only the most base theoretical knowledge of? Try to understand gravity, once we've gotten that far then perhaps we can start to control it.
So my impression of UnitedLinux is that there will be a base system shared between the companies, and each of you will build upon it in whatever way you see most useful/profitable/whatever.
Will each of you be sharing the base, separate from your proprietary distros? It seems that having the base available, as a working OS, would be immensely useful to the community.
I think they need to stop trying to make cheating impossible and instead focus on making it unatractive. Focus on cheat detection, it's not easy, but I think it's a much more attainable goal than cheat prevention. If you can detect cheats then you can punish cheating. And if done right, that will eliminate cheating as a problem.
It's funny, cheating doesn't bother me half as much as seeing someone get away with it. Someone who cheats makes me annoyed. Someone who cheats but can't be caught really gets me pissed.
Mr. Axlerod says those who deal with computers and students need to consider the humans who use the computers, rather than just the computers themselves.
I've been saying this for a long time. I'm rather glad to hear someone else say it. Now if people can move this kind of thinking into legal circles all the IP law crap might start to work itself out. It boggles my mind that people don't realize that applying existing laws correctly makes the DMCA as unnecessary as it is stupid.
If it drops the cost of broadband and increases the bandwidth becuase tehse companys can afford to do it i have no problem
And that kind of short sightedness is exactly the problem. That is only good in the long term. These companies aren't giving you cheap access because they want to, it's because they get business out of doing it. Once someone has an actual monopoly the prices shoot up and it's too late to do anything about it. As long as there are a few corporations, and they are actually competing, things wil be ok. When they coordinate to price gouge or when one gains control of the entire market then the consumer is screwed.
The sad thing is that it's their own fault. It doesn't have to be this way. If they would just stop fighting the customer they might find that the customers don't have some deep seated desire to deprive them of money. They just want to be treated as human beings. Apparently that's too much to ask, so the music industry is getting what it deserves.
Since I'm not a mod all I can do is chime in and agree with you. I really have nothing to add to that, but I want to thank you for saying it and agree with you.
A friend of mine is a math/science teacher at a local high school and he arranges such things. I've never been there, but it sounds like it works well. Also, I'm a tech at a small college and me and my co-workers and some of our friends do the same. It's convinient that art departments require high power graphics cards;)
That's reason enough to get worried and stay worried.
I think that's reason enough to get involved. Getting worried gives you an ulcer, getting involved might do nothing, but it also might solve the problem.
which had little to do with keeping space a peaceful utopia.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who would be disapointed to see that happen. Sadly, there are a lot of folks in power who would be upset to see a utopia because that limits their opprotunity to exploit other people. I hope someday we can learn to better distinguish who is on which side of that line and keep those more interested in their own good than that of many out of power. Seems we're on the opposite end of that one right now.
WHY do you think a business is even remotely concerned with what is good for consumers?
Call me an idealist, but I think that people shouldn't act like assholes. And something a lot of people seem to forget, businesses are made up of people.
As a human, I expect a certain amount of respect from other humans. It's perfectly within their rights to deny me that respect, but I see no reason to respect them at all if they do.
I am speaking on behalf, as he is, as he will no doubt tell you on behalf of hundreds of thousands of men and women who without public knowledge or recognition, who are not besieged by fans, but who are artisans, craftsmen, carpenters, bricklayers, all kinds of people, who work in this industry, not only in this State but in the 50 States where American films are shot on location. And they deserve no less, Mr. Chairman, than the concern of the Congress for the preservation of their industry.
Which means something like "I'm going to speak for the average American. I will tell you what is good for him. He may disagree with me, but that's because he doesn't understand the way things are. I do, so listen to me, and consider my opinion his, because my opinion is the one he would have if he was as smart as me and you."
It's interesting that these people argue that money that is being spent on their products would cease to be spent if their products weren't around. I the RIAA stops working the world won't end, people will just buy something else. In such an entertainment saturated society where in the world do they get the idea that their entertainment is more important than anyone elses to the economy?
Of course, the funniest (or least funny) thing about this is that the same stupid, rediculous arguments are still getting used.
I would argue that morality, although important, should not be a justification for the state to regulate our behavior.
An interesting comment. What then should we use as justification for the state to regulate behavior?
Before you answer that, could you define morality? I would argue that morality is the only basis for law. Why do we make theft or killing illegal? Because it impedes another persons life, liberty or persute of hapiness. Why is that bad? Because our culture has made that moral assertion.
Copying is only a problem because it is so epidemic. There are currently laws against it. If someone would get around to punishing those who copy (no, not those who allow for copying, those who copy) then this entire mess would go away. It would probably be a bigger mess for a little while, but it would go away.
Make an example of a few hundred people (be sure it's a slap on the wrist) and Joe Average won't feel like it's his right to download free music anymore. There are always people who commit crimes, and always people who get away with it. The purpose of laws and enforcement is to minimize it. Having an unenforced law is worse than nothing, so enforce the law already.
I always like Obi-Wan better. But that doesn't mean that Star Wars was as good as it was because of Lucas. I don't think it was luck, but I do think it was a lot of factors that were not under his control.
I'm not too well informed on this topic, but I think this is a valid question. If they are just trying to get away from the standards fees couldn't they just make DVD players without the DVD logo? And if it's more than that then doesn't making machines that play DVDs pretty much catch them up no matter what other factors are involved?
A friend of mine pointed out something I thought was really funny. George started out in the role of Luke Skywalker, a small rebel fighting a giant. He's now become the emperor, a greedy old man telling everyone else that what he wants is what everyone should do.
I think the thing that made the origionals so good was that it was Lucas and a bunch of friends and equals working on a movie. Now it's Lucas and a bunch of people who he can fire if he doesn't like what they think.
Slashdot Mirror
No, not at all. It goes something more like this. *Find holes in MS software. *Publicise them frantically. *Try to protect your knee caps and hide from the lawyers. *Come to "an agreement."
You can't abandon a car, you'll eventually be tracked down and made to pay for proper disposal. Same thing with real property - you will be tracked down and hit with cleanup fees for any toxic wastes you left behind.
That's completely besides the point. Software doesn't have a "pulic" existance. If no one in particular is currently holding on to it then it ceases to exist. You can't dump you code on the street, you delete it.
A more appropriate question is are you allowed to give away your car? Software that has been put into the pulic domain is essentially software that you are offering to give away. The only real difference is that you don't cease to have the software after giving it away, which there is no real world analogy for. And that makes sense, because source code is knowledge, not property. Treating it like property is just imposing a foreign set of rules on it because we don't know how to treat knowlege that requires work to produce.
They never even had a good reason to argue the EULA in this case. There was no sale of Mythics property. Mythic owned the whatever (char, item, gold) before the transaction and they own it after. Only access to that thing was sold.
They are letting the USER decide how to use their technology! That certainly can't be allowed.
Does anyone know what can be done about this? If you told them you were not an expert but they credited you as one anyway they have a direct lie in the paper. Perhaps the BBB would have something to say about such a thing?
I don't know, it just seems that an institution whose primary business is knowlege knowingly printing a lie should be dealt with somehow.
Well, ICANN does need to be reigned in. Unfortunately giving the government control is the wrong solution, as it will just make it more of a political tool. Perhaps they should just break up the current board and force a permanent democratic election process for board memebers. Of course, I don't know if it is within the power of the government to do so.
is some understanding of gravity. How backwards is it that so much time and effort is spent trying to manipulate something that we have only the most base theoretical knowledge of? Try to understand gravity, once we've gotten that far then perhaps we can start to control it.
So my impression of UnitedLinux is that there will be a base system shared between the companies, and each of you will build upon it in whatever way you see most useful/profitable/whatever.
Will each of you be sharing the base, separate from your proprietary distros? It seems that having the base available, as a working OS, would be immensely useful to the community.
I think they need to stop trying to make cheating impossible and instead focus on making it unatractive. Focus on cheat detection, it's not easy, but I think it's a much more attainable goal than cheat prevention. If you can detect cheats then you can punish cheating. And if done right, that will eliminate cheating as a problem.
It's funny, cheating doesn't bother me half as much as seeing someone get away with it. Someone who cheats makes me annoyed. Someone who cheats but can't be caught really gets me pissed.
Mr. Axlerod says those who deal with computers and students need to consider the humans who use the computers, rather than just the computers themselves. I've been saying this for a long time. I'm rather glad to hear someone else say it. Now if people can move this kind of thinking into legal circles all the IP law crap might start to work itself out. It boggles my mind that people don't realize that applying existing laws correctly makes the DMCA as unnecessary as it is stupid.
If it drops the cost of broadband and increases the bandwidth becuase tehse companys can afford to do it i have no problem
And that kind of short sightedness is exactly the problem. That is only good in the long term. These companies aren't giving you cheap access because they want to, it's because they get business out of doing it. Once someone has an actual monopoly the prices shoot up and it's too late to do anything about it. As long as there are a few corporations, and they are actually competing, things wil be ok. When they coordinate to price gouge or when one gains control of the entire market then the consumer is screwed.
The sad thing is that it's their own fault. It doesn't have to be this way. If they would just stop fighting the customer they might find that the customers don't have some deep seated desire to deprive them of money. They just want to be treated as human beings. Apparently that's too much to ask, so the music industry is getting what it deserves.
Since I'm not a mod all I can do is chime in and agree with you. I really have nothing to add to that, but I want to thank you for saying it and agree with you.
A friend of mine is a math/science teacher at a local high school and he arranges such things. I've never been there, but it sounds like it works well. Also, I'm a tech at a small college and me and my co-workers and some of our friends do the same. It's convinient that art departments require high power graphics cards ;)
That's reason enough to get worried and stay worried.
I think that's reason enough to get involved. Getting worried gives you an ulcer, getting involved might do nothing, but it also might solve the problem.
which had little to do with keeping space a peaceful utopia. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who would be disapointed to see that happen. Sadly, there are a lot of folks in power who would be upset to see a utopia because that limits their opprotunity to exploit other people. I hope someday we can learn to better distinguish who is on which side of that line and keep those more interested in their own good than that of many out of power. Seems we're on the opposite end of that one right now.
WHY do you think a business is even remotely concerned with what is good for consumers?
Call me an idealist, but I think that people shouldn't act like assholes. And something a lot of people seem to forget, businesses are made up of people.
As a human, I expect a certain amount of respect from other humans. It's perfectly within their rights to deny me that respect, but I see no reason to respect them at all if they do.
Maybe if you don't start by assuming people are criminals they won't act like it. Then again, maybe not.
I am speaking on behalf, as he is, as he will no doubt tell you on behalf of hundreds of thousands of men and women who without public knowledge or recognition, who are not besieged by fans, but who are artisans, craftsmen, carpenters, bricklayers, all kinds of people, who work in this industry, not only in this State but in the 50 States where American films are shot on location. And they deserve no less, Mr. Chairman, than the concern of the Congress for the preservation of their industry.
Which means something like "I'm going to speak for the average American. I will tell you what is good for him. He may disagree with me, but that's because he doesn't understand the way things are. I do, so listen to me, and consider my opinion his, because my opinion is the one he would have if he was as smart as me and you."
It's interesting that these people argue that money that is being spent on their products would cease to be spent if their products weren't around. I the RIAA stops working the world won't end, people will just buy something else. In such an entertainment saturated society where in the world do they get the idea that their entertainment is more important than anyone elses to the economy?
Of course, the funniest (or least funny) thing about this is that the same stupid, rediculous arguments are still getting used.
I would argue that morality, although important, should not be a justification for the state to regulate our behavior. An interesting comment. What then should we use as justification for the state to regulate behavior?
Before you answer that, could you define morality? I would argue that morality is the only basis for law. Why do we make theft or killing illegal? Because it impedes another persons life, liberty or persute of hapiness. Why is that bad? Because our culture has made that moral assertion.
Copying is only a problem because it is so epidemic. There are currently laws against it. If someone would get around to punishing those who copy (no, not those who allow for copying, those who copy) then this entire mess would go away. It would probably be a bigger mess for a little while, but it would go away.
Make an example of a few hundred people (be sure it's a slap on the wrist) and Joe Average won't feel like it's his right to download free music anymore. There are always people who commit crimes, and always people who get away with it. The purpose of laws and enforcement is to minimize it. Having an unenforced law is worse than nothing, so enforce the law already.
Well... who do you like more? I always liked Han.
I always like Obi-Wan better. But that doesn't mean that Star Wars was as good as it was because of Lucas. I don't think it was luck, but I do think it was a lot of factors that were not under his control.
Back in college I always wanted a girlfriend. since you're talking about a girl that probably doesn't apply, but anyway.
I'm not too well informed on this topic, but I think this is a valid question. If they are just trying to get away from the standards fees couldn't they just make DVD players without the DVD logo? And if it's more than that then doesn't making machines that play DVDs pretty much catch them up no matter what other factors are involved?
A friend of mine pointed out something I thought was really funny. George started out in the role of Luke Skywalker, a small rebel fighting a giant. He's now become the emperor, a greedy old man telling everyone else that what he wants is what everyone should do. I think the thing that made the origionals so good was that it was Lucas and a bunch of friends and equals working on a movie. Now it's Lucas and a bunch of people who he can fire if he doesn't like what they think.