This is the type of thing that makes me really embarassed to be an American.
These people should have been shown a warrant and that warrant should be public.
We should know the EXACT reason those hard disks were taken for NOW. This type of crap really, really disturbs me.
What's left to prevent fishing expeditions against people the gov't doesn't like?
They show up search the place, find something illegal, and make up the warrant afterwards?
This is lunacy. The executive branch has been breaking constitutional law left and right and no one is on trial.
They also published the personal information of the delegates which included home addresses, phone numbers, and places of work.
There were also numerous hacks around that time (protestwarrior for one) in which personal information was posted on Indymedia sites.
When anti-abortion groups post this information on doctors who perform abortions, it is considered a threat. Why is this any different?
Two reason:
These people CHOOSE to go into public service. Publishing the office address of the president (or home for that matter) is a extremely different than publishing the home address of a doctor. These people are SUPPOSED to be contactable by the public at large. They're politicians.
The lists are not being posted in the form of "These people should be bombed:". That's what really lead to the takedown of the doctor's info. It wasn't just personal information it was a list of people someone wanted dead. While it's legal for me to post your address online, it is NOT legal for me to post a list of people I want killed and their addresses. The ADDRESS isn't the threat, the action is.
In almost every car ever produced, the brakes are far more "powerful" than the engine. This is complete bullshit, unless the car was poorly maintained or had a serious defect. You can't ride them- you really have to push hard and bring the vehicle to a stop quickly, or yes, you will overheat the brakes- but even if you do that, you don't have to wait long for them to cool down.
Spoken like someone who doesn't know much about brakes. On 90% of cars out there, the brakes are doing all they can to execute one high-speed stop.
Manufacturers cheap out on brakes because consumers like you, don't know enough about them.
The brakes on my Saturn can execute a high speed stop ONCE and then they're pretty much guaranteed to be warped. This is WITHOUT the engine fighting them.
Yes, the brakes can exert more force than the engine for A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. The problem is that brakes have a LIMITED CAPABILITY TO DEAL WITH HEAT. As brakes heat up, they become ineffective.
Using the brakes with the engine stuck wide-open is a LAST resort. You are risking going from a car with a stuck throttle, to a car with a stuck throttle AND no brakes. (When your brakes get hot enough, they can fail catastropihcally.)
Funny thing, but they found absafuckingloutly nothing wrong with the car she was driving. The woman was simply a hysterical bitch who wanted attention. Suddenly after being brought to a stop by the cruiser, she could turn off the ignition. Why the fuck didn't she do that in the first place?
Because we don't teach people that's what they should do. It's absolutely retarded that we hand out drivers liscenses with no mention of what to do if something goes wrong with your car but that's the way we do it.
As someone who has actually HAD their throttle get stuck wide open going down the highway, it's a very scary experience. I was lucky enough to know that turning off the ignition will kill the spark, even on the carb'ed vehicle that I was driving. I was also lucky enough to not remove the key from the ignition and engage the steering wheel lock.
I would have MUCH rather been told that by someone else, as opposed to trying to figure it all out within the space of two seconds.
99% of the stories about cars going "out of control" are bullshit. It's almost always driver error- or a complete fabrication by the driver to get out of trouble (or for attention).
99% of statistics like this one are total bullshit that was made up on the spot. They only detract from the discussion.
I fail to see what exactly they are going to arrest or prosecute people for.
That relies on the faulty assumption that the police are actually interested with what the law actuall is.
"You have a tail light out."
"No I don't."
*SMASH*
"Yes you do, here's your ticket."
(Sure I haven't actually witnessed this but I did have a friend get a ticket for "insufficiently bright taillights", which were perfectly functioning and stock.)
My point is if the police don't like what you're doing they'll arrest you. They can always make something up after the fact. Look at all those protestors that got arrested in NYC or trumped-up charges.
We'd be using FreeBSD instead. Nothing catastrophic
You fail to realize the HUGE difference that GPL vs. BSD makes.
Make some of us don't feel like writing Microsoft's next network stack only to have them bastardize it, break the standard, and make our own programs on BSD mostly irrelevant.
Linus has said that the smartest thing he ever did was releasing Linux under the GPL and I agree with him.
Technically, liscense doesn't directly affect the software, but it most certainly does affect its uses and progress.
At what point does Google go from hip, cool company to overbearing, monopolistic, Microsoft company? It seems public opinion is a bit fickle.
When they start helping totalitarian regimes oppress their people.
If you had a million dollars and any sort of social conscience would, YOU keep working there?
I wouldn't. It's seems Google is on its way to becoming as morally bankrupt as Enron and Halliburton.
...but hey it will make their stock worth 1% more. Way to go, assholes.
Why? You have the right of first sale, but you have no right to sell anything on eBay. If they don't want to deal in software licences, medicines or plush bunnies, that is a completely valid policy.
Not always. To some extent, companies are required to "play fair". They also typically aren't allowed to consipre with other companies to control markets.
One could argue ebay is attempting to enforce an illegal/invalid contract "second hand". Or that they are attemping to manipulate the market for software. Or that they are discrimiating unfairly.
Of course all fo this is moot, becuase in the US anyone can sue you for pretty much anything.
But really, there are laws, and a business can't just do whatever the hell it wants. A good example would be ebay prohiting the sale of "ethnic" (non-white) dolls. Sure, it's their website, but that doesn't mean they can do ANYTHING they want with it. A lawsuit about that type of action would probably be pretty likely to succeed. IANAL, of course.
Open source is great and all...but where is the financial incentive for programmers?
The same place it is for most programmers of proprietary software, in their paychecks. (If the programmer is actually the owner of the code, skip ahead.)
If I decide to pay you to write and office suite, open or closed, you're still getting paid.
Where's the incetive to pay for the creation of open source software?
All over the place. No recurring liscense fees. Others will maintain it for you. Others will standardize on YOUR software, making it easy for to interact with them. Great reputation building potential for a consultancy business, potential to get paid to implemet feature requests, etc, etc.
Hmmm... from my reading of the link, it appears this has not been ruled on by "the supreme court"
My bad. I was going from memory and threw the link in a that last second.
At least one person actually read it:)
I fully admit that I was wrong in calling it a supreme court ruling.
In fact, the ruling was not even the final ruling in the case at hand. I think my company and I will respect the existing license agreements until there's something a little more final and definite that we can rely on.
Still, I think that ruling is going to be hard for anyone to contradict. If you want a valid legal agreement, you need to do it properly and can't just slap a sticker on an envelope that you know there other person won't even see until AFTER the sale.
I really seems like basic common sense to me.
Anyways, I put the challenge forth to you to find a case where a court has EVER held a "shrinkwrap" after-the-sale liscense agreement to be valid.
I think what my grandparent meant was that, in BeOS, you stick in a new disk and, lo, it is merely a click away. (I never used BeOS for any serious length of time, so I am just guessing.) Here in Linux-land, we cat/proc/partitions, then su, then mount, then become mortal once more, then use, then su again, then umount, then go get a beer.
That all depends on how your distribution is configured. If you're using knoppix, for example, then the drives do automatically pop up on the desktop.
Ask for getting a driver to mount in the same place all the time, the trick I use on my Gentoo desktop is to use a LABEL= entry instead of mounting/dev/sda1. That way the device always shows up in the same place, not matter what order you plug them in.
I'm not saying linux is perfect, but it has a lot of capabilities people don't know about. Maybe someone will read this and go: Ah! That's the solution to my problem.
A perfect example of how the system should work. The patent office doesn't need a reform, it needs to simply do a better job of following its own rules.
Yes it does.
The fundamental concepts behind the patent office have become unworkable.
With our currently level of technology, it is unreasonable to believe that there is ANY organization that can sufficiently understand every technology on the planet in order to determine whether an invention is novel.
Back in the days when the patent office was created, it might have been a reasonable concept but today it's not. There's way too much specialized knowedge out there for it to be practical.
The patent ofice should admit what is has already become, a mere registy of "I invented this on this date" and drop all pretenses of actually being expert enough that all patents they accept are automatically valid.
1. The only replacement for Windows on the desktop is Mac OS X. Linux is not that replacement.
I guess I don't exist then. I've replaced Windows on my desktop for the last four years with Linux..
I do EVERYTHING in linux. Video editing. Watch TV. Edit documents. Chat online. Browse slashdot, etc etc etc.
Linux IS a replacement. Period.
Maybe you don't like it, but it most certainly DOES exist and is being used.
Just because it's not the replacement YOU want, does not mean it's not a valid replacement.
A few of my own auctions have been terminated for this reason (I was very candid about the OEM status), so if there's a legal defense for this, I'd like to know.
It's call the doctrine of first sale.
It's a legal concept that says when I buy a copy of something that is copyrighted, I get a certain set of rights by default. One of those is the right to resell it.
MS would have to believe that their EULAs constitute a valid legal agreement, and remove that right, but that's about as legaly enfocable as someone selling a house and leaving a sticker on the door that says, "by breaking this seal, you agree to these additional terms...".
You can't force someone to argee to a contract, by putting a sticker on something that's legally THEIRS.
If MS wants their EULAs to be legally valid, they need to be "signed" when the money is exchanged.
Imagine if you bought a new car and there was a sticker on the lock that said "By removing this sticker, you agree never to resell this car".
It's total nonsense.
In the case of ebay, you want to point them to
THIS news item: The judge, in the case Adobe vs Softman heard in the Central District of California, has ruled that consumers can resell bundled software, no matter what the EULA, or End User License Agreement, stipulates.
Then tell ebay that they are attemping to enforce liscense restrictions that the supreme court has ruled illegal.
You could point out that by having such a policy they are therefore opening themselves up to lawsuits frow people who just want to execise their own legal rights.
A quick reality check here. In 2003, a "noisy" Australian deisel boat sunk two US nuclear attack subs and an aircraft carrier during joint war games. The Dutch have done the same sort of thing.
That doesn't say much all by itself.
What were the rules?
What was the mission of each side?
Were there any handicaps?
Did the US sink any ships?
etc etc etc
For all that story tells us, the US might have sunk 30 ships. I'm not trying to insult Australians here, I'm just saying that article is REALLY vague.
And no parent has ever sued a school for harm to their child even after they signed a permission slip granting free reign to the school to do with the child as they please?
And no insurance agency has ever fought a claim?
Try asking someone with "health insureance" if they feel like they still have to worry about their medical bills.
I understand what you are saying about skipping the sizes. I wanted to say that if 17mm wrench doesn't fit, I know for sure that there is no 17.5 wrench, while SAE may have something/64.
No. That's equivalent to arguing that there are no standard sizes for SAE, yet there are for metric. It's not true.
Anyway, to many sizes is not a fault of the metric system itself, but rather easily fixable inconvinience.
No the fault of the metric units themselves? yes. Incovenitent? yes. Easily fixable? heck no.
But how do you solve 1/4 vs 7/32 situation? Is it natural for you to add 14'7 3/8" and 9'8 11/16"?
For me, yes. Decimals are nice for computer programs, but sometimes fractions are easier to work with in your head. Not always, but sometimes.
Also, 12 has more, arguably better, factors than ten, so depending on the actual operation you need to do it can actually be easier in feet. For example, if you have a round number of feet (ex: any lumber you buy) and divide it by three, or four you're going to get a round number of feet plus a round number of inches.
Typically you're much more likely to cut a board into thirds or fourths than fifths, since five-legged tables, or five-sided houses are not a common occurance.
This statement is not entirely correct. If I create a derivative work based on GPLed code and don't redistribute it, no one has the right to steal it from me and put my changes back into the original open source version. This guy who did the contract work (assuming there was a typical contract) signed over his ownership to the derivative work to Connelly. By keeping a local copy (which he should not have) and putting derivatives of that back into the main project, he may have effectively stole the code from his employer and put it under GPL.
Actually there really isn't any way that this work ISN"T under the GPL.
As others have pointed out, the GPL specfically states that transmission between a organization and an "offsite contractor" constitutes distribution, and therefore must be done under the GPL liscense.
That means that the code he sent to his employer MUST have been GPL'ed or it was illegal for him to send it. This means that any copy of the code the employer has MUST be under the GPL.
The sticky part is whether this means that any other copies are ALSO under the GPL.
IANAL, so please correct me if I'm wrong here.
Nor am I, and I feel the question brought up really requires a lawyer to answer.
It definately seems against the "spirt" of the GPL for the resulting to code to be anything but GPL'ed, but that cases really seems to demand a detailed reading of the "letter" of the GPL.
There are tons of questions posed here. For example, by selling the rights to GPL'ed code that I have created, am I giving up my right to a GLP'ed copy of that code?
How can I have a legal copy of GPL-derived code from another organization, if not under the GPL?
If the company had sent him the code, he could distribute it under the GPL. If the code was not a work for hire, he could distribute iot under the GPL.
How then, does to code being a "work for hire" make his copy *NOT*, GPL'ed? Can he even legally create a "work for hire" with that code?
Of course here's another interesting point....
If his employer sent him a copy of his own code, even just ONCE. He has a right to distribute it under the GPL, or his employer send him his own code was illegal.
So Alice gets this program under the GPL and modifies it. She Must distribute it under the GPL.
...BUT she only distributes it to the company that hired her. That company then never distributes it further, thus it remains "closed".
At first glance it seems that this is kind of a looophole in the GPL, but I think it *might* be covered by various "non-discrimination" clauses in the GPL.
OR as you suggested, perhaps there is a clause which prohibits her from distibuting the code at all while bound by such restrictions. (This would very likely be near the anti-patent provisons.)
Of course, if the company ever sends her a copy of her own code, it would seem like she could automatically distribute it, since the only way the company could legally send it out would be under the GPL liscense.
See? If they skip 1 size in metric wrenches, you notice it right away..
You *WANT* them to skip sizes.
There is no reason do have both 17mm bolts and 18mm, because the sizes aren't different enough from each other. It's like having a 49/64" bolt, it's silly.
With imperial, I wouldn't even know if the set I bought is incomplete
Any set of wrenches is going to be "incomplete" since there are an infinate number of possible sizes.
In reality you need to pick a limited subset of the availible sizes. The american standard does a better job at this becuase it's better at using small steps between small bolts and bigger steps between bigger bolts.
This isn't a flaw of meters as a unit, but of they way they decided to subdivide it for wrench sizes.
Let's say you are working on a car, tried 1/4" socket and it is too big. Should you pick 17/32? or 7/16?. I agree, it doesn't take that long to calculate, but the choice between 5mm and 6mm is clearer.
Actually, whench sizes are a great example of where american sizing is more logical than metric. American uses fractional sizes, and as size increases, so does the spacing between the sizes.
With metric, they just keep bumping it up by one mm for much longer than they should.
If you go to a place like Sears and look at a metirc set of wrenchs vs an american set with the same number of pieces, you'll see that the american set covers a larger diversity of sizes with the same number of wrenchs, while at the same time using a more reasonable spacing between sizes. (16mm is twice as big as 8mm, yet they still counting by 1 mm increments.)
Metric wrenches are also a bitch because once manfacutrers do start skipping sizes, some manufacturers skip the 18mm size, and some skip the 19mm size. This means that even if I went out and bought a set that covers 10mm-19mm I still don't have all the wrenches to work on every bolt in between those two numbers.
This is first time when somebody actually argues that imperial system is better.
I'm not claiming it's better for everything, just certain things. Technically my complaint about wrench sizes is even really about the metric "system" because there's no reason the could have used a more reasonable spacing for metric wrenches.
It is the public that looks for style over substance.
Actually, many members of the public would LOVE some substance, UNFORTUNATELY WE DON"T OWN ANY MAJOR TV NETWORKS.
How much did Microsoft, Enron, etc contribute to the Democrats in the last few years? (lots)
The Republicans? (lots)
The Green party? (nothing)
If you just spent a bunch on money buying the sopport of both the democrats and republicans, would you cover a third party on your TV network? Of course not.
They are real debates, with real moderation and real issues.
No they aren't.
The questions are known beforehand and the answers are scripted. These are as much of a real debate as the Barbie Dreamhouse is a real house.
The moderators are just for appearences. There is nothing to moderate, as they've all decided what is going to happen in advance.
The "real issues" consist of topics chosen by the canidates in advance as issues they would *like* to discuss.
In these "debates" both canidates can chose to refuse to discuss anything they want.
Centigrade is the smallest difference which can be felt by human body in everyday situation.
This is totally wrong. People will get in fights over one degree F on a thermostat. Not everyone, but enough that it matters.
To me the opposite is true. I don't find MPH more convinient than KPH,
That's all a matter of what you're used to, which is totally NOT what I was talking about. I was talking about the actual span of the units. For something like a thermostat you either end up being too imprecise (using only 2 digits) or overly precise (nobody really is going to care about.1 deg C).
Similarly, driving down the road, you're really not going to be able to notice a 1 km/hr speed difference. Sure you could get used to viewing your speed in just about any units, but it doesn't necessarily mean there the most efficient way to present the information you're actually going to use.
I don't hate the metric system. I find it really useful when I'm doing engineering, it has some really great points, but the "imperial" units have their own merits too. Sometimes this comes from their origins being rooted less in physics and more in human experience.
There's no convenient size for beer for example. You can't just walk into a bag and order "one <insert metric unit here>". A deciliter isn't enought, and a whole liter is going to get warm before you finish it.
For the average person, a pint is "just right" and if you say "two pints" they know to assume you want two beers not one really big beer.
I think, being reasonably intelligent individuals, we should be able to cope with multiple systems of measurement.
If you're used to km/hr for example, then by all means use it, it's my opinion however that there's basically no gain from swithing all the US street signs to metric units, for example.
People are used to the current system, and there really isn't much cost to its continued use. The US is a big enough marlet that there really isn't any extra cost to have our speedos in MPH and our thermos in deg F, in is some ways they're both actually a more efficient way to convey information.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the type of thing that makes me really embarassed to be an American.
These people should have been shown a warrant and that warrant should be public.
We should know the EXACT reason those hard disks were taken for NOW. This type of crap really, really disturbs me.
What's left to prevent fishing expeditions against people the gov't doesn't like?
They show up search the place, find something illegal, and make up the warrant afterwards?
This is lunacy. The executive branch has been breaking constitutional law left and right and no one is on trial.
Two reason:
There a difference between doing business with the people of an oppressive country and DIRECTLY HELPING TO OPPRESS THOSE WITHIN THAT COUNTRY.
Selling them food, medicine, etc is ok.
Selling them your sevices to assist in the violation of human rights is not.
Companies are supposed to provide services, and Google is doing that perfectly well.
And what if that service is gassing abunch of jews?
In almost every car ever produced, the brakes are far more "powerful" than the engine. This is complete bullshit, unless the car was poorly maintained or had a serious defect. You can't ride them- you really have to push hard and bring the vehicle to a stop quickly, or yes, you will overheat the brakes- but even if you do that, you don't have to wait long for them to cool down.
Spoken like someone who doesn't know much about brakes.
On 90% of cars out there, the brakes are doing all they can to execute one high-speed stop.
Manufacturers cheap out on brakes because consumers like you, don't know enough about them.
The brakes on my Saturn can execute a high speed stop ONCE and then they're pretty much guaranteed to be warped. This is WITHOUT the engine fighting them.
Yes, the brakes can exert more force than the engine for A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. The problem is that brakes have a LIMITED CAPABILITY TO DEAL WITH HEAT. As brakes heat up, they become ineffective.
Using the brakes with the engine stuck wide-open is a LAST resort. You are risking going from a car with a stuck throttle, to a car with a stuck throttle AND no brakes. (When your brakes get hot enough, they can fail catastropihcally.)
Funny thing, but they found absafuckingloutly nothing wrong with the car she was driving. The woman was simply a hysterical bitch who wanted attention. Suddenly after being brought to a stop by the cruiser, she could turn off the ignition. Why the fuck didn't she do that in the first place?
Because we don't teach people that's what they should do. It's absolutely retarded that we hand out drivers liscenses with no mention of what to do if something goes wrong with your car but that's the way we do it.
As someone who has actually HAD their throttle get stuck wide open going down the highway, it's a very scary experience. I was lucky enough to know that turning off the ignition will kill the spark, even on the carb'ed vehicle that I was driving. I was also lucky enough to not remove the key from the ignition and engage the steering wheel lock.
I would have MUCH rather been told that by someone else, as opposed to trying to figure it all out within the space of two seconds.
99% of the stories about cars going "out of control" are bullshit. It's almost always driver error- or a complete fabrication by the driver to get out of trouble (or for attention).
99% of statistics like this one are total bullshit that was made up on the spot. They only detract from the discussion.
I fail to see what exactly they are going to arrest or prosecute people for.
That relies on the faulty assumption that the police are actually interested with what the law actuall is.
"You have a tail light out."
"No I don't."
*SMASH*
"Yes you do, here's your ticket."
(Sure I haven't actually witnessed this but I did have a friend get a ticket for "insufficiently bright taillights", which were perfectly functioning and stock.)
My point is if the police don't like what you're doing they'll arrest you. They can always make something up after the fact. Look at all those protestors that got arrested in NYC or trumped-up charges.
We'd be using FreeBSD instead. Nothing catastrophic
You fail to realize the HUGE difference that GPL vs. BSD makes.
Make some of us don't feel like writing Microsoft's next network stack only to have them bastardize it, break the standard, and make our own programs on BSD mostly irrelevant.
Linus has said that the smartest thing he ever did was releasing Linux under the GPL and I agree with him.
Technically, liscense doesn't directly affect the software, but it most certainly does affect its uses and progress.
At what point does Google go from hip, cool company to overbearing, monopolistic, Microsoft company? It seems public opinion is a bit fickle.
...but hey it will make their stock worth 1% more. Way to go, assholes.
When they start helping totalitarian regimes oppress their people.
If you had a million dollars and any sort of social conscience would, YOU keep working there?
I wouldn't. It's seems Google is on its way to becoming as morally bankrupt as Enron and Halliburton.
Why? You have the right of first sale, but you have no right to sell anything on eBay. If they don't want to deal in software licences, medicines or plush bunnies, that is a completely valid policy.
Not always. To some extent, companies are required to "play fair". They also typically aren't allowed to consipre with other companies to control markets.
One could argue ebay is attempting to enforce an illegal/invalid contract "second hand". Or that they are attemping to manipulate the market for software. Or that they are discrimiating unfairly.
Of course all fo this is moot, becuase in the US anyone can sue you for pretty much anything.
But really, there are laws, and a business can't just do whatever the hell it wants. A good example would be ebay prohiting the sale of "ethnic" (non-white) dolls. Sure, it's their website, but that doesn't mean they can do ANYTHING they want with it. A lawsuit about that type of action would probably be pretty likely to succeed. IANAL, of course.
Open source is great and all...but where is the financial incentive for programmers?
The same place it is for most programmers of proprietary software, in their paychecks. (If the programmer is actually the owner of the code, skip ahead.)
If I decide to pay you to write and office suite, open or closed, you're still getting paid.
Where's the incetive to pay for the creation of open source software?
All over the place. No recurring liscense fees. Others will maintain it for you. Others will standardize on YOUR software, making it easy for to interact with them. Great reputation building potential for a consultancy business, potential to get paid to implemet feature requests, etc, etc.
Hmmm... from my reading of the link, it appears this has not been ruled on by "the supreme court"
:)
My bad. I was going from memory and threw the link in a that last second.
At least one person actually read it
I fully admit that I was wrong in calling it a supreme court ruling.
In fact, the ruling was not even the final ruling in the case at hand. I think my company and I will respect the existing license agreements until there's something a little more final and definite that we can rely on.
Still, I think that ruling is going to be hard for anyone to contradict. If you want a valid legal agreement, you need to do it properly and can't just slap a sticker on an envelope that you know there other person won't even see until AFTER the sale.
I really seems like basic common sense to me.
Anyways, I put the challenge forth to you to find a case where a court has EVER held a "shrinkwrap" after-the-sale liscense agreement to be valid.
I think what my grandparent meant was that, in BeOS, you stick in a new disk and, lo, it is merely a click away. (I never used BeOS for any serious length of time, so I am just guessing.) Here in Linux-land, we cat /proc/partitions, then su, then mount, then become mortal once more, then use, then su again, then umount, then go get a beer.
/dev/sda1. That way the device always shows up in the same place, not matter what order you plug them in.
That all depends on how your distribution is configured. If you're using knoppix, for example, then the drives do automatically pop up on the desktop.
Ask for getting a driver to mount in the same place all the time, the trick I use on my Gentoo desktop is to use a LABEL= entry instead of mounting
I'm not saying linux is perfect, but it has a lot of capabilities people don't know about. Maybe someone will read this and go: Ah! That's the solution to my problem.
Not only that, but BeOS back then also automatically recognized new partitions, something Linux did not and still doesn't seem to do well.
/proc/partitions".
Type "cat
Seems to work fine for me.
If I plug in a USB disk, the new partitions will automatically show up in that list.
A perfect example of how the system should work. The patent office doesn't need a reform, it needs to simply do a better job of following its own rules.
Yes it does.
The fundamental concepts behind the patent office have become unworkable.
With our currently level of technology, it is unreasonable to believe that there is ANY organization that can sufficiently understand every technology on the planet in order to determine whether an invention is novel.
Back in the days when the patent office was created, it might have been a reasonable concept but today it's not. There's way too much specialized knowedge out there for it to be practical.
The patent ofice should admit what is has already become, a mere registy of "I invented this on this date" and drop all pretenses of actually being expert enough that all patents they accept are automatically valid.
1. The only replacement for Windows on the desktop is Mac OS X. Linux is not that replacement.
I guess I don't exist then. I've replaced Windows on my desktop for the last four years with Linux..
I do EVERYTHING in linux. Video editing. Watch TV. Edit documents. Chat online. Browse slashdot, etc etc etc.
Linux IS a replacement. Period.
Maybe you don't like it, but it most certainly DOES exist and is being used.
Just because it's not the replacement YOU want, does not mean it's not a valid replacement.
A few of my own auctions have been terminated for this reason (I was very candid about the OEM status), so if there's a legal defense for this, I'd like to know.
It's call the doctrine of first sale.
It's a legal concept that says when I buy a copy of something that is copyrighted, I get a certain set of rights by default. One of those is the right to resell it.
MS would have to believe that their EULAs constitute a valid legal agreement, and remove that right, but that's about as legaly enfocable as someone selling a house and leaving a sticker on the door that says, "by breaking this seal, you agree to these additional terms...".
You can't force someone to argee to a contract, by putting a sticker on something that's legally THEIRS.
If MS wants their EULAs to be legally valid, they need to be "signed" when the money is exchanged.
Imagine if you bought a new car and there was a sticker on the lock that said "By removing this sticker, you agree never to resell this car".
It's total nonsense.
In the case of ebay, you want to point them to THIS news item:
The judge, in the case Adobe vs Softman heard in the Central District of California, has ruled that consumers can resell bundled software, no matter what the EULA, or End User License Agreement, stipulates.
Then tell ebay that they are attemping to enforce liscense restrictions that the supreme court has ruled illegal.
You could point out that by having such a policy they are therefore opening themselves up to lawsuits frow people who just want to execise their own legal rights.
A quick reality check here. In 2003, a "noisy" Australian deisel boat sunk two US nuclear attack subs and an aircraft carrier during joint war games. The Dutch have done the same sort of thing.
That doesn't say much all by itself.
What were the rules?
What was the mission of each side?
Were there any handicaps?
Did the US sink any ships? etc etc etc
For all that story tells us, the US might have sunk 30 ships. I'm not trying to insult Australians here, I'm just saying that article is REALLY vague.
And no parent has ever sued a school for harm to their child even after they signed a permission slip granting free reign to the school to do with the child as they please?
And no insurance agency has ever fought a claim?
Try asking someone with "health insureance" if they feel like they still have to worry about their medical bills.
I understand what you are saying about skipping the sizes. I wanted to say that if 17mm wrench doesn't fit, I know for sure that there is no 17.5 wrench, while SAE may have something/64.
No. That's equivalent to arguing that there are no standard sizes for SAE, yet there are for metric. It's not true.
Anyway, to many sizes is not a fault of the metric system itself, but rather easily fixable inconvinience.
No the fault of the metric units themselves? yes. Incovenitent? yes. Easily fixable? heck no.
But how do you solve 1/4 vs 7/32 situation? Is it natural for you to add 14'7 3/8" and 9'8 11/16"?
For me, yes. Decimals are nice for computer programs, but sometimes fractions are easier to work with in your head. Not always, but sometimes.
Also, 12 has more, arguably better, factors than ten, so depending on the actual operation you need to do it can actually be easier in feet. For example, if you have a round number of feet (ex: any lumber you buy) and divide it by three, or four you're going to get a round number of feet plus a round number of inches.
Typically you're much more likely to cut a board into thirds or fourths than fifths, since five-legged tables, or five-sided houses are not a common occurance.
This statement is not entirely correct. If I create a derivative work based on GPLed code and don't redistribute it, no one has the right to steal it from me and put my changes back into the original open source version. This guy who did the contract work (assuming there was a typical contract) signed over his ownership to the derivative work to Connelly. By keeping a local copy (which he should not have) and putting derivatives of that back into the main project, he may have effectively stole the code from his employer and put it under GPL.
Actually there really isn't any way that this work ISN"T under the GPL.
As others have pointed out, the GPL specfically states that transmission between a organization and an "offsite contractor" constitutes distribution, and therefore must be done under the GPL liscense.
That means that the code he sent to his employer MUST have been GPL'ed or it was illegal for him to send it. This means that any copy of the code the employer has MUST be under the GPL.
The sticky part is whether this means that any other copies are ALSO under the GPL.
IANAL, so please correct me if I'm wrong here.
Nor am I, and I feel the question brought up really requires a lawyer to answer.
It definately seems against the "spirt" of the GPL for the resulting to code to be anything but GPL'ed, but that cases really seems to demand a detailed reading of the "letter" of the GPL.
There are tons of questions posed here. For example, by selling the rights to GPL'ed code that I have created, am I giving up my right to a GLP'ed copy of that code?
How can I have a legal copy of GPL-derived code from another organization, if not under the GPL?
If the company had sent him the code, he could distribute it under the GPL. If the code was not a work for hire, he could distribute iot under the GPL.
How then, does to code being a "work for hire" make his copy *NOT*, GPL'ed? Can he even legally create a "work for hire" with that code?
Of course here's another interesting point....
If his employer sent him a copy of his own code, even just ONCE. He has a right to distribute it under the GPL, or his employer send him his own code was illegal.
That's a really interesting concept.
...BUT she only distributes it to the company that hired her. That company then never distributes it further, thus it remains "closed".
So Alice gets this program under the GPL and modifies it. She Must distribute it under the GPL.
At first glance it seems that this is kind of a looophole in the GPL, but I think it *might* be covered by various "non-discrimination" clauses in the GPL.
OR as you suggested, perhaps there is a clause which prohibits her from distibuting the code at all while bound by such restrictions. (This would very likely be near the anti-patent provisons.)
Of course, if the company ever sends her a copy of her own code, it would seem like she could automatically distribute it, since the only way the company could legally send it out would be under the GPL liscense.
Maybe I'll go read the GPL one more time...
See? If they skip 1 size in metric wrenches, you notice it right away. .
You *WANT* them to skip sizes.
There is no reason do have both 17mm bolts and 18mm, because the sizes aren't different enough from each other. It's like having a 49/64" bolt, it's silly.
With imperial, I wouldn't even know if the set I bought is incomplete
Any set of wrenches is going to be "incomplete" since there are an infinate number of possible sizes.
In reality you need to pick a limited subset of the availible sizes. The american standard does a better job at this becuase it's better at using small steps between small bolts and bigger steps between bigger bolts.
This isn't a flaw of meters as a unit, but of they way they decided to subdivide it for wrench sizes.
Let's say you are working on a car, tried 1/4" socket and it is too big. Should you pick 17/32? or 7/16?. I agree, it doesn't take that long to calculate, but the choice between 5mm and 6mm is clearer.
Actually, whench sizes are a great example of where american sizing is more logical than metric. American uses fractional sizes, and as size increases, so does the spacing between the sizes.
With metric, they just keep bumping it up by one mm for much longer than they should.
If you go to a place like Sears and look at a metirc set of wrenchs vs an american set with the same number of pieces, you'll see that the american set covers a larger diversity of sizes with the same number of wrenchs, while at the same time using a more reasonable spacing between sizes. (16mm is twice as big as 8mm, yet they still counting by 1 mm increments.)
Metric wrenches are also a bitch because once manfacutrers do start skipping sizes, some manufacturers skip the 18mm size, and some skip the 19mm size. This means that even if I went out and bought a set that covers 10mm-19mm I still don't have all the wrenches to work on every bolt in between those two numbers.
This is first time when somebody actually argues that imperial system is better.
I'm not claiming it's better for everything, just certain things. Technically my complaint about wrench sizes is even really about the metric "system" because there's no reason the could have used a more reasonable spacing for metric wrenches.
It is the public that looks for style over substance.
Actually, many members of the public would LOVE some substance, UNFORTUNATELY WE DON"T OWN ANY MAJOR TV NETWORKS.
How much did Microsoft, Enron, etc contribute to the Democrats in the last few years? (lots)
The Republicans? (lots)
The Green party? (nothing)
If you just spent a bunch on money buying the sopport of both the democrats and republicans, would you cover a third party on your TV network? Of course not.
They are real debates, with real moderation and real issues.
No they aren't.
The questions are known beforehand and the answers are scripted.
These are as much of a real debate as the Barbie Dreamhouse is a real house.
The moderators are just for appearences. There is nothing to moderate, as they've all decided what is going to happen in advance.
The "real issues" consist of topics chosen by the canidates in advance as issues they would *like* to discuss.
In these "debates" both canidates can chose to refuse to discuss anything they want.
Centigrade is the smallest difference which can be felt by human body in everyday situation.
.1 deg C).
This is totally wrong. People will get in fights over one degree F on a thermostat. Not everyone, but enough that it matters.
To me the opposite is true. I don't find MPH more convinient than KPH,
That's all a matter of what you're used to, which is totally NOT what I was talking about. I was talking about the actual span of the units. For something like a thermostat you either end up being too imprecise (using only 2 digits) or overly precise (nobody really is going to care about
Similarly, driving down the road, you're really not going to be able to notice a 1 km/hr speed difference. Sure you could get used to viewing your speed in just about any units, but it doesn't necessarily mean there the most efficient way to present the information you're actually going to use.
I don't hate the metric system. I find it really useful when I'm doing engineering, it has some really great points, but the "imperial" units have their own merits too. Sometimes this comes from their origins being rooted less in physics and more in human experience.
There's no convenient size for beer for example. You can't just walk into a bag and order "one <insert metric unit here>". A deciliter isn't enought, and a whole liter is going to get warm before you finish it.
For the average person, a pint is "just right" and if you say "two pints" they know to assume you want two beers not one really big beer.
I think, being reasonably intelligent individuals, we should be able to cope with multiple systems of measurement.
If you're used to km/hr for example, then by all means use it, it's my opinion however that there's basically no gain from swithing all the US street signs to metric units, for example.
People are used to the current system, and there really isn't much cost to its continued use. The US is a big enough marlet that there really isn't any extra cost to have our speedos in MPH and our thermos in deg F, in is some ways they're both actually a more efficient way to convey information.