I remember the former Soviet Union outlawed all sorts of things. Did it stop people? No, it just pissed them off until...well we all know what happened.
I have to chuckle everytime I see a law or technology attempt to suppress the desires of the people. First we had Napster, then Kazaa, now Bittorrent. The geeks will always win.
Now what worries me is the effects of all this in the interim. The message of freedom being spread throughout the world is spoken by those who consistently attempt to pass laws controlling what we can and can't do.
If you're Exxon, you'll get an exemption for pollution. If you're Joe Blow, you'll get put in jail for fast forwarding through a commercial. What's wrong with this picture?
I'm afraid it's going to have to get a lot worse before the revolution begins and heads start rolling. It always works this way, just read your history.
The EBay request to verify account information. I've received this several times. Perhaps the financial institutions don't do much because a small country in Africa isn't going to let U.S. law enforcement take care of the problem. Too much corruption is usually the case.
The maxim I always use is: The company that holds your account never needs to ask you for your password since they already have it.
Something many probably don't know is that your local police dept. probably has a high tech crimes unit. They will investigate and prosecute illegal activites like snooping around your company network. They can be very helpful.
After a move to an apartment, I decided to change my address with my banks, etc. This apparently triggered something which froze all my accounts. I took so long to straighten out that I had to borrow money from friends to make my payments and to live. My broker told me this was a new government requirement from the Patriot Act.
Thing is, I was freaked out that all the freedom we claim to have in this country was suddenly pulled out from under me. Most people don't think they could ever be affected by things like this but I am much more of a civil libertarian because of it.
Large corporations amoral? This is crap. Large corporations are run by people with all sorts of differing moral attitudes. Look at Rupert Murdoch's empire. His news/entertainment is a complete reflection of the man's political and social desires.
While the common wisdom is that corporations will only do what's best for their bottom line, the reality is somewhat murkier.
Hey, that's how you control the people. Seed fear and uncertainty and make sure to divide the people into good and evil groups.
This is a time tested strategy. Honestly, if everyone would read a little bit of history they'd see the pattern. Some leaders are altruistic yet succumb to the whispers(and $$) of the lobbyists. Others, like our fearless leader Bush, have an agenda and will do what ever is necessary to make it happen. Then there are a small minority of leaders with integrity. Sadly, they don't stand much chance usually.
Actually, although I don't like Kerry that much more than Bush, I think he is the lesser of two evils. A government which has trouble passing bills because there's no clear majority is also less likely to infringe on the constitution. Bush has too much power and is willing to wield it to further his administration's own goals. He believe's he's more a benevolent king than a public servant.
You need to have a criminal entity in order to press charges or present a civil suit. If the software is public domain or collaborativewave like sourceforge stuff, then there's no one to go after. It doesn't even matter that the software is deemed "illegal", you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
I think the internet has become the biggest thorn in the side of those who would control us(government and large corporations).
Napster was the first scrificial lamb, then came Kazaa, now we have bittorrent, eDonkey, etc. It will take a police state to stop innovation and technology and even then...
If Apple had just kept their mouth shut and made sure that updates to the iPod would break Real's songs, then the consumer would quickly learn that buying a third party product involves risk. This would probably hurt Realnetworks. Of course, this would be a very unscrupulous thing to do but if done surrepitiously, only Real would look bad. Apple would only be guilty of "improving" the software and incidentally breaking Real.
Unfortunately, a series of terrorist events will cause the government to indefinitely "postpone" the election. Of course, martial law will follow and anything that doesn't tote the party line (slashdotters lookout) will be summarily seized and thrown into a black hole. That's the good news.
The escrow service idea would work great as long as you can inspect the merchandise prior to accepting shipment and thereby releasing payment. It's more of a hassle but safer.
Bottom line: unless you're buying something from a reputable store on ebay with return policies, customer service, etc, you're taking a chance.
You said that very well! The need for the rights of the individual over the righteousness of those who would impose their ideals are well documented in the early days of the U.S and should never be forgotten(even in times of a so-called war).
I suspect that this is an issue because two companies can have identical balance sheets but one of the companies is mortgaged to the hilt in employee stock options. This effect should be captured and shown. Saying a stock option shouldn't be expensed is like saying a long term liability or investment shouldn't be shown.
Perhaps because stock options behave differently than most traditional expenses they should simply be valued at the time the financials are reported and then adjusted.
"It's like watching a water bucket with a large hole and small hole in the bottom," Russ said. "For some reason, the water is pouring out the small hole six times faster than it's coming out of the large one. Something unusual must be going on inside the bucket."
Doesn't this attempted decryption of the universe break a provision in the DMCA? If that's not applicable, then I'm sure Microsoft will be getting a patent on it any day now.
It's not about legitimacy, it's about control. DirectTV wants control over their broadcasts. They do have the right to only allow paying customers access and they are trying whatever they an to stop piracy.
It's kind of screwed up but it's like the filesharing networks that do have legal uses but in practice are mostly engaged in copyright violations.
Now the RIAA can change their business model ala iTunes, etc. This is the obvious solution. DirectTV doesn't really have an alternative.
In some ways, it's like legal sales of assault rifles or dope smoking accessories. You just have to trust that people are responsible.
I always thought the whole idea of a patent was to protect the inventor of a brilliant idea. There are so many ideas out there and yet few of them are truly novel. It's like patenting the little cardboard ring that they put around a paper coffee cup at Starbucks to make it easier to hold. This isn't a brilliant idea. However the invention of styrofoam is. In one case you are describing a common idea(using an insulator to protect your hands from a hot item) and the other is inventing something that hasn't been thought of before. You could patent a new way of manufacturing of cardboard rings and that would be patenting a novel idea.
So when Amazon patents the one-click approach they are are simply patenting a feature not a novel idea. If they were patenting a new database concept or algorithm, then sure.
It all boils down to how detailed a patent can be and whether that patent is for a novel idea or just a specific application of a common idea.
Everquest is governed by what is called a benevolent dictatorship(Sony). Though some may dispute the use of the term benevolent, it nonetheless is a fairly accurate description.
Players have no vote and no legal recourse but are simly at the mercy of the overlords(GMs). This produces a very stable environment at the cost of extreme suppression of thinking "out of the box" which is called an exploit and will get you executed(banned).
I think the Bush administration would like to be the GMs of the United States. Try not to get banned!
What has happened historically is the rich get richer, the upper class, middle class and poor get poorer. Everyone looks at the rich as an example that the American dream actually works. The government (in the pocket of the rich) tells us that the rich need tax breaks too and proceed to give the rich massive flexibility to screw the average worker. The constitution is "reworked" and "re-interpreted" to fit the definition that suits the rich. The average person believes all this crap until...
The majority of the country is poor and a revolution occurs. Just check the history books.
Excuse me Akhilesh but you are making some pretty bold assumptions.
First of all, we make our own laws and regulations. There is no intrinsic rule to govern the way your information is used other than those rules which our legislature has enacted.
Second, there is always a balance between privacy and your interaction with the world. If you never talk, write, email, etc to anyone, you'll probably never get spam, junk mail, unsolicited phone calls, etc. It's your choice and if you don't like the way it works, then either change the way you communicate or write your congressman to have the laws changed.
Third, even though we have a constitution and laws and the appearance of order the one with more money, influence, power will almost always have the upper hand. I realize this sounds cynical but that's the way it is.
It's a pretty slick interface and one that would also be easy to copy. I can't fault Apple for trying to protect against a horde of Asian clone iPods. If a patent is granted and Apple has the common sense to only enforce it in obvious cases of someone copying the interface, then great. If they get the patent and then sue anyone and everyone who has something that sort of works like the iPod, then that sucks.
While I certainly agree that you have the right to monitor your kid's net use and can have video cameras in every room of the house, the point many are trying to make is that this should not be considered a panacea for parenting. There are millions of people out there using the internet unsupervised with full access who are not doing anything illegal or "bad". Kids grow up to be these kinds of people with good parenting.
My kids aren't quite old enough to surf the net and get into trouble on purpose so I would probably make random checks on what they're doing. For instance, you wouldn't give a 16 year old the keys to your Ferrari and tell them to do whatever they wanted. You set some rules. The internet is pretty wide open and kids don't always have the best judgement.
What I'm getting at is that most kids are curious and will explore if left on their own. They just need to be instilled with the common sense and good judgement to draw their own boundaries. It's a balance that if done right will enable you as a parent to release control gradually as they get older. I've seen parents actually try to control their kids more and more as they get older and all that happens is everyone gets frustrated and then you get real problems.
I was an original Mac person. Way back with the Apple II, then the Mac, etc. Finally I switched to the PC for all the obvious reasons.
What got me to buy an iPod was the almost sensual way it felt, the intuitive way it operates and the "cool" factor which is worth a lot to me.
Of course, I wouldn't go near it until the PC interface came out and I still wish it supported more formats. I know most of the/. crowd is obsessed with specs and functionality but I think the iPod is a thing of beauty. What Apple did with the mini is add a color choice which instantly makes it legitimate to the eye of a woman. Most women I know are much more color sensitive than men. The small size helps too.
I think secretly I like seeing the Apple logo on my desk full of functional PC crap.
What does hurt kids (and society in general) is the fact that the Janet Jackson incident was really about rape and yet all that was talked about was the boob.
"he's never going to seriously cause problems on the way out like an ex might"
Ha! Don't count on it. Family members can be far more treacherous than business partners who just want to move on. There's usually lot's of old baggage in families.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember the former Soviet Union outlawed all sorts of things. Did it stop people? No, it just pissed them off until...well we all know what happened.
I have to chuckle everytime I see a law or technology attempt to suppress the desires of the people. First we had Napster, then Kazaa, now Bittorrent. The geeks will always win.
Now what worries me is the effects of all this in the interim. The message of freedom being spread throughout the world is spoken by those who consistently attempt to pass laws controlling what we can and can't do.
If you're Exxon, you'll get an exemption for pollution. If you're Joe Blow, you'll get put in jail for fast forwarding through a commercial. What's wrong with this picture?
C'mon people just give it up...
I'm afraid it's going to have to get a lot worse before the revolution begins and heads start rolling. It always works this way, just read your history.
The EBay request to verify account information. I've received this several times. Perhaps the financial institutions don't do much because a small country in Africa isn't going to let U.S. law enforcement take care of the problem. Too much corruption is usually the case.
The maxim I always use is: The company that holds your account never needs to ask you for your password since they already have it.
Something many probably don't know is that your local police dept. probably has a high tech crimes unit. They will investigate and prosecute illegal activites like snooping around your company network. They can be very helpful.
After a move to an apartment, I decided to change my address with my banks, etc. This apparently triggered something which froze all my accounts. I took so long to straighten out that I had to borrow money from friends to make my payments and to live. My broker told me this was a new government requirement from the Patriot Act.
Thing is, I was freaked out that all the freedom we claim to have in this country was suddenly pulled out from under me. Most people don't think they could ever be affected by things like this but I am much more of a civil libertarian because of it.
Large corporations amoral? This is crap. Large corporations are run by people with all sorts of differing moral attitudes. Look at Rupert Murdoch's empire. His news/entertainment is a complete reflection of the man's political and social desires.
While the common wisdom is that corporations will only do what's best for their bottom line, the reality is somewhat murkier.
Hey, that's how you control the people. Seed fear and uncertainty and make sure to divide the people into good and evil groups.
This is a time tested strategy. Honestly, if everyone would read a little bit of history they'd see the pattern. Some leaders are altruistic yet succumb to the whispers(and $$) of the lobbyists. Others, like our fearless leader Bush, have an agenda and will do what ever is necessary to make it happen. Then there are a small minority of leaders with integrity. Sadly, they don't stand much chance usually.
Actually, although I don't like Kerry that much more than Bush, I think he is the lesser of two evils. A government which has trouble passing bills because there's no clear majority is also less likely to infringe on the constitution. Bush has too much power and is willing to wield it to further his administration's own goals. He believe's he's more a benevolent king than a public servant.
Exactly!
You need to have a criminal entity in order to press charges or present a civil suit. If the software is public domain or collaborativewave like sourceforge stuff, then there's no one to go after. It doesn't even matter that the software is deemed "illegal", you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
I think the internet has become the biggest thorn in the side of those who would control us(government and large corporations).
Napster was the first scrificial lamb, then came Kazaa, now we have bittorrent, eDonkey, etc. It will take a police state to stop innovation and technology and even then...
has just gotten better!
If Apple had just kept their mouth shut and made sure that updates to the iPod would break Real's songs, then the consumer would quickly learn that buying a third party product involves risk. This would probably hurt Realnetworks. Of course, this would be a very unscrupulous thing to do but if done surrepitiously, only Real would look bad. Apple would only be guilty of "improving" the software and incidentally breaking Real.
Unfortunately, a series of terrorist events will cause the government to indefinitely "postpone" the election. Of course, martial law will follow and anything that doesn't tote the party line (slashdotters lookout) will be summarily seized and thrown into a black hole. That's the good news.
We will all live happily ever after...
The escrow service idea would work great as long as you can inspect the merchandise prior to accepting shipment and thereby releasing payment. It's more of a hassle but safer.
Bottom line: unless you're buying something from a reputable store on ebay with return policies, customer service, etc, you're taking a chance.
Cheers!
You said that very well! The need for the rights of the individual over the righteousness of those who would impose their ideals are well documented in the early days of the U.S and should never be forgotten(even in times of a so-called war).
I suspect that this is an issue because two companies can have identical balance sheets but one of the companies is mortgaged to the hilt in employee stock options. This effect should be captured and shown. Saying a stock option shouldn't be expensed is like saying a long term liability or investment shouldn't be shown.
Perhaps because stock options behave differently than most traditional expenses they should simply be valued at the time the financials are reported and then adjusted.
"It's like watching a water bucket with a large hole and small hole in the bottom," Russ said. "For some reason, the water is pouring out the small hole six times faster than it's coming out of the large one. Something unusual must be going on inside the bucket."
Doesn't this attempted decryption of the universe break a provision in the DMCA? If that's not applicable, then I'm sure Microsoft will be getting a patent on it any day now.
It's not about legitimacy, it's about control. DirectTV wants control over their broadcasts. They do have the right to only allow paying customers access and they are trying whatever they an to stop piracy.
It's kind of screwed up but it's like the filesharing networks that do have legal uses but in practice are mostly engaged in copyright violations.
Now the RIAA can change their business model ala iTunes, etc. This is the obvious solution. DirectTV doesn't really have an alternative.
In some ways, it's like legal sales of assault rifles or dope smoking accessories. You just have to trust that people are responsible.
College? (laughs)
My motto: Never postpone joy.
I always thought the whole idea of a patent was to protect the inventor of a brilliant idea. There are so many ideas out there and yet few of them are truly novel. It's like patenting the little cardboard ring that they put around a paper coffee cup at Starbucks to make it easier to hold. This isn't a brilliant idea. However the invention of styrofoam is. In one case you are describing a common idea(using an insulator to protect your hands from a hot item) and the other is inventing something that hasn't been thought of before. You could patent a new way of manufacturing of cardboard rings and that would be patenting a novel idea.
So when Amazon patents the one-click approach they are are simply patenting a feature not a novel idea. If they were patenting a new database concept or algorithm, then sure.
It all boils down to how detailed a patent can be and whether that patent is for a novel idea or just a specific application of a common idea.
M
Everquest is governed by what is called a benevolent dictatorship(Sony). Though some may dispute the use of the term benevolent, it nonetheless is a fairly accurate description.
Players have no vote and no legal recourse but are simly at the mercy of the overlords(GMs). This produces a very stable environment at the cost of extreme suppression of thinking "out of the box" which is called an exploit and will get you executed(banned).
I think the Bush administration would like to be the GMs of the United States. Try not to get banned!
Yes, the market will sort it out eventually.
What has happened historically is the rich get richer, the upper class, middle class and poor get poorer. Everyone looks at the rich as an example that the American dream actually works. The government (in the pocket of the rich) tells us that the rich need tax breaks too and proceed to give the rich massive flexibility to screw the average worker. The constitution is "reworked" and "re-interpreted" to fit the definition that suits the rich. The average person believes all this crap until...
The majority of the country is poor and a revolution occurs. Just check the history books.
All able bodied goats, donkeys and cows are to report you your local draft board. We will fight the creeping menace. We will stop the evil...
Excuse me Akhilesh but you are making some pretty bold assumptions.
First of all, we make our own laws and regulations. There is no intrinsic rule to govern the way your information is used other than those rules which our legislature has enacted.
Second, there is always a balance between privacy and your interaction with the world. If you never talk, write, email, etc to anyone, you'll probably never get spam, junk mail, unsolicited phone calls, etc. It's your choice and if you don't like the way it works, then either change the way you communicate or write your congressman to have the laws changed.
Third, even though we have a constitution and laws and the appearance of order the one with more money, influence, power will almost always have the upper hand. I realize this sounds cynical but that's the way it is.
M
It's a pretty slick interface and one that would also be easy to copy. I can't fault Apple for trying to protect against a horde of Asian clone iPods. If a patent is granted and Apple has the common sense to only enforce it in obvious cases of someone copying the interface, then great. If they get the patent and then sue anyone and everyone who has something that sort of works like the iPod, then that sucks.
M
While I certainly agree that you have the right to monitor your kid's net use and can have video cameras in every room of the house, the point many are trying to make is that this should not be considered a panacea for parenting. There are millions of people out there using the internet unsupervised with full access who are not doing anything illegal or "bad". Kids grow up to be these kinds of people with good parenting.
My kids aren't quite old enough to surf the net and get into trouble on purpose so I would probably make random checks on what they're doing. For instance, you wouldn't give a 16 year old the keys to your Ferrari and tell them to do whatever they wanted. You set some rules. The internet is pretty wide open and kids don't always have the best judgement.
What I'm getting at is that most kids are curious and will explore if left on their own. They just need to be instilled with the common sense and good judgement to draw their own boundaries. It's a balance that if done right will enable you as a parent to release control gradually as they get older. I've seen parents actually try to control their kids more and more as they get older and all that happens is everyone gets frustrated and then you get real problems.
M
I was an original Mac person. Way back with the Apple II, then the Mac, etc. Finally I switched to the PC for all the obvious reasons.
/. crowd is obsessed with specs and functionality but I think the iPod is a thing of beauty. What Apple did with the mini is add a color choice which instantly makes it legitimate to the eye of a woman. Most women I know are much more color sensitive than men. The small size helps too.
What got me to buy an iPod was the almost sensual way it felt, the intuitive way it operates and the "cool" factor which is worth a lot to me.
Of course, I wouldn't go near it until the PC interface came out and I still wish it supported more formats. I know most of the
I think secretly I like seeing the Apple logo on my desk full of functional PC crap.
M
What does hurt kids (and society in general) is the fact that the Janet Jackson incident was really about rape and yet all that was talked about was the boob.
"he's never going to seriously cause problems on the way out like an ex might"
Ha! Don't count on it. Family members can be far more treacherous than business partners who just want to move on. There's usually lot's of old baggage in families.
M