I just sat back and thought about that a minute... here is my list of who needs to compensate me for potential criminal infringement:
All car sales - each car could be used to cause property damage to my posessions, or to aid in theft from my home/bank All electric usage - could be used to commit any number of crimes ranging from listening to illegal music I wrote to murder, so this should be a large tax All gun sales - the purchaser could potentailly shoot me or my property All light bulb sales - Someone could drill a hole and fill it with a combustible, thus causing vandalism on my property, and possible bodily harm All computer sales - Cracking my account All sales of bottled water - could be used to litter my lawn All food sales - could be combined with poion to kill me
Man, everyone out there owes me so much compensation... and I need to stop buying this stuff because I am going to end up owing too!
I have to second that notion. And the last time something refused to turn off when *I* said it would, I cut the power cord. Physics wins over evil bits any day. If the power comes on the cable line, I cut the line. Beam the power, I still have a abseball bat.
The only one that controls my life and my equipment is me. Try to force bull on me and I am willing to use the TV as an experimental subject for the first direct solar probe.
And I doubt I am the only one getting more pissed off by the day with this corporate bs.
Ah, but while the individual comments are copyright the poster, you must set aside literal geekthink and look from a lawyer's perspective. The individual facts (comments) are owned by the posters, the database comprised of the facts (Slashdot) is copyright OSDN. Thus, the poster may reuse a comment elsewhere, but to reference more than one comprises a copyright violation on the database.
The printers I have been buying locally retail for $50.00. Replacements for the 4 cartridges required are $66 altogether, and I retain the color cartridges until they run out. This means that I accrue a collection of the more expensive cartridges, and replace the printer/black ink only when necessary. They come with 50% cartridges normally. Given the tax deduction of the printer is $50 for the printer + $30 for the included black cartridge (you can claim both) I recover a deduction of $80 overall.
Thus I pay approximately $20 for the $66 set of cartridges, less than buying the 50% cartridges.
Copyright (C) 2004 Lemmeoutada Collecti, All Rights Reserved.
Open Source Authors are hereby grented a non transferrable royalty free license to use the above database for Open Source Products. All others remain subject to a $1.00 US license fee per use.
Given that the human brain is a data storage and correlation device, and given that it operates on electronic principles, I hereby submit that the facts in my brain are in fact stored in a correlative, referential database using an entropic indexing key. Therefore, presentation of these facts would in fact be a violation of Copyright. Further, since the data is stored in an encrypted form, decrypting that data without expressed written authorization of the creator of that key $DIETY would be a violation of the DMCA.
I buy a new printer whenever I need ink again, and donate the old one to a school or charity as a tax write off. Thus far, it has been a much cheaper per page cost, not counting the tax value. Remember, many organizations let you say how much the item is worth on donation.
Since the computer on the Enterprise is capable of voice recognition, and to a more limited extent voice pattern analysis and pattern cognition, we could assume that the basic recipe for Tea, Earl Grey, was at some point after the Farpoint mission programmed by Engineering. Picard then ordered the tea, which he is particularly fond of, and the computer, being programmed to do so, memorized the way he orders it. This left him only needing to specify three basic things, that he wanted his tea, he wanted it Earl Grey, and he wanted it hot. We can only assume that at other times he would drink other teas, or perhaps have iced teas, most likely when he was not stressed and in the big chair, so the computer needed those three bits to make him the perfect cup of something almost entirely unlike tea.
Side by side is in this area generally 5-6 aisles apart. Lindows sits in the Linux section at Office Depot, Staples, CompUSA, Best Buy. This is usually in the back area of the Software section, well removed from the Microsoft block, which comprises the entire front aisle or two. There are rarely, if ever, any non Microsoft products mixed in that block.
The similarity is a different element altogether, but Microsoft makes sure to have it's products get prime retail placement.
Re:How does one dispute math as a universal concep
on
The Golden Ratio
·
· Score: 1
Communication of Mathematical Laws are based on a common perception and measurement system. If you and I are differing species, and I am trying to teach you to count in my system, and I show you a book, what you are referring to as one may in my number system be what I refer to as many, merely because of the perceptual differences. I'm not referring so much to the mathematical basis, but to the communication difficulties in assuming that what you percieve as singular I may not.
Re:How does one dispute math as a universal concep
on
The Golden Ratio
·
· Score: 3, Informative
The flaw in that line of thinking, which many on/. are making, is assuming that what we percieve singularly is similarly percieved by another species. Let's take a thought walk for a moment... First, we percieve an object, say a book, at a single position in time/space. While we can percieve the entirety of it in space, our perceptions cannot percieve simultaneously the entirety of it's temporal measurement. Therefore, we see on book in the now.
Now another lifeform comes along, one which can percieve the entirety of the book in time/space. They percieve not only a different book than we are capable of, but further, they may percieve each temporal book as a seperate item, just as we percieve spacially translated objects as seperate. So where we see a single book, they see an infinite number of books. We can only assume that their method of counting would differ from ours, or that we would be unable to correlate ours to theirs because we can not percieve the many, only the one.
Assuming that another specias percieves the universe the way we do is the height of hubris, and the largest flaw in alien contact scenarios. Our mathematical beauties when percieved on a larger scale may be no more than a mere curiosity, instead of the vaunted unchanging laws.
Borgolsmock is divisible using a thersian constant. To assume that just because your single dimensional mathematics cannot divide a borgolsmock does not similarly limit n-dimensional. Why the mere act of division is a limitation of linearly conecived time, a limitation we have never faced.
Aside from which, where you see a single item, I percieve an infinite semi recursive series. There are more than one apple in that one apple. There are an infinite (using your limited numbering) number of apples. That apple you call 'one' in fact contains the entirety of it's temporal measurement, which is a bounded infinite series. So now tell me about this concept you call singularity?
The problem with that premise is that it assumes law abiding citizens. In the current state of US law, both Federal and State, every citizen has broken at least one law. Whether it is something as minor as violating a Keep-Off-The-Grass sign, or speeding on the interstate, very probably 99% or the adult citizenry have violated at least one law. If you need reaffirmation of that, look at DumbLaws.com
That is usually all the ammunition a corrupt government ever needs.
As far as terrorism, the terrorist I am more worried about are not external, but internal. The politicians, the megacorporations, the lobbying groups.
Before we try to secure the 'free world' we should look to our own home.
I loaded Sol on the TRS from a drive server machine in another room over the serial network, would that count? I also had a sol game running on my BBS in the late 80's...
I used to run Solitaire (Hoyle) on my Tandy 1000 SL/2 with Hard Drive kit. Back in the 80's. And before that, I had Sol on a TRD 80 Model II on the 8" floppy. Talk about prior art, I think there was a version for the VAX.
Head over to the Artists Against the RIAA site and get music that is legal to share. Then flood the p2p with it. Or support the EFF and other organizations that fight the bull going on here. Prove with the one thing it takes, money, that there are legal uses.
Every time you download a song from a legit source, tell two friends, and tell them to tell two more. Get information out using p2p about how to use this to get legal, free music. And if you like what you've found, buy CD's. Pay money to the artists directly. We don't mind, really.
We don't neet ranting, ravin, or hotheaded reactions. We need people to tell other poeple who tell other people where to find the free music, how to support the artists, and how not to be sheep.
Or you can just be a sheep and rant and rave till they own you. Your choice of course.
First, the RIAA does none of that. The individual labels make a floating term loan to the artists, then charge the artists to use their facilities (recovering the loan as an artist expense) to record and distribute. Once sales begin, the label owns the music and collects the royalties, ostensibly in the name of the artist. After the label removes costs, tithes, dues, taxes, expenses, and of course the original loan payment, the artist gets the crumb that remains.
Through all of this, the RIAA does nothing for the artist. The RIAA is a group of labels working together to maintain artificially inflated prices, a controlled consumer market, and to provide sufficient lobbying power in DC.
And please be aware, there are non RIAA labels out there who provide all this at minimal costs, without an upfront loan, and leave the copyright where it belongs. With the artist. And those studios fare very well.
See my sig for my reference. IIASE (I am a sound engineer)
What kind of answers do you typically get for that question?
Given that the point under scrutiny has been examined numerous times, it is prudent to avoid the eggregious mistake often made of providing a terse, trite answer. Let us instead consider the question in a more proactive light. The business critical evaluator will, of course, take the question in a retrospective based on core values, and produce a deliverable in a timely, mission centric fashion.
An old quote seems to me to apply here... "Technological solutions should not be applied to social problems." (paraphrased, attribution unknown)
As many others have pointed out, a company is making mony off works copyrighted by the author. University specific agreements notwithstanding, this is a clear violation of US copyright law. But to me this is the lesser issue.
I was twice caught by one of these anti-plagarism systems, and had to spend valuable time and effort proving that I was innocent. In both cases, I was using material from an earlier work I had written. Also, in both cases, the original work was properly cited, with full bibliography. I ended up over a course of weeks wasting time I could have spent learning defending my own works.
The professors I have worked with in college varied from the intern teaching English I to the dedicated professor of Operating System Concepts, to the lackadasical instructor of Introduction To Computer Science. Many of the required courses I felt were a waste of time and money, both for me and the University. Why would someone who already works in the Computer Science field need an Introduction to Computer Science course? A simple exam would have saved me and many others wasted hours listening to an instructor drone on about the basics parts of a computer. In a course like that, there is no wonder a portion of the students don't want to waste their time.
I think that the professor's duty is not just to make and grade assignments, but to challenge and educate the students. If the material is delivered by reading line for line from a textbook, the professor has failed in their duty. On the other hand, the professors that made the material relevant, interesting, and challenging, always got full effort from me.
In any given system, there will be cheaters, and there will be the amazingly honest. And there will always be many in the middle of the group. But treating everyone according to the lowest common denominator is never an adequate solution.
Slashdot Mirror
I just sat back and thought about that a minute... here is my list of who needs to compensate me for potential criminal infringement:
All car sales - each car could be used to cause property damage to my posessions, or to aid in theft from my home/bank
All electric usage - could be used to commit any number of crimes ranging from listening to illegal music I wrote to murder, so this should be a large tax
All gun sales - the purchaser could potentailly shoot me or my property
All light bulb sales - Someone could drill a hole and fill it with a combustible, thus causing vandalism on my property, and possible bodily harm
All computer sales - Cracking my account
All sales of bottled water - could be used to litter my lawn
All food sales - could be combined with poion to kill me
Man, everyone out there owes me so much compensation... and I need to stop buying this stuff because I am going to end up owing too!
I have to second that notion. And the last time something refused to turn off when *I* said it would, I cut the power cord. Physics wins over evil bits any day. If the power comes on the cable line, I cut the line. Beam the power, I still have a abseball bat.
The only one that controls my life and my equipment is me. Try to force bull on me and I am willing to use the TV as an experimental subject for the first direct solar probe.
And I doubt I am the only one getting more pissed off by the day with this corporate bs.
I'll see your logic and raise you the Microsoft Lawyer Consortium. 'Nuff said.
Ah, but while the individual comments are copyright the poster, you must set aside literal geekthink and look from a lawyer's perspective. The individual facts (comments) are owned by the posters, the database comprised of the facts (Slashdot) is copyright OSDN. Thus, the poster may reuse a comment elsewhere, but to reference more than one comprises a copyright violation on the database.
I feel dirty now... I so despise copyright law...
The printers I have been buying locally retail for $50.00. Replacements for the 4 cartridges required are $66 altogether, and I retain the color cartridges until they run out. This means that I accrue a collection of the more expensive cartridges, and replace the printer/black ink only when necessary. They come with 50% cartridges normally. Given the tax deduction of the printer is $50 for the printer + $30 for the included black cartridge (you can claim both) I recover a deduction of $80 overall.
Thus I pay approximately $20 for the $66 set of cartridges, less than buying the 50% cartridges.
while we're at it
0|
1234567890
-1
2_
3=
4+
5[
6{
7]
8}
9\
1/
2?
3>
4.
5
6,
7:
8;
9"
0' ! @ # $ % ^ & * ( ) ~ `
Copyright (C) 2004 Lemmeoutada Collecti, All Rights Reserved.
Open Source Authors are hereby grented a non transferrable royalty free license to use the above database for Open Source Products. All others remain subject to a $1.00 US license fee per use.
Please remit fees immediately.
Have a nice day.
Given that the human brain is a data storage and correlation device, and given that it operates on electronic principles, I hereby submit that the facts in my brain are in fact stored in a correlative, referential database using an entropic indexing key. Therefore, presentation of these facts would in fact be a violation of Copyright. Further, since the data is stored in an encrypted form, decrypting that data without expressed written authorization of the creator of that key $DIETY would be a violation of the DMCA.
Well, since publication constitutes copyright in the US, all comments on this topic are now Copyright(C) 2004 Slashdot a.k.a. OSDN
Please surrender your license at the door
Every day I feel my nick becomes more and more appropriate...
I buy a new printer whenever I need ink again, and donate the old one to a school or charity as a tax write off. Thus far, it has been a much cheaper per page cost, not counting the tax value. Remember, many organizations let you say how much the item is worth on donation.
Since the computer on the Enterprise is capable of voice recognition, and to a more limited extent voice pattern analysis and pattern cognition, we could assume that the basic recipe for Tea, Earl Grey, was at some point after the Farpoint mission programmed by Engineering. Picard then ordered the tea, which he is particularly fond of, and the computer, being programmed to do so, memorized the way he orders it. This left him only needing to specify three basic things, that he wanted his tea, he wanted it Earl Grey, and he wanted it hot. We can only assume that at other times he would drink other teas, or perhaps have iced teas, most likely when he was not stressed and in the big chair, so the computer needed those three bits to make him the perfect cup of something almost entirely unlike tea.
Or maybe I'm needing something like caffiene...
Yep, and the Bart Simpson Dude (BSD) is dying. DOH!
Side by side is in this area generally 5-6 aisles apart. Lindows sits in the Linux section at Office Depot, Staples, CompUSA, Best Buy. This is usually in the back area of the Software section, well removed from the Microsoft block, which comprises the entire front aisle or two. There are rarely, if ever, any non Microsoft products mixed in that block.
The similarity is a different element altogether, but Microsoft makes sure to have it's products get prime retail placement.
Communication of Mathematical Laws are based on a common perception and measurement system. If you and I are differing species, and I am trying to teach you to count in my system, and I show you a book, what you are referring to as one may in my number system be what I refer to as many, merely because of the perceptual differences. I'm not referring so much to the mathematical basis, but to the communication difficulties in assuming that what you percieve as singular I may not.
The flaw in that line of thinking, which many on /. are making, is assuming that what we percieve singularly is similarly percieved by another species. Let's take a thought walk for a moment... First, we percieve an object, say a book, at a single position in time/space. While we can percieve the entirety of it in space, our perceptions cannot percieve simultaneously the entirety of it's temporal measurement. Therefore, we see on book in the now.
Now another lifeform comes along, one which can percieve the entirety of the book in time/space. They percieve not only a different book than we are capable of, but further, they may percieve each temporal book as a seperate item, just as we percieve spacially translated objects as seperate. So where we see a single book, they see an infinite number of books. We can only assume that their method of counting would differ from ours, or that we would be unable to correlate ours to theirs because we can not percieve the many, only the one.
Assuming that another specias percieves the universe the way we do is the height of hubris, and the largest flaw in alien contact scenarios. Our mathematical beauties when percieved on a larger scale may be no more than a mere curiosity, instead of the vaunted unchanging laws.
Just a thought.
Borgolsmock is divisible using a thersian constant. To assume that just because your single dimensional mathematics cannot divide a borgolsmock does not similarly limit n-dimensional. Why the mere act of division is a limitation of linearly conecived time, a limitation we have never faced.
Aside from which, where you see a single item, I percieve an infinite semi recursive series. There are more than one apple in that one apple. There are an infinite (using your limited numbering) number of apples. That apple you call 'one' in fact contains the entirety of it's temporal measurement, which is a bounded infinite series. So now tell me about this concept you call singularity?
Don't forget
- Anonymous Cowards
- Marketing peeps
The problem with that premise is that it assumes law abiding citizens. In the current state of US law, both Federal and State, every citizen has broken at least one law. Whether it is something as minor as violating a Keep-Off-The-Grass sign, or speeding on the interstate, very probably 99% or the adult citizenry have violated at least one law. If you need reaffirmation of that, look at DumbLaws.com
That is usually all the ammunition a corrupt government ever needs.
As far as terrorism, the terrorist I am more worried about are not external, but internal. The politicians, the megacorporations, the lobbying groups.
Before we try to secure the 'free world' we should look to our own home.
I loaded Sol on the TRS from a drive server machine in another room over the serial network, would that count? I also had a sol game running on my BBS in the late 80's...
I used to run Solitaire (Hoyle) on my Tandy 1000 SL/2 with Hard Drive kit. Back in the 80's. And before that, I had Sol on a TRD 80 Model II on the 8" floppy. Talk about prior art, I think there was a version for the VAX.
Head over to the Artists Against the RIAA site and get music that is legal to share. Then flood the p2p with it. Or support the EFF and other organizations that fight the bull going on here. Prove with the one thing it takes, money, that there are legal uses.
Every time you download a song from a legit source, tell two friends, and tell them to tell two more. Get information out using p2p about how to use this to get legal, free music. And if you like what you've found, buy CD's. Pay money to the artists directly. We don't mind, really.
We don't neet ranting, ravin, or hotheaded reactions. We need people to tell other poeple who tell other people where to find the free music, how to support the artists, and how not to be sheep.
Or you can just be a sheep and rant and rave till they own you. Your choice of course.
First, the RIAA does none of that. The individual labels make a floating term loan to the artists, then charge the artists to use their facilities (recovering the loan as an artist expense) to record and distribute. Once sales begin, the label owns the music and collects the royalties, ostensibly in the name of the artist. After the label removes costs, tithes, dues, taxes, expenses, and of course the original loan payment, the artist gets the crumb that remains.
Through all of this, the RIAA does nothing for the artist. The RIAA is a group of labels working together to maintain artificially inflated prices, a controlled consumer market, and to provide sufficient lobbying power in DC.
And please be aware, there are non RIAA labels out there who provide all this at minimal costs, without an upfront loan, and leave the copyright where it belongs. With the artist. And those studios fare very well.
See my sig for my reference. IIASE (I am a sound engineer)
Several companies in the area are preparing for a hiring blitz. Orlando, Florida. Just thought someone might be interested.
I wondered if anyone would catch that. Such a common misspelling that is has become an accepted variant. So, looking for work?
What kind of answers do you typically get for that question?
Given that the point under scrutiny has been examined numerous times, it is prudent to avoid the eggregious mistake often made of providing a terse, trite answer. Let us instead consider the question in a more proactive light. The business critical evaluator will, of course, take the question in a retrospective based on core values, and produce a deliverable in a timely, mission centric fashion.
Naturally.
An old quote seems to me to apply here... "Technological solutions should not be applied to social problems." (paraphrased, attribution unknown)
As many others have pointed out, a company is making mony off works copyrighted by the author. University specific agreements notwithstanding, this is a clear violation of US copyright law. But to me this is the lesser issue.
I was twice caught by one of these anti-plagarism systems, and had to spend valuable time and effort proving that I was innocent. In both cases, I was using material from an earlier work I had written. Also, in both cases, the original work was properly cited, with full bibliography. I ended up over a course of weeks wasting time I could have spent learning defending my own works.
The professors I have worked with in college varied from the intern teaching English I to the dedicated professor of Operating System Concepts, to the lackadasical instructor of Introduction To Computer Science. Many of the required courses I felt were a waste of time and money, both for me and the University. Why would someone who already works in the Computer Science field need an Introduction to Computer Science course? A simple exam would have saved me and many others wasted hours listening to an instructor drone on about the basics parts of a computer. In a course like that, there is no wonder a portion of the students don't want to waste their time.
I think that the professor's duty is not just to make and grade assignments, but to challenge and educate the students. If the material is delivered by reading line for line from a textbook, the professor has failed in their duty. On the other hand, the professors that made the material relevant, interesting, and challenging, always got full effort from me.
In any given system, there will be cheaters, and there will be the amazingly honest. And there will always be many in the middle of the group. But treating everyone according to the lowest common denominator is never an adequate solution.