Putting something on the net with a disclaimer that you can't use it to breach copyright is a sufficient warning (as per the photocopier case). You'll note that the disclaimer was part of the scenario I mentioned
Copying for the purposes of study and review are two of the four "fair use" provisions applicable to all copyright-protected items in Australia
If someone uses a service (with suitable disclaimer) to breach copyright, it's their problem, not yours.
Of course, if someone was to do this, they would get sued, and probably lose the case. However, the arguments would be around intent.
Under Australian copyright law, this would be a perfectly legal setup:
Load a CD tower up with music CDs
Publish a web site that allows you to download music from the tower, with automatic ripping to MP3 as part of the download process
Stick a disclaimer on the site that, if you are not the owner of the CDs in the tower, then you are required to use the resulting MP3s only for the purposes of study or review (two of the four "fair use" rights under Australian law)
Offering files under Australian law isn't a violation of copyright; you are not copying(*). Under Australian law, it is legal to copy something for the purpose of review, including private review, thus the act of downloading in and of itself is legal. It's only when you fail to delete the copy after making your review that you have violated the law.
I wouldn't want to argue this in a court of law, per se, but the letter of the law is set up that way.
* Storing them as MP3s would, but an on-the-fly translation to MP3 is equivalent to encoding for transmission, which is permitted, and is what makes it legal to play them in your computer. Saying that the act of offering the files is copying is like saying that putting a photocopier on the street is illegal.
What it boils down to is that if I do something wrong, then at the minimum, the cost of correcting the mistake is:
cost of doing the wrong thing first + cost of changing it do the right thing - cost of doing the right thing first
As the cost of doing the wrong thing + the cost of changing it is always going to be larger than the cost of doing it right, you'll always end up with a positive number.
The rest is about momentum; the earlier the mistake was made in the cycle, the more subsequent decisions were made that are also wrong.
Note, however, this has nothing to do with the cost of adding new features later. Here, you've got nothing done wrong to start with, and the cost of changing it is equal to the cost of doing it right. What you lose is the opportunity cost, which can be iffy.
Not necessarily. The key to decrypting the data is the.NET passport, right?
Who has complete access to every.NET passport?
All they need is a way of identifying which.NET passport signed the data, which would be pretty standard. No uber-password needed.
Of course, we all trust Microsoft, and have complete confidence that the registry of.NET passports will never be compromised. Damn, I nearly pulled that off with a straight face...
Still not a match. The laser launch engine works by vaporising part of the craft to produce thrust. This plane is essentially a solar-powered aircraft that happens to be getting the "solar-power" part by laser instead of sunlight.
The best analogy would probably be the various proposals for microwave-based power satellites beaming down to solar-power plants in the desert; same principle, at least.
The problem is that many parts are not available anymore.
More than that, quite a lot of the parts don't have plans available. They'd have to be redesigned if you wanted to go for an exact replica (vacuum tubes and all).
So, we could fly a Saturn V if we wanted to, but before that would happen we would need to redesign many systems on the rocket to use modern technology.
Translation: if you wanted to build a rocket with the same performance characteristics as the Saturn V, you'd have to design one starting largely from the whiteboard up. The good news is that you've got a lot of empirical knowledge on how things get into space and what happens to them there that wasn't available in the 60s. So it would only take 4 years to get back to the moon, not 8 (or however long it took after JFK's speech...)
Never seen that at a non-violent protest, and never seen a violent protest where the cops started it. Well, not in the last 20 years. That includes the link you submitted.
Th most police will do in a non-violent protest is drag away people.
Well, it's highly likely the original recipe (the one with the cocaine in it) has already been leaked; certainly, there is a contender for it.
But you couldn't sell the beverage as CocaCola if you wanted to, because of the trademark. In the same way, you can't use the Dewey Decimal System and call it that (the way the hotel in question did) because of the trademark.
Very simply because in real life you can get really arrested, really have your life ruined, really get shot dead.
And here I though that the US was the land of the free... you might get arrested if you're an idiot and start getting violent, but a peaceful protest is hardly likely to end up with those consequences in any Western country.
It's not just about the system. It's about the work of classifying books into the categories and coming up with new categories. That takes effort, you know.
Furthermore, this is about trademark infringements. Trademarks last as long as you pay the fees for.
Just for comparision, a certain dark-coloured caffineated beverage was first patented and trademarked in 1887, but I don't see anyone saying that the recipe for the original CocaCola should be made public, or the current one (which was settled down in the 1920s).
I'd imagine your local department of education pays the license on behalf. Either that, or the owner of the trademark gives out free licenses for educational institutions.
Ah, the flaws of assuming you had the same frame of reference as I did...:)
I worded the clause carefully. You will notice that the "1 million dollars" part doesn't state the full currency while the "0.25 US dollars" does. You've just assumed I was talking about US dollars.
In the same way, in computing, the common frame of reference for Gigabyte is 2^30 bytes, or 2^33 bits, to be more pedantic. By chucking in the clause, they escape the need for staying in the common frame of reference, same as I did.
Want a million dollars? I'll write you a cheque for a million dollars. On the side, I'll add some small print: "NB: 1 million dollars is considered to equal 0.25 US Dollars".
How many ounces are there in a gallon of ice cream?
Hint: to answer this question, you need to also state the density of the icecream in question. Perhaps the icecream makers simple made the icecream less dense...
Just like an operating system, a connection service should be "secure by default".
99% of the users in this world have no need for open ports. When they do, they can mostly accept that opening those ports poses risks, and they can be educated on the risks.
(Now, if an ISP was to charge you more for opening those ports, that would be different; a one-off administration fee, maybe, but that's it)
*cough* The "City of Sydney" is a very small district, centered on the CBD. That's one electoral district for the Sydney City Council. It's analogous to the "City of London".
You may have noticed a little further down the page where it said that 293000 people worked in the "City of Sydney"; that should have helped give you a clue.
The data from the site I quoted earlier is sourced from the UN. BTW, on the same site is the listing from the US Census bureau. Top 9 cities:
New York (8 million)
LA (3.7 mil)
Chi-town (2.9 mil)
Houston (1.9 mil)
Philly (1.5 mil)
Phoenix (1.3 mil)
San Diego (1.2 mil)
Dallas (1.2 mil)
San Antonio (1.1 mil)
Seattle ranked in at 563,374. DC was a bit larger at 572,059. Boston was 589,141.
That 19 million figure for NY you have, BTW, is for New York State, not NYC (again, according to the US Census...). If you want to check your facts and figures, you're welcome to play again, though.
BTW, Sydney doesn't "lump in the neigboring areas". There's at least one city next to Sydney (Paramatta), which shows up separatly on our census figures, and it's been more or less swallowed up by the urban sprawl.
Australia has fewer cities than the US; that doesn't make them smaller. While the US has 9 cities with population above 1 million, Australia (with less than 10% of the population of the US) has 5 (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, and Perth);
Just for the record: Sydney is the 31st largest city in the world, with a population just above 4 million, according to this site.
The US has only one city larger, and that's the Big Apple (with LA coming second, at about 3.8 million); there are 9 US cities with a population exceeding one million.
The population of the greater Auckland region is just above 1 million. So yes, it's a major city (and yes, I know that administratively it's actually 4 cities)
About this time last year, I had a major bitch with my cable internet provider (hello, BigPond support staff!). Almost every day, I would come home, switch my computer on, and find out I couldn't connect to the net.
The first couple of times, I rang up the help desk. They would ask a few standard questions, and I would happily reboot into Windows 98 and walk through their script. Then they would tell me it's a hardware problem. I would say "No, it's not. My computer can talk to the other computer on the network fine, and the other computer can connect through to your server". At this point, they would tell me they don't support home networks (despite the fact I was paying to have multiple user ids), and try to kick me off the line.
The funny thing about all this was that, at about 10-11pm each night, I could connect again. Turned out that the issue was that the ISP had oversubscribed their network considerably; past a certain number of users, and you weren't able to get an IP address from the DHCP server (which I could see quite happily).
Once I worked out the pattern, I tried the help desk again; I wanted to inform them of this problem. I went through hell for this; reworked my network, reset the cable modem several times, and even had a tech to come out and look at my gear; all according to the script. Of course, the tech came out at 9:30 am, when I'd made it clear that the problem was between 5pm and 10pm, but hey.
In the end, I lodged a complaint with the TIO about the crap support I was getting, while also leaving my computer on when I was at work (thus shunting the problem onto someone else). After two months of complaints circling around, Telstra upgraded their routers and the problem went away. Of course, they never told me that's what they were doing; a friend on the inside let me know. They just said all along that it was a problem on my end, that their techs had repeatedly shown no connection problem (during the day!) and for me to bugger off (one support caller actually used those words).
To make it worse, these guys couldn't put me through to a more senior person; it was an outsourced call center (natch), and the operations group worked for a different company (again, outsourced). They couldn't even lodge a complaint to the other group without a tech certifing a problem, which they couldn't do because they couldn't send them out to my house outside of normal hours!
Re:Isn't the term "Career Programmer" an oxymoron?
on
The Career Programmer
·
· Score: 1
For a certain level of problem, you're right. Domain expertise is always essential to building successful programs, and for simpler programs, a reasonable level of programming expertise can suffice.
However, when you want to implement an enterprise-wide engine to run mission critical systems, I suggest you bring in the professionals.
It's the difference, if you like, between changing a light bulb, changing a light socket, and rewiring your house. Anyone should be able to do the first, the second isn't too hard but does require a bit of nounce, and the third should only be done by an expert.
Remember, money doesn't vanish. All that money lost in the tech boom? It was lost because someone else had it
If half of the population don't work, and thus don't get any money (ignoring welfare, theft, and so forth), that just means that the money is circulating within the confines of the other half. And that other half will sell each other robots.
The market pretty much ignores people with no money.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, if someone was to do this, they would get sued, and probably lose the case. However, the arguments would be around intent.
Offering files under Australian law isn't a violation of copyright; you are not copying(*). Under Australian law, it is legal to copy something for the purpose of review, including private review, thus the act of downloading in and of itself is legal. It's only when you fail to delete the copy after making your review that you have violated the law.
I wouldn't want to argue this in a court of law, per se, but the letter of the law is set up that way.
* Storing them as MP3s would, but an on-the-fly translation to MP3 is equivalent to encoding for transmission, which is permitted, and is what makes it legal to play them in your computer. Saying that the act of offering the files is copying is like saying that putting a photocopier on the street is illegal.
Or you can read Alistair Cockburn's proof
What it boils down to is that if I do something wrong, then at the minimum, the cost of correcting the mistake is:
cost of doing the wrong thing first + cost of changing it do the right thing - cost of doing the right thing first
As the cost of doing the wrong thing + the cost of changing it is always going to be larger than the cost of doing it right, you'll always end up with a positive number.
The rest is about momentum; the earlier the mistake was made in the cycle, the more subsequent decisions were made that are also wrong.
Note, however, this has nothing to do with the cost of adding new features later. Here, you've got nothing done wrong to start with, and the cost of changing it is equal to the cost of doing it right. What you lose is the opportunity cost, which can be iffy.
Mind you, there's no way the current system can be hacked at all. Just ask President Gore.
Not necessarily. The key to decrypting the data is the .NET passport, right?
.NET passport?
.NET passport signed the data, which would be pretty standard. No uber-password needed.
.NET passports will never be compromised. Damn, I nearly pulled that off with a straight face...
Who has complete access to every
All they need is a way of identifying which
Of course, we all trust Microsoft, and have complete confidence that the registry of
Still not a match. The laser launch engine works by vaporising part of the craft to produce thrust. This plane is essentially a solar-powered aircraft that happens to be getting the "solar-power" part by laser instead of sunlight.
The best analogy would probably be the various proposals for microwave-based power satellites beaming down to solar-power plants in the desert; same principle, at least.
Well, yes, but that would be sensible...
More than that, quite a lot of the parts don't have plans available. They'd have to be redesigned if you wanted to go for an exact replica (vacuum tubes and all).
Translation: if you wanted to build a rocket with the same performance characteristics as the Saturn V, you'd have to design one starting largely from the whiteboard up. The good news is that you've got a lot of empirical knowledge on how things get into space and what happens to them there that wasn't available in the 60s. So it would only take 4 years to get back to the moon, not 8 (or however long it took after JFK's speech...)
Never seen that at a non-violent protest, and never seen a violent protest where the cops started it. Well, not in the last 20 years. That includes the link you submitted.
Th most police will do in a non-violent protest is drag away people.
Well, it's highly likely the original recipe (the one with the cocaine in it) has already been leaked; certainly, there is a contender for it.
But you couldn't sell the beverage as CocaCola if you wanted to, because of the trademark. In the same way, you can't use the Dewey Decimal System and call it that (the way the hotel in question did) because of the trademark.
Very simply because in real life you can get really arrested, really have your life ruined, really get shot dead.
And here I though that the US was the land of the free... you might get arrested if you're an idiot and start getting violent, but a peaceful protest is hardly likely to end up with those consequences in any Western country.
It's not just about the system. It's about the work of classifying books into the categories and coming up with new categories. That takes effort, you know.
Furthermore, this is about trademark infringements. Trademarks last as long as you pay the fees for.
Just for comparision, a certain dark-coloured caffineated beverage was first patented and trademarked in 1887, but I don't see anyone saying that the recipe for the original CocaCola should be made public, or the current one (which was settled down in the 1920s).
I'd imagine your local department of education pays the license on behalf. Either that, or the owner of the trademark gives out free licenses for educational institutions.
Ah, the flaws of assuming you had the same frame of reference as I did... :)
I worded the clause carefully. You will notice that the "1 million dollars" part doesn't state the full currency while the "0.25 US dollars" does. You've just assumed I was talking about US dollars.
In the same way, in computing, the common frame of reference for Gigabyte is 2^30 bytes, or 2^33 bits, to be more pedantic. By chucking in the clause, they escape the need for staying in the common frame of reference, same as I did.
Want a million dollars? I'll write you a cheque for a million dollars. On the side, I'll add some small print: "NB: 1 million dollars is considered to equal 0.25 US Dollars".
How does that sound?
How many ounces are there in a gallon of ice cream?
Hint: to answer this question, you need to also state the density of the icecream in question. Perhaps the icecream makers simple made the icecream less dense...
No.
Just like an operating system, a connection service should be "secure by default".
99% of the users in this world have no need for open ports. When they do, they can mostly accept that opening those ports poses risks, and they can be educated on the risks.
(Now, if an ISP was to charge you more for opening those ports, that would be different; a one-off administration fee, maybe, but that's it)
Actually, MS are trying to get 3rd-parties involved with updates.
Case in point: it offered me an update for my NVIDIA card recently, supplied by NVIDIA.
(Of course, it was too stupid to notice that I'd applied exactly the same update directly from NVIDIA about a month before...)
You may have noticed a little further down the page where it said that 293000 people worked in the "City of Sydney"; that should have helped give you a clue.
The data from the site I quoted earlier is sourced from the UN. BTW, on the same site is the listing from the US Census bureau. Top 9 cities:
Seattle ranked in at 563,374. DC was a bit larger at 572,059. Boston was 589,141.
That 19 million figure for NY you have, BTW, is for New York State, not NYC (again, according to the US Census...). If you want to check your facts and figures, you're welcome to play again, though.
BTW, Sydney doesn't "lump in the neigboring areas". There's at least one city next to Sydney (Paramatta), which shows up separatly on our census figures, and it's been more or less swallowed up by the urban sprawl.
Australia has fewer cities than the US; that doesn't make them smaller. While the US has 9 cities with population above 1 million, Australia (with less than 10% of the population of the US) has 5 (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, and Perth);
Just for the record: Sydney is the 31st largest city in the world, with a population just above 4 million, according to this site.
The US has only one city larger, and that's the Big Apple (with LA coming second, at about 3.8 million); there are 9 US cities with a population exceeding one million.
The population of the greater Auckland region is just above 1 million. So yes, it's a major city (and yes, I know that administratively it's actually 4 cities)
About this time last year, I had a major bitch with my cable internet provider (hello, BigPond support staff!). Almost every day, I would come home, switch my computer on, and find out I couldn't connect to the net.
The first couple of times, I rang up the help desk. They would ask a few standard questions, and I would happily reboot into Windows 98 and walk through their script. Then they would tell me it's a hardware problem. I would say "No, it's not. My computer can talk to the other computer on the network fine, and the other computer can connect through to your server". At this point, they would tell me they don't support home networks (despite the fact I was paying to have multiple user ids), and try to kick me off the line.
The funny thing about all this was that, at about 10-11pm each night, I could connect again. Turned out that the issue was that the ISP had oversubscribed their network considerably; past a certain number of users, and you weren't able to get an IP address from the DHCP server (which I could see quite happily).
Once I worked out the pattern, I tried the help desk again; I wanted to inform them of this problem. I went through hell for this; reworked my network, reset the cable modem several times, and even had a tech to come out and look at my gear; all according to the script. Of course, the tech came out at 9:30 am, when I'd made it clear that the problem was between 5pm and 10pm, but hey.
In the end, I lodged a complaint with the TIO about the crap support I was getting, while also leaving my computer on when I was at work (thus shunting the problem onto someone else). After two months of complaints circling around, Telstra upgraded their routers and the problem went away. Of course, they never told me that's what they were doing; a friend on the inside let me know. They just said all along that it was a problem on my end, that their techs had repeatedly shown no connection problem (during the day!) and for me to bugger off (one support caller actually used those words).
To make it worse, these guys couldn't put me through to a more senior person; it was an outsourced call center (natch), and the operations group worked for a different company (again, outsourced). They couldn't even lodge a complaint to the other group without a tech certifing a problem, which they couldn't do because they couldn't send them out to my house outside of normal hours!
For a certain level of problem, you're right. Domain expertise is always essential to building successful programs, and for simpler programs, a reasonable level of programming expertise can suffice.
However, when you want to implement an enterprise-wide engine to run mission critical systems, I suggest you bring in the professionals.
It's the difference, if you like, between changing a light bulb, changing a light socket, and rewiring your house. Anyone should be able to do the first, the second isn't too hard but does require a bit of nounce, and the third should only be done by an expert.
It's people like the Gentoo team that have made Linux the phenomenon that it is.
That is to say, it's not the Gentoo team, but people with similar attitudes and motivations. The Gentoo team are continuing on the same traditions.
I'm assuming you meant 1768, right?
And which Native American tribe did you say you belonged to?
Quite easily.
Remember, money doesn't vanish. All that money lost in the tech boom? It was lost because someone else had it
If half of the population don't work, and thus don't get any money (ignoring welfare, theft, and so forth), that just means that the money is circulating within the confines of the other half. And that other half will sell each other robots.
The market pretty much ignores people with no money.