IANAL. In fact, this is the first I've heard of Noerr-Pennington, and what little I've learned in the last 15 minutes is from reading a pretty nifty Federal Trade Commission staff report (PDF warning).
Anyways, one of the branches of descent of this doctrine (California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited) protects court action (lawsuits) from antitrust enforcement (on the basis that petitioning the government is a 1st Amendment protected activity, even if anticompetitive, and a lawsuit is a petition to the judicial branch.)
So... the angle seems to be that somehow, the RIAA's original lawsuit was protected speech, and immune to countersuit from an antitrust angle. Is antitrust or pro-competition an element of Anderson's countersuit? That might be the in.
(Also, the doctrine has a "sham exception", where petition which is intended primarily to delay, vex, or interfere with a competitor, rather than as sincere petition to government, is not protected. Very interesting....)
But again, I AM NOT A LAWYER. Not much of this makes sense to me.
Do you mean, little pieces of paper with the words "STOCK CERTIFICATE" printed on them? Tangible, yes. Valuable, no, unless you really really really have to wipe your butt. Oh, the financial value of those? Completely intangible and immaterial. A number in a computer. A fantasy, supported by the biggest case of mutual willing suspension of disbelief ever.
wealth
More of the same. Please display the tangible representation of your net wealth. (I'd atwitter with suspense at what the physical manifestation of a negative net worth would be.)
houses
Ah, sticks of shaped pine and slabs of reformed pulverized stone. Or maybe property? Rights to a piece of ground? Which rights? Mineral? Water? Unfettered use of the topographic plane surface of the plat? (I mean, that's how property is described, right? A 2-dimensional descriptor.) That's tangible. No, wait, it isn't.
boats
OK, that's tangible. That's material. Copyright can't be compared to nautical vessels. Check.
Really, you are naively neglecting one critical fact: "ownership" is a fiction, mutually agreed, bound by social contract, and protected by state force. Pretending any kind of property ownership is "natural" and "inherent" is self-deluded, and arguing it is equally deluded or misleading. Therefore, if society has decided that intellectual property is property, you are welcome to disagree as long as you're willing to be wrong, because you aren't making the rules. I'm sure the squatter on the back acres of some rich guy's property would agree with you, because they also disagree with society's definition of property (in this case, "real estate"), but that doesn't make them right either.
But I'm not touching 9.04. I'm sticking with LTSs because I like being able to use my system, not fix assorted weird system problems created by a non-LTS upgrade. YMMV.
It's kinda unnerving. I've noticed that in the U.S., most of the "smart money" is on buying people fish, rather than teaching them to fish. It doesn't make any obvious sense, if you try to make rational assumptions about intentions and goals. But if you try to make other assumptions about intentions and goals.... well, paranoia and conspiracy theories bloom rampant in that direction.
Actually, Hawking's observed photon trace virtualized into a Hawking-antiHawking pair. AntiHawking fell into a black hole, and we're recovering Hawking.
I'm slightly surprised a warrant was required for this.
Well, IANAL, but since I'm sure this is leading to a criminal prosecution, I can't imagine otherwise. Arguably, the GWOT has encouraged procedural end-runs on Constitutional protections, but such plays have apparently always foreclosed any legal pursuit after the fact. Unless you imagine the cable-cutting 'tards winding up in whatever replaces Gitmo, the warrant would be a dead-on necessity. Even the most feeble and overtaxed public defender would be able to score big on warrantless datatapping.
That's a good point. The smugness evident upthread makes it clear that advocates of a public-transport-centric lifestyle have an answer to every point of view that doesn't agree with theirs. The fact that we car-driving carbon-spewing troglodytes don't immediately fall into line must be terribly frustrating.
The worst atrocities are visited on "the masses" by the "enlightened minority." acting in "the public best interests".
So your answer is, "Our stuff rox, if yours isn't working it's your fault."
Weak.
"Your snark is well constructed, but logically inert. F5 stuff handles the biggest loads going. Name a vendor that can compete on pps, thruput or other performance stat. Then show evidence from a repeatable, reasonable test rather than benchmarketing."
-1, off-topic. (And also -1, marketing.)
He's not talking about throughput, other than the fact that in his specific case, BIG-IP doesn't have it. Corner case, exceptional case, freak accident? Sure. We'll stipulate that. But also valid. Statistical evaluation is the tool of marketing. The current, real-world, bare-metal case at hand is reality. "It usually works" is unacceptable. "It works for everyone but you" is even worse.
If what you need is simple load balancing, you don't need F5. Many situations require more. And yes, the F5 solution is more integrated in a meaningful way than a chain of separate proxies.
"integrated in a meaningful way" isn't particularly meaningful, except in a market-buzzword sense. Care to cite concrete examples of how integration improves throughput in BIG-IP products?
Now, all that said, I generally like F5 products. I've been in large military data centers where the load-balancer of choice was BIG-IP, and almost always it worked out well. Performance was good, reliability was good, and it certainly made DoD PKI easy to deploy.
But your response would have been completely unacceptable if we had a problem with our F5 products and you were handling our case. Entirely blaming the customer for the joint (customer and tech) inability to resolve a crippling problem is just wrong.
How many of these appliances are based on Linux or BSD?
Well, ironically (and yet apropos at the same time), F5 BIG-IP products. (Currently, Linux; in an earlier incarnation, they ran BSDi; the organization I worked for had a few of these installed at that time.)
But it's not a tax on commerce. It's a tax on use. "Use" and "Commerce" look nothing alike. They aren't pronounced the same at all. "Use" taxation is on the basis that you use that thing you brought across state lines. And how do we valuate that property that you're using? Hmm... maybe, what it sells for. A percentage of the sales price in the state you brought it in from. And since you bought it there, you even have the receipt that tells you what the basis of taxation will be!
Yes, the reasoning is specious, fatuous, and bogus. But the shallowest of rationalizations seem to work out just fine in matters of taxation, as long as the government is the one doing the rationalizing.
I wonder what happens if you buy a thing in one state and never use it in your state of residence. Will they charge non-use tax?
*If you haven't yet, buy the song or the album. Jonathon Coulton's a genius and ought to be making more money than all of RIAA and its ass-ociated labels combined. And I like Spiff's videos for Coulton's music. Somehow, much of Jonathan's music seems to work very well as WoW machinima.
I don't know why GP poster would make an off-topic reference to an obscure and forgettable movie less than 2 years old. But the Slashdot moves in mysterious ways, and its ways are not our ways.
Well, the support apparatus would be slightly less suspicious than removing dismembered body parts from your backpack. Anyone in a position to become suspicious at said checkpoint probably won't wait to examine the plumbing before deciding the disembodied human hand is...suspicious...a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL. In fact, this is the first I've heard of Noerr-Pennington, and what little I've learned in the last 15 minutes is from reading a pretty nifty Federal Trade Commission staff report (PDF warning).
Anyways, one of the branches of descent of this doctrine (California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited) protects court action (lawsuits) from antitrust enforcement (on the basis that petitioning the government is a 1st Amendment protected activity, even if anticompetitive, and a lawsuit is a petition to the judicial branch.)
So... the angle seems to be that somehow, the RIAA's original lawsuit was protected speech, and immune to countersuit from an antitrust angle. Is antitrust or pro-competition an element of Anderson's countersuit? That might be the in.
(Also, the doctrine has a "sham exception", where petition which is intended primarily to delay, vex, or interfere with a competitor, rather than as sincere petition to government, is not protected. Very interesting....)
But again, I AM NOT A LAWYER. Not much of this makes sense to me.
All the things you mention are MATERIAL THINGS.
Really.
Do you mean, little pieces of paper with the words "STOCK CERTIFICATE" printed on them? Tangible, yes. Valuable, no, unless you really really really have to wipe your butt. Oh, the financial value of those? Completely intangible and immaterial. A number in a computer. A fantasy, supported by the biggest case of mutual willing suspension of disbelief ever.
More of the same. Please display the tangible representation of your net wealth. (I'd atwitter with suspense at what the physical manifestation of a negative net worth would be.)
Ah, sticks of shaped pine and slabs of reformed pulverized stone. Or maybe property? Rights to a piece of ground? Which rights? Mineral? Water? Unfettered use of the topographic plane surface of the plat? (I mean, that's how property is described, right? A 2-dimensional descriptor.) That's tangible. No, wait, it isn't.
OK, that's tangible. That's material. Copyright can't be compared to nautical vessels. Check.
Really, you are naively neglecting one critical fact: "ownership" is a fiction, mutually agreed, bound by social contract, and protected by state force. Pretending any kind of property ownership is "natural" and "inherent" is self-deluded, and arguing it is equally deluded or misleading. Therefore, if society has decided that intellectual property is property, you are welcome to disagree as long as you're willing to be wrong, because you aren't making the rules. I'm sure the squatter on the back acres of some rich guy's property would agree with you, because they also disagree with society's definition of property (in this case, "real estate"), but that doesn't make them right either.
A new kind of science is srs bzns.
Me too!
Kubuntu. Nice cool KDE blue.
But I'm not touching 9.04. I'm sticking with LTSs because I like being able to use my system, not fix assorted weird system problems created by a non-LTS upgrade. YMMV.
It's kinda unnerving. I've noticed that in the U.S., most of the "smart money" is on buying people fish, rather than teaching them to fish. It doesn't make any obvious sense, if you try to make rational assumptions about intentions and goals. But if you try to make other assumptions about intentions and goals.... well, paranoia and conspiracy theories bloom rampant in that direction.
But of course, it was designed and built for them by someone else. Kinda like some of their cars.
I've been looking for a computer that could fetch me a beer
Maybe use "sudo" next time?
Reason with them.
But please, seriously, shut the fuck up. On the Internet. Feel free to blather on your radios.
Quoth the slashbot. On the Internet.
+1 Ironic (and not in the Morissette sense)
Hell, there's no sane reason amateur radio shouldn't be a low-capacity emergency part of the Internet.
You should probably work out your deep-seated issues with your daddy someplace else. Rather than on the Internet.
Actually, Hawking's observed photon trace virtualized into a Hawking-antiHawking pair. AntiHawking fell into a black hole, and we're recovering Hawking.
There is no centrifugal force; there is no centripetal force; there is no free-fall.
Those satellites remain up there because they rightly fear returning to Chuck Norris.
I'm slightly surprised a warrant was required for this.
Well, IANAL, but since I'm sure this is leading to a criminal prosecution, I can't imagine otherwise. Arguably, the GWOT has encouraged procedural end-runs on Constitutional protections, but such plays have apparently always foreclosed any legal pursuit after the fact. Unless you imagine the cable-cutting 'tards winding up in whatever replaces Gitmo, the warrant would be a dead-on necessity. Even the most feeble and overtaxed public defender would be able to score big on warrantless datatapping.
That's a good point. The smugness evident upthread makes it clear that advocates of a public-transport-centric lifestyle have an answer to every point of view that doesn't agree with theirs. The fact that we car-driving carbon-spewing troglodytes don't immediately fall into line must be terribly frustrating.
The worst atrocities are visited on "the masses" by the "enlightened minority." acting in "the public best interests".
Bobby Tables, is that you?
So your answer is, "Our stuff rox, if yours isn't working it's your fault."
Weak.
"Your snark is well constructed, but logically inert. F5 stuff handles the biggest loads going. Name a vendor that can compete on pps, thruput or other performance stat. Then show evidence from a repeatable, reasonable test rather than benchmarketing."
-1, off-topic. (And also -1, marketing.)
He's not talking about throughput, other than the fact that in his specific case, BIG-IP doesn't have it. Corner case, exceptional case, freak accident? Sure. We'll stipulate that. But also valid. Statistical evaluation is the tool of marketing. The current, real-world, bare-metal case at hand is reality. "It usually works" is unacceptable. "It works for everyone but you" is even worse.
If what you need is simple load balancing, you don't need F5. Many situations require more. And yes, the F5 solution is more integrated in a meaningful way than a chain of separate proxies.
"integrated in a meaningful way" isn't particularly meaningful, except in a market-buzzword sense. Care to cite concrete examples of how integration improves throughput in BIG-IP products?
Now, all that said, I generally like F5 products. I've been in large military data centers where the load-balancer of choice was BIG-IP, and almost always it worked out well. Performance was good, reliability was good, and it certainly made DoD PKI easy to deploy.
But your response would have been completely unacceptable if we had a problem with our F5 products and you were handling our case. Entirely blaming the customer for the joint (customer and tech) inability to resolve a crippling problem is just wrong.
Linux, now. Formerly BSDi BSD/OS, but Wind River Systems bought out BSDi in 2001 and pretty much EOL'd BSD/OS by 2004.
Linky
How many of these appliances are based on Linux or BSD?
Well, ironically (and yet apropos at the same time), F5 BIG-IP products. (Currently, Linux; in an earlier incarnation, they ran BSDi; the organization I worked for had a few of these installed at that time.)
There is no cow level, man!
Actually, there is one. And Hellcows walk around on hind... hooves.. wielding nasty polearms. So the genetic engineering must have worked. Poor Wirt.
That still leaves 10% screwing around time - with no productivity lost and enormous power savings!
Well, actually, that still leaves 20% screwing around time, since that number (as a floor) is as immutable as 3.1415927 and 299,792,458
But who's gonna notice a 10% hit in productivity?
But it's not a tax on commerce. It's a tax on use. "Use" and "Commerce" look nothing alike. They aren't pronounced the same at all. "Use" taxation is on the basis that you use that thing you brought across state lines. And how do we valuate that property that you're using? Hmm... maybe, what it sells for. A percentage of the sales price in the state you brought it in from. And since you bought it there, you even have the receipt that tells you what the basis of taxation will be!
Yes, the reasoning is specious, fatuous, and bogus. But the shallowest of rationalizations seem to work out just fine in matters of taxation, as long as the government is the one doing the rationalizing.
I wonder what happens if you buy a thing in one state and never use it in your state of residence. Will they charge non-use tax?
In pieces, I bet
Meh, it takes 3 seconds to type and submit 4 words and 30 seconds waiting for slashcode to stop spazzing out
but does it have half-monkey half-pony monsters? Hungry wolves patrolling the grounds?
Whadday mean, it's not inside a mountain? Color me "meh."
Give me Skullcrusher Mountain* any day.
*If you haven't yet, buy the song or the album. Jonathon Coulton's a genius and ought to be making more money than all of RIAA and its ass-ociated labels combined. And I like Spiff's videos for Coulton's music. Somehow, much of Jonathan's music seems to work very well as WoW machinima.
No, I think you misunderstood GP's comment title.
It's an reference to one of Kelsey Grammer's many movie roles: Police Detective Brunner in Even Money.
I don't know why GP poster would make an off-topic reference to an obscure and forgettable movie less than 2 years old. But the Slashdot moves in mysterious ways, and its ways are not our ways.
Well, the support apparatus would be slightly less suspicious than removing dismembered body parts from your backpack. Anyone in a position to become suspicious at said checkpoint probably won't wait to examine the plumbing before deciding the disembodied human hand is...suspicious...a bit.