If you want to control the terms of the publishing of anything you create, you'd better not need to ever have it published. That way, when the pressure sales tactics come out, you shrug and say NO.
As soon as you need to have a record deal, or a publishing deal, you've lost any bargaining position whatsoever.
An example. In a school district near my work, a teacher was suspended for insubordination for 1 week without pay. The reason? Well a couple of years ago, the test scores came back without the required number of students placing in the "advanced" category. So the principal ordered the teacher to "toughen up" the curriculum to ensure that the test scores showed more "advanced" students. So the teacher made the course harder.
Now, the test scores went up a little bit, but the number of students having trouble passing the class increased as well. Some parents complain, and the principal's solution is to order the teacher to change the grades so that some kids pass the class! The teacher can't do that as that would be unethical, and possibly illegal. So the superintendent orders her to change the grades and now she's under suspension because won't change grades. The principal reports to the superintendent who is a political appointee of an elected school board. Don't like your kids grades, call up the politician, and if you're in the right crowd a few "suggestions" can be made to the teacher about what grades little Johnny should get.
Doesn't happen that way at univeristy and that is one BIG difference.
You don't get it. This isn't about regulating computer misuse or spam, which have laws already in place. This is about regulating all forms of transmitted communication. If this is upheld they'll start censoring the web just like they do broadcast TV. Look at the WWW and see how many cases of "Fuck" are on the web. Googling the word fuck brings up 40,000,000 hits. At five grand a hit, you've got enough in fines to fund the war on the world. As far as FCC regulating equipment interference, it's been done for years. Modems, TV's, monitors, computers, all comply with FCC regulations for electronic devices.
So you put up a web site with a comments section like Slashdot. The FCC will then come by and say... Hmm Casualposter put up the word fuck three times and so we've got to fine that ripe little bastard fifteen grand, and slashdot as well for "broadcasting" the whole rotten lot. Oh yeah, did I mention that broadcasters have to have FCC liscenses. How about the same thing for websites?
And then we've got that anonymous fellow. He's a potty mouth and owes the FCC several billion for the f-word. So cough up his ID oh slashdot or else we'll haul comander taco off to jail, just for starters, for contempt you see. We can't have this immoral stuff on the net. It's bad for the kiddies. You see the internet is just like TV or radio. Somebody sets up a website (like a radio station), and anybody with the right kind of equipment (like a radio) can find the URL (like dialing in the radio station) and load up the website (like a radio program). As you can see, the website folks are just like radio stations and therefore they should be FORCED to protect our precious children from the dreaded f-word.
And all that porn, why that doesn't belong where anyone who isn't willing to drive out into the boonies or a dangerous part of town to hang out at a sleazy theater with other scummy people to see some really ugly, stoned people doing bad things. Put the porn back in the ghettos where it belongs.
So the real effect is to do though regulation what the courts have not allowed congress to do via laws like CIPA. The FCC already regulates the content of broadcast TV and radio, and with the power grab will be regulating what ever gets put up on the web. That should reduce the web to little more than static TV for your computer.
As to regulating spam and viruses. Since when has the FCC ever gone after international criminals? All the laws in the world won't reduce spam as long as a few billion dollars can be made. It's like drugs. Outlaw Spam and the spammers will be criminals and the spam will get worse, not better, just like the war on drugs has made little dent in the drug problem, but it has made a lot of folks more dangerous to the rest of us.
Oh yeah, I could be wrong. But I've never ever seen a government do GOOD regulations of communications content. Aircraft reliability and equipment reliability and non-interference? Yes the regulation is good. But why the fuck should I pay twenty grand for typing 16 characters in a comment? Or howard stern pay fines for saying fuck on the air? That's content control.
The responsibilities of the office of the President of the United STates are quite clearly delineated in the US Constitution. Among the duties of the President, and sworn to in the oath of office, is "to protect and defend the constitution of the United States." By removing someone who wore a shirt marked "Protect our Civil Liberties," the Repbulicans in charge of this gathering, have implied that they do not agree with that phrase. How can a man swear to uphold the US Constitution as required of him, and find repugnant the phrase "Protect our Civil Liberties?" If performing the duties of the office are so offensive, then why run for re-election? The job description has not changed in 200 years, and is unlikely to change in the next four.
I am more than uncomfortable with a group of republicans who are uncomfortable with protecting our civil liberties. That is the foundation of the US government.
And with all of the outsourcing to "cheaper" parts of the world, how is MS going to come up with that 31% USD profit margin? And they say outsourcing is good.
Perhaps then we should set up an automated system to fire off DMCA take down notices for every file that even remotely looks like it could be infringing on some copyright. Get obnoxious enough with this and the law wil change.
If the Sony-Betamax decision did not apply to radio, then there would have been a great controversy over the ability to easily record live radio programs on cassette tape. That ability predates the VCR issue completely, and as far as I know, is perfectly legal.
CD's aren't that great. They have this tendency to get scratched. Music on Hard drives doesn't suffer from being scratched nearly as often, and with proper backup software, the enevitable hard drive crash is no loss of data.
If you've got small children in the house, then it is absolutely necessary to make a copy of your software and keep the originals in a VERY safe place, otherwise you'll be at the store buying a replacement for those horribly scratched discs that the munchkins "played" with; left in the laundry basket, let the dog chew on, used to make sand castles in the back yard. So anyone that wants to disable me ability to make a "working" copy of software I purchases, is about to get a nasty letter and a return for refund. If they cost me money by deliberately imparing the functionality of my computer, I would send them a bill, and maybe, (depending upon just how mad I got) take 'em to small claims court for it.
I sure hope you're not advocating taking someone's else's creative effort, printing it in China from a digital copy you bought and underpricing them by selling on EBAY. That's copyright infringement, and if you did it to me, I'd sue your ass into the ground. The current penalty is $150,000 per copy.
I don't see how you'd do better by printing in China and then selling on Ebay because books are HEAVY and cost a lot to ship. the whole idea of charging extra for shipping is one thing, but Amazon and Barnes and Nobles do have free shipping on some size orders. You're certainly not going to be a low price leader if the shipping from China is too high. And you're assuming that you can actually do this in China. Maybe you can, but that is not something that you can JUST DO. Doing business in China is complex.
Doesn't it say in the EULA for Windows XP Pro that you are not to use the software to fly airplanes? I thought I read that in there somewhere, but I could be dreaming again.
PATRIOT ACT is to protect us from terrorists, but as we all know, or should by now, that law enforcement doesn't care about the intent of the law, they only care about putting perps in jail. This makes it a lot easier to get around those nasty restrictions on kicking your door in. Let do this a lot and then we'll get rid of the Patriot ACT.
This is a very good reason to do everything we can to eradicate Orin Hatch's INDUCE act.
It's not about paranoia. It's about an administration that has been promoting a fascist agenda, ie moving away from civil liberties and towards a tyrany, (check out the patriot act, and the current homeland security mandates for industry--official USCG regulations as examples) in bed with Diebold, who happens to (1) support Bush with political donations and public pronouncements (look how much Diebold execs have contributed to Bush and that somewhat famous quote about Diebold being ready to deliver the election to GWB),(2) to be practicing deception in the distribution of voting machines that CANNOT be audited for a recount, and (3) has been found to be lying about their voting software.
A "flaw" in the voting software would not be detectable by the public because the code is proprietary and hidden from sight. That flaw could accidently swing the vote towards a particular candidate or party. Who would know? Election fraud is NOT new and politicians would risk it, just as other criminals risk breaking the law to achieve their own ends.
The RISK is that our liberty is at stake. Our say in how our country is adminstrated is at stake. Why should we trust a company that AT BEST is not very competent and at worst might just be in league with some less than honest politicians to stuff the ballot box in their favor? There is a recognized opportunity to rig the elections in a way that would be VERY hard to prove. And if you can't prove election fraud, then you have no crime, so the practicer would get away with it. Right, the only way then to prove it would be a wistle blower...and are we to hang the whole of our liberty upon the supposed honesty of one person?
The best practice is to trust, but to verify. It is the verification step, the auditable voting records that could demonstrate election fraud, and the openness of the code to public scruitiny, that is lacking in Diebold. And we have seen, in other areas of government, that were there is darkness (secrecy) there is a strong tendency towards corruption. Hence the many "sunshine" laws.
If you're good enough, you can tell them to provide the tools to do the job or they won't get it done. The folks who will bend to such obviously stupid management by terror tactics are not good enough to walk out and get a job. Somebody is always hiring somewhere. You may have to move, but you can find another job. Just do so before you quit.
This is going on in my company. I put in my 50 hours and that's what they get. My department has lost two techs and we've not been allowed to replace them, because the owner doesn't want to spend the money. So when he calls and wants to know why X project is not done, I explain it to him. I even use small words to be sure he understands. So far, no problem.
In a time of limited resources, the management has to set the priorities. Your personal time is not a part of the pay check and is not "Negotiable" no matter what Mr, MBA wants you to think. When they want you to pay out of your pocket, you decide what you are willing to do and then do it. Put in reasonable hours and move on.
Seems clear that when the Ashcroft and the Bush said that the war against terrorism was "everywhere" including presumable the streets of the USA and it's territories, then suddenly, the DOD would have to become prepared to treat every sqaure millimeter of land in the wide world as the new "battleground."
This isn't about law enforcement, but about catching all of you folks what aren't on the "proper side" and seeing that you get detained in one of those interrogation camps.
The current war is not one the US HAD to fight. It has been shown to have been started by warmongers who lied about Iraq's military abilities. It has been used to the benefit of certain companies with links to the current US administration, and to benefit Israel. The cost of putting men on Mars has been estimated to be around 100 billion dollars, which is less than the current amount of money spent on the foolish "war on terrorism." The US has also spent more than the cost of a Mars mission on the wars against: "Poverty" and "Drugs" - - neither of which has been significantly reduced.
The money spent on building an infra structure in space would eventually pay for itself in new technologies, jobs, and economic opportunities that we have yet to imagine. Just as the Appollo space missions did.
I have a hard time justifying spending billions of dollars to destroy another country, especially one incapable of harming the US. We could have spent that money on an infrastruction that would provide benefits for all people on this tiny blue world, instead of spreading death and destruction.
Terrorists are criminals and should be treated as such, with police and courts and proper sentences; not elevated to the status of "enemy state" and attacked with an army.
Well, yeah I'd have like for them to have tracked the dirty sob's that stole money out of my bank account, but it wasn't enough money lost for the cops or FBI to even bother with. BUT, ask about steam tunnels and they can scare up a couple of agents for a few hours.
It's about fucking with your civil rights not protecting you from terrorists.
just look back to J. Edgar Hoover and the Nixon era for examples of how the FBI works.
The movie "walking tall" is in theaters. But there was an older movie with the same name. And a TV show.
Not conclusive that this is the latest movie "Walking Tall." Therefore not conclusive that MGM owns the rights.
As a risk factor, the ISP's have been trying to avoid being liable for what happens on their equipment using the "common carrier" principle. This is what keeps the phone company from being liable for every crime that is commited using phone equipment. The phone company rightly claims that it can't effectively monitor the network for crime and shouldn't do it and therefore doesn't. The copyright holders (RIAA MPAA in particular) don't want to go after everyone else for every infringement and have been trying to shift the burden to the ISP's. This appears to be a reasonable middleground between sue 'em all, and ISP's monitoring 100% of the net content.
I've paid my share of speeding tickets, fines for failing to have the sticker on the liscence plate up to date, or the inspection sticker is expired. I sure don't want Joe Computer System monitoring my every move to see if I drive EXACTLY according to the law.
But there are some intersections where the presence of a cop or a computer ticket machine might work out very well. Its one of those intersections were the red light seems to be a suggestion to speed up, or is outright ignored. I've sat at that light three cars back and still had someone fly through the red light as though it were green. And boy would I have really liked to see red flashing lights right then.
I hear that the auto mechanic er technician field is going to boom as the autos get more and more complex. They really will need all of those computer skills.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to control the terms of the publishing of anything you create, you'd better not need to ever have it published. That way, when the pressure sales tactics come out, you shrug and say NO.
As soon as you need to have a record deal, or a publishing deal, you've lost any bargaining position whatsoever.
An example. In a school district near my work, a teacher was suspended for insubordination for 1 week without pay. The reason? Well a couple of years ago, the test scores came back without the required number of students placing in the "advanced" category. So the principal ordered the teacher to "toughen up" the curriculum to ensure that the test scores showed more "advanced" students. So the teacher made the course harder.
Now, the test scores went up a little bit, but the number of students having trouble passing the class increased as well. Some parents complain, and the principal's solution is to order the teacher to change the grades so that some kids pass the class! The teacher can't do that as that would be unethical, and possibly illegal. So the superintendent orders her to change the grades and now she's under suspension because won't change grades. The principal reports to the superintendent who is a political appointee of an elected school board. Don't like your kids grades, call up the politician, and if you're in the right crowd a few "suggestions" can be made to the teacher about what grades little Johnny should get.
Doesn't happen that way at univeristy and that is one BIG difference.
You don't get it. This isn't about regulating computer misuse or spam, which have laws already in place. This is about regulating all forms of transmitted communication. If this is upheld they'll start censoring the web just like they do broadcast TV. Look at the WWW and see how many cases of "Fuck" are on the web. Googling the word fuck brings up 40,000,000 hits. At five grand a hit, you've got enough in fines to fund the war on the world. As far as FCC regulating equipment interference, it's been done for years. Modems, TV's, monitors, computers, all comply with FCC regulations for electronic devices.
So you put up a web site with a comments section like Slashdot. The FCC will then come by and say... Hmm Casualposter put up the word fuck three times and so we've got to fine that ripe little bastard fifteen grand, and slashdot as well for "broadcasting" the whole rotten lot. Oh yeah, did I mention that broadcasters have to have FCC liscenses. How about the same thing for websites?
And then we've got that anonymous fellow. He's a potty mouth and owes the FCC several billion for the f-word. So cough up his ID oh slashdot or else we'll haul comander taco off to jail, just for starters, for contempt you see. We can't have this immoral stuff on the net. It's bad for the kiddies. You see the internet is just like TV or radio. Somebody sets up a website (like a radio station), and anybody with the right kind of equipment (like a radio) can find the URL (like dialing in the radio station) and load up the website (like a radio program). As you can see, the website folks are just like radio stations and therefore they should be FORCED to protect our precious children from the dreaded f-word.
And all that porn, why that doesn't belong where anyone who isn't willing to drive out into the boonies or a dangerous part of town to hang out at a sleazy theater with other scummy people to see some really ugly, stoned people doing bad things. Put the porn back in the ghettos where it belongs.
So the real effect is to do though regulation what the courts have not allowed congress to do via laws like CIPA. The FCC already regulates the content of broadcast TV and radio, and with the power grab will be regulating what ever gets put up on the web. That should reduce the web to little more than static TV for your computer.
As to regulating spam and viruses. Since when has the FCC ever gone after international criminals? All the laws in the world won't reduce spam as long as a few billion dollars can be made. It's like drugs. Outlaw Spam and the spammers will be criminals and the spam will get worse, not better, just like the war on drugs has made little dent in the drug problem, but it has made a lot of folks more dangerous to the rest of us.
Oh yeah, I could be wrong. But I've never ever seen a government do GOOD regulations of communications content. Aircraft reliability and equipment reliability and non-interference? Yes the regulation is good. But why the fuck should I pay twenty grand for typing 16 characters in a comment? Or howard stern pay fines for saying fuck on the air? That's content control.
The responsibilities of the office of the President of the United STates are quite clearly delineated in the US Constitution. Among the duties of the President, and sworn to in the oath of office, is "to protect and defend the constitution of the United States." By removing someone who wore a shirt marked "Protect our Civil Liberties," the Repbulicans in charge of this gathering, have implied that they do not agree with that phrase. How can a man swear to uphold the US Constitution as required of him, and find repugnant the phrase "Protect our Civil Liberties?" If performing the duties of the office are so offensive, then why run for re-election? The job description has not changed in 200 years, and is unlikely to change in the next four.
I am more than uncomfortable with a group of republicans who are uncomfortable with protecting our civil liberties. That is the foundation of the US government.
And with all of the outsourcing to "cheaper" parts of the world, how is MS going to come up with that 31% USD profit margin? And they say outsourcing is good.
Perhaps then we should set up an automated system to fire off DMCA take down notices for every file that even remotely looks like it could be infringing on some copyright. Get obnoxious enough with this and the law wil change.
If the Sony-Betamax decision did not apply to radio, then there would have been a great controversy over the ability to easily record live radio programs on cassette tape. That ability predates the VCR issue completely, and as far as I know, is perfectly legal.
CD's aren't that great. They have this tendency to get scratched. Music on Hard drives doesn't suffer from being scratched nearly as often, and with proper backup software, the enevitable hard drive crash is no loss of data.
The scratched CD is just TOAST.
If you've got small children in the house, then it is absolutely necessary to make a copy of your software and keep the originals in a VERY safe place, otherwise you'll be at the store buying a replacement for those horribly scratched discs that the munchkins "played" with; left in the laundry basket, let the dog chew on, used to make sand castles in the back yard. So anyone that wants to disable me ability to make a "working" copy of software I purchases, is about to get a nasty letter and a return for refund. If they cost me money by deliberately imparing the functionality of my computer, I would send them a bill, and maybe, (depending upon just how mad I got) take 'em to small claims court for it.
I sure hope you're not advocating taking someone's else's creative effort, printing it in China from a digital copy you bought and underpricing them by selling on EBAY. That's copyright infringement, and if you did it to me, I'd sue your ass into the ground. The current penalty is $150,000 per copy.
I don't see how you'd do better by printing in China and then selling on Ebay because books are HEAVY and cost a lot to ship. the whole idea of charging extra for shipping is one thing, but Amazon and Barnes and Nobles do have free shipping on some size orders. You're certainly not going to be a low price leader if the shipping from China is too high. And you're assuming that you can actually do this in China. Maybe you can, but that is not something that you can JUST DO. Doing business in China is complex.
No that would be 95 years after the death of the author. Different if the work was done for a corporation (work for hire).
Doesn't it say in the EULA for Windows XP Pro that you are not to use the software to fly airplanes? I thought I read that in there somewhere, but I could be dreaming again.
PATRIOT ACT is to protect us from terrorists, but as we all know, or should by now, that law enforcement doesn't care about the intent of the law, they only care about putting perps in jail. This makes it a lot easier to get around those nasty restrictions on kicking your door in. Let do this a lot and then we'll get rid of the Patriot ACT.
This is a very good reason to do everything we can to eradicate Orin Hatch's INDUCE act.
It's not about paranoia. It's about an administration that has been promoting a fascist agenda, ie moving away from civil liberties and towards a tyrany, (check out the patriot act, and the current homeland security mandates for industry--official USCG regulations as examples) in bed with Diebold, who happens to (1) support Bush with political donations and public pronouncements (look how much Diebold execs have contributed to Bush and that somewhat famous quote about Diebold being ready to deliver the election to GWB),(2) to be practicing deception in the distribution of voting machines that CANNOT be audited for a recount, and (3) has been found to be lying about their voting software.
A "flaw" in the voting software would not be detectable by the public because the code is proprietary and hidden from sight. That flaw could accidently swing the vote towards a particular candidate or party. Who would know? Election fraud is NOT new and politicians would risk it, just as other criminals risk breaking the law to achieve their own ends.
The RISK is that our liberty is at stake. Our say in how our country is adminstrated is at stake. Why should we trust a company that AT BEST is not very competent and at worst might just be in league with some less than honest politicians to stuff the ballot box in their favor? There is a recognized opportunity to rig the elections in a way that would be VERY hard to prove. And if you can't prove election fraud, then you have no crime, so the practicer would get away with it. Right, the only way then to prove it would be a wistle blower...and are we to hang the whole of our liberty upon the supposed honesty of one person?
The best practice is to trust, but to verify. It is the verification step, the auditable voting records that could demonstrate election fraud, and the openness of the code to public scruitiny, that is lacking in Diebold. And we have seen, in other areas of government, that were there is darkness (secrecy) there is a strong tendency towards corruption. Hence the many "sunshine" laws.
If you're good enough, you can tell them to provide the tools to do the job or they won't get it done. The folks who will bend to such obviously stupid management by terror tactics are not good enough to walk out and get a job. Somebody is always hiring somewhere. You may have to move, but you can find another job. Just do so before you quit.
This is going on in my company. I put in my 50 hours and that's what they get. My department has lost two techs and we've not been allowed to replace them, because the owner doesn't want to spend the money. So when he calls and wants to know why X project is not done, I explain it to him. I even use small words to be sure he understands. So far, no problem.
In a time of limited resources, the management has to set the priorities. Your personal time is not a part of the pay check and is not "Negotiable" no matter what Mr, MBA wants you to think. When they want you to pay out of your pocket, you decide what you are willing to do and then do it. Put in reasonable hours and move on.
Linux
Seems clear that when the Ashcroft and the Bush said that the war against terrorism was "everywhere" including presumable the streets of the USA and it's territories, then suddenly, the DOD would have to become prepared to treat every sqaure millimeter of land in the wide world as the new "battleground."
This isn't about law enforcement, but about catching all of you folks what aren't on the "proper side" and seeing that you get detained in one of those interrogation camps.
Of course, I'm just paranoid, right?
Not the government, but government officials. It's much easier to hide the bribes if they are not traceable.
The current war is not one the US HAD to fight. It has been shown to have been started by warmongers who lied about Iraq's military abilities. It has been used to the benefit of certain companies with links to the current US administration, and to benefit Israel. The cost of putting men on Mars has been estimated to be around 100 billion dollars, which is less than the current amount of money spent on the foolish "war on terrorism." The US has also spent more than the cost of a Mars mission on the wars against: "Poverty" and "Drugs" - - neither of which has been significantly reduced.
The money spent on building an infra structure in space would eventually pay for itself in new technologies, jobs, and economic opportunities that we have yet to imagine. Just as the Appollo space missions did.
I have a hard time justifying spending billions of dollars to destroy another country, especially one incapable of harming the US. We could have spent that money on an infrastruction that would provide benefits for all people on this tiny blue world, instead of spreading death and destruction.
Terrorists are criminals and should be treated as such, with police and courts and proper sentences; not elevated to the status of "enemy state" and attacked with an army.
I suppose that Groklaw is going down for using "grok," a term coined by R A Heinlein?
This is so stupid.
Well, yeah I'd have like for them to have tracked the dirty sob's that stole money out of my bank account, but it wasn't enough money lost for the cops or FBI to even bother with. BUT, ask about steam tunnels and they can scare up a couple of agents for a few hours.
It's about fucking with your civil rights not protecting you from terrorists.
just look back to J. Edgar Hoover and the Nixon era for examples of how the FBI works.
The movie "walking tall" is in theaters. But there was an older movie with the same name. And a TV show.
Not conclusive that this is the latest movie "Walking Tall." Therefore not conclusive that MGM owns the rights.
As a risk factor, the ISP's have been trying to avoid being liable for what happens on their equipment using the "common carrier" principle. This is what keeps the phone company from being liable for every crime that is commited using phone equipment. The phone company rightly claims that it can't effectively monitor the network for crime and shouldn't do it and therefore doesn't. The copyright holders (RIAA MPAA in particular) don't want to go after everyone else for every infringement and have been trying to shift the burden to the ISP's. This appears to be a reasonable middleground between sue 'em all, and ISP's monitoring 100% of the net content.
I've paid my share of speeding tickets, fines for failing to have the sticker on the liscence plate up to date, or the inspection sticker is expired. I sure don't want Joe Computer System monitoring my every move to see if I drive EXACTLY according to the law.
But there are some intersections where the presence of a cop or a computer ticket machine might work out very well. Its one of those intersections were the red light seems to be a suggestion to speed up, or is outright ignored. I've sat at that light three cars back and still had someone fly through the red light as though it were green. And boy would I have really liked to see red flashing lights right then.
I hear that the auto mechanic er technician field is going to boom as the autos get more and more complex. They really will need all of those computer skills.
Well at least we yanks don't have a governement bureau to determine which words we should incorporate in to our language.
Better to get a word from a moron than wait a decade for a word from a bureau.