Do i ever feel stupid about the copywrite thing, i suppose I should use preview.
But your second point is kind of a gray area. Profit is not a deciding factor in copyrights, I cannot make a copy and give it out to someone, regardless of whether i charge for it or not. The idea of making a copy for yourself has only come up in the last 30 years, and while nothing has ever been done to directly stop it, it is not guaranteed under copyright law.
In Canada these things are under the jurisdiction of cancopy - http://www.cancopy.com/
There seems to be some misconceptions about fair use around here. In the US and most other western countries, you have the legal right to copy portions of copywrited work for certain purposes. Thats is, you have the right to photocopy portions of a book, or use part of a song in a presentation. I'm sure someone else could provide more information of the detail of how much.
However there is no right guaranteeing that you can use this, that is a copywrite holder has the right to try and prevent the fair use of his work, however the copywrite holder has no legal was to prevent fair use. Even the DMCA and the whateverthehellthehollingsbilliscalledtoday do not try and prevent fair use, but they make it harder to be able to use it 'fairly', while trying to prevent it being used unfairly.
This is very much like free speech, you have the right to say whatever you want, but no right to be heard (ie published).
Obviously fair use is in everyones best intrest, it can only help publicize work and it gives people the ability to use portions of it, but it is a casualty of trying to prevent non-fair use.
Actually it is mostly about hatred of freedom. They do not hate the US for being in the region, they hate them for keeping progressive values in the region. Saudi Arabias governent, while still a monachy is far more progressive than that of iraq, iran and other countries with similar oil wealth. They do not use enforce fundimentalist islamic laws.
To the extreamists the Americans are much like the jews were to the nazis, a place to point the discontent of the citizens. Just as emmanul goldstein was in 1984.
The only way to fight terrorism is through education, however that will not happen under an extreamist government. The only way to fix it is to oust the current government and provide a substantial amount of international aid. That is what is happening now, and must happen.
Maybe its me, but something seems kinda strange with this situation. What he seems to be saying is "Reverse engineering is ok, but don't reverse engineer my code."
Creating a struct is a type of engineering, and creating ones own version of it is simply reverse engineering. It is unfair to believe the rules change just because you decided to let others see it. You just did a worse job of protecting your IP than the cuecat people who slashdot laughted at.
And for those of you who think that sturcture defs would be protected should quit whining about fair use.
The major problem here is the exact same as as for every other digital version of a phyical product, and that is that once you have your product you can retain a copy and give it to twenty friends, where as with a physical copy only one friend can have it at a time, and you cannot, at least not for free.
A system to sell content online, while letting both the publisher and the consumer have to same rights they do with pysical media is very difficult to find. A completely new model will have to be created, and supported by law. It will require both parties to give up some rights.
Many people believe that they should have all the rights that they currently have under copyright law, plus the publisher should give up more of theirs, but the only way that online content will ever work is if both sides give up something.
Giving up the ability to lend is not that bad if the cost is far less, as it should be without the physical cost. At the same time the publisher must not raise the cost of the content.
Thats the problem with all government companies in Canada. If the CBC was to actually show cultural programming, then I would have a lot less problem giving them more of my taxes, but instead they create drama series, sitcoms and other losy types of shows that CTV and global are already producing.
Stop trying to make money and put the money you get to good use.
There is no point in the government paying to compete with the private sector, that is exactly what is happening here.
If you don't mind paying the extra cash, and don't need to use windows apps, sun workstations are often made without fans. The high end ones are some of the best quality computers that you can get.
Well if they were the sole authors they have the right to change the licence and release future code under without the source. But all previous code will still be under the gpl and you cannot retroactivly change the licence.
Re:Could this be used as a "legitimate use of p2p"
on
Swarmcast GPLed
·
· Score: 2
True peer to peer is a terrible way to distribute anything important. It becomes harder to prove the validity of anything. I'm sure md5 could help, but a series of high speed mirrors would work better.
The courts would laugh at this. It is distributing content that is legal to be distributed. That is the issue with napster, not peer to peer file sharing. In fact I used to get all my mp3 in a client/server setup.
The Americans eventually did join in on the Dresden bombing, but it was the only time they did it in the european theatre. In Japan it was used from quite late in the war until the time of the nuclear bombs, which made it unnecessary. This is also why the nukes were justified on the basis of saving Japanese lives.
Actually the US funded the Germans before the rise of hitler. At the same time as the French were driving the them into facism. The French tried to milk every last drop out of their WWI victory, a war ended by the influx of fresh Americans. The nazis were not funded by Americans.
And the Americans had a major influence in the European theater. They were also the only country to hold out on carpet bombing.
While its fun to pretend the Americans are always bad, this is not real. You must learn to seperate joking from reality.
Please use this responsibly. This princepal already has a great deal of stress, and probably some guilt, and does not need a bunch of semi-informed people accusing him of being responable for the kids death.
Why would they reconsider. It is like banning forks in school because someone was killed with one. Millions of kids have been suspended, a very, very small number will kill themselves.
When I was a kid I was in this situation many times, at least one time it was this bad. I was angry, I blamed others, I blamed myself, I kicked, I screamed, but never did I consider killing myself. The final straw was the suspension, but if it had not been that then it would have been something else.
Well if it was a major break in, which is criminal, then 10 days is justified. You have to understand that this is the real world, and things like this are taken seriously.
It might be easy to blame the suspension, but the kid almost certainly had emotional problems, and the suspension is not to blame at all.
this should not even be on slashdot, it is very sad, but nothing to do with technology, and it happens every day.
Haha, i've been waiting for that one. And it came from the man who calls himself unreasonable, and now links to the moronic mike moore us government in exile page. Not that it was flamebait.
Progress does not depend on unreasonable people, it is based solely on reasonable people. How far did nazi germany get, what about soviet russia, maybe the great leap forward, the early french revolution?
In trying to adapt the world to yourself you leave out the others who disagree, the only way to get your way is then violence. That is why we will never see a democratic facist or communist government.
Progress, and democracy comes from those who do not try to adapt the world solely for themseleves, but using reason take into account the needs of all people.
And while in your closed minded world there is only proof against the effectiveness of 'censorware', in the real world it is effective. Until you have a constitutional right to view all internet material, the government has the right to mandate filtering software for connections they help pay for.
Moderators, please do not moderate me down because you disagree.
In a democracy there are two sources of protection. One is the courts, and they are ideally not influenced by public opinion. The second in from the legistative body, and they should ideally be influenced by public opinion. In order for the majority to protect the rights of the minority they must not only see why it is important, but _understand_ why it is important.
The only way that you're rights will ever be protected is if the mainstream understands the importance of it. Protesting moves in the opposite direction, and if large enough, with the possibility of 'mob mentality' taking over, you will lose all credibility.
Trying to seperate yourself from the mainstream may make you feel superior, but it will get you nowheres.
Protesting like this does nothing except isolating them from the mainstream. Without mainstream support, all that they are is a group of extreamist nuts who will ever be taken seriously in a democratic country.
Another problem is that while some thing, like reverse engineering restrictions are bad, goes futher, into things that most people disagree with.
If you ever want to be taken seriously, you must take a more reasonable stance.
As above please do not moderate me down because you disagree with me.
I'm sure the german government could get one, however it is most likely there are some anti-ms people in the german security/computer organizations, and they feel that this is the best way to get around it.
If it is possible to utilize a backdoor, then it is just as possible to use the latest exploit, and they would be better off hiring decent admins.
Hiding hole built into as much software as microsoft has shipped is not trivial.
Its also possible that the german government wants to stimulate its software industry, the US has had policies like this for many years to give american companies advantages.
The first reason could give linux a chance, but the second would most likely be a proprietary solution.
It seems like everyone responding to this thread 'understands' that there are ways to get around file name screening. Yes there are ways, napster knows it and the RIAA knows it, but they don't care.
Why, you may ask?
Its very simple, and represents the problem they have with napster; its simple, mainstream and promotes causal pirating of mp3s.
Many people here remember the days before napster, having to search ftps and sharing them with friends. The RIAA didn't care, its difficult and time consuming. For many people its just not worth the time. That is why this will work.
And i still have opennap.
On a side note, i think this whole article just shows the lack of understanding of human nature 'geeks' and 'nerds' really do have.
Please don't moderate me down because you do not agree with me.
Several points. First of all I think that you should read up on the tax situation and how it is working.
Second, these desicions are made within NASA, and with the cost overrun of the space station, there is just less money to spend on these projects. Why would NASA cut this project? Its simple, the technology has been proven, and in order to make something like this a reallity it will take huge sums of money. When the time comes that NASA needs a new reusable launch vehicle, they will recieve the funding to do it, and it will cost more than expected, just like the shuttle and the space station.
NASA does not like to take on more than one project, and have shown themselves to be best when working towards a finite and defined goal, with little distraction and lots of money.
There is also money in the budget for further development on new technologies, and when the time comes that they are needed, they will be given more funding.
This is how NASA has always worked, regardless of the administration.
Slashdot Mirror
Those are actually types of conflict, not plots. There is a difference.
Do i ever feel stupid about the copywrite thing, i suppose I should use preview.
But your second point is kind of a gray area. Profit is not a deciding factor in copyrights, I cannot make a copy and give it out to someone, regardless of whether i charge for it or not. The idea of making a copy for yourself has only come up in the last 30 years, and while nothing has ever been done to directly stop it, it is not guaranteed under copyright law.
In Canada these things are under the jurisdiction of cancopy - http://www.cancopy.com/
There seems to be some misconceptions about fair use around here. In the US and most other western countries, you have the legal right to copy portions of copywrited work for certain purposes. Thats is, you have the right to photocopy portions of a book, or use part of a song in a presentation. I'm sure someone else could provide more information of the detail of how much.
However there is no right guaranteeing that you can use this, that is a copywrite holder has the right to try and prevent the fair use of his work, however the copywrite holder has no legal was to prevent fair use. Even the DMCA and the whateverthehellthehollingsbilliscalledtoday do not try and prevent fair use, but they make it harder to be able to use it 'fairly', while trying to prevent it being used unfairly.
This is very much like free speech, you have the right to say whatever you want, but no right to be heard (ie published).
Obviously fair use is in everyones best intrest, it can only help publicize work and it gives people the ability to use portions of it, but it is a casualty of trying to prevent non-fair use.
I've seen that sig here for over a year, probably living with his parents
Your opinion fits so well with the slashdot sheep.
-Republicans evil and only concerned with taking away your civil liberties for the hell of it.
-Microsoft should be severely punished because I don't like them.
Blindly following the left is just as stupid as blindly following the right, and it is even worse when you pretend you have a better understanding.
Actually it is mostly about hatred of freedom. They do not hate the US for being in the region, they hate them for keeping progressive values in the region. Saudi Arabias governent, while still a monachy is far more progressive than that of iraq, iran and other countries with similar oil wealth. They do not use enforce fundimentalist islamic laws.
To the extreamists the Americans are much like the jews were to the nazis, a place to point the discontent of the citizens. Just as emmanul goldstein was in 1984.
The only way to fight terrorism is through education, however that will not happen under an extreamist government. The only way to fix it is to oust the current government and provide a substantial amount of international aid. That is what is happening now, and must happen.
Maybe its me, but something seems kinda strange with this situation. What he seems to be saying is "Reverse engineering is ok, but don't reverse engineer my code."
Creating a struct is a type of engineering, and creating ones own version of it is simply reverse engineering. It is unfair to believe the rules change just because you decided to let others see it. You just did a worse job of protecting your IP than the cuecat people who slashdot laughted at.
And for those of you who think that sturcture defs would be protected should quit whining about fair use.
CNN is a news channel owned by the Time Warner, and now the part of the Time Warner AOL company, their name is not part of either companies name.
This also isn't a merger so much as it is one large company buying a share of the assets of another. The rest of AT&Ts opperations would be seperate.
The major problem here is the exact same as as for every other digital version of a phyical product, and that is that once you have your product you can retain a copy and give it to twenty friends, where as with a physical copy only one friend can have it at a time, and you cannot, at least not for free.
A system to sell content online, while letting both the publisher and the consumer have to same rights they do with pysical media is very difficult to find. A completely new model will have to be created, and supported by law. It will require both parties to give up some rights.
Many people believe that they should have all the rights that they currently have under copyright law, plus the publisher should give up more of theirs, but the only way that online content will ever work is if both sides give up something.
Giving up the ability to lend is not that bad if the cost is far less, as it should be without the physical cost. At the same time the publisher must not raise the cost of the content.
Thats the problem with all government companies in Canada. If the CBC was to actually show cultural programming, then I would have a lot less problem giving them more of my taxes, but instead they create drama series, sitcoms and other losy types of shows that CTV and global are already producing.
Stop trying to make money and put the money you get to good use.
There is no point in the government paying to compete with the private sector, that is exactly what is happening here.
If you don't mind paying the extra cash, and don't need to use windows apps, sun workstations are often made without fans. The high end ones are some of the best quality computers that you can get.
Well if they were the sole authors they have the right to change the licence and release future code under without the source. But all previous code will still be under the gpl and you cannot retroactivly change the licence.
True peer to peer is a terrible way to distribute anything important. It becomes harder to prove the validity of anything. I'm sure md5 could help, but a series of high speed mirrors would work better.
The courts would laugh at this. It is distributing content that is legal to be distributed. That is the issue with napster, not peer to peer file sharing. In fact I used to get all my mp3 in a client/server setup.
The Americans eventually did join in on the Dresden bombing, but it was the only time they did it in the european theatre. In Japan it was used from quite late in the war until the time of the nuclear bombs, which made it unnecessary. This is also why the nukes were justified on the basis of saving Japanese lives.
Actually the US funded the Germans before the rise of hitler. At the same time as the French were driving the them into facism. The French tried to milk every last drop out of their WWI victory, a war ended by the influx of fresh Americans. The nazis were not funded by Americans.
And the Americans had a major influence in the European theater. They were also the only country to hold out on carpet bombing.
While its fun to pretend the Americans are always bad, this is not real. You must learn to seperate joking from reality.
Please use this responsibly. This princepal already has a great deal of stress, and probably some guilt, and does not need a bunch of semi-informed people accusing him of being responable for the kids death.
Why would they reconsider. It is like banning forks in school because someone was killed with one. Millions of kids have been suspended, a very, very small number will kill themselves.
When I was a kid I was in this situation many times, at least one time it was this bad. I was angry, I blamed others, I blamed myself, I kicked, I screamed, but never did I consider killing myself. The final straw was the suspension, but if it had not been that then it would have been something else.
Well if it was a major break in, which is criminal, then 10 days is justified. You have to understand that this is the real world, and things like this are taken seriously.
It might be easy to blame the suspension, but the kid almost certainly had emotional problems, and the suspension is not to blame at all.
this should not even be on slashdot, it is very sad, but nothing to do with technology, and it happens every day.
Haha, i've been waiting for that one. And it came from the man who calls himself unreasonable, and now links to the moronic mike moore us government in exile page. Not that it was flamebait.
Progress does not depend on unreasonable people, it is based solely on reasonable people. How far did nazi germany get, what about soviet russia, maybe the great leap forward, the early french revolution?
In trying to adapt the world to yourself you leave out the others who disagree, the only way to get your way is then violence. That is why we will never see a democratic facist or communist government.
Progress, and democracy comes from those who do not try to adapt the world solely for themseleves, but using reason take into account the needs of all people.
And while in your closed minded world there is only proof against the effectiveness of 'censorware', in the real world it is effective. Until you have a constitutional right to view all internet material, the government has the right to mandate filtering software for connections they help pay for.
Moderators, please do not moderate me down because you disagree.
.
Sorry, i accidentally posted as an AC.
In a democracy there are two sources of protection. One is the courts, and they are ideally not influenced by public opinion. The second in from the legistative body, and they should ideally be influenced by public opinion. In order for the majority to protect the rights of the minority they must not only see why it is important, but _understand_ why it is important.
The only way that you're rights will ever be protected is if the mainstream understands the importance of it. Protesting moves in the opposite direction, and if large enough, with the possibility of 'mob mentality' taking over, you will lose all credibility.
Trying to seperate yourself from the mainstream may make you feel superior, but it will get you nowheres.
Protesting like this does nothing except isolating them from the mainstream. Without mainstream support, all that they are is a group of extreamist nuts who will ever be taken seriously in a democratic country.
Another problem is that while some thing, like reverse engineering restrictions are bad, goes futher, into things that most people disagree with.
If you ever want to be taken seriously, you must take a more reasonable stance.
As above please do not moderate me down because you disagree with me.
I'm sure the german government could get one, however it is most likely there are some anti-ms people in the german security/computer organizations, and they feel that this is the best way to get around it.
If it is possible to utilize a backdoor, then it is just as possible to use the latest exploit, and they would be better off hiring decent admins.
Hiding hole built into as much software as microsoft has shipped is not trivial.
Its also possible that the german government wants to stimulate its software industry, the US has had policies like this for many years to give american companies advantages.
The first reason could give linux a chance, but the second would most likely be a proprietary solution.
It seems like everyone responding to this thread 'understands' that there are ways to get around file name screening. Yes there are ways, napster knows it and the RIAA knows it, but they don't care.
Why, you may ask?
Its very simple, and represents the problem they have with napster; its simple, mainstream and promotes causal pirating of mp3s.
Many people here remember the days before napster, having to search ftps and sharing them with friends. The RIAA didn't care, its difficult and time consuming. For many people its just not worth the time. That is why this will work.
And i still have opennap.
On a side note, i think this whole article just shows the lack of understanding of human nature 'geeks' and 'nerds' really do have.
Please don't moderate me down because you do not agree with me.
Several points. First of all I think that you should read up on the tax situation and how it is working.
Second, these desicions are made within NASA, and with the cost overrun of the space station, there is just less money to spend on these projects. Why would NASA cut this project? Its simple, the technology has been proven, and in order to make something like this a reallity it will take huge sums of money. When the time comes that NASA needs a new reusable launch vehicle, they will recieve the funding to do it, and it will cost more than expected, just like the shuttle and the space station.
NASA does not like to take on more than one project, and have shown themselves to be best when working towards a finite and defined goal, with little distraction and lots of money.
There is also money in the budget for further development on new technologies, and when the time comes that they are needed, they will be given more funding.
This is how NASA has always worked, regardless of the administration.