Please name the countries where copyright infringement is legal (as opposed to illegal but unenforced due to how widespread it is like in most parts of Asia).
Actually, Russia. They didn't sign the Berne Convention or whatever it's called, so infringing a US copyright isn't illegal.
It's actually legal for you to fly to Russia, buy a copied CD/DVD/Piece of software and then fly home. NO law has been broken unless you choose to sell the stuff...
Machiavelli wrote about a fictional Prince who kept going on about "the ends justify the means" except he was referring to his brutal and ruthless methods of controlling a fictional populace.
May I suggest you actually read "The Prince" ?
It is in fact a treatise on achieving and keeping power. It details methods for dealing with many situations, and promotes the use of stealth when trying to overcome a more powerful foe.
I to, am a night owl. which is perfectly accepctable within Computing and/or Computer Science but IT is the Business side of Computing. and in
the Business world you do as you are told and do not ask questions. This is why there is so much stress I suppose
NOT TRUE!
I work for a bank, and I come in when I want, leave when I want, wear jeans and T-Shirt, web-browse as much as I want etc etc...
There is a lot of stress, but it comes from knowing that if you screw up the system then the <insert big company> stops working...
If you are good at your job, work hard enough to get the work done, and aren't on call, you can get away with pretty much everything else...
Yes, but a large reason for that is the BBC, not to mention ITN.
Having 2 major non-murdoch-owned news / ents providers, one of which is semi-owned by the govt (Actually the license-fee payers), increases the likelihood of you getting good news from the "non-aligned" sources like murdoch...
They all act as checks and balances. Anyhoo, try reading some non-UK media about the UK some time. Highly amusing...
I've worked for a few drug companies in my time (As a sysadmin), and the most memorable thing is something said by my boss when we were having a beer.
"Any time you think you're working for a company that saves lives, have a look and see how many treatments this company has made, and then at how many cures. For the cures, see when the treatment went out of patent"
firstly we have a right not to answer questions put to us (and silence, as I recall, can't be taken to infer guilt)
Wellll. The UK USED to have this, but if you get arrested now it says:
"You have the right to remain silent, but it may harm your defense if you fail to mention something which you rely on in court"
Not quite the same really...
I left the UK just over a year ago and moved to amsterdam, the police here are *nice*, *Friendly* and *helpful*. The laws are vaguely sensible, and Jack Straw isn't here.
Oh, and street crime is almost non-existant. Funny that.
The friends you have at the company will either understand, or they aint the friends you think they are.
The thing that a lot of geeks forget is that you go to work to support yourself (Work to live...)
While I'm all for being friends with the people you work with, there comes a point at which you are threatening your ability to support yourself and it becomes "Live to Work", which is bad.
Part of the beauty of being a techy is that you don't have to go down with the ship.
Re:We need to be more like the Europeans
on
"Traffic"
·
· Score: 1
The Chinese came up with the only method of cutting drug use.
When the communists came to power they took all the drug addicts, pushers, users etc etc, lined them up in a square and shot them in the back of the head. Drug use dropped overnight.
Not that I'm advocating it, just noting the lengths people will go to when they are actually trying to WIN a war on drugs, rather than get lots of money to spend on FIGHTING a war on drugs.
Re:We need to be more like the Europeans
on
"Traffic"
·
· Score: 1
No, it's not legal in the UK. But you try and find someone that actually gets arrested for an amount that can even be justified as "I'm a really heavy smoker, gov"
Re:"Benefits" of the War On (some) Drugs:
on
"Traffic"
·
· Score: 1
OK. Here's my (Non-US-Citizen) take.
Every Government needs to motivate it's people in some way. Being lazy, people are best motivated by fear and/or hatred. Therefore a "sensible" Govt gives the people someone to hate and the economy booms.
See:
Hitler in the 40's - Jews
America in the 50's/60's/70's - Communism
Russia (Same period) (The wife (Muscovite) has just made me change this to USSR (Maybe CCCP is better honey)) - Capitalist pig-dogs
Tribalism, wherever it is - Other tribes
&c, &c, &c
Now, the US Govt (And most of the rest of the world (I'm writing this in Amsterdam, so that's all right then) have hit on this wonderful combination: Drugs.
They have people to hate (Addicts AND Pushers), they have someone to fear (Pushers, drug lords, smacked out robbers killing granny for her pension etc) AND they pick a segment of the population that is (a) Less productive economically anyways, and (b) Too stoned to get all riled up and uppity.
What? You mean the *people* (not corporation going for lowest common denominator in order to skim the majority of the money from a low quality throwaway (Don't get me started on the throwaway issue) product, but a real live (Usually single) person) who wanted to hear the music of the people they liked had to pay for it to be produced?
Wow! Who'd'a'thunk it???
I think in todays modern climate a business model (For the artist themselves, kinda like patronage) could evolve that had a fairly broad range.
The problem with copyright is that it can be transferred, leading to things like Britney Spears getting backing. Do you think that someone rich enough to actually pay a significant enough amount of money to support an artist would support her as an artist??? Is it right that because a large amount of people don't actually find it toooooo offensive her record company should become rich, while someone who would produce something that would be adored by a smaller number, for a far longer time has to become a car mechanic?
I mean, come on people, go read the documents on GNU about how much programmers/techies get paid and why it's wrong.
An artist deserves a good living, and a good artist would have it without copyright. A bad artist could practice the phrase "Want fries with that"
Slime-ball record execs and RIAA lawyers don't deserve a better living than good artists who produce truly good, long lasting music just because 12 year olds haven't yet evolved a sense of taste.
OK, I am not an american, but a little lesson for you (And everyone else that says "if they're too dumb they shouldn't vote"
It's called UNIVERSAL suffrage because everyone should be allowed to vote, even the dumb people (Except for those with a mental handicap that means that they cannot form an opinion)
Also, why do you think that it's a cross you put on the ballot, rather than writing the name? Mainly so that illiterate people could still vote, after being shown which candidate was in which box...
I *really* resent supposedly intelligent people, who argue strongly for keeping their freedoms and rights (Even when the majority would say that the right they are fighting for is theft (I'm thinking Napster here)), arguing that because someone may be a little slow off the mark they should lose the right to vote...
The ultimate ignorance is being smart enough to think rationally, and then not using that ability.
Stangnation like the human race had prior to copyright you mean?
<SARCASM>
I'm so glad we have copyright, you don't want communist-lackeys like Leonardo creating things, or Mozart, or Bach, we need the truly great products of a copyright and profit driven art, would we have what we have today if it wasn't for copyright? Britney Spears, Christine Aguillera, Boyzone, 5ive?
What high-art copyright provides...
</SARCASM>
The difference would be twofold, (1) The quantity of stuff produced would go down, true, because only the people who truly wanted to do something would do it, and (2) Since they are usually the people who have the actual talent, the quality would go up.
You might not like classical music, or Shakespeare, or any of the other people that produced stuff before copyright was invented, but I don't reckon people will know who Britney Spears is in a thousand years...
How many of you will trust your mission critical data to linux 2.4.0?
Grow up and start to behave like real people. A dot-0 release is just a feature freeze dressed up for Sunday school. Wait for the bugfix release before you think about using it for real data.
By the way Bob, RH7 is excellent. It's let me finally get rid of all M$ products on my home network. I've installed it on my workstations and my notebooks, and I'll be patching them soon to get them there bugfixes. (The glibc/XMMS one annoys me...)
I still run 6.2 on the server though, coz I'm not nuts. Data safe, workstations featureful (And pretty damn stable at that) Hmmmm...
Slashdot Mirror
Secondly, when a piece of software comes on a CD along with the crack to break the dongle protection (3ds max) - It's fair to say it aint legit.
However I agree with your point in general...
Actually, Russia. They didn't sign the Berne Convention or whatever it's called, so infringing a US copyright isn't illegal.
It's actually legal for you to fly to Russia, buy a copied CD/DVD/Piece of software and then fly home. NO law has been broken unless you choose to sell the stuff...
fbi$ chmod +x /bin/laden /bin/laden --notrial --with-extreme-prejudice
fbi$
You are plain wrong I'm afraid, the fact that you haven't seen any tasks where more money equals more value just means you aint seen nothin'
"[`uname -n`]`whoami`: "
I switch machines and users a lot...
I also have a DBA friend (Hi Dave) who's prompt is "out of cheese error"
I dunno, aviplay does it fine for me...
May I suggest you actually read "The Prince" ?
It is in fact a treatise on achieving and keeping power. It details methods for dealing with many situations, and promotes the use of stealth when trying to overcome a more powerful foe.
It's very Machiavellian, I love it...
How far do you think RF travels???
NOT TRUE!
I work for a bank, and I come in when I want, leave when I want, wear jeans and T-Shirt, web-browse as much as I want etc etc...
There is a lot of stress, but it comes from knowing that if you screw up the system then the <insert big company> stops working...
If you are good at your job, work hard enough to get the work done, and aren't on call, you can get away with pretty much everything else...
Having 2 major non-murdoch-owned news / ents providers, one of which is semi-owned by the govt (Actually the license-fee payers), increases the likelihood of you getting good news from the "non-aligned" sources like murdoch...
They all act as checks and balances. Anyhoo, try reading some non-UK media about the UK some time. Highly amusing...
"Any time you think you're working for a company that saves lives, have a look and see how many treatments this company has made, and then at how many cures. For the cures, see when the treatment went out of patent"
Gravity's a myth - The world sucks.
If you want to Reverse Engineer the GPL'd code, that's legal...
"You have the right to remain silent, but it may harm your defense if you fail to mention something which you rely on in court"
Not quite the same really...
I left the UK just over a year ago and moved to amsterdam, the police here are *nice*, *Friendly* and *helpful*. The laws are vaguely sensible, and Jack Straw isn't here.
Oh, and street crime is almost non-existant. Funny that.
The UK disgusts me now, the way they are going...
The friends you have at the company will either understand, or they aint the friends you think they are.
The thing that a lot of geeks forget is that you go to work to support yourself (Work to live...)
While I'm all for being friends with the people you work with, there comes a point at which you are threatening your ability to support yourself and it becomes "Live to Work", which is bad.
Part of the beauty of being a techy is that you don't have to go down with the ship.
When the communists came to power they took all the drug addicts, pushers, users etc etc, lined them up in a square and shot them in the back of the head. Drug use dropped overnight.
Not that I'm advocating it, just noting the lengths people will go to when they are actually trying to WIN a war on drugs, rather than get lots of money to spend on FIGHTING a war on drugs.
No, it's not legal in the UK. But you try and find someone that actually gets arrested for an amount that can even be justified as "I'm a really heavy smoker, gov"
Every Government needs to motivate it's people in some way. Being lazy, people are best motivated by fear and/or hatred. Therefore a "sensible" Govt gives the people someone to hate and the economy booms.
See:
- Hitler in the 40's - Jews
- America in the 50's/60's/70's - Communism
- Russia (Same period) (The wife (Muscovite) has just made me change this to USSR (Maybe CCCP is better honey)) - Capitalist pig-dogs
- Tribalism, wherever it is - Other tribes
&c, &c, &cNow, the US Govt (And most of the rest of the world (I'm writing this in Amsterdam, so that's all right then) have hit on this wonderful combination: Drugs.
They have people to hate (Addicts AND Pushers), they have someone to fear (Pushers, drug lords, smacked out robbers killing granny for her pension etc) AND they pick a segment of the population that is (a) Less productive economically anyways, and (b) Too stoned to get all riled up and uppity.
You have to admit it's a pretty sweet deal...
Wow! Who'd'a'thunk it???
I think in todays modern climate a business model (For the artist themselves, kinda like patronage) could evolve that had a fairly broad range.
The problem with copyright is that it can be transferred, leading to things like Britney Spears getting backing. Do you think that someone rich enough to actually pay a significant enough amount of money to support an artist would support her as an artist??? Is it right that because a large amount of people don't actually find it toooooo offensive her record company should become rich, while someone who would produce something that would be adored by a smaller number, for a far longer time has to become a car mechanic?
I mean, come on people, go read the documents on GNU about how much programmers/techies get paid and why it's wrong.
An artist deserves a good living, and a good artist would have it without copyright. A bad artist could practice the phrase "Want fries with that"
Slime-ball record execs and RIAA lawyers don't deserve a better living than good artists who produce truly good, long lasting music just because 12 year olds haven't yet evolved a sense of taste.
It's called UNIVERSAL suffrage because everyone should be allowed to vote, even the dumb people (Except for those with a mental handicap that means that they cannot form an opinion)
Also, why do you think that it's a cross you put on the ballot, rather than writing the name? Mainly so that illiterate people could still vote, after being shown which candidate was in which box...
I *really* resent supposedly intelligent people, who argue strongly for keeping their freedoms and rights (Even when the majority would say that the right they are fighting for is theft (I'm thinking Napster here)), arguing that because someone may be a little slow off the mark they should lose the right to vote...
The ultimate ignorance is being smart enough to think rationally, and then not using that ability.
<SARCASM>
I'm so glad we have copyright, you don't want communist-lackeys like Leonardo creating things, or Mozart, or Bach, we need the truly great products of a copyright and profit driven art, would we have what we have today if it wasn't for copyright? Britney Spears, Christine Aguillera, Boyzone, 5ive?
What high-art copyright provides...
</SARCASM>
The difference would be twofold, (1) The quantity of stuff produced would go down, true, because only the people who truly wanted to do something would do it, and (2) Since they are usually the people who have the actual talent, the quality would go up.
You might not like classical music, or Shakespeare, or any of the other people that produced stuff before copyright was invented, but I don't reckon people will know who Britney Spears is in a thousand years...
Grow up and start to behave like real people. A dot-0 release is just a feature freeze dressed up for Sunday school. Wait for the bugfix release before you think about using it for real data.
By the way Bob, RH7 is excellent. It's let me finally get rid of all M$ products on my home network. I've installed it on my workstations and my notebooks, and I'll be patching them soon to get them there bugfixes. (The glibc/XMMS one annoys me...)
I still run 6.2 on the server though, coz I'm not nuts. Data safe, workstations featureful (And pretty damn stable at that) Hmmmm...
That, of course, should have said ...mailings Private key
How do they decrypt it without the person I'm mailings Public key?
The people I mail my key to also check the key carefully when they receive it. That's their responsibility in the whole key exchange deal.
If you're going to use cryptography you have to be paranoid about these things. It's kinda like security issues anywhere...
To mess with my data you would have to have access to my server. I keep my machine pretty up to date, and even have a little firewall.
Yes I know my web admins phone number, it's mine. (My web pages run on my home machine...)
Like I said. Trust no one...
Because someone (Phil Zimmerman) decided that proper encryption would be a nice idea and wrote an application that he gave away for free.
Then all of a sudden, if the commercial ones aren't as secure, the free one gets it.
If you look at a lot of what's happening in the world today, you'll find a free software angle in it somewhere.
The world is being changed. It's just too damn big for you to notice it all at once...