Chil man. I thought he was lampooning the anti-digital copy protection brigade who see it as their divine right to make off-air copies of anything they wish.
At a large multi screen chain cinema, it last cost me 5.40, but we also have old fashioned local 2 screen cinemas near me that show films a week or three later and charge 3.00 .
We run both Windows 2000 and Linux here, but Linux is restricted to development of linux based embedded systems.
The view of one IT porffessional I have spoken to is that linux is a vast security hole, his main reasoning being that as the source code of Windows is not publically available, and all the source for linux is easily found, Windows must be intrinsically secure!
Tom is as we said a little bit mad, and knows no more than the rest of us.
BTW people are also talking about Alan Davies (of Jonathan Creek fame), Richard E Grant, and Stephen Fry. Alan said on daytime TV his next project is "Not exactly new".
You're right in the panic sense. I won't personally mourn the death of MSN chat, just the humbug surrounding it on child protection grounds.
If nothing else this story fuels ignorance and fear, much as the distorted coverage of peadophiles and MMR. It just so happens that children will not suffer in personal development terms from their parents having unfounded fears of internet chatrooms, where as fears that prevent parents letting their kids walk to school, play out, or go on adventurous activities will.
The problem is not chatrooms, but that parents don't teach kids how to deal with strangers. They prefer instead to prevent their kids from meeting "strangers" in the first place.
Well sort of: this is the third webcast of it's
type, presumably on their Doctor Who sub-site.
Big Finish, the company producing this, have been making a living out of releasing new Doctor Who stories starring Davison, C Baker, McCoy and McGann on audio CDs for 2 or 3 years now.
Tom Baker has been offered scripts but has declined to participate.
That does not totally invalidate the orignal rant-
however patents are a double edged sword.
They do allow people to protect their ideas so others don't proffeteer leaving the orignial inventor with nothing. However there is a clause which states patents can not be taken out on things that are obvious or common practice.
However it sometimes seems that some patent officials are not literate in technical matters, borne out by the pleas of "don't send us too much jargon" recently heard from the patent office.
Where I used to work there were allways people scrabbling around trying to find "prior art" on spurious patent applications by a particularly patent happy competitor who used patents more as a weapon to limit the capabilities of competitors than to protect their own ideas.
It seems that the US patent office are doing something about such activity- by introducting a charging structure that is the inverse of a bulk discount. They are also hiring more staff from different backgrounds so hopefully more patents on obvious concepts will be refused.
The other thing to hope for is that they will accept prior art from outside the USA!
Slashdot Mirror
Chil man. I thought he was lampooning the anti-digital copy protection brigade who see it as their divine right to make off-air copies of anything they wish.
At a large multi screen chain cinema, it last cost me 5.40, but we also have old fashioned local 2 screen cinemas near me that show films a week or three later and charge 3.00 .
Exactly.
People seem to confuse fair use and rights, with "What we've been able to get away with in the past.
What you state is a simple concept few people seem to grasp.
Er to me it's clearly formatted as an editorial piece rather than a news item which has different formatting, and no by-line for the author etc.
It may interest you to know that in qualatatative studies the BBC has also been shown to be relatively balanced in its reporting.
It's not permitted to patent somthing that's already been done by someone else or an "Obvious" development of an existing concept.
Um.. dual decker VCRs were available from Amstrad in the late 80s.
You could just as easily suggest that paper be burnt to provide heat and power.
We run both Windows 2000 and Linux here, but Linux is restricted to development of linux based embedded systems. The view of one IT porffessional I have spoken to is that linux is a vast security hole, his main reasoning being that as the source code of Windows is not publically available, and all the source for linux is easily found, Windows must be intrinsically secure!
Tom is as we said a little bit mad, and knows no more than the rest of us.
BTW people are also talking about Alan Davies (of Jonathan Creek fame), Richard E Grant, and Stephen Fry. Alan said on daytime TV his next project is "Not exactly new".
Didn't russel T. Davies do Dark Season for Childrens BBC; very Doctor Who like.
There is a prominent British comedy/drama star giving not so subtle hints on daytime TV that it's him
The claim MSN are making is that shutting their chatroom service is in the name of child protection. When as you say it makes no difference.
And this is relevant to the post you are replying to in what way?
If nothing else this story fuels ignorance and fear, much as the distorted coverage of peadophiles and MMR. It just so happens that children will not suffer in personal development terms from their parents having unfounded fears of internet chatrooms, where as fears that prevent parents letting their kids walk to school, play out, or go on adventurous activities will.
The problem is not chatrooms, but that parents don't teach kids how to deal with strangers. They prefer instead to prevent their kids from meeting "strangers" in the first place.
I'm using /. to read up on some interesting, but vaguely work related stuff.
I'm puzzled,
Which clause of your constitution gives you the right to copy other people's output? Seeing as this all seems to be about rights.
Some of this is going way over my head, this seems to me to be people campaigning for more rigourous defense of their rights, not anything else.
I don't think it got anywhere.
Are you talking about the TV Movie or this year's "Real Time"?
Big Finish, the company producing this, have been making a living out of releasing new Doctor Who stories starring Davison, C Baker, McCoy and McGann on audio CDs for 2 or 3 years now.
Tom Baker has been offered scripts but has declined to participate.
That does not totally invalidate the orignal rant- however patents are a double edged sword. They do allow people to protect their ideas so others don't proffeteer leaving the orignial inventor with nothing. However there is a clause which states patents can not be taken out on things that are obvious or common practice. However it sometimes seems that some patent officials are not literate in technical matters, borne out by the pleas of "don't send us too much jargon" recently heard from the patent office. Where I used to work there were allways people scrabbling around trying to find "prior art" on spurious patent applications by a particularly patent happy competitor who used patents more as a weapon to limit the capabilities of competitors than to protect their own ideas. It seems that the US patent office are doing something about such activity- by introducting a charging structure that is the inverse of a bulk discount. They are also hiring more staff from different backgrounds so hopefully more patents on obvious concepts will be refused. The other thing to hope for is that they will accept prior art from outside the USA!