Huh? Why do eBooks necessitate DRM in your mind? I've got plenty of eBooks that aren't restricted. And you suggest using PDFs instead. Why don't PDFs count as eBooks? Because they're in your preferred format? PDFs are absolutely useless to read unless you've got a device that will display the whole rendered with of the PDF legibly. Much more useful are formats that allow text re-flowing so you read them on mobile devices with smaller screen-widths.
What you're talking about is not what the article is talking about. They article is talking about a mandatory license before being allowed online.
You're talking about a cert issued by the government to secure optional transactions.
What you suggest makes some kind of sense. What the article suggests, doesn't. FWIW, drivers are licensed because the roads are public property, and therefore the public (government) can restrict who drives on it. The fees from the licenses are ostensibly used for the maintenance of infrastructure.
The internet infrastructure is primarily private property, and the owners already restrict who "drives" on it (whoever pays access fees). Considering that the infrastructure companies already took public funds for developing their infrastructure, and haven't, giving them more seems particularly stupid.
It's not necessarily competitive - you can do it with your friends down at the pool with no competition if you like. It can be made into a competition - as can most things. People generally don't consider singing a competition - but if you enter an eisteddfod, or go on reality TV it can be made competitive.
That said, my comment was a humerous attempt to agree with you. Synchronised swimming is (at least in my country) the most notoriously un-cared about olympic sport, and is characterised by it's co-operative rather than competitive nature.
But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world. Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.
In other words, the ends justifies the means. Who cares if you trample on the occasional freedom or two, if it means you can look like you're trying to catch the boogaboo-of-the-month (terrorist, pedophile, communist). Because, you know, getting people to dob in websites is going to really put a dent in terrorist activities. All those terrorist organisations with military training camps in the Middle East won't have a clue what to do if we take down all the websites about how to make Molotov cocktails.
Yeah, and I use that (or similar) in all my PHP stuff. It's still a bit of a hack. Not as bad as most, but something that really should be just in the language.
If you read about it in other places besides here, what you'd more likely see is just endless mockery that would blind people to anything that really *could* go wrong with vaccinations.
Actually, that's pretty much what I'm seeing here too.
Yeah, I think I'm gonna make investment choices based on their choice of development language rather than, you know, the product they make with it. Hurrrr.
@ predates PHP exception handling, and was used for the old method of error handling.
That said, PHP's error handling in general is annoying, as the built-in functions generally raise errors instead of throwing exceptions. That's an artifact of the way the language changed over time, rather than that it was poorly designed.
He didn't say college was overrated; he said college degrees were overrated. Although you learned and studied a lot, there were probably others who graduated with the exact same degree from the same institution as you, who bludged their way through the course, and are useless at actually doing the thing their degree describes.
That's why he was saying a degree is useless. It doesn't actually provide what it says it does - that is, a certification that the person who has it knows their stuff.
Your problem isn't with people like this guy. It's with politicians who have pushed copyright into the realms of insanity. If works expired in 14 years, they would probably survive to enter the public domain.
He only stayed for one session, a once-off, so we didn't get into mechanics. He played it cause it was funny, mostly. I imagine if you were going to play it longer-term, it'd be something along the lines of that he believes the divine is a natural force able to be tapped by humans, and that all the ritual of religion is just window-dressing for that access. If you've read the Deverry series, their system of divinity is pretty close, seen through the perspective of a Dweomermaster.
I grew up a little later than that, but I found that sort of prejudice wasn't necessarily among the religious - it was among the "family values" types. The type of people that watch the nightly news and consider themselves well-informed. The people who start stampeding at the first sign of a moral panic. While there's some overlap, at least in my country, that sort of attitude isn't the sole domain of the church.
Shares are different. They're a risky investment. They cost money to purchase, and there's just as much a chance they're going to vanish and you lose your money as there is that the company will prosper, or pay a dividend. Saying share's should expire is like saying that if you've got your money in a term deposit, the bank should be able to claim it. You earn money for putting your resources at other's disposal. If it's a risky one (shares), your return is likely to be higher. If it's less risky (term deposit) then you're basically being paid for the opportunity cost lost by not having access to your money.
You don't have to do anything. You have to not do something. If you don't like the way Google uses your information, refuse to visit Google or any site that uses Google ads.
Advertisers work in the same way as the rest of the web. You hit their ad, they log you're IP address. Any other information they get is something you've provided them with when you use their services. If you don't like it, don't use them.
Really? I asked around at church, and we got so many people interested, we had to rope in another DM and organise two games. Most of the people who play are in the 18 - 24 bracket. Although our assistant minister joined us for one game as a cleric of atheism.
If you write a novel, die, and then a year later it gets its second larger print run after good reviews / word of mouth, or it gets bought for turning into a film, or whatever, your widow would get nothing to represent the value of the work.
Huh? Of course she does. I didn't say copyrights should expire on death - I said they should extend a fixed term. All other things being equal, your widow would get exactly what she would of got from that work had you lived out the entire term.
Bull. There will never be any reduction in the copyright term, regardless of what arguments you make, until the US government is not owned by the corporations. The copyright term has been set and extended based on what is good for those who lobby. Unless you can convince the copyright loby that a lower term will make their industry more profitable for them (good luck) or prevent them from exerting undue influence on Congress, the only change that will be made will be upwards.
They don't need reasons to keep extending it when they have dollars.
Huh? What's so special about an author, that they get life insurance for free? Everyone else has to pay for that sort of guarantee for our dependants. Copyright should be a fixed term, regardless of the mortal status of the author.
Because the police have extra-ordinary powers, and they require permission to use them? If an advertiser placed a tap on your phoneline, or a keylogger on your computer, you can bet they'd be in violation of the law. Police, on the other hand, are legally allowed to do these things, once they have permission.
Dealing with advertisers is entirely your choice. They only have control over the information you give them. If you choose to give them your information, that's your choice. If you don't like their terms, don't do business with them. The government does not exist to shape the world the way you'd like it to be.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? Why do eBooks necessitate DRM in your mind? I've got plenty of eBooks that aren't restricted. And you suggest using PDFs instead. Why don't PDFs count as eBooks? Because they're in your preferred format? PDFs are absolutely useless to read unless you've got a device that will display the whole rendered with of the PDF legibly. Much more useful are formats that allow text re-flowing so you read them on mobile devices with smaller screen-widths.
What you're talking about is not what the article is talking about. They article is talking about a mandatory license before being allowed online.
You're talking about a cert issued by the government to secure optional transactions.
What you suggest makes some kind of sense. What the article suggests, doesn't. FWIW, drivers are licensed because the roads are public property, and therefore the public (government) can restrict who drives on it. The fees from the licenses are ostensibly used for the maintenance of infrastructure.
The internet infrastructure is primarily private property, and the owners already restrict who "drives" on it (whoever pays access fees). Considering that the infrastructure companies already took public funds for developing their infrastructure, and haven't, giving them more seems particularly stupid.
It's not necessarily competitive - you can do it with your friends down at the pool with no competition if you like. It can be made into a competition - as can most things. People generally don't consider singing a competition - but if you enter an eisteddfod, or go on reality TV it can be made competitive.
That said, my comment was a humerous attempt to agree with you. Synchronised swimming is (at least in my country) the most notoriously un-cared about olympic sport, and is characterised by it's co-operative rather than competitive nature.
Along these lines, no one's going to watch a sports game that only involves cooperation, instead of competition.
Synchronised Swimming has a world wide audience!
But you all need to realise that when the rubber hits the road, idealism doesn't get you very far in the real world. Truth be told, the UK has a large problem with radical, violent, political Islam, and merely pussyfooting around, striving not to offend, and obsessing about theoretical and abstract notions of "rights" and "freedoms" -- and conveniently ignoring the obligations of EVERYONE to obey the law and behave like citizens -- will get us nowhere.
In other words, the ends justifies the means. Who cares if you trample on the occasional freedom or two, if it means you can look like you're trying to catch the boogaboo-of-the-month (terrorist, pedophile, communist). Because, you know, getting people to dob in websites is going to really put a dent in terrorist activities. All those terrorist organisations with military training camps in the Middle East won't have a clue what to do if we take down all the websites about how to make Molotov cocktails.
Yeah, and I use that (or similar) in all my PHP stuff. It's still a bit of a hack. Not as bad as most, but something that really should be just in the language.
PHP5 was already a breaking revision of the language; they could have just as well taken care of that bit.
PHP5 didn't break that much of the language, but I agree, it should have been changed then.
Even so, saying that @ is syntactic sugar for an empty try-catch is misleading.
If you read about it in other places besides here, what you'd more likely see is just endless mockery that would blind people to anything that really *could* go wrong with vaccinations.
Actually, that's pretty much what I'm seeing here too.
Yeah, I think I'm gonna make investment choices based on their choice of development language rather than, you know, the product they make with it. Hurrrr.
@ predates PHP exception handling, and was used for the old method of error handling.
That said, PHP's error handling in general is annoying, as the built-in functions generally raise errors instead of throwing exceptions. That's an artifact of the way the language changed over time, rather than that it was poorly designed.
He didn't say college was overrated; he said college degrees were overrated. Although you learned and studied a lot, there were probably others who graduated with the exact same degree from the same institution as you, who bludged their way through the course, and are useless at actually doing the thing their degree describes. That's why he was saying a degree is useless. It doesn't actually provide what it says it does - that is, a certification that the person who has it knows their stuff.
Your problem isn't with people like this guy. It's with politicians who have pushed copyright into the realms of insanity. If works expired in 14 years, they would probably survive to enter the public domain.
He only stayed for one session, a once-off, so we didn't get into mechanics. He played it cause it was funny, mostly. I imagine if you were going to play it longer-term, it'd be something along the lines of that he believes the divine is a natural force able to be tapped by humans, and that all the ritual of religion is just window-dressing for that access. If you've read the Deverry series, their system of divinity is pretty close, seen through the perspective of a Dweomermaster.
Liverpool-ish, NSW, Australia
Yeah, I was going to write that, then settled for "all things being equal" instead, as being less provocative.
I grew up a little later than that, but I found that sort of prejudice wasn't necessarily among the religious - it was among the "family values" types. The type of people that watch the nightly news and consider themselves well-informed. The people who start stampeding at the first sign of a moral panic. While there's some overlap, at least in my country, that sort of attitude isn't the sole domain of the church.
Shares are different. They're a risky investment. They cost money to purchase, and there's just as much a chance they're going to vanish and you lose your money as there is that the company will prosper, or pay a dividend. Saying share's should expire is like saying that if you've got your money in a term deposit, the bank should be able to claim it. You earn money for putting your resources at other's disposal. If it's a risky one (shares), your return is likely to be higher. If it's less risky (term deposit) then you're basically being paid for the opportunity cost lost by not having access to your money.
You don't have to do anything. You have to not do something. If you don't like the way Google uses your information, refuse to visit Google or any site that uses Google ads. Advertisers work in the same way as the rest of the web. You hit their ad, they log you're IP address. Any other information they get is something you've provided them with when you use their services. If you don't like it, don't use them.
4E, clerics can be devoted to a deity, or a concept or philosophy
Really? You don't think a minister could get a helluva lot of kicks putting words into the mouth of a proponent of atheism?
Really? I asked around at church, and we got so many people interested, we had to rope in another DM and organise two games. Most of the people who play are in the 18 - 24 bracket. Although our assistant minister joined us for one game as a cleric of atheism.
If you write a novel, die, and then a year later it gets its second larger print run after good reviews / word of mouth, or it gets bought for turning into a film, or whatever, your widow would get nothing to represent the value of the work.
Huh? Of course she does. I didn't say copyrights should expire on death - I said they should extend a fixed term. All other things being equal, your widow would get exactly what she would of got from that work had you lived out the entire term.
Bull. There will never be any reduction in the copyright term, regardless of what arguments you make, until the US government is not owned by the corporations. The copyright term has been set and extended based on what is good for those who lobby. Unless you can convince the copyright loby that a lower term will make their industry more profitable for them (good luck) or prevent them from exerting undue influence on Congress, the only change that will be made will be upwards.
They don't need reasons to keep extending it when they have dollars.
Huh? What's so special about an author, that they get life insurance for free? Everyone else has to pay for that sort of guarantee for our dependants. Copyright should be a fixed term, regardless of the mortal status of the author.
Because the police have extra-ordinary powers, and they require permission to use them? If an advertiser placed a tap on your phoneline, or a keylogger on your computer, you can bet they'd be in violation of the law. Police, on the other hand, are legally allowed to do these things, once they have permission.
Dealing with advertisers is entirely your choice. They only have control over the information you give them. If you choose to give them your information, that's your choice. If you don't like their terms, don't do business with them. The government does not exist to shape the world the way you'd like it to be.