I'm thinking the last stanza is also base 3, with digits then represented in unary, but with || indicating a division between the base 3 digits.
So || | | || is "2" with a separation marker on each end.
This would put an anomaly at the end of the second line which could be interpreted as the || being broken across the two lines (so the second line would end with 3 and the third line would start with 3).
Indeed. One ought to be able to discern what they can and can't do by reading the statutes (since the will of the people is represented by the legislature). But there are tons upon tons of "case law" sitting atop that, consisting of judges "interpreting" the statutes per their own political desires. That makes finding out what's legal or illegal virtually unapproachable without the help of a lawyer.
I don't think anybody should be claiming Einstein for their own camp. He changed his mind a lot on this subject over the years, and not just during his childhood.
First, that was NOT the entire's US response to Katrina. It was the feds, not citizen's. Don't forget the rousing response from the State of Louisiana as well as the City of New Orleans. Or, for that matter, their... deftness... in preparing for the situation.
Schools should be places where those interested can get ahead, not some sort of prison. What's amusing about that statement is that those who decide they're not interested in the former are far more likely to end up in the latter.
Besides, PHP programming should be as independent as possible to PHP settings. Fine, that's great. Going forward, people writing for PHP 6 can forget that magic quotes ever existed.
But there is still a lot of code out there written in contemplation that a PHP 4/5 system wasn't installed by the person writing or installing the scripts (such as shared server environments), meaning that the magic quotes setting is immutable for practical purposes. That means that the script author has to check whether the system is using magic quotes and handle the affected input strings accordingly.
In PHP 6 (and 7, 8, 5000, etc.), since magic quotes no longer work, the return value "false" is still the correct answer to a call to get_magic_quotes_gpc. By implementing that function to always return false, there are tons of legacy scripts out there that won't break - scripts that are already correctly written to handle input strings appropriately when magic quotes are off (or nonexistent).
Removing the get_magic_quotes_gpc function altogether seems like the dumb way to handle backwards compatibility, breaking scripts for no good reason. Why not keep the function and just always have it return false?
If downloadable content is such a big part of the game, why do they need install activation anyway? Treat it like a MMOG - create an account, use the account key that comes with game, ban accounts that get shared.
Pirates are going to crack the install activation eventually, but an account system is completely under their control, and it's far less onerous (people create accounts for trivial things on teh Intarweb all the time).
Ah, but you can terminate your license at will, sell the media the software came on (as long as you don't keep any copies for yourself), and then the person who bought it from you can accept the terms of the license on their own.
Selling the media is indeed covered by the first-sale doctrine.
Re:Also tortious contract interference
on
Who Owns Software?
·
· Score: 1
My understanding, though I am not a lawyer, is that the claim requires that the defendant's actions induce one party of a contract to breach that contract. The "test" I've run across reading up on this via Google essentially requires five things: One, a contract exists between the plaintiff and some party; two, the defendant is aware of that contract; three, the defendant commits acts with the intent of inducing the other party to breach the contract; four, such a breach does occur; and five, the plaintiff suffers damages because of the breach.
The only thing at question here is whether MDY intended to induce their customers to breach the contract, i.e., use their software in the process of cheating in World of Warcraft (which is forbidden by the EULA/TOS). The fact that MDY routinely updates their software to counteract changes that Blizzard makes to the game to block programs like Glider, as well as to help their customers avoid detection by Blizzard, would go a long way toward establishing that.
Unless it is clearly spelled out in a binding contract, this idea shouldn't even come up! Even if it is spelled in a contract, it would still be questionable to legal pass. And the contract needs to be entirely up front, and completely rejectable. Not something that you need to break the seal upon just to read, and can't get your money back for breaking the seal. Actually, the WoW EULA probably qualifies. Even if your local software store won't accept the return, Blizzard provides a means of returning the software directly to them for a refund as long as you don't use the account activation key.
This is sort of an extension of prior decisions on EULAs, though - the specific concept of providing a refund after the fact hasn't been tried in court, to my knowledge, but in general, EULAs have been ruled binding when the purchasing party was required to accept the terms before purchase.
Also tortious contract interference
on
Who Owns Software?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Blizzard is also alleging the somewhat more sane claim of tortious contract interference, by saying that Blizzard is engaged in a contractual relationship with its customers, and MDY is willfully interfering, for profit, with that relationship.
The problem for Blizzard is that this claim is far more nebulous in terms of damages. Copyright law includes statutory damages, meaning that they don't actually have to prove that they were damaged, or by how much, if they win on the copyright claim.
Either way, getting injunctive relief against MDY is the most important thing, but if Blizzard can also get a monetary award, then it puts all the other cheat developers on notice that they could end up in very hot water if they don't close up shop. If all Blizzard manages to get is an injunction, however, cheat developers will likely just wait until they actually get sued before they bother to decide whether or not they will shut down their business.
Maybe a linguist can pitch in to explain why tebibyte sounds so awful? Tebibyte-buh: It's bad-buh because-buh it makes-buh you sound-buh like Mushmouth-buh.
The Democrats aren't "good guys" either. For every thing about them that is better than the Republicans, there's something else that's worse. And both of them are weighed down by party politics that prevent true visionary thinking from actually improving the government.
or specifically one eye for a click (Then you could get left and right clicks) I can see it now: all the Apple fanboys poking out one of their eyes to make themselves "compatible".
Dude, those are coming back, I just know it... I suppose anything's possible. I mean, chicks like those bug-eyed clown sunglasses now*, so mullets and aviator shades could always make a comeback.
* Who knows, maybe those actually are somehow cool, and I'm just getting old:P
Slashdot Mirror
I'm thinking the last stanza is also base 3, with digits then represented in unary, but with || indicating a division between the base 3 digits.
So || | | || is "2" with a separation marker on each end.
This would put an anomaly at the end of the second line which could be interpreted as the || being broken across the two lines (so the second line would end with 3 and the third line would start with 3).
Indeed. One ought to be able to discern what they can and can't do by reading the statutes (since the will of the people is represented by the legislature). But there are tons upon tons of "case law" sitting atop that, consisting of judges "interpreting" the statutes per their own political desires. That makes finding out what's legal or illegal virtually unapproachable without the help of a lawyer.
I don't think anybody should be claiming Einstein for their own camp. He changed his mind a lot on this subject over the years, and not just during his childhood.
I'm waiting for a machine that turns on before I actually push the power button.
But there is still a lot of code out there written in contemplation that a PHP 4/5 system wasn't installed by the person writing or installing the scripts (such as shared server environments), meaning that the magic quotes setting is immutable for practical purposes. That means that the script author has to check whether the system is using magic quotes and handle the affected input strings accordingly.
In PHP 6 (and 7, 8, 5000, etc.), since magic quotes no longer work, the return value "false" is still the correct answer to a call to get_magic_quotes_gpc. By implementing that function to always return false, there are tons of legacy scripts out there that won't break - scripts that are already correctly written to handle input strings appropriately when magic quotes are off (or nonexistent).
Removing the get_magic_quotes_gpc function altogether seems like the dumb way to handle backwards compatibility, breaking scripts for no good reason. Why not keep the function and just always have it return false?
*explosion*
Bender: Hey, thanks, Takei, now everybody knows!
Me. I hate them both equally.
If downloadable content is such a big part of the game, why do they need install activation anyway? Treat it like a MMOG - create an account, use the account key that comes with game, ban accounts that get shared.
Pirates are going to crack the install activation eventually, but an account system is completely under their control, and it's far less onerous (people create accounts for trivial things on teh Intarweb all the time).
That's okay. Your vote only counts if you log in.
Ah, but you can terminate your license at will, sell the media the software came on (as long as you don't keep any copies for yourself), and then the person who bought it from you can accept the terms of the license on their own.
Selling the media is indeed covered by the first-sale doctrine.
Okay, you win :)
My understanding, though I am not a lawyer, is that the claim requires that the defendant's actions induce one party of a contract to breach that contract. The "test" I've run across reading up on this via Google essentially requires five things: One, a contract exists between the plaintiff and some party; two, the defendant is aware of that contract; three, the defendant commits acts with the intent of inducing the other party to breach the contract; four, such a breach does occur; and five, the plaintiff suffers damages because of the breach.
The only thing at question here is whether MDY intended to induce their customers to breach the contract, i.e., use their software in the process of cheating in World of Warcraft (which is forbidden by the EULA/TOS). The fact that MDY routinely updates their software to counteract changes that Blizzard makes to the game to block programs like Glider, as well as to help their customers avoid detection by Blizzard, would go a long way toward establishing that.
They don't get that specific, and I've never tried it to find out.
This is sort of an extension of prior decisions on EULAs, though - the specific concept of providing a refund after the fact hasn't been tried in court, to my knowledge, but in general, EULAs have been ruled binding when the purchasing party was required to accept the terms before purchase.
Blizzard is also alleging the somewhat more sane claim of tortious contract interference, by saying that Blizzard is engaged in a contractual relationship with its customers, and MDY is willfully interfering, for profit, with that relationship.
The problem for Blizzard is that this claim is far more nebulous in terms of damages. Copyright law includes statutory damages, meaning that they don't actually have to prove that they were damaged, or by how much, if they win on the copyright claim.
Either way, getting injunctive relief against MDY is the most important thing, but if Blizzard can also get a monetary award, then it puts all the other cheat developers on notice that they could end up in very hot water if they don't close up shop. If all Blizzard manages to get is an injunction, however, cheat developers will likely just wait until they actually get sued before they bother to decide whether or not they will shut down their business.
Hey hey hey!
The Democrats aren't "good guys" either. For every thing about them that is better than the Republicans, there's something else that's worse. And both of them are weighed down by party politics that prevent true visionary thinking from actually improving the government.
Hey, if it means I get to make out with a 23-year-old Ashley Judd, sign me up!
* Who knows, maybe those actually are somehow cool, and I'm just getting old