"You are right, though, in that if someone just gives you an unlawfully made copy physically, without your making it in some fashion, that possession isn't infringing. But that basically never happens when we're talking about downloading."
Well, I have on several occasions received CD:s with MP3 files from friends. If these MP3:s were originally downloaded, do you mean that this wouldn't be infringing under U.S. law?
Well, I am. But that's not what stings. What stings is that Netscape was in the position (sought after or not) to look like it was everything MS wasn't (for example, being able to produce a good browser...;-) ), and that's apparently changed. Well, I shouldn't be surprised, things do change. No sane person would argue today that Netscape is a better browser than IE. 5 years ago, however, things were very different.
As an old Netscape fan, I can only say: "Disappointed!!" Since they are one of MS:s most prominent historical "enemies", I really thought they could be trusted.
OK, I know I shouldn't post this. But dswan69 is SO right, I have to cheer a little bit. And the key word is 'independent'. Don't you ever forget that! Please...
Well, you may not be right-wing, but you appear to be pretty cynical. In a perfect world, where everybody actually have the same possibilities from birth, regardless of who their parents are and the situation they are in, I would have had no problem with your assertion. That's not the world I live in, however.
The American Constitution is, as far as I know, one of the greatest pieces of text ever written. But in the American society there seems to be a greater respect for capitalism than for the values expressed in the Constitution, e.g. democracy. The current administration is trying to remake the country into a plutocracy, and with astonishing speed, at that. (And alienating all of its friends by its foreign policy at the same speed, but that's another matter.)
Please, dear Americans, start with doing something about the funding of politicians' campaigns. The Clinton administration had a proposition in the works, the way I recall it, but it was killed off immediately after the election. The rest of the world needs you in the spirit your government says you're in, not the spirit in which your country is actually behaving.
This is a very good example of the fact that studies like these NEVER say ANYTHING about an individual. If the study is really good (most are not. I should know, I'm in the business myself...), it may say something important about GROUPS of people.
And, as another poster remarked, don't forget "recall bias", which means that people with a disease may remember the same things differently from people without the disease, particularly if they haver reason to believe that - in this case - coffee may have something to do with the disease.
Further, even if we were to repeat exactly the same study in 100 similar individuals, we could end up with rather different results, even if there really is something causal going on here. Such are the laws of chance.
And EVEN further, there are a zillion of compounds other than caffeine in coffee, most of which are not very well examined.
In summary, doing research on these kind of things are, IMNSHO, much like building anthills. You do it one little piece at the time, and it takes many pieces before you can see the pattern, if any. Drink coffee if you like, avoid it if you like, but don't make the decision on the basis of only one study of one disease.
Slashdot Mirror
Your sig quote... Wasn't that Dario Fo? Couldn't verify it quickly, though...
"You are right, though, in that if someone just gives you an unlawfully made copy physically, without your making it in some fashion, that possession isn't infringing. But that basically never happens when we're talking about downloading."
Well, I have on several occasions received CD:s with MP3 files from friends. If these MP3:s were originally downloaded, do you mean that this wouldn't be infringing under U.S. law?
No, AOL is the major reason why I run Mozilla nowadays. We're still waiting for that reader, I suppose.
Well, I am. But that's not what stings. What stings is that Netscape was in the position (sought after or not) to look like it was everything MS wasn't (for example, being able to produce a good browser... ;-) ), and that's apparently changed. Well, I shouldn't be surprised, things do change. No sane person would argue today that Netscape is a better browser than IE. 5 years ago, however, things were very different.
As an old Netscape fan, I can only say: "Disappointed!!" Since they are one of MS:s most prominent historical "enemies", I really thought they could be trusted.
OK, I know I shouldn't post this. But dswan69 is SO right, I have to cheer a little bit. And the key word is 'independent'. Don't you ever forget that! Please...
Well, you may not be right-wing, but you appear to be pretty cynical. In a perfect world, where everybody actually have the same possibilities from birth, regardless of who their parents are and the situation they are in, I would have had no problem with your assertion. That's not the world I live in, however.
Please, dear Americans, start with doing something about the funding of politicians' campaigns. The Clinton administration had a proposition in the works, the way I recall it, but it was killed off immediately after the election. The rest of the world needs you in the spirit your government says you're in, not the spirit in which your country is actually behaving.
Peter, European.
And, as another poster remarked, don't forget "recall bias", which means that people with a disease may remember the same things differently from people without the disease, particularly if they haver reason to believe that - in this case - coffee may have something to do with the disease.
Further, even if we were to repeat exactly the same study in 100 similar individuals, we could end up with rather different results, even if there really is something causal going on here. Such are the laws of chance.
And EVEN further, there are a zillion of compounds other than caffeine in coffee, most of which are not very well examined.
In summary, doing research on these kind of things are, IMNSHO, much like building anthills. You do it one little piece at the time, and it takes many pieces before you can see the pattern, if any. Drink coffee if you like, avoid it if you like, but don't make the decision on the basis of only one study of one disease.