And since it isn't a law, I would be interested in knowing what penalties one can expect to receive should the mandate be ignored. Anyone care to enlighten me? The first defector stands to make a lot of $$$ and schemes like region coding seems to be universally ignored these days.
Grrr... that argument is really old. The Democrats differ from the Republicans on any number of issues
They have their differences, but both parties have a lot of overlap on issues too. Especially THIS issue. Both side with Hollywood, not librarians. Telling me how different the two are on affirmative action is pretty pointless when the discussion is about copyright.
On June 9, 2002 Jose Padilla--a.k.a. Abdullah Al Muhajir--was transferred from control of the U.S. Department of Justice to military control. Since that time, Padilla has been held in a navy brig in South Carolina.
Padilla has not been charged with a crime, and does not have access to a lawyer in his detention.
And since "sneak and peek" DOES NOT SUNSET, be prepared to not know for a long time to come. The gubmint has been trying to slip this one by us since well before 9/11. It was shot down at least three times in recent history. First it was the Cyberspace Electronic Security Act (CESA). Then the Clinton administration tried to push it through with a meth bill. When that failed, they tried to sneak in through as an amendment to a bankruptcy bill. All the while, the DOJ, led by Reno, was claiming to already have this power without any need for additional legislation in the Nicodemo Scarfo case.
Your only hope is to have it shot down in the Supreme Court now. Both parties have been pushing for this for some time. The People had already spoken. We consistently and emphatically told them 'hell no'. Three strikes, you're out, right? Oh no! Now the world's a different place with all the terrorists running about! Privacy is great an all, but the founding fathers could hardly anticipate terrorism! Get with the program you whining liberal pinkos! Now the FBI can sign their own warrant, sneak into your home, plant bugs and video cameras, and basically make Amendment 4 null and void.
May I make one suggestion; Would you be so kind as to change your name from FBI to KGB and give up any pretense? Thanks.
By backing Linux, they are respecting copyright and 'intellectual property' rights. When the average monthly salary of the average person in Brazil is about $240, I'd say they don't have much choice in the matter. As for patients, patents, and cheap drugs, I won't go into it. That's a whole different flame war regarding life or death situations which is getting off topic.
What's so wrong about people seeking work that pays better than what they had originally?
That's not the issue. You know it.
Just because they're of a different ethnicity than you, or they speak a different language, you think we should forbid them from coming here to work?
They aren't coming here to work. They're manning call centers in India. The only difference is that they've gone multi-national and are using Canadian PR to front for them. Nobody here has a problem with indian workers having a better life. The problem is that our kids are going hungry as a result.
News flash: People are people, some of us had the fortune of being born and raised in stronger economical and freer political environments, but to act like it's wrong for a person to find a better job somewhere and for a company to hire that person is completely antithetical to what freedom and our capitalistic nation is all about.
Those people don't have the environmental regulations, the labor laws, the minimum wages, or any of the other things this 'capitalistic nation is all about'. When you can figure out how to level the playing field without further turning this nation into a wage slavery shit hole feel free to return and present your argument again. Otherwise, you are comparing apples to oranges and you know it.
One absentee:-) Surely you jest. Kerry didn't vote. What you're seeing is a summary for a voice vote. You know, the kind of vote where everyone's too much of a pussy to actually go on record as having voted. The same kind of vote that passed the $87,000,000,000.00 for Iraq. Kerry didn't vote for that either. He wasn't there. All of six senators showed up that day. Kerry was out playing golf or busy taking bribes or something. These people don't even show up for work. They draw straws to see who shows up for today's 'non-controversial' topic for voice vote. The DMCA passed both House and Senate by voice vote.
Would you employee someone who didn't show up to work 90% of the time? Of course you wouldn't, it would bankrupt your business. Well, maybe you would; Turn on CSPAN sometime. The place is empty. Those are your employees in action. They don't read the legislation they pass. They don't show up for work. They've pretty well delegated all authority to multinational corporations.
Woohoo! Go vote in your gerrymandered district. Vote on your paperless voting machine. This is the most important election evar! Vote and think you are free.
I'm not a real grammar nazi. I make mistakes occasionally. I'm pretty good with it's/its, but I often end up quoting "like this". Grammar nazis tell me it should be "like this." I generally don't mind being corrected myself, but usually I'm thinking somewhere in the back of my mind
Was I writing a doctoral thesis? No. I wonder if this guy stops friends in mid-sentence saying something like "It's isn't, not ain't. Ain't isn't a word."
But being that I technically am incorrect, I try to make note and correct myself in the future.
So what does all this have to do with the correction at hand? Well, while you were busy worrying about it's/its, you've completely missed the fact that it isn't AMD's SOI technology. Credit belongs to IBM for their Power processor line. It was licensed by Motorola for G3/G4 production, and originally made it into AMD chips at Motorola fabrication plants. Moto's copper and IBM's SOI gave you X86er's your big Gigahertz speed boost at a time when Motorola was facing brain drain thanks to Intel. PowerPCs had the tech first, but lacked the engineers to capitalize on it. I'm sure AMD has had their hand in improvements to the technology since then, but if we're gonna be picky, how about being picky over factual mistakes first. Those things matter a whole lot more to me than the position of an apostrophe.
I'm not at all sure what a good argument for you suddenly "automatically" having rights to stuff I thought up might look like - I've never seen one. Want to present one? I'll read it, at the very least.
You read it once already. Allow me to repeat it at greater length. Silence was copyrighted in 1952. Obviously, silence did not exist before that year. Assuming no further term extensions, silence will be owned by the John Cage foundation until the year 2052, as he died in 1977. You are hereby forbidden, under penalty of law, to copy, distribute, or publicly perform silence without permission of the John Cage foundation for the next 48 years. You may have the right to remain silent when arrested, but exercising that right without proper permission puts you in violation of copyright law. Penalties can be as great as 5 years in prison and $150,000 per offense. Can you honestly tell me that is not absolutely the most utterly ridiculous perversion of copyright law you have ever heard?
So, back to you. How do I "automatically" have rights to stuff you thought up? Simple, you told me what you thought up. What, you can collect money and then erase your idea from my mind? No, I didn't think so. You have it backwards. What gave you the right to dictate what I could do with an idea you shared with me? Without copyright, absolutely nothing. That's the point of Copyright; to give you just enough incentive to share what you know to promote progress. Copyright is about making sure you want to share that great idea with the rest of us. That way, we as a whole can make use of it for the good of mankind. It is not in any way compensation for work of any kind. Allowing you and your descendants to play idea dictator with copyright is expressly against the intention of copyright. If you didn't want to share your ideas with the world, you should have kept them to yourself. If you need further elaboration, I suggest you read this.
Hopefully after reading that you will understand my point more thoroughly. However, my guess is you've already labeled me a whiney p2p pirate who has some sense of entitlement to free stuff and skipped into skim mode. You are the one with the mistaken sense of entitlement. I have presented this argument, at length, a number of times to people like yourself. To date, no one on your side of the argument has attempted to read or understand what I have presented. They simply continue to spout **AA duckspeak.
I am not against copyright. Nothing could be further from the truth. Copyright is extremely useful. Copyright is, after all, what gives the GPL its teeth. Copyright gives me incentive to create software. But I am very much against ridiculous copyright terms, penalties, and restrictions. Those things only serve to destroy the very system you and I live by. Infringement on P2P networks is not a cause for 'tough, new' copyright laws and enforcement. It is the effect of the overly restrictive and oppressive copyright laws we have already. Continuing down the path you so fervently defend is to seek the destruction of copyright in its entirety.
And there I go pulling a John Kerry; describing complex issues in detail when the average joe just wants a sound bite. Well, here's one of those for you too:
Copyright as we know it today is nothing more than a pyramid scheme.
How about "as long as I'm not hurting anyone then it's cool, right?" It isn't about profits. It's about control. The music industry is losing that control as instant publishing and person to person communications evolve. They are fit to be tied because they see themselves being removed from the equation. They've gouged artists and fans long enough. Nobody will be sorry to see them go.
Personally, I blame...
on
Good Bad Attitude
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Personally, I blame the parents.
Personally, I blame 100+ year copyrights and a system that made silence into private property in 1952.
If the search of an ISP's drives is going to take more than a few hours, I believe it's standard procedure to seize the drives, copy them, and return them. I think the only time limitation is up to whoever signs the warrant. Parent is correct. They could easily just carnivore the upstream, and if they really needed to get at the server for traffic analysis, they'd just write themselves a warrant and do a black bag job per the PATRIOT Act Sec. 215. Why would you raid a place and alert the world to your presence if the goal is to monitor ongoing traffic? I don't have a lot of confidence in our government, but they aren't that stupid. (BTW, Section 215 does not sunset... ever! Ahhh crap, does that mean I'm now a rambling paranoid too...)
I think you'll agree that this is a less invasive and probably cheaper computer/brain interface. Oh yeah, for you Mac trivia junkies, IBVA's gear started Mac only =) They've branched out over the years though.
Available application servers.
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 1
So Java is playing syntax catchup with 1.5. (Not making a statement, just noting what the intro seems to imply.) Great, they both seem to be taking plays from the good ol' C playbook. What appservers are available for C# though? Anything not made by Microsoft?
I have always wondered what would happen if one of our representatives hosted a web site that allowed people in his/her district to know what votes were coming up in Congress, how he/she is planning to vote and why, and allowed some informal polling and commentary on the issues. I know this isn't what this guy is doing, but I wonder if it isn't the logical next step.
I promise you, when they figure out PayPal, they are gonna be all over that.
It could be useful to paint the bill as the "It will make it illegal to fast-forward through commercials!!" to get the word out.
Misleading others to promote your opinion is not useful. It is actually quite damaging. Most people don't appreciate being lied to. If you lie about one part, all other parts of your argument will loose force when the lie is discovered. You're right though... It doesn't appear to make skipping commercials illegal, as long as you don't save a copy with the commercials clipped. If you do, well reading this...
(B) A manufacturer, licensee, or licensor of technology that enables the making of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture imperceptible that is authorized under subparagraph (A) is not liable on account of such manufacture or license for a violation of any right under this Act, if such manufacturer, licensee, or licensor
ensures that the technology provides a clear and conspicuous notice that the performance of the motion picture is altered from the performance intended by the director or copyright holder of the motion picture.
Great, so we have to rewrite QuickTime and Windows Media frameworks for the movie industry? Oh, and we have a whole 180 days to 'make it so'? Well isn't that generous of them? Where are the tech industry tax breaks to pay for this crap? Not only that, but this sounds like a really REALLY hard programming problem. So, umm, yeah, how? I suppose you have designed some kind of open, industry standard, fast and accurate a/v fingerprinting technology that thousands of brilliant programmers have been unable to produce in several decades time? I further suppose you boys in the Senate already have audio/video fingerprints for every copyrighted work on planet Earth on file and served up on a webserver, right? Oh you don't? Then how the fsck is my multimedia framework supposed to just know if this particular piece of media is copyrighted by XYZ corp or just a video of Joe Public's birthday party? This is the same kind of vague impossible task that courts handed Napster, except this time, it will be the whole industry having their ass handed to them. You can kiss iLife goodbye. Adios filmGIMP. What the hell are these people thinking? Good job boys, you just criminalized all home audio/visual editing software. If this should pass, I hope the tech industry discontinues ALL a/v products in retaliation. Kick Hollywood back into the a/v stone age for biting the hand that feeds it.
Rick Boucher of Virginia. He's running for re-election this year, so send him a few bucks. I don't care if you are a R or a D, he's the only friend you've got up there. So contribute, and if you're in his district, go vote for him.
I am not a public figure selected, elected, or otherwise chosen to act on behalf of 'The People.' By your logic, my yearly budget should be public record just like the national budget. Sorry, but twisting logic doesn't make you right.
If you wanted to argue this properly, you should have chosen a more appropriate analogy; Juror privacy for instance. As it is, you have been modded troll and you will probably just blame that on 'those damned leftist slashdot hippy moderators' right?
The 'regular media' isn't so fucking stupid as to post names, addresses, and phone numbers of RNC delegates.
But they don't mind violating rape shield laws when a basketball star's butt is on the line, do they? There is no law against posting names, addresses, and phone numbers of delegates.
Why bother creating a cyber-crimes unit for Scottsdale when for a fraction of the price they could hire some out of work coders to put together a secure your wi-fi community education program? Hell, enlist Mr. Anderson's 8th grade comp sci class for that matter. It would cost a lot less and put idle hands to work. The geeks could go war driving and stop at every house with an open access point. Problem solved. Oops, I forgot... gotta bulk up that standing army a bit more...
Slashdot Mirror
And since it isn't a law, I would be interested in knowing what penalties one can expect to receive should the mandate be ignored. Anyone care to enlighten me? The first defector stands to make a lot of $$$ and schemes like region coding seems to be universally ignored these days.
They have their differences, but both parties have a lot of overlap on issues too. Especially THIS issue. Both side with Hollywood, not librarians. Telling me how different the two are on affirmative action is pretty pointless when the discussion is about copyright.
Padilla has not been charged with a crime, and does not have access to a lawyer in his detention.
Source
11/3/04 - 6/9/02 = 2 years, 4 months, and 3 weeks.
No charges, no trial, no lawyer. Nothing. Welcome to your new home citizen. Enjoy your stay here at the Ministry of Love.
Your only hope is to have it shot down in the Supreme Court now. Both parties have been pushing for this for some time. The People had already spoken. We consistently and emphatically told them 'hell no'. Three strikes, you're out, right? Oh no! Now the world's a different place with all the terrorists running about! Privacy is great an all, but the founding fathers could hardly anticipate terrorism! Get with the program you whining liberal pinkos! Now the FBI can sign their own warrant, sneak into your home, plant bugs and video cameras, and basically make Amendment 4 null and void.
May I make one suggestion; Would you be so kind as to change your name from FBI to KGB and give up any pretense? Thanks.
I loaded the site, but got no tunes. Perhaps they removed the music when they realized the RIAA would seek damages of $150,000 per page view.
By backing Linux, they are respecting copyright and 'intellectual property' rights. When the average monthly salary of the average person in Brazil is about $240, I'd say they don't have much choice in the matter. As for patients, patents, and cheap drugs, I won't go into it. That's a whole different flame war regarding life or death situations which is getting off topic.
What's so wrong about people seeking work that pays better than what they had originally?
That's not the issue. You know it.
Just because they're of a different ethnicity than you, or they speak a different language, you think we should forbid them from coming here to work?
They aren't coming here to work. They're manning call centers in India. The only difference is that they've gone multi-national and are using Canadian PR to front for them. Nobody here has a problem with indian workers having a better life. The problem is that our kids are going hungry as a result.
News flash: People are people, some of us had the fortune of being born and raised in stronger economical and freer political environments, but to act like it's wrong for a person to find a better job somewhere and for a company to hire that person is completely antithetical to what freedom and our capitalistic nation is all about.
Those people don't have the environmental regulations, the labor laws, the minimum wages, or any of the other things this 'capitalistic nation is all about'. When you can figure out how to level the playing field without further turning this nation into a wage slavery shit hole feel free to return and present your argument again. Otherwise, you are comparing apples to oranges and you know it.
Would you employee someone who didn't show up to work 90% of the time? Of course you wouldn't, it would bankrupt your business. Well, maybe you would; Turn on CSPAN sometime. The place is empty. Those are your employees in action. They don't read the legislation they pass. They don't show up for work. They've pretty well delegated all authority to multinational corporations.
Woohoo! Go vote in your gerrymandered district. Vote on your paperless voting machine. This is the most important election evar! Vote and think you are free.
- Was I writing a doctoral thesis? No. I wonder if this guy stops friends in mid-sentence saying something like "It's isn't, not ain't. Ain't isn't a word."
But being that I technically am incorrect, I try to make note and correct myself in the future.So what does all this have to do with the correction at hand? Well, while you were busy worrying about it's/its, you've completely missed the fact that it isn't AMD's SOI technology. Credit belongs to IBM for their Power processor line. It was licensed by Motorola for G3/G4 production, and originally made it into AMD chips at Motorola fabrication plants. Moto's copper and IBM's SOI gave you X86er's your big Gigahertz speed boost at a time when Motorola was facing brain drain thanks to Intel. PowerPCs had the tech first, but lacked the engineers to capitalize on it. I'm sure AMD has had their hand in improvements to the technology since then, but if we're gonna be picky, how about being picky over factual mistakes first. Those things matter a whole lot more to me than the position of an apostrophe.
Much obliged :-)
You read it once already. Allow me to repeat it at greater length. Silence was copyrighted in 1952. Obviously, silence did not exist before that year. Assuming no further term extensions, silence will be owned by the John Cage foundation until the year 2052, as he died in 1977. You are hereby forbidden, under penalty of law, to copy, distribute, or publicly perform silence without permission of the John Cage foundation for the next 48 years. You may have the right to remain silent when arrested, but exercising that right without proper permission puts you in violation of copyright law. Penalties can be as great as 5 years in prison and $150,000 per offense. Can you honestly tell me that is not absolutely the most utterly ridiculous perversion of copyright law you have ever heard?
So, back to you. How do I "automatically" have rights to stuff you thought up? Simple, you told me what you thought up. What, you can collect money and then erase your idea from my mind? No, I didn't think so. You have it backwards. What gave you the right to dictate what I could do with an idea you shared with me? Without copyright, absolutely nothing. That's the point of Copyright; to give you just enough incentive to share what you know to promote progress. Copyright is about making sure you want to share that great idea with the rest of us. That way, we as a whole can make use of it for the good of mankind. It is not in any way compensation for work of any kind. Allowing you and your descendants to play idea dictator with copyright is expressly against the intention of copyright. If you didn't want to share your ideas with the world, you should have kept them to yourself. If you need further elaboration, I suggest you read this.
Hopefully after reading that you will understand my point more thoroughly. However, my guess is you've already labeled me a whiney p2p pirate who has some sense of entitlement to free stuff and skipped into skim mode. You are the one with the mistaken sense of entitlement. I have presented this argument, at length, a number of times to people like yourself. To date, no one on your side of the argument has attempted to read or understand what I have presented. They simply continue to spout **AA duckspeak.
I am not against copyright. Nothing could be further from the truth. Copyright is extremely useful. Copyright is, after all, what gives the GPL its teeth. Copyright gives me incentive to create software. But I am very much against ridiculous copyright terms, penalties, and restrictions. Those things only serve to destroy the very system you and I live by. Infringement on P2P networks is not a cause for 'tough, new' copyright laws and enforcement. It is the effect of the overly restrictive and oppressive copyright laws we have already. Continuing down the path you so fervently defend is to seek the destruction of copyright in its entirety.
And there I go pulling a John Kerry; describing complex issues in detail when the average joe just wants a sound bite. Well, here's one of those for you too:
Wouldn't that put Google squarely in the **AA's sights? And didn't someone smaller already get bitch slapped for this very same 'innovation'?
How about "as long as I'm not hurting anyone then it's cool, right?" It isn't about profits. It's about control. The music industry is losing that control as instant publishing and person to person communications evolve. They are fit to be tied because they see themselves being removed from the equation. They've gouged artists and fans long enough. Nobody will be sorry to see them go.
Personally, I blame the parents.
Personally, I blame 100+ year copyrights and a system that made silence into private property in 1952.
If the search of an ISP's drives is going to take more than a few hours, I believe it's standard procedure to seize the drives, copy them, and return them. I think the only time limitation is up to whoever signs the warrant. Parent is correct. They could easily just carnivore the upstream, and if they really needed to get at the server for traffic analysis, they'd just write themselves a warrant and do a black bag job per the PATRIOT Act Sec. 215. Why would you raid a place and alert the world to your presence if the goal is to monitor ongoing traffic? I don't have a lot of confidence in our government, but they aren't that stupid. (BTW, Section 215 does not sunset... ever! Ahhh crap, does that mean I'm now a rambling paranoid too...)
As I said before, don't trust any of the major parties to safeguard your privacy.
You qualify this statement in regards to privacy? How strange... ;-)
Coulda fooled me. That seems to be all our esteemed candidates do.
I think you'll agree that this is a less invasive and probably cheaper computer/brain interface. Oh yeah, for you Mac trivia junkies, IBVA's gear started Mac only =) They've branched out over the years though.
So Java is playing syntax catchup with 1.5. (Not making a statement, just noting what the intro seems to imply.) Great, they both seem to be taking plays from the good ol' C playbook. What appservers are available for C# though? Anything not made by Microsoft?
I promise you, when they figure out PayPal, they are gonna be all over that.
Misleading others to promote your opinion is not useful. It is actually quite damaging. Most people don't appreciate being lied to. If you lie about one part, all other parts of your argument will loose force when the lie is discovered. You're right though... It doesn't appear to make skipping commercials illegal, as long as you don't save a copy with the commercials clipped. If you do, well reading this...
- (B) A manufacturer, licensee, or licensor of technology that enables the making of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture imperceptible that is authorized under subparagraph (A) is not liable on account of such manufacture or license for a violation of any right under this Act, if such manufacturer, licensee, or licensor
- ensures that the technology provides a clear and conspicuous notice that the performance of the motion picture is altered from the performance intended by the director or copyright holder of the motion picture.
Great, so we have to rewrite QuickTime and Windows Media frameworks for the movie industry? Oh, and we have a whole 180 days to 'make it so'? Well isn't that generous of them? Where are the tech industry tax breaks to pay for this crap? Not only that, but this sounds like a really REALLY hard programming problem. So, umm, yeah, how? I suppose you have designed some kind of open, industry standard, fast and accurate a/v fingerprinting technology that thousands of brilliant programmers have been unable to produce in several decades time? I further suppose you boys in the Senate already have audio/video fingerprints for every copyrighted work on planet Earth on file and served up on a webserver, right? Oh you don't? Then how the fsck is my multimedia framework supposed to just know if this particular piece of media is copyrighted by XYZ corp or just a video of Joe Public's birthday party? This is the same kind of vague impossible task that courts handed Napster, except this time, it will be the whole industry having their ass handed to them. You can kiss iLife goodbye. Adios filmGIMP. What the hell are these people thinking? Good job boys, you just criminalized all home audio/visual editing software. If this should pass, I hope the tech industry discontinues ALL a/v products in retaliation. Kick Hollywood back into the a/v stone age for biting the hand that feeds it.Rick Boucher of Virginia. He's running for re-election this year, so send him a few bucks. I don't care if you are a R or a D, he's the only friend you've got up there. So contribute, and if you're in his district, go vote for him.
If you wanted to argue this properly, you should have chosen a more appropriate analogy; Juror privacy for instance. As it is, you have been modded troll and you will probably just blame that on 'those damned leftist slashdot hippy moderators' right?
But they don't mind violating rape shield laws when a basketball star's butt is on the line, do they? There is no law against posting names, addresses, and phone numbers of delegates.
Why bother creating a cyber-crimes unit for Scottsdale when for a fraction of the price they could hire some out of work coders to put together a secure your wi-fi community education program? Hell, enlist Mr. Anderson's 8th grade comp sci class for that matter. It would cost a lot less and put idle hands to work. The geeks could go war driving and stop at every house with an open access point. Problem solved. Oops, I forgot... gotta bulk up that standing army a bit more...
Firewalls