Not one quote from one student in a story about an issue that primarily affects students.
A half dozen officials from the university and the ACLU quoted. Not a single student.
The lack of any quotes from any actual students stands out especially because of this line:
Most students have responded to the ban positively, Kennedy said.
I've been living in Germany for 8 months now and generally use SkypeIn to call people. Well, actually, SkypeIn gives you a local number in whatever area code you want and then people can call you on your computer. It costs 10 euros for 3 months of service or 30 euros for a full year.
Basically, when I want to talk to someone, I call them with SkypeOut (~2 cents/min) and have them call me back (free for me, and whatever costs for them to call my local number in the states--generally just using up cell phone minutes).
It's worked out very well for me and I have probably saved $50-100 on phone calls since I have been here.
Ahemm, wouldn't copying your DVD to work on another device be a clear example of fair use?
You can tell it's fair use because what the company would like you to do--buy a whole new copy of something you already own--would be completely unfair.
Since I'm a recently graduated student with a bachelor's degree in Global Studies, I am of course uniquely qualified to long-windedly give a not very definite answer to the question: "Is he right?"
The answer all depends on how you feel about the nation-state. Are nations becoming more powerful, as they or are they losing ground to multinational corporations and the influence of transnational forces like the increased movement of people, media images, technologies, and ideas? This is a fundamental question because it is key to how one agrees with, disagrees with, or simply understands Clarke's stance on the issue of nationalizing space.
What is the nation-state? The Peace of Westphalia that settled the 30 Year's War in 1648 essentially gave birth to the state in the modern sense of the word. The treaties formally recognized the sovereignty of all the countries involved and provided certain rights for the states and rules for their interaction, to a limited degree. It's interesting to note that the very creation of the nation is actually an international matter--a treaty signed among warring parties.
Nations don't just will themselves into legal existence, they are fought for and fought over, and their very existence hinges on their as being accepted as legitimate by other nations. In one way, this can be seen as one grand global rivalry--everyone belongs to a tribe (whether large or small or subsumed by some larger identity) and that's the way it always will be (see: Sam Huntington's Clash of Civilizations or Ben Barber's Jihad vs. McWorld). Or, you take a longer term view and consider that the nation-state as we know it today is no older than 350 years (and most are much younger still... consider the relatively newly independent states of Africa for example) and that this whole flag-waving thing will be passé before too long.
I take the longer-term view. While I believe that the nation-state is currently the most powerful player in the global geopolitical world order, it is being challenged on all fronts by the reality of a 17th century concept trudging ahead into the 21st century.
As people are presented with more and more images of other lives, of other possibilities for human existence (an idea referred to as the social imaginaire), their identities become more complex than what is required for nations of bounded, mostly segregated peoples? People can begin to conceptualize of their
And all this is well and good and nicely theoretical, but it's all about cash in the end. Governments and businesses have it, so they're both going to be out there in the solar system. My bet is that space will be colonized by political entities formed by nations in large ideological/cultural blocks (e.g. the West, China & Russia, etc.) but also multinational corporations seeking new revenue streams. I can only hope that these efforts will be minimally competitive and completely demilitarized, but that's probably not likely to happen.
The worst outcome, I believe, would be for corporations to control space with exclusive rights to resources and territory. At least with national governments, there's the pretense that people are in control through democratic mechanisms... with corporations you have no such possibility of the popular will having any input in how things are run.
It may only be in space where masses of humans will learn how to relate to one another on a post-national basis. For an interesting view of how this might play out, I'd suggest Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy, a fictional account of the first 100 settlers on Mars, who come from many differen
Uh... the day Slashdot links to Zeldman is the day I stop reading Slashdot...
So... I guess you won't be here tomorrow?
Zeldman is a true leader in web standards, and A List Apart has been an invaluable reference for this amateur web designer.
I work for a small private university in the midwest as a student helpdesk consultant. Our phones are ringing off the hook as fauclty, staff, and students are getting upwards of 30 emails every few minutes of this worm.
We're trying to contain it here, but of course people are always eager to open up email attachments from anyone they know... even if the filetype is unkown and there is no actual personal information in the email. Oh, the stupidity.
Get real.. these numbers are just too fucking small to do shit
That's exactly the point. This is not a money-making venture we're talking about. The tiny amount of money to continue a copyright is intended to make the work fall out of copyright and into the public domain. It's not like the government is going to be making big bucks off of this.
For my part, I would like to see copyright's terms limited to 10-20 years, but I'm a young radical who hasn't created much of value yet. I'm sure I'll feel differently once I've sold out, struck it rich, and sold my soul to Walt.
Couldn't it be that the new Firewire2 will be used in a new iPod, perhaps the one that is supposed to play video? Since video is on the magnitude of gigs rather than the megs of audio, could this new Firewire standard be made purely for this new device? Or would an iPod be a hardware version of a killer app for the standard?
Considering most of their money is made through licensing their search technology to other searching outfits and businesses, they shouldn't have any trouble making money.
If you feel that volunteering this informatin would jeopardize your chances of landing the job (or subsequently losing it), then you shouldn't do so. If you are directly asked whether you will be takin vacation time, it's a much clearer ethical problem--you should probably inform them.
This most likely isn't a concern for the company, but if you offer the information and show that you yourself are concerned about it, they might in turn become very concerned and think twice about your standing with the company.
Fifteen months in the future is a long way off. Get yourself settled in at the company before you announce your plans. If you do it well enough ahead of time, your prudence will probably even be appreciated.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been living in Germany for 8 months now and generally use SkypeIn to call people. Well, actually, SkypeIn gives you a local number in whatever area code you want and then people can call you on your computer. It costs 10 euros for 3 months of service or 30 euros for a full year. Basically, when I want to talk to someone, I call them with SkypeOut (~2 cents/min) and have them call me back (free for me, and whatever costs for them to call my local number in the states--generally just using up cell phone minutes). It's worked out very well for me and I have probably saved $50-100 on phone calls since I have been here.
Ahemm, wouldn't copying your DVD to work on another device be a clear example of fair use? You can tell it's fair use because what the company would like you to do--buy a whole new copy of something you already own--would be completely unfair.
Since I'm a recently graduated student with a bachelor's degree in Global Studies, I am of course uniquely qualified to long-windedly give a not very definite answer to the question: "Is he right?"
The answer all depends on how you feel about the nation-state. Are nations becoming more powerful, as they or are they losing ground to multinational corporations and the influence of transnational forces like the increased movement of people, media images, technologies, and ideas? This is a fundamental question because it is key to how one agrees with, disagrees with, or simply understands Clarke's stance on the issue of nationalizing space.
What is the nation-state? The Peace of Westphalia that settled the 30 Year's War in 1648 essentially gave birth to the state in the modern sense of the word. The treaties formally recognized the sovereignty of all the countries involved and provided certain rights for the states and rules for their interaction, to a limited degree. It's interesting to note that the very creation of the nation is actually an international matter--a treaty signed among warring parties.
Nations don't just will themselves into legal existence, they are fought for and fought over, and their very existence hinges on their as being accepted as legitimate by other nations. In one way, this can be seen as one grand global rivalry--everyone belongs to a tribe (whether large or small or subsumed by some larger identity) and that's the way it always will be (see: Sam Huntington's Clash of Civilizations or Ben Barber's Jihad vs. McWorld ). Or, you take a longer term view and consider that the nation-state as we know it today is no older than 350 years (and most are much younger still... consider the relatively newly independent states of Africa for example) and that this whole flag-waving thing will be passé before too long.
I take the longer-term view. While I believe that the nation-state is currently the most powerful player in the global geopolitical world order, it is being challenged on all fronts by the reality of a 17th century concept trudging ahead into the 21st century. As people are presented with more and more images of other lives, of other possibilities for human existence (an idea referred to as the social imaginaire), their identities become more complex than what is required for nations of bounded, mostly segregated peoples? People can begin to conceptualize of their
And all this is well and good and nicely theoretical, but it's all about cash in the end. Governments and businesses have it, so they're both going to be out there in the solar system. My bet is that space will be colonized by political entities formed by nations in large ideological/cultural blocks (e.g. the West, China & Russia, etc.) but also multinational corporations seeking new revenue streams. I can only hope that these efforts will be minimally competitive and completely demilitarized, but that's probably not likely to happen.
The worst outcome, I believe, would be for corporations to control space with exclusive rights to resources and territory. At least with national governments, there's the pretense that people are in control through democratic mechanisms... with corporations you have no such possibility of the popular will having any input in how things are run.
It may only be in space where masses of humans will learn how to relate to one another on a post-national basis. For an interesting view of how this might play out, I'd suggest Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy, a fictional account of the first 100 settlers on Mars, who come from many differen
Yes, so quietly that we've been hearing about this for the better part of a week!
Wow, now that's what I call late-breaking news!
Uh... the day Slashdot links to Zeldman is the day I stop reading Slashdot... So... I guess you won't be here tomorrow? Zeldman is a true leader in web standards, and A List Apart has been an invaluable reference for this amateur web designer.
I work for a small private university in the midwest as a student helpdesk consultant. Our phones are ringing off the hook as fauclty, staff, and students are getting upwards of 30 emails every few minutes of this worm. We're trying to contain it here, but of course people are always eager to open up email attachments from anyone they know... even if the filetype is unkown and there is no actual personal information in the email. Oh, the stupidity.
You can also shatter the chip by placing it on a hard surface (concrete works well) and hitting it hard with a hammer.
I find this hammer technique works well with most things.
Everyone should just mirror the PDF file on your own web server. Would it matter then, if the court filed an injunction? Everyone already has it.
Couldn't it be that the new Firewire2 will be used in a new iPod, perhaps the one that is supposed to play video? Since video is on the magnitude of gigs rather than the megs of audio, could this new Firewire standard be made purely for this new device? Or would an iPod be a hardware version of a killer app for the standard?
Considering most of their money is made through licensing their search technology to other searching outfits and businesses, they shouldn't have any trouble making money.
If you feel that volunteering this informatin would jeopardize your chances of landing the job (or subsequently losing it), then you shouldn't do so. If you are directly asked whether you will be takin vacation time, it's a much clearer ethical problem--you should probably inform them.
This most likely isn't a concern for the company, but if you offer the information and show that you yourself are concerned about it, they might in turn become very concerned and think twice about your standing with the company.
Fifteen months in the future is a long way off. Get yourself settled in at the company before you announce your plans. If you do it well enough ahead of time, your prudence will probably even be appreciated.