The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
(At which point Republicans tend to say, 'Ah! See: the states can restrict these things'. But that's because they always stop reading too soon. We fought a big war about this stuff, and came up with some new amendments, notably, number fourteen. They hate that one, and I know those down south where I live [North Carolina] like to predent it doesn'
t exist.)
That being said the intellectual property is not that of RIAA but actual artists most of whom don't even hold rights to their own creation
So the RIAA doesn't own it, and the artists don't have rights to it? I guess it would make sense that it's essentially in the public domain then.
But let's analyse that claim:
(1) The artists have no rights to the music.
(2) Because the artists own the music, the RIAA doesn't own the music, so they have no rights to the music.
Therefore (3), neither of them have rights to the music.
(4) Nobody other than the RIAA or the artists have rights to the music.
Therefore, (5) Nobody has rights to the music.
(Note: Yes, I know RIAA != label, and public domain != no rights. That's unimportant here.)
So we're claiming the artist can own the music while not having the rights to it. Where did the rights go?
The normal claim would be that the rights were assigned to another body (or to the public domain) by the artist. But we just said the RIAA (the other body) doesn't have the rights. Why?
The answer most people arguing your position give is that it was essentially not a free choice. They had no choice if they wanted to make it big*. Something like that.
But if the artist didn't freely choose to assign the rights to the RIAA, surely they still own the rights! Who would really buy the position that if I'm coerced to give away my rights to something that something goes into the public domain? They stay with the artist, darn it!
So either the artist has the rights, because they were coerced, or the RIAA has the rights because he freely assigned them to the RIAA.
Or there's no such thing as ownership of information or the right to restrict access to certain information. That's the other position, and one quite hard to defend while simultaneously telling me I can't share your credit card number or nudie photos of your girlfriend with my buddies. The right to privacy is a right to control the access to information. Same as copyright.
Sorry for the off-topic rant.
* Exactly what makes you think people have a right to 'make it big' is beyond me, as is why double-platinum indie artists don't disprove this claim.
Uh, no? First, how would you propose we detect a gamma ray burst, which travels at the speed of light (of course), before it gets here?
Well, I was going to use quantum entanglement to establish instantaneous communicationwith sensors placed all over the galaxy.:-p
Of course, we could just watch for the cause rather than the actual burst.
On a side note, this was a plot device in a book by Stephen Baxter, although I can't remember the title. Every couple million years, two stars in the center part of the galaxy would collide, and knock all life in the galaxy back to single-stage or before; species would struggle back up the evolutionary ladder, and just as they achieved spaceflight, the next stars would collide. Great book-
On an even sidier note, that's one of the most popular literary devices on Cardassia. (Sorry. Too much Deep Space Nine.)
Just yesterday I decided to do my cryptography assignment (breaking a Hill Cypher) using FORTRAN. Didn't feel like implementing matrix multiplication myself, and MATMUL was right there.
Of course, I changed my mind, but I was pretty close to teaching myself FORTRAN.
He's not saying they were justified in doing what they did, but we shouldn't just then say that they had no reasons. Maybe various US actions were viewed as unjust by the terrorists--either rightly or wrongly--and as a result, the terrorists did attacked us. They were not well-justified and what they did was wrong, most certainly, but just saying 'they hate our freedom, so they attacked us' doesn't cover it. People on the other side of the world aren't going to put that much effort into attacking just because we're free; clearly they dislike us for some reason, and we do need to honestly consider if they have good reasons for hating us, even though those reasons clearly aren't sufficient to justified the attacks they make.
I will agree that the grandfather termed it overly-deterministically, and seemed to put too much (all) the fault on us, but the core of what he's saying makes some sense.
Why is it any less appropriate than having a senior prom? Why is one within the mission of school and the other not? Neither seems particularly educational.
No, you're right, of course, that it's not useless. But the usefulness isn't that it takes away parents' choice as to whether their child should play the game. It gives parents a guideline--information--so they can then make a relatively informed decision that's right for their child. If these parents decide to let their kids play the games, fine.
Providing information to parents is the good. Making the decisions for the parents is not (in the case of violent games).
An M rating shouldn't be the concern of the school if the parents don't object. There's no science behind these letters, beyond anthropology/sociology. They're less significant, I'd say, than the 'For ages 7-10' one find on non-computerised game boxes.
IE isn't bad (okay, it is, but finish reading my sentence), monocultures are bad. If everyone switches to Firefox, it will still be worse than if there are a lot of standards-compliant browsers in use.
Actually, I'm going to be shot or punched every four years unless something changes. Do I focus on the short term, or the long term, given that neither is likely to be fatal?
I'm going long-term. Not sure who that is, but it's neither Bush nor Kerry.
The ice at the north pole is floating. It's melting won't raise sea level.
The real difference in sea level comes from water expanding when heated. It's most dense around 40deg f (~2deg c). If the water heats up just one or two degrees, it expand, and when water in something as deep as the ocean expands by even as little as 1%, that's not a negligible rise in sea level.
That's a very good illustration of Kerry's flip-flop on the war, but it annoyed me in attacking his voting against the 87 000 000 000USD. He did vote for it before he voted against it. There were two votes: one wanted to provide funding from one source (he voted yea), the other from another source (he voted no). That's not a flip-flop. Voting different ways on different bills? How dare he?
Kerry did a major switch on the war. There's no need for the video to hurt its credibility by presenting what is clearly a distortion of his actions regarding his 87B vote. Focus on Kerry's actual flaws and mistakes. It's not like there aren't any to pick on.
The original poster made the assertion that Europe has fixed the problems. The immediate reply (great grandparent?) came back with 'but Europe had problems a hundred years ago'. That's not a counter-example, and the original poster didn't have a logical fallacy that I can see.
Yes, but the phrase I quoted was '...if you gave *anyone* under the age of 20...';-p (Actually, most would probably be able to figure it out given a couple minutes. At least those with basic problem solving skills. So maybe one or two percent.)
When was the last time you saw, let alone used, a rotary dial phone?
I think it's been about two years since I've used one. Much less since I've seen one.
In fact, I bet if you gave anyone under the age of 20 such a phone and told them to dial 911 (999, 112, or whatever) then they wouldn't have a clue how to do it.
The eighteen-year-old sitting next to me knows how.
It's as annoying as those people who build their houses next to airports and then complain about the noise. They knew what they were getting into when they built there!
Be careful not to take this analogy too seriously. It's not like they could have bought a quite lot far from the airport (IE, gotten a longer-lasting copyright) if they'd wanted.
Personally, I'm not sure how I feel about copyright lengths. They seem similar to (but different from) ownership of my great grandmother's old coffee table. That got passed down to my mother, and could continue to be passed down indefinitely*. Obviously there's no way we could make it 'public domain' and still have our own copy, but, as I said, it's similar.
I oppose lengthening copyrights, but I'd rather focus on convincing people to freely agree to release copyrights after a certain amount of time, or to choose a GNU/CC lisence. (I wonder...how will we tell when an older of versions of Linux go from GPL to Public Domain? Do we have to checked the death-dates of every contributor? Maybe Microsoft will do that and radically improve Windows 2100 by basing it off of Linux 2.4.0. I hope I'm around for that.) *wanders of still rambling*
* Well, my brothers and I did a fair bit towards shortening it's lifespan, I'm sure. But in theory.
At my school (East Carolina University), the classrooms in the English building that have computers in them are locked when not in use, but not because people steal the computers. No, it's because people steal the mice balls and it costs 80USD to replace a mouse ball. At least, that's what one of my teachers was told.
The English department is quite the bureaucracy, I guess.
I ran Mozilla on a 166MHz system with 64MB of RAM. Windows 98 SE2. It was slow, but it did run. Well, walked. Crawled. Oozed.
Anyway, on a fast computer, it's fast. On my 400MHz Linux box (312MB of RAM, no video card to speak of), it's still slow. I use Galeon as my primary graphical browser. But I use Elinks for almost everything. (Skipstone was nice and snappy, but no longer has a Debian package, and Dillo doesn't support cookies.)
I'm like to install Firefox on the school computers. Unfortunately, since they got XP, I have to reinstall every time I log on, except in the CS lab where I have a few more privileges to abuse.
You might not want to be doing it while they're being Slashdotted (actually, Slashdot isn't a huge threat: they outdo Slashdot in traffic), but you can download the databases.
Total size 15483MB (633MB for just current revisions). English is 281MB cur, 8165MB old.
Sadly, I don't think they've made a way to downloaad the images in one file yet. They discussed it a while back, but I don't think anything ever really got done.
"what is real" asks Morpheus to Neo didn't you see it?, how come did you miss the answer. And when Neo gets out of the Constructor and finds himself injured, do you remember what it comes next? Take your time, watch the movies again.
I didn't really see any development of 'anti-realist' thought in the film. I saw soundbites like Morpheus' question. Granted, I wouldn't want to watch a two hour film of the philosophy club I attend, but 'what is real?' isn't a very provacative question anymore. It's been a popular thing for people to say when they don't feel like debating a point. Doesn't make me think about what 'real' is (I've already done that), it makes me say, 'Not that'. (Because they say it when I've told them something isn't real, and asking me to think about reality without providing any argument isn't about to change my mind. [But I digress])
I will watch the film again and try to look more carefully for the stuff you and the other posters have pointed out. I'll probably like it better, but I still don't think I'll like it half as much as most people here. Which is okay.
Slashdot Mirror
(At which point Republicans tend to say, 'Ah! See: the states can restrict these things'. But that's because they always stop reading too soon. We fought a big war about this stuff, and came up with some new amendments, notably, number fourteen. They hate that one, and I know those down south where I live [North Carolina] like to predent it doesn' t exist.)
So the RIAA doesn't own it, and the artists don't have rights to it? I guess it would make sense that it's essentially in the public domain then.
But let's analyse that claim:
(1) The artists have no rights to the music.
(2) Because the artists own the music, the RIAA doesn't own the music, so they have no rights to the music.
Therefore (3), neither of them have rights to the music.
(4) Nobody other than the RIAA or the artists have rights to the music.
Therefore, (5) Nobody has rights to the music.
(Note: Yes, I know RIAA != label, and public domain != no rights. That's unimportant here.)
So we're claiming the artist can own the music while not having the rights to it. Where did the rights go?
The normal claim would be that the rights were assigned to another body (or to the public domain) by the artist. But we just said the RIAA (the other body) doesn't have the rights. Why?
The answer most people arguing your position give is that it was essentially not a free choice. They had no choice if they wanted to make it big*. Something like that.
But if the artist didn't freely choose to assign the rights to the RIAA, surely they still own the rights! Who would really buy the position that if I'm coerced to give away my rights to something that something goes into the public domain? They stay with the artist, darn it!
So either the artist has the rights, because they were coerced, or the RIAA has the rights because he freely assigned them to the RIAA.
Or there's no such thing as ownership of information or the right to restrict access to certain information. That's the other position, and one quite hard to defend while simultaneously telling me I can't share your credit card number or nudie photos of your girlfriend with my buddies. The right to privacy is a right to control the access to information. Same as copyright.
Sorry for the off-topic rant.
* Exactly what makes you think people have a right to 'make it big' is beyond me, as is why double-platinum indie artists don't disprove this claim.
Well, I was going to use quantum entanglement to establish instantaneous communicationwith sensors placed all over the galaxy. :-p
Of course, we could just watch for the cause rather than the actual burst.
On an even sidier note, that's one of the most popular literary devices on Cardassia. (Sorry. Too much Deep Space Nine.)
I'm pretty sure that Marc Andreesen of Netscape was working for 1USD/year as well prior to AOL buying Netscape.
Just yesterday I decided to do my cryptography assignment (breaking a Hill Cypher) using FORTRAN. Didn't feel like implementing matrix multiplication myself, and MATMUL was right there.
Of course, I changed my mind, but I was pretty close to teaching myself FORTRAN.
He's not saying they were justified in doing what they did, but we shouldn't just then say that they had no reasons. Maybe various US actions were viewed as unjust by the terrorists--either rightly or wrongly--and as a result, the terrorists did attacked us. They were not well-justified and what they did was wrong, most certainly, but just saying 'they hate our freedom, so they attacked us' doesn't cover it. People on the other side of the world aren't going to put that much effort into attacking just because we're free; clearly they dislike us for some reason, and we do need to honestly consider if they have good reasons for hating us, even though those reasons clearly aren't sufficient to justified the attacks they make.
I will agree that the grandfather termed it overly-deterministically, and seemed to put too much (all) the fault on us, but the core of what he's saying makes some sense.
Why is it any less appropriate than having a senior prom? Why is one within the mission of school and the other not? Neither seems particularly educational.
No, you're right, of course, that it's not useless. But the usefulness isn't that it takes away parents' choice as to whether their child should play the game. It gives parents a guideline--information--so they can then make a relatively informed decision that's right for their child. If these parents decide to let their kids play the games, fine.
Providing information to parents is the good. Making the decisions for the parents is not (in the case of violent games).
An M rating shouldn't be the concern of the school if the parents don't object. There's no science behind these letters, beyond anthropology/sociology. They're less significant, I'd say, than the 'For ages 7-10' one find on non-computerised game boxes.
IE isn't bad (okay, it is, but finish reading my sentence), monocultures are bad. If everyone switches to Firefox, it will still be worse than if there are a lot of standards-compliant browsers in use.
Of course, they're both Gecko. . .
It's in Cambridge. Trim the suffix. (And perhaps get a better dictionary.)
Sometimes that's not good enough. In such instances, I always rot-13 it two times for twice the security.
Actually, I'm going to be shot or punched every four years unless something changes. Do I focus on the short term, or the long term, given that neither is likely to be fatal?
I'm going long-term. Not sure who that is, but it's neither Bush nor Kerry.
Bills don't just add laws; they also revise or repeal them.
Anonymous Cowards are a vital part of the Internet community. I guess the judges don't consider anonymity important.
And that's why I'm posting this while logged in. I don't want to jeopardise my chances of getting on the list.
The ice at the north pole is floating. It's melting won't raise sea level.
The real difference in sea level comes from water expanding when heated. It's most dense around 40deg f (~2deg c). If the water heats up just one or two degrees, it expand, and when water in something as deep as the ocean expands by even as little as 1%, that's not a negligible rise in sea level.
That's a very good illustration of Kerry's flip-flop on the war, but it annoyed me in attacking his voting against the 87 000 000 000USD. He did vote for it before he voted against it. There were two votes: one wanted to provide funding from one source (he voted yea), the other from another source (he voted no). That's not a flip-flop. Voting different ways on different bills? How dare he?
Kerry did a major switch on the war. There's no need for the video to hurt its credibility by presenting what is clearly a distortion of his actions regarding his 87B vote. Focus on Kerry's actual flaws and mistakes. It's not like there aren't any to pick on.
The original poster made the assertion that Europe has fixed the problems. The immediate reply (great grandparent?) came back with 'but Europe had problems a hundred years ago'. That's not a counter-example, and the original poster didn't have a logical fallacy that I can see.
Yes, but the phrase I quoted was '...if you gave *anyone* under the age of 20...' ;-p (Actually, most would probably be able to figure it out given a couple minutes. At least those with basic problem solving skills. So maybe one or two percent.)
I think it's been about two years since I've used one. Much less since I've seen one.
The eighteen-year-old sitting next to me knows how.
Personally, I'm not sure how I feel about copyright lengths. They seem similar to (but different from) ownership of my great grandmother's old coffee table. That got passed down to my mother, and could continue to be passed down indefinitely*. Obviously there's no way we could make it 'public domain' and still have our own copy, but, as I said, it's similar.
I oppose lengthening copyrights, but I'd rather focus on convincing people to freely agree to release copyrights after a certain amount of time, or to choose a GNU/CC lisence. (I wonder...how will we tell when an older of versions of Linux go from GPL to Public Domain? Do we have to checked the death-dates of every contributor? Maybe Microsoft will do that and radically improve Windows 2100 by basing it off of Linux 2.4.0. I hope I'm around for that.) *wanders of still rambling*
* Well, my brothers and I did a fair bit towards shortening it's lifespan, I'm sure. But in theory.
At my school (East Carolina University), the classrooms in the English building that have computers in them are locked when not in use, but not because people steal the computers. No, it's because people steal the mice balls and it costs 80USD to replace a mouse ball. At least, that's what one of my teachers was told.
The English department is quite the bureaucracy, I guess.
I ran Mozilla on a 166MHz system with 64MB of RAM. Windows 98 SE2. It was slow, but it did run. Well, walked. Crawled. Oozed.
Anyway, on a fast computer, it's fast. On my 400MHz Linux box (312MB of RAM, no video card to speak of), it's still slow. I use Galeon as my primary graphical browser. But I use Elinks for almost everything. (Skipstone was nice and snappy, but no longer has a Debian package, and Dillo doesn't support cookies.)
I'm like to install Firefox on the school computers. Unfortunately, since they got XP, I have to reinstall every time I log on, except in the CS lab where I have a few more privileges to abuse.
You might not want to be doing it while they're being Slashdotted (actually, Slashdot isn't a huge threat: they outdo Slashdot in traffic), but you can download the databases.
Total size 15483MB (633MB for just current revisions). English is 281MB cur, 8165MB old.Sadly, I don't think they've made a way to downloaad the images in one file yet. They discussed it a while back, but I don't think anything ever really got done.
I will watch the film again and try to look more carefully for the stuff you and the other posters have pointed out. I'll probably like it better, but I still don't think I'll like it half as much as most people here. Which is okay.