Someone somewhere (I stumbled across his website by accident) actually went and built a basic compiler in assembly from scratch and used it to bootstrap a compiler that could compile GCC; he also used a FPGA he'd designed himself to do it on. His compiled GCC and GNU stock GCC both output an identical GCC when compiling itself, so he concluded that the NSA is not in our programs, compiling our code. Now I just need to find the darned page again.
Try asking a response officer how easy it is to get a team like that to back you up of a Saturday night. It's not. As for the de Menezes killing, there was so much conflicting evidence that it was near impossible to properly assign blame. Tomlinson? The inquiry hasn't reported yet, but there is a lot more going on than we see in that one video. And the police did not want and have not welcomed the photography laws, which have yet to be tested in courts and will most likely fail under human rights law anyway.
It's complex, but basically during the first round of the case, the judge believed that under the Berne Convention, the case should have been judged under UK rules (ie, whether it was copyrighted under UK law). After some back-and-forth, it was decided that it was American copyright law that should apply, but the judge did note that he believed it would still have been the same under UK law. The Wikipedia article on the case goes into some detail.
I don't know if that's the case in America, but certainly not over here. The police are subject to so much oversight and second-guessing it's not funny. And they go out at night armed with a short stick and 25 grams of pepper spray. That's hardly a militarised force. Read some of the British police blogs sometimes - they are very informative reading. I recommend Inspector Gadget as a starting point.
I'm not sure why the Civil War has slipped out of the English consciousness so much over the last hundred years, because it really was an earth-shaking event in British history and it defines British history down to the present day. Anyway, I think you're right up to a point; but on the other hand I think British people do have a good sense of how much is too much - I remember the Poll Tax riots, and I can remember meeting survivors of the Spanish Civil War. When the government does cross the line - as it probaby will, eventually - you'll see something interesting happen.
Yes, but Bridgeman v. Corel is pretty widely followed; it has in been cited in UK cases (indeed, on examination, I note that the judge in Bridgeman held that his ruling would stand under UK law).
Yes, but their dissapearance would prbably involve some sort of event that had a major impact on access to food markets anyway, so the point is rather moot. Look at what Kirchner has done to the Argentine farming community. Argentina might not be in famine or anywhere near it, but they pay more for their food than they should. If she pursues her current policies, it will get worse.
Are there USB turntables that turn in both directions, are fully variable in speed up to 100rpm, including the ability to deal with constant linear velocity, take discs up to half a metre across, with two arms for seperately tracked grooves?
This Supreme Court is just handwaving - it doesn't change very much. As the last court of appeal in the UK, the Law Lords that sit in the Lords were effectively independent anyway. This is just giving them a new home and constitutional separation from the legislature (not that the Lords do much legislating anyway).
There has never been an equivalent of the Corel v. Bridgeman case in the UK - so it is a grey area in UK law. That said, apparently the chances are it would go the other way.
But this kind of test is stupid. If I grabbed one of these portraits off the wall and threw it in a photocopier, do I get copyright on whatever comes out? I should hope not. Likewise, while it may not be easy to photograph one of these works, you are certainly not adding anything to the actual content of the image; indeed, you are actively trying not to. Technical expertise went into creating them, yes. Artistry, no.
Do, please, name one well governed country with stable property rights, a functioning financial systems, and access to world markets, that has ever suffered a famine.
In fairness, the licensing issue is a bit more difficult than that for images. Good fonts are extremely valuable, far more so than any single image. This system involves handing them out on a plate; expect to see a lot of ignorant developers getting shafted by the foundries. That said, I don't think it's a major issue; I suspect we'll see the emergence of a certain class of web-available fonts and the rest will simply not be sold on.
For sites that reject +-address email addresses through gmail, use dots. It's not quite as clear, but if you don't have to do it very often it works. Gmail sees u38cg@gmail.com and u.38.cg@gmail.com as the same address.
It doesn't make much difference. My email address is in the clear, here and everywhere else I post. I average between 300-1000 spam emails a month, and the bulk of that is *still* to the address I used to use to post to Usenet. As far as I can tell, spammers don't scrape the web much any more.
The point is, if you or I did this, it wouldn't *be* a problem. It would be fairly daft, but as far as I know there's nothing to stop you posting a fake review anywhere per se. So there's by extension nothing that the people have done wrng as individuals. This does not mean that a corporation can order its employees to gun down the opposition (though it would make hostile takeovers much more interesting).
Actually, I'm the opposite. I can understand why a normal person would not think through the issues beyond "we need to protect against child porn", misguided though it might be; it's an understandable response. Politicians, on the other hand, are paid to think about exactly these kind of issues and the fact they don't care to exposes their moral bankruptcy.
Slashdot Mirror
Except he went on to become a CS prof...
So how many games did you write that lasted forty years? ;)
Someone somewhere (I stumbled across his website by accident) actually went and built a basic compiler in assembly from scratch and used it to bootstrap a compiler that could compile GCC; he also used a FPGA he'd designed himself to do it on. His compiled GCC and GNU stock GCC both output an identical GCC when compiling itself, so he concluded that the NSA is not in our programs, compiling our code. Now I just need to find the darned page again.
Try asking a response officer how easy it is to get a team like that to back you up of a Saturday night. It's not. As for the de Menezes killing, there was so much conflicting evidence that it was near impossible to properly assign blame. Tomlinson? The inquiry hasn't reported yet, but there is a lot more going on than we see in that one video. And the police did not want and have not welcomed the photography laws, which have yet to be tested in courts and will most likely fail under human rights law anyway.
It's complex, but basically during the first round of the case, the judge believed that under the Berne Convention, the case should have been judged under UK rules (ie, whether it was copyrighted under UK law). After some back-and-forth, it was decided that it was American copyright law that should apply, but the judge did note that he believed it would still have been the same under UK law. The Wikipedia article on the case goes into some detail.
I don't know if that's the case in America, but certainly not over here. The police are subject to so much oversight and second-guessing it's not funny. And they go out at night armed with a short stick and 25 grams of pepper spray. That's hardly a militarised force. Read some of the British police blogs sometimes - they are very informative reading. I recommend Inspector Gadget as a starting point.
I'm not sure why the Civil War has slipped out of the English consciousness so much over the last hundred years, because it really was an earth-shaking event in British history and it defines British history down to the present day. Anyway, I think you're right up to a point; but on the other hand I think British people do have a good sense of how much is too much - I remember the Poll Tax riots, and I can remember meeting survivors of the Spanish Civil War. When the government does cross the line - as it probaby will, eventually - you'll see something interesting happen.
And when did you last shoot a cop in defence of your rights?
Yes, but Bridgeman v. Corel is pretty widely followed; it has in been cited in UK cases (indeed, on examination, I note that the judge in Bridgeman held that his ruling would stand under UK law).
Yes, but their dissapearance would prbably involve some sort of event that had a major impact on access to food markets anyway, so the point is rather moot. Look at what Kirchner has done to the Argentine farming community. Argentina might not be in famine or anywhere near it, but they pay more for their food than they should. If she pursues her current policies, it will get worse.
Are there USB turntables that turn in both directions, are fully variable in speed up to 100rpm, including the ability to deal with constant linear velocity, take discs up to half a metre across, with two arms for seperately tracked grooves?
Mod -1, Made Me Need New Keyboard And Look Like A Fool In Front Of Office.
This Supreme Court is just handwaving - it doesn't change very much. As the last court of appeal in the UK, the Law Lords that sit in the Lords were effectively independent anyway. This is just giving them a new home and constitutional separation from the legislature (not that the Lords do much legislating anyway).
There has never been an equivalent of the Corel v. Bridgeman case in the UK - so it is a grey area in UK law. That said, apparently the chances are it would go the other way.
Facts, they are relevant to your arguments.
But this kind of test is stupid. If I grabbed one of these portraits off the wall and threw it in a photocopier, do I get copyright on whatever comes out? I should hope not. Likewise, while it may not be easy to photograph one of these works, you are certainly not adding anything to the actual content of the image; indeed, you are actively trying not to. Technical expertise went into creating them, yes. Artistry, no.
Do, please, name one well governed country with stable property rights, a functioning financial systems, and access to world markets, that has ever suffered a famine.
In fairness, the licensing issue is a bit more difficult than that for images. Good fonts are extremely valuable, far more so than any single image. This system involves handing them out on a plate; expect to see a lot of ignorant developers getting shafted by the foundries. That said, I don't think it's a major issue; I suspect we'll see the emergence of a certain class of web-available fonts and the rest will simply not be sold on.
For sites that reject +-address email addresses through gmail, use dots. It's not quite as clear, but if you don't have to do it very often it works. Gmail sees u38cg@gmail.com and u.38.cg@gmail.com as the same address.
It doesn't make much difference. My email address is in the clear, here and everywhere else I post. I average between 300-1000 spam emails a month, and the bulk of that is *still* to the address I used to use to post to Usenet. As far as I can tell, spammers don't scrape the web much any more.
The point is, if you or I did this, it wouldn't *be* a problem. It would be fairly daft, but as far as I know there's nothing to stop you posting a fake review anywhere per se. So there's by extension nothing that the people have done wrng as individuals. This does not mean that a corporation can order its employees to gun down the opposition (though it would make hostile takeovers much more interesting).
Whoosh!
In which case you have Asperger's, you cold, unfeeling, emotionally-bereft person you.
Tough shit. No-one said civil liberties were easy to take or defend.
Actually, I'm the opposite. I can understand why a normal person would not think through the issues beyond "we need to protect against child porn", misguided though it might be; it's an understandable response. Politicians, on the other hand, are paid to think about exactly these kind of issues and the fact they don't care to exposes their moral bankruptcy.