Some of us worry about our right to be able to develop software and protocols without getting sued the way that Bram Cohen will be soon. He developed software for distributing things like Linux distribution that others are now using for movies/music. He did not promote it as a way to distribute illegal material, but do you think that it will matter?
Civil Servants can be fired. And they pay into their retirement just like anyone else. A retirement system that sucks so much by the way that they had to create a seperate optional system for retirement called a thrift savings plan, which is like a 401K. You see, they still have to pay into the pension (FERS) because the government is dependent on that money to borrow from and also to help keep social security solvent but the government sort of said "look, we know future civil servant retirees are going to get screwed in this deal, so we are going to give you the option of having another retirement account, however we are still going to need you to pay into this other account which you will never be able to get the money back from."
Yea, but doesn't there then have to be some sort of record that "mom and pop" were paying into unemployment? So in order for this to work you have to construct a fake business and actually make some payments.
So we should just hand our money over to a morally bankrupt robber so that way he won't have to bother robbing us? I am sorry, there are plenty of poor people out there who choose not to mug strangers because they no that it is wrong. I support forms of social welfare but I do it because I believe in helping others. If every unemployed person was a violent criminal then you could be damn sure that I would do everything in my power to make sure they never touch that unemployment money.
If I pay into unemployment, I want the assurance of knowing that there is going to be money available when I am the one unemployed. If money is being stolen from the system then that means that there is less money for me and the 60% of people unemployed in certain parts of Chicago. Recording of a fingerprint is no more obtrusive than the current storage of your SS#. They are both unique identifications for individuals. The difference is that a fingerprint and other biological data is much more difficult to use fraudulently. The individuals charged with collecting this money from the public are responsible for assuring that this money goes where it is supposed to go.
If you can devise a system that can assure that recipients of these funds are individuals whom are supposed to receive these funds without retaining any sources of identification information then I would be interested in learning how you plan to do this.
The author only addresses how to detect and punish the fraud when it happens as opposed to preventing the fraud. Here is a much better idea: Force those wanting unemployment to travel to the unemployment office in person, scan a fingerprint with a modern scanner, take their picture, and record the SS#, age, and name. This will prevent two individuals from ever claiming the same identity, or a single person from registering multiple SS#s.
Here is the exact problem with copyright law and in fact terming copyright infringement as "stealing". How many people do you think you know that have never infringed copyright at sometime or another? Fair Use had to be created because legislators realized that the vast majority of the population had become "thiefs" according to the strict interpretation of copyright law. Even with fair use the line that line that seperates criminal behavior from legal behavior is blurred. It always comes down to the highly subjective opinion of the particular judge deciding on each individual case.
What this study shows is that copyright enforcement (I say enforcement and not law because again, it is so open to interpretation) does not reflect the values of society. The majority of the population really does see stealing as wrong, that is not to say that we do not steal when given the opportunity, just that we know that it is wrong. The majority of the population however does not even see copyright infringement as wrong, so not only will they commit infringement, but they will not even feel guilty about it. One of the most concerning things about this study is that many view this as a value of the population that needs to be changed as opposed to shaping the laws to reflect the population's values.
I would be interested to see how the publics opinion changes when given examples of different types of copyright infringement. My hypothesis is that most see it as wrong when a publishing company copies material from another publisher and resells it. In this article they are clearly focusing on copying at the consumer level.
Pretty much anything can be made as an argument for "public benefit". The majority of the benefit is given away to the underhanded criminals in suits and the public manages to get a few pennies out of the deal. Meanwhile a certain nobody lost their home in the deal. Of course the private company could always purchase the home from the private owner, but then they might have to pay TRUE market value. This law is going to be used for nothing but corruption. I guarantee that you will not see any Walmarts torn down to encourage citizens to invest in home ownership and pay property taxes.
Are you disagreeing with the grandparent post and saying that this patent is indeed patent worthy? If not, then you are adding nothing constructive to either side of the argument.
Everybody on slashdot runs Linux, yet we spend all of our free time downloading the vast amount of Windows applications that are shared via bitTorrent. And we are super concerned about that adware getting installed on our Linux distributions as well.
That is my point. There are going to be a variety of software available on a every platform that may result in diffent looks and ideas. If you are looking for standards there are lots of them, just do not plan on everyone using the same standard that you use.
KDE is a great example of what is right with OSS! The fact that you can actually CHOOSE to use it or not to use it is what makes it better. I had a previous computer that had 256 MB of RAM (some of which was given to graphics). Needless to say it did not do well with either Windows XP or Linux + KDE, but Linux + Fluxbox worked pretty well. On this computer with 512 MB or RAM I use KDE because I like it's features. If you are looking for a highly integrated environment, then KDE does a great job.
My wife is an auditor at one of the countries largest universities. A couple of years ago she found several people involved in tens of thousands of dollars worth of fraud in a cash handling area, they all either resigned or were fired. One of them sued to get his job back. The judge agreed stating that it was to harsh a punishment and ordered that the university allow the theif to return to his cash handling position and the University was required to pay for the one and a half years that he was not working.
Moral of the story: Steal from your employer, get caught and you will get rewarded with a year and a half vacation.
"...the constitution was designed to be a living, evolving document..."
Not true. The Constitution was designed to lay some ground rules so that we would not get off course. It is meant to be as constant as reasonably possible. That is why it is so difficult to change it. Even with a Republican majority and a Republican President they were not able to pass an amendment pertaining to gay marriage.
Not everyone on slashdot is of the same opinions. Afterall, you are on slashdot. I do not support software patents and I do not support them in this case either.
Contractors should not need babysitters. Instead of paying a contractor and then paying more for govt employees to monitor everything they do, we should start handing out some accountability to the contractors and take our money back when they continually try to cheat the taxpayers out of money.
The problem is, this solution takes the internet down a path we do not want to go down. It will lead to regulation of what type of protocols can be used in which countries. This will require agencies which provide oversight to ISPs to monitor and enforce proper internet usage. In the meantime, Sherman Networks will just modify Kazaa's protocol slightly and call it Wazaa forcing that protocol to be made illegal. Making software or protocols illegal is not the solution to this problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of us worry about our right to be able to develop software and protocols without getting sued the way that Bram Cohen will be soon. He developed software for distributing things like Linux distribution that others are now using for movies/music. He did not promote it as a way to distribute illegal material, but do you think that it will matter?
No, I mean, prove that there is a 9 to 1 ratio. I am betting that you just pulled the number out of your behind.
Civil Servants can be fired. And they pay into their retirement just like anyone else. A retirement system that sucks so much by the way that they had to create a seperate optional system for retirement called a thrift savings plan, which is like a 401K. You see, they still have to pay into the pension (FERS) because the government is dependent on that money to borrow from and also to help keep social security solvent but the government sort of said "look, we know future civil servant retirees are going to get screwed in this deal, so we are going to give you the option of having another retirement account, however we are still going to need you to pay into this other account which you will never be able to get the money back from."
Yea, but doesn't there then have to be some sort of record that "mom and pop" were paying into unemployment? So in order for this to work you have to construct a fake business and actually make some payments.
So we should just hand our money over to a morally bankrupt robber so that way he won't have to bother robbing us? I am sorry, there are plenty of poor people out there who choose not to mug strangers because they no that it is wrong. I support forms of social welfare but I do it because I believe in helping others. If every unemployed person was a violent criminal then you could be damn sure that I would do everything in my power to make sure they never touch that unemployment money.
Prove it.
If you can devise a system that can assure that recipients of these funds are individuals whom are supposed to receive these funds without retaining any sources of identification information then I would be interested in learning how you plan to do this.
The author only addresses how to detect and punish the fraud when it happens as opposed to preventing the fraud. Here is a much better idea: Force those wanting unemployment to travel to the unemployment office in person, scan a fingerprint with a modern scanner, take their picture, and record the SS#, age, and name. This will prevent two individuals from ever claiming the same identity, or a single person from registering multiple SS#s.
What this study shows is that copyright enforcement (I say enforcement and not law because again, it is so open to interpretation) does not reflect the values of society. The majority of the population really does see stealing as wrong, that is not to say that we do not steal when given the opportunity, just that we know that it is wrong. The majority of the population however does not even see copyright infringement as wrong, so not only will they commit infringement, but they will not even feel guilty about it. One of the most concerning things about this study is that many view this as a value of the population that needs to be changed as opposed to shaping the laws to reflect the population's values.
I would be interested to see how the publics opinion changes when given examples of different types of copyright infringement. My hypothesis is that most see it as wrong when a publishing company copies material from another publisher and resells it. In this article they are clearly focusing on copying at the consumer level.
Pretty much anything can be made as an argument for "public benefit". The majority of the benefit is given away to the underhanded criminals in suits and the public manages to get a few pennies out of the deal. Meanwhile a certain nobody lost their home in the deal. Of course the private company could always purchase the home from the private owner, but then they might have to pay TRUE market value. This law is going to be used for nothing but corruption. I guarantee that you will not see any Walmarts torn down to encourage citizens to invest in home ownership and pay property taxes.
Which makes a great case for having Opt-In databases as opposed to Opt-out.
Don't forget about the horse that they rode in on!
Are you disagreeing with the grandparent post and saying that this patent is indeed patent worthy? If not, then you are adding nothing constructive to either side of the argument.
Everybody on slashdot runs Linux, yet we spend all of our free time downloading the vast amount of Windows applications that are shared via bitTorrent. And we are super concerned about that adware getting installed on our Linux distributions as well.
That is my point. There are going to be a variety of software available on a every platform that may result in diffent looks and ideas. If you are looking for standards there are lots of them, just do not plan on everyone using the same standard that you use.
Have used Python/Tk in windows? How about Java + Swing? Sounds like a double standard to me.
KDE is a great example of what is right with OSS! The fact that you can actually CHOOSE to use it or not to use it is what makes it better. I had a previous computer that had 256 MB of RAM (some of which was given to graphics). Needless to say it did not do well with either Windows XP or Linux + KDE, but Linux + Fluxbox worked pretty well. On this computer with 512 MB or RAM I use KDE because I like it's features. If you are looking for a highly integrated environment, then KDE does a great job.
I think that it would be simpler and cheaper to just add on external digital tuners to equipment.
Moral of the story: Steal from your employer, get caught and you will get rewarded with a year and a half vacation.
Not true. The Constitution was designed to lay some ground rules so that we would not get off course. It is meant to be as constant as reasonably possible. That is why it is so difficult to change it. Even with a Republican majority and a Republican President they were not able to pass an amendment pertaining to gay marriage.
Not everyone on slashdot is of the same opinions. Afterall, you are on slashdot. I do not support software patents and I do not support them in this case either.
Maybe he is just extremely overweight and really is the world's "biggest" hacker.
Contractors should not need babysitters. Instead of paying a contractor and then paying more for govt employees to monitor everything they do, we should start handing out some accountability to the contractors and take our money back when they continually try to cheat the taxpayers out of money.
Sounds like it would be a pretty shitty knife to me.
The problem is, this solution takes the internet down a path we do not want to go down. It will lead to regulation of what type of protocols can be used in which countries. This will require agencies which provide oversight to ISPs to monitor and enforce proper internet usage. In the meantime, Sherman Networks will just modify Kazaa's protocol slightly and call it Wazaa forcing that protocol to be made illegal. Making software or protocols illegal is not the solution to this problem.