So you vandalize Wikipedia and come here to brag about it, when all along you could have been part of the solution instead of contributing to the problem. Fantastic.
Exactly. For example, Google sponsors Nova, probably the best non-kids-oriented show on PBS. They get an ad at the top of every show, just after the teaser and Nova title card and before the actual episode starts. The ad isn't garish or obnoxious, and it goes along with the declaration that the show is made possible by viewers like me (presumably the ones with more disposable income than me, though). The rest of the show is solid ad-free content.
This is exactly what Wikipedia is doing, and as long as the sponsorship messages are kept in the context of Wikipedia donation drives and not plastered across the articles, I think it's a good thing. They're having a great run in their drive for $1.5M this time around, and a lot of that comes from corporate matching donations.
It sounds to me like the problem isn't with the existence of security cameras, but with the suit-happy civil legal system. Get some real tort reform in there, and people would be protected from frivolous suits filed by evil psycho bitches like that woman.
Content producers wouldn't license their content to Google/YouTube if they weren't getting something out of it (either money or free advertising). And as we've seen in the past, when it comes to money, the content producers would rather make more of it, even in the face of rampant unauthorized duplication, rather than follow through on their threats to take their toys and go home.
The content producers who are going to license their content will ultimately do so without any sort of detection scheme, and the ones who don't license their content can continue to do things the old fashioned way, i.e., DMCA takedown requests.
What amazes me is that we go to such (potential) lengths to inspect people who are entering the country legally, but we can't seem to deal with the zillions of people crossing into the US or overstaying their visas illegally.
Exactly. What we need is "no-tax and no-spend" - or something moving in that direction - but then we wouldn't be able to fund all the pork, entitlements, and poorly-handled military engagements.
Wikipedia wouldn't have this sort of problem if they implemented a policy where you had to register an account in order to edit. Then they could block offending accounts and impose a temporary block on new account creation from an IP address or range whenever a problem arose. This would allow all the established editors to continue editing even if they share an IP address with an entire flotilla of spammers/vandals.
If you R'ed TFA with any modicum of care, you'd see that the article makes no claims about being solely about the US. And I think one would be hard-pressed to rank all (or any) of the items on that list ahead of true gross violations of human rights like what's going on in Darfur.
I don't get it. In this case, the plaintiff isn't allowed to view presumably proprietary/copyrighted source code for a voting machine to go on a fishing expedition to see whether it caused her to lose.
On the other hand, the RIAA gets not only to view the contents of a woman's hard drive to go on a fishing expedition to see whether she was sharing music files, but they get to make their own copy of it, including all that stuff they don't hold the copyright on (Windows, the woman's e-mails, etc.).
It seems to me that what's good for the turkeys oughta be good for us chickens. Or something.
Arbitrage isn't as risk-free as they like to make it sound.
Huh? As long as you ditch your PS3 before the return period ends, the only thing you've risked is a little bit of free time, some gas, and maybe some interest on your credit card. And from all indications, for now you can still turn a profit - just not the mammoth gonzo profits you were hoping for.
If that's how he's doing it - by distributing disc keys - then the studios will just start making shorter runs of the discs from the same master. There'll be, say, a hundred different disc keys for the same movie, and you won't know which one you have until you try them all. An individual or group would have to get hold of all 100 discs (or at least the portions of each that store the disc keys) to compile a complete list.
While it's certainly a move in the right direction, unfortunately, it's far from ideal. The reason I feel no moral compunction about saying this is because of your astute observation that this DRM scheme utterly fails to prevent piracy and instead is unfairly limiting how legitimate customers can use the products they buy. It's likely that this was the primary intent all along.
They're already suffering gazillions of dollars in annual losses due to piracy, if you believe the content cabal. You'd think that would already be priced in, and a successful DRM scheme would cause prices to drop from their current levels.
Of course, when you consider that this is an industry that claims they're protecting artists/performers/actors/crew/etc. and then stabs them in the back by trying to cut their royalties, I think we can rest assured that your prediction will come true.
I know you want to defend the decision of the Democrats (this is Slashdot, after all)
Not really. In fact, I'm hoping that the Blue Dog democrats manage to convince the Republicans to vote for one of them for Speaker, and show Pelosi that the election was a referendum against political extremism.
I was watching the late night talk shows last night, when the broadcast was interrupted by a "special news report". Well, unfortunately for them, their sound was screwed up, so I flipped over to the cable news channels. CNN was the only other channel reporting anything about Ford's death, and Anderson Cooper was giving his report over a crapload of stock video of various events in Ford's presidency.
In other words, they've had this queued up and ready to go for some time now. Of course, Ford's health got considerably worse over the course of the past year, so it's not like it's a huge surprise, but it still seems a bit morbid to me.
Bill Clinton's Head:(to Leela) Hey, sugar cookie! You know, legally, nothing I can do counts as sex anymore. Gerald Ford's Head: I apologize for his rudeness, ma'am. He gets this way around meaty looking women. Fry:(to Clinton) Hey, I remember you. I was gonna vote for you one time. But voting isn't cool, so I stayed home alone and got trashed on Listerine. Gerald Ford's Head: Frankly, I've never felt voting to be all that essential to the process. Richard Nixon's Head: No kidding, Ford!
Everything that happens on the floor ends up in the Congressional Record anyway, which is publicly available within a couple days of it happening. It's text, which means it's searchable, which makes it a ton better than video when it comes to accessing what you need. It also includes all the extraneous material that gets included in the record but is never read on the floor.
Many committees provide streaming audio of their open proceedings even if they aren't covered by C-SPAN, but transcripts of committee meetings aren't usually made. Unfortunately, the second most "closed" part of Congress is the numerous committee meetings that are closed to the public. (The first most "closed" part is all the back room dealings that result in 11th hour and 59th minute changes to bills in conference, and I don't expect that to change with the Dems in power, either.)
But the winner in openness (modulo their impartiality) has to be the Supreme Court, who, though they don't televise their proceedings, now make transcripts of arguments available within a couple of hours of the event.
Professor Helbing (as mentioned on that page) gave a talk at ALife X this past year. Normally, we're all about artificial biology and dynamical systems and stuff like that, so Helbing considered himself something of an outsider. But the emergent properties of traffic flow and the dynamical systems involved were actually a quite natural fit with our normal areas of research in the artificial life community.
He talked some about vehicle traffic, but focused more on people traffic. For example, he spoke about problems with people traffic at Mecca, where millions of people arrive at the same time to perform a ritual which essentially involves walking to the center of a large arena and throwing pebbles at some pillars that represent the Devil. The way the arena is set up was conducive to massive traffic jams of people as well as deadly stampedes. At the time, as I recall, Helbing and his team recommended replacing the traditional pillars with wall segments which would afford pilgrims a wider opportunity to perform the ritual. Officials there also built a second layer of walkway near the wall segments to afford more traffic flow.
Of course, this didn't solve the problem of the fairly narrow entrance and exit to the facility, and stampedes in those areas still occur, though with less frequency.
Slashdot Mirror
So you vandalize Wikipedia and come here to brag about it, when all along you could have been part of the solution instead of contributing to the problem. Fantastic.
I was going to make a Johnnie Cochran joke, but I couldn't think of any programming languages that would make a good pun.
Exactly. For example, Google sponsors Nova, probably the best non-kids-oriented show on PBS. They get an ad at the top of every show, just after the teaser and Nova title card and before the actual episode starts. The ad isn't garish or obnoxious, and it goes along with the declaration that the show is made possible by viewers like me (presumably the ones with more disposable income than me, though). The rest of the show is solid ad-free content.
This is exactly what Wikipedia is doing, and as long as the sponsorship messages are kept in the context of Wikipedia donation drives and not plastered across the articles, I think it's a good thing. They're having a great run in their drive for $1.5M this time around, and a lot of that comes from corporate matching donations.
It sounds to me like the problem isn't with the existence of security cameras, but with the suit-happy civil legal system. Get some real tort reform in there, and people would be protected from frivolous suits filed by evil psycho bitches like that woman.
Content producers wouldn't license their content to Google/YouTube if they weren't getting something out of it (either money or free advertising). And as we've seen in the past, when it comes to money, the content producers would rather make more of it, even in the face of rampant unauthorized duplication, rather than follow through on their threats to take their toys and go home.
The content producers who are going to license their content will ultimately do so without any sort of detection scheme, and the ones who don't license their content can continue to do things the old fashioned way, i.e., DMCA takedown requests.
"Don't whiz on the Electric Fence!"
What amazes me is that we go to such (potential) lengths to inspect people who are entering the country legally, but we can't seem to deal with the zillions of people crossing into the US or overstaying their visas illegally.
I am very optimistic that Condoleeza Rice will continue to displace 129,000 tons of salty brine
Does she have 6000 hulls?
Exactly. What we need is "no-tax and no-spend" - or something moving in that direction - but then we wouldn't be able to fund all the pork, entitlements, and poorly-handled military engagements.
Wikipedia wouldn't have this sort of problem if they implemented a policy where you had to register an account in order to edit. Then they could block offending accounts and impose a temporary block on new account creation from an IP address or range whenever a problem arose. This would allow all the established editors to continue editing even if they share an IP address with an entire flotilla of spammers/vandals.
I'm just hoping that the tax-and-spend liberals aren't our only alternative.
when the article is about the US
If you R'ed TFA with any modicum of care, you'd see that the article makes no claims about being solely about the US. And I think one would be hard-pressed to rank all (or any) of the items on that list ahead of true gross violations of human rights like what's going on in Darfur.
I don't get it. In this case, the plaintiff isn't allowed to view presumably proprietary/copyrighted source code for a voting machine to go on a fishing expedition to see whether it caused her to lose.
On the other hand, the RIAA gets not only to view the contents of a woman's hard drive to go on a fishing expedition to see whether she was sharing music files, but they get to make their own copy of it, including all that stuff they don't hold the copyright on (Windows, the woman's e-mails, etc.).
It seems to me that what's good for the turkeys oughta be good for us chickens. Or something.
Actually, if you type the numbers they read out into your calculator and turn it upside down, it spells out "BOOBS".
Arbitrage isn't as risk-free as they like to make it sound.
Huh? As long as you ditch your PS3 before the return period ends, the only thing you've risked is a little bit of free time, some gas, and maybe some interest on your credit card. And from all indications, for now you can still turn a profit - just not the mammoth gonzo profits you were hoping for.
I, for one, welcome our new robotic underlords.
There is a lot of potential to know if people have been looking at specific sites.
The only sites I look at are Slashdot and pron, so put that in your database and smoke it.
If that's how he's doing it - by distributing disc keys - then the studios will just start making shorter runs of the discs from the same master. There'll be, say, a hundred different disc keys for the same movie, and you won't know which one you have until you try them all. An individual or group would have to get hold of all 100 discs (or at least the portions of each that store the disc keys) to compile a complete list.
While it's certainly a move in the right direction, unfortunately, it's far from ideal. The reason I feel no moral compunction about saying this is because of your astute observation that this DRM scheme utterly fails to prevent piracy and instead is unfairly limiting how legitimate customers can use the products they buy. It's likely that this was the primary intent all along.
They're already suffering gazillions of dollars in annual losses due to piracy, if you believe the content cabal. You'd think that would already be priced in, and a successful DRM scheme would cause prices to drop from their current levels.
Of course, when you consider that this is an industry that claims they're protecting artists/performers/actors/crew/etc. and then stabs them in the back by trying to cut their royalties, I think we can rest assured that your prediction will come true.
I know you want to defend the decision of the Democrats (this is Slashdot, after all)
Not really. In fact, I'm hoping that the Blue Dog democrats manage to convince the Republicans to vote for one of them for Speaker, and show Pelosi that the election was a referendum against political extremism.
You know what's really amusing about that?
I was watching the late night talk shows last night, when the broadcast was interrupted by a "special news report". Well, unfortunately for them, their sound was screwed up, so I flipped over to the cable news channels. CNN was the only other channel reporting anything about Ford's death, and Anderson Cooper was giving his report over a crapload of stock video of various events in Ford's presidency.
In other words, they've had this queued up and ready to go for some time now. Of course, Ford's health got considerably worse over the course of the past year, so it's not like it's a huge surprise, but it still seems a bit morbid to me.
And in response, an obligatory Futurama quote:
Bill Clinton's Head: (to Leela) Hey, sugar cookie! You know, legally, nothing I can do counts as sex anymore.
Gerald Ford's Head: I apologize for his rudeness, ma'am. He gets this way around meaty looking women.
Fry: (to Clinton) Hey, I remember you. I was gonna vote for you one time. But voting isn't cool, so I stayed home alone and got trashed on Listerine.
Gerald Ford's Head: Frankly, I've never felt voting to be all that essential to the process.
Richard Nixon's Head: No kidding, Ford!
Everything that happens on the floor ends up in the Congressional Record anyway, which is publicly available within a couple days of it happening. It's text, which means it's searchable, which makes it a ton better than video when it comes to accessing what you need. It also includes all the extraneous material that gets included in the record but is never read on the floor.
Many committees provide streaming audio of their open proceedings even if they aren't covered by C-SPAN, but transcripts of committee meetings aren't usually made. Unfortunately, the second most "closed" part of Congress is the numerous committee meetings that are closed to the public. (The first most "closed" part is all the back room dealings that result in 11th hour and 59th minute changes to bills in conference, and I don't expect that to change with the Dems in power, either.)
But the winner in openness (modulo their impartiality) has to be the Supreme Court, who, though they don't televise their proceedings, now make transcripts of arguments available within a couple of hours of the event.
Hehe, that applet is a lot of fun to play with.
Professor Helbing (as mentioned on that page) gave a talk at ALife X this past year. Normally, we're all about artificial biology and dynamical systems and stuff like that, so Helbing considered himself something of an outsider. But the emergent properties of traffic flow and the dynamical systems involved were actually a quite natural fit with our normal areas of research in the artificial life community.
He talked some about vehicle traffic, but focused more on people traffic. For example, he spoke about problems with people traffic at Mecca, where millions of people arrive at the same time to perform a ritual which essentially involves walking to the center of a large arena and throwing pebbles at some pillars that represent the Devil. The way the arena is set up was conducive to massive traffic jams of people as well as deadly stampedes. At the time, as I recall, Helbing and his team recommended replacing the traditional pillars with wall segments which would afford pilgrims a wider opportunity to perform the ritual. Officials there also built a second layer of walkway near the wall segments to afford more traffic flow.
Of course, this didn't solve the problem of the fairly narrow entrance and exit to the facility, and stampedes in those areas still occur, though with less frequency.
And here I thought you were going for, "My RFID is my passport. Verify me."