They admit $400,000 was paid to purchase the rights to the edition, which is being put online "for free" by two foundations, but they still require that anybody not accessing solely for themselves (and I would assume this includes teachers and orchestras in this too) may not use it, but instead must purchase from a "authorized" vendor.
These are not nice people who from one side of their mouths say they are doing a public service while from the other side they force you to lie basically, if you want to share it with others.
But if they only purchased the online publishing rights, they can't grant you public performance rights, not because they're meanies but because they can't confer rights they don't have.
I think they ought to gather some DNA if they haven't already. However, I don't think stored DNA is much consolation for extinction. Even if you could reconstitue the species, it would just die out again for exactly the same reasons it did the first time, unless its habitat could be restored. It might be easy to confuse a strand of DNA with a "life form," but an organism with that genetic makeup will only be viable within a suitable environment.
Imagine that to gain immortality we blast some human DNA off into space, and one day it lands on a planet with a methane atmosphere. They'd have a heck of a time using that to figure out what we are like and how we live here on earth.
My guess is nothing, because this law wouldn't really allow (or enable) the blind to hunt, only to pull the trigger. By the time you've tracked the game, spotted it, managed to sneak up on it, and aimed the gun, the hunt is 99.9 percent over. "Hunting" mostly means "searching," which is why you can be a "bargain hunter."
If it makes you feel any better, look at it this way: cragslist generates more profit than probably 99.99% of the "profit-maximizing" websites out there. Or look at it this way, in the long run, how much wealth did Enron actually produce?
Every time I see an amateur video on the news I think "that's interesting, but it's too bad they didn't get a professional cameraman there in time."
Yeah, so? The point is that's usually impossible. Gadget-freaks obsess about image quality, but if you want images of an event as it actually happened, the choice is often between "something" and "nothing."
Yes, there will always be a market for high-quality searing images of the aftermath of an attack or natural disaster. But now, there's a market for images and video of the actual event too, even if it isn't pretty to look at. I think it's pretty neat, and will have a big impact. In fact, I don't think the Abu-Ghirab scandal would ever have broken with any significant impact, without the ease of transmitting digital photos.
Yeah, the love their pirated copies of Windows for that. But Microsoft would be just as happy without them. The difficulty of pirating a "service" as opposed to a.iso will be one of the factors driving software as a service.
I'm just not impressed by systems that have courses plotted into them and use GPS and high resolution maps and intimate fore-knowledge of the landscape, etc.
The fact that no cars finished the first year, and only three the second, prove that the challenge difficulty was perfect - difficult but achievable by taking the few next technological steps. Whether it impresses you is more a measure of your preconceptions of the field than of the field itself. If you're so sure it's easy, I encourage you to step up for your share of the $3M prize.
Re:If you've ever seen how fast a fire moves...
on
Arson Science Rewritten
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The problem is separating fact from conventional wisdom. Almost all of what we as individuals "know" is what we've heard from other people. There just isn't time for every person to reproduce all of human knowlege from first principles. Raise your hand if you believe e=mc^2. Now raise your hand if you can derive it from first principles (or even list the "first principles" in question). People do not (and perhaps cannot) track all the uncertainty of their knowledge, and their conclusions from that knowledge, all the way down to decision making, except perhaps within a very narrow specialty.
Does power management work properly on Apple computers? If so, they're the only ones to get it working right. On Linux you normally can get it working, but it's the kind of job that is likely to take several days with no guaranteed outcome. And 90% of the time you think it's working, you'll still find glitches over time - no sound after resume, won't suspend if USB devices are plugged in, won't suspend if 3d acceleration is enabled, crashes every 10th suspend or so, appears to suspend to RAM just fine but battery drain is far more than it should be... I've concluded that power management is just insanely tricky. APM/ACPI must be inconsistently implemented on every device, otherwise it could never work as poorly as it does.
I should never have to reboot my laptop. I should be able to pop it into my docking station, resume from hibernation, and have it come up working properly including my desktop monitor and all the other peripherals hooked to the docking station. And the reverse should be true when I leave at night. I've never seen it happen.
Internet viewers want to quickly scan 100's of videos to find what works, most don't want to sit down in front of their 17 in monitor in the office and watch TV sitcoms with the family.
If the networks ever want to compete on the Internet, they're going to have to take the plunge and put content out there, even though most people don't have the hardware to display it on their TV yet. It's a chicken-in-egg problem, and in this case it's a lot easier for the content producers to move first.
You are exactly right. It's about estates and trustees. Somebody wants to leave some annual income to his children. There is nothing wrong with that.
Yes there is something wrong with it. Half the nation's top-ten riches people have done nothing productive, they're wal-mart heirs. Divorce merit from reward and you have an economic problem, not to mention a social injustice.
Not targeting you specifically here, but it never ceases to amaze me how certain people will moan and cry about poor people leaching a few hundred bucks per month off the system, yet have no problem with rich heirs who spend *millions* they never earned.
Well there you go, the spec is useless. Good enough to confuse people into thinking it's open (just like OpenDocument!), but not good enough to actually open most.doc files. And to be fair, it would be a monumental task to write a spec for every version and bug of.doc, since there probably never was one in the first place.
Wow, 6,000 pages to describe an "open" format? Never underestimate the power of committees.
Even more important than the length, is it really accurate and specific enough to write software that can access.doc? Remember, Word was not written to this spec, it's the other way around. So it may be more descriptive than definitive.
True. Managing groups competing for bandwidth is a separate issue. Assuming you had some site policy to do that, each group might still want control over how their own parcel of bandwidth was prioritized. That's where per-application prioritization like this comes into play.
In a residential setting, do I expect this script to pry bandwidth away from my neighbors? Of course not, my ISP manages that. But smart queueing on my end manages whatever upstream is allocated to me.
In practice, it means VOIP and ssh still work well even if people are downloading big files from me.
Here's my script to do this in Linux. What it does is prioritize these types of outbound traffic, in order: voip (vonage), ssh (to or from my domain), web browsing, scp, other people browsing my website, other (filesharing, mail).
Mostly it works by discriminating on the basis of source or destination port. A couple apps are nice enough to set the "type of service" bits in the ip header, so you don't need to look at port numbers.
This was a civil matter. and 99 times out of 100, civil matters are about one thing: money.
And I guess the responsible executives at HP will be personally responsible and pay from their own pockets, right? I mean, they make millions of dollars because they're practically gods walking the earth, so on the rare occasion they do fall short of perfection, I suppose they'd be the first to bear the consequence of their own personal choices.
the federal government should create contests and prize awards for successful science ideas, while another advises that the National Science Foundation fund more graduate students and increase the amount of the fellowships
It's not as complicated as many make it out to be, encourage today's youth to think for themselves and experiment
"Encourage" is pretty general, and I don't think a few "attaboy" contests and prizes will do it.
Yes, money is a huge compontent of prestige and influence. But government re-distribution of trivial amounts is the wrong idea; it will always be seen as a handout. Instead of re-distribution, think distribution. If employment law gave scientists non-reassignable rights to a significant portion of ip rights from their discoveries, being a scientist would be a valid alternative to, say, being a hedge fund manager. As it is, the only way to profit from science is not to be one, but to buy up a bunch of them and capitalize off their inventions. The fact is, science and technology are the critical components of economic growth, yet the rewards do not follow.
Some may argue the market will sort this out - if it's a good idea, some company will try it and they'll dominate. The problem is, intellectual property is at least as much about law as it is business policy. I still think the market will find a solution to re-emphasize innovators, but it will probably not be here in the US. Once lost, the lead will be very, very difficult to regain.
the top 2% of the rich probably also fund the employment of half the world.
Open your eyes, half of American's top 10 richest people are Wal Mart heirs. If you're saying the business they inherited provides a lot of jobs, you're right. But if you think the world owes them gratitude for their blind luck, you're crazy.
Secondly, had Bill Gates never been born, there would still be just as many people buying and working on computers. They'd simply be doing so under another banner.
No, most people doing serious testing actually measure wall plug power, which takes into account everything in the case.
I wouldn't measure power consumption on a laptop that way, for a few reasons:
1) That would take into account the efficiency of the transformer, which doesn't impact battery life.
2) Many laptops run in a high power/performance mode when plugged in.
3) At least be sure to take the battery out of the laptop so it's not charging while you're measuring!
Wearing armor would also imply that the crowd is likely to atack. Try to picture someone putting on armor so they could quietly sit and protest. These are people who'd at least be throwing rocks.
You make armor sound like a big deal. Wouldn't a 2 ounce space blanket at the ready in your back pocket serve the purpose?
What I want from Web 2.0 is micropayments, by which I mean a form of digital cash with no more than 1% transaction fee down to a minimum transaction fee of 1 cent. I suspenct all the web content that's free now would still be free, but the ability to make money straight from viewers of a web page would be a revolution.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine that to gain immortality we blast some human DNA off into space, and one day it lands on a planet with a methane atmosphere. They'd have a heck of a time using that to figure out what we are like and how we live here on earth.
If it makes you feel any better, look at it this way: cragslist generates more profit than probably 99.99% of the "profit-maximizing" websites out there. Or look at it this way, in the long run, how much wealth did Enron actually produce?
Virtually all laws are easy to break, if you choose to do so.
OK, I'll grant the article's premise about photojournalists going extinct is silly.
Yes, there will always be a market for high-quality searing images of the aftermath of an attack or natural disaster. But now, there's a market for images and video of the actual event too, even if it isn't pretty to look at. I think it's pretty neat, and will have a big impact. In fact, I don't think the Abu-Ghirab scandal would ever have broken with any significant impact, without the ease of transmitting digital photos.
The problem is separating fact from conventional wisdom. Almost all of what we as individuals "know" is what we've heard from other people. There just isn't time for every person to reproduce all of human knowlege from first principles. Raise your hand if you believe e=mc^2. Now raise your hand if you can derive it from first principles (or even list the "first principles" in question). People do not (and perhaps cannot) track all the uncertainty of their knowledge, and their conclusions from that knowledge, all the way down to decision making, except perhaps within a very narrow specialty.
I should never have to reboot my laptop. I should be able to pop it into my docking station, resume from hibernation, and have it come up working properly including my desktop monitor and all the other peripherals hooked to the docking station. And the reverse should be true when I leave at night. I've never seen it happen.
Not targeting you specifically here, but it never ceases to amaze me how certain people will moan and cry about poor people leaching a few hundred bucks per month off the system, yet have no problem with rich heirs who spend *millions* they never earned.
Well there you go, the spec is useless. Good enough to confuse people into thinking it's open (just like OpenDocument!), but not good enough to actually open most .doc files. And to be fair, it would be a monumental task to write a spec for every version and bug of .doc, since there probably never was one in the first place.
In a residential setting, do I expect this script to pry bandwidth away from my neighbors? Of course not, my ISP manages that. But smart queueing on my end manages whatever upstream is allocated to me. In practice, it means VOIP and ssh still work well even if people are downloading big files from me.
Mostly it works by discriminating on the basis of source or destination port. A couple apps are nice enough to set the "type of service" bits in the ip header, so you don't need to look at port numbers.
Yes, money is a huge compontent of prestige and influence. But government re-distribution of trivial amounts is the wrong idea; it will always be seen as a handout. Instead of re-distribution, think distribution. If employment law gave scientists non-reassignable rights to a significant portion of ip rights from their discoveries, being a scientist would be a valid alternative to, say, being a hedge fund manager. As it is, the only way to profit from science is not to be one, but to buy up a bunch of them and capitalize off their inventions. The fact is, science and technology are the critical components of economic growth, yet the rewards do not follow.
Some may argue the market will sort this out - if it's a good idea, some company will try it and they'll dominate. The problem is, intellectual property is at least as much about law as it is business policy. I still think the market will find a solution to re-emphasize innovators, but it will probably not be here in the US. Once lost, the lead will be very, very difficult to regain.
Secondly, had Bill Gates never been born, there would still be just as many people buying and working on computers. They'd simply be doing so under another banner.
1) That would take into account the efficiency of the transformer, which doesn't impact battery life.
2) Many laptops run in a high power/performance mode when plugged in.
3) At least be sure to take the battery out of the laptop so it's not charging while you're measuring!
What I want from Web 2.0 is micropayments, by which I mean a form of digital cash with no more than 1% transaction fee down to a minimum transaction fee of 1 cent. I suspenct all the web content that's free now would still be free, but the ability to make money straight from viewers of a web page would be a revolution.