the point is that the people who copyright christian works can be viewed as being hypocritical. first off, they're making a personal profit from their attempt to spread the word of god. secondly, they're restricting others from freely spreading their interpretation of the word
They are not necessarily hypocritical. They may not consider the works to be the word of god. They may consider them to be merely interesting historical documentation of how a whole bunch of people were duped and milked.
Depending on your beliefs you may or may not find that attitude equally abhorrent but there are possibilities other than that such people are hypocrites
No, that will happen as Microsoft continues to suffer from competition due to OSS.
Eventually they'll find themselves forced to drop the price of packages people actually buy not just ones that aren't generally bought but that can generate column inches.
Nobody, I hope given that this would appear to be what SCO wants. Let them know that screaming 'Mommy, I want to be bought out' is not enough to make it so but will only get them sent to their room without supper.
It's not buying out SCO that would be expensive for IBM. It's setting the precedent that this is a viable exit strategy. The suits would be never ending (although this this one is starting to seem that way)
... and of course, as it was when AltaVista was synonymous with search.
Of course AV fumbled the ball but it shows that it can happen. If Google fumbles there will be others waiting to take their place and that is not a physical impossibility. What about the press releases are news debacle. Something like that on the 'Web' search could lose them a lot of users.
A poem about an emotional moment in your life conjured up by seeing the dam covered in that scaffolding has a better chance of holding up. People tend to be more interesting than technology in the long run, and the good poems with, uh, technology in them tend not to be about technology at all.
Given my lack of mod points I'll second this. I wouldn't even bother with the tact in this case either. If a poem is good then it is because it is to do with people in some way, whatever else it may reference.
I'd agree with banning software patents but I think the recipe argument is a little weak. You could provide a list of commands to follow for which you end up with a patented physical object
I'd rather go with the does it promote innovation argument. When it comes to physical objects then many times it is going to involve substantial monetary investment even if that is only for creating prototype after prototype while you find what works. When it comes to software for how many patents can you, as a prospective patent owner, argue that if you didn't do this commercially that nobody else would do it?
It will get increasingly difficult to argue that a software innovation could only have been done comercially. Programming has long been a hobby for many people but there are barriers. My first computer was a BBC B. £399 almost twenty years ago. In real terms you can get a computer for a lot less now, plus a household is more likely to have a computer for other uses already given the increase in functionality. Then you have to have some software to develop in. I was lucky with the beeb in that respect as it came with a decent BASIC and Assembler! These days there is plenty of open source software that will fulfill that requirement. (Possibly) finally you do need to learn to program. There are going to be people who might have been great programmers who fail when starting to program and never pick up the bug. How much easier is this these days with the internet? When you're learning you have readily accessible tutorials. When you're stuck with debugging there's usenet and message boards. All this adds up to an increasing population of competent programmers. If a certain percent of these have a mindset to do at least some noncommercial programming then this also adds up to an increasing population of noncommercial competent programmers.
Add to this the ease, again given the internet, for these programmers to collaborate on projects that they would never have attempted on their own and how many software innovations are reliant on patents for their existence?
Actually scratch that. Do away with the toolbar. If there's no toolbar you can't put a button on it with functionality that *$"$^%$ isn't in the menus and doesn't have a keyboard equivalent (or at least any reasonable way of ascertaining what the shortcut might be)
Yes, alright so some people want the toolbar. All I really want is for people not to put in toolbar only functionality.
Possibly time to be flamed, but what I'd like is buttons for the functionality you do use on a regular basis appearing on a minimal button bar instead of menu items disappearing from menus if you don't use them enough. (With of course the ability to set the initial buttons according to role)
Google claims to present the unbiased results of its secret PageRank formula
Unless you want to say that they are never allowed to change that formula then why can Google not have as part of that formula, 'We don't think SearchKing is particularly good'?
Until Google comes right out and says "We look for SearchKing specifically and downrank them!" It's not censorship nor is it wrong IMNSHO
Even if Google comes right out and says exactly that, so what. They are in the business of giving their opinion of websites. If that's their opinion then that to me looks like a perfectly valid adjustment to their algorithm. It is to be avoided wherever practical of course but I've certainly written algorithms with clauses specifically for special cases. I suspect most of/. has as well.
It is of course a whatsit if you're the one affected but to play spot the quote - personal isn't the same as important.
Slashdot Mirror
They are not necessarily hypocritical. They may not consider the works to be the word of god. They may consider them to be merely interesting historical documentation of how a whole bunch of people were duped and milked.
Depending on your beliefs you may or may not find that attitude equally abhorrent but there are possibilities other than that such people are hypocrites
All The Web might be a better bet than AltaVista
Is he also known as CMOT Dibbell?
I'm pretty sure reverse-engineering is protected for interoperability purposes even under DMCA.
That is clearly a loophole in the system that must be fixed!
Time to patent the idea of reverse-engineering for interoperability purposes. That should put a stop to these shameless acts of communism.
No, that will happen as Microsoft continues to suffer from competition due to OSS.
Eventually they'll find themselves forced to drop the price of packages people actually buy not just ones that aren't generally bought but that can generate column inches.
Can you make it a claim of passing off? They're making they're ads look like part of the page. Can't say that about the blockers
Does 'passing off' exist in America?
Where's the 'insightful (unfortunately)' option?
Wow. If he can do it for 'sex', 'gambling', 'dating' or 'travel' then I want to meet (& hire) this guy ;>
Isn't it a little out of proportion to hope that /. dies soon just because of that?
I'm sure some would prefer it to be +1, CheapShot ;)
Who wants to start up a donation site to Buy SCO?
Nobody, I hope given that this would appear to be what SCO wants. Let them know that screaming 'Mommy, I want to be bought out' is not enough to make it so but will only get them sent to their room without supper.
Really, they're old enough to know better.
It's not buying out SCO that would be expensive for IBM. It's setting the precedent that this is a viable exit strategy. The suits would be never ending (although this this one is starting to seem that way)
True... As far as I know, there isn't any analog protection for analog audio (except making it sound really crappy... but who'd listen to it then?)
The studios seem to be finding plenty of people to listen to it!
Compare and contrast...
Google
to Yahoo
to Inktomi (via hotbot)
... and of course, as it was when AltaVista was synonymous with search.
Of course AV fumbled the ball but it shows that it can happen. If Google fumbles there will be others waiting to take their place and that is not a physical impossibility. What about the press releases are news debacle. Something like that on the 'Web' search could lose them a lot of users.
A poem about an emotional moment in your life conjured up by seeing the dam covered in that scaffolding has a better chance of holding up. People tend to be more interesting than technology in the long run, and the good poems with, uh, technology in them tend not to be about technology at all.
Given my lack of mod points I'll second this. I wouldn't even bother with the tact in this case either. If a poem is good then it is because it is to do with people in some way, whatever else it may reference.
Let there be light ;>
I'd agree with banning software patents but I think the recipe argument is a little weak. You could provide a list of commands to follow for which you end up with a patented physical object
I'd rather go with the does it promote innovation argument. When it comes to physical objects then many times it is going to involve substantial monetary investment even if that is only for creating prototype after prototype while you find what works. When it comes to software for how many patents can you, as a prospective patent owner, argue that if you didn't do this commercially that nobody else would do it?
It will get increasingly difficult to argue that a software innovation could only have been done comercially. Programming has long been a hobby for many people but there are barriers. My first computer was a BBC B. £399 almost twenty years ago. In real terms you can get a computer for a lot less now, plus a household is more likely to have a computer for other uses already given the increase in functionality. Then you have to have some software to develop in. I was lucky with the beeb in that respect as it came with a decent BASIC and Assembler! These days there is plenty of open source software that will fulfill that requirement. (Possibly) finally you do need to learn to program. There are going to be people who might have been great programmers who fail when starting to program and never pick up the bug. How much easier is this these days with the internet? When you're learning you have readily accessible tutorials. When you're stuck with debugging there's usenet and message boards. All this adds up to an increasing population of competent programmers. If a certain percent of these have a mindset to do at least some noncommercial programming then this also adds up to an increasing population of noncommercial competent programmers.
Add to this the ease, again given the internet, for these programmers to collaborate on projects that they would never have attempted on their own and how many software innovations are reliant on patents for their existence?
'creates exceptionally random cipher text'
WOW! Not just random but 'exceptionally random'. That's got to be very unique.
Sorry, too tired - AGAIN
The whole point of a one time pad is that you're only supposed to use each cipher once!
Actually scratch that. Do away with the toolbar. If there's no toolbar you can't put a button on it with functionality that *$"$^%$ isn't in the menus and doesn't have a keyboard equivalent (or at least any reasonable way of ascertaining what the shortcut might be)
Yes, alright so some people want the toolbar. All I really want is for people not to put in toolbar only functionality.
Possibly time to be flamed, but what I'd like is buttons for the functionality you do use on a regular basis appearing on a minimal button bar instead of menu items disappearing from menus if you don't use them enough. (With of course the ability to set the initial buttons according to role)
I've got my asbestos suit on. Go for it
Google claims to present the unbiased results of its secret PageRank formula
Unless you want to say that they are never allowed to change that formula then why can Google not have as part of that formula, 'We don't think SearchKing is particularly good'?
Until Google comes right out and says "We look for SearchKing specifically and downrank them!" It's not censorship nor is it wrong IMNSHO
Even if Google comes right out and says exactly that, so what. They are in the business of giving their opinion of websites. If that's their opinion then that to me looks like a perfectly valid adjustment to their algorithm. It is to be avoided wherever practical of course but I've certainly written algorithms with clauses specifically for special cases. I suspect most of /. has as well.
It is of course a whatsit if you're the one affected but to play spot the quote - personal isn't the same as important.