The newegg support was quite nice in helping m get drives from different batches (overkill, but nice).
It has worked fantastic. Supports timemachine and itunes naively, is a media server (integrates with my segate freeagent theater+ and PS3 seamlessly), the download manager rocks, and all our photo's are served up to the extended family (yea dyndns integration). Also integrates with UPS, external drives, and broadcasts the UPS issue to all my machines on the network. support for everything (and I mean everything.)
Mr. Wizard, and 3 2 1 Contact are fantastic programs. They should be still on TV in syndication now, but sadly they are not. I would also recommend Cosmos w/ Carl Sagan. The Science Cannel has been re broadcasting that series. Hands down the best introductory science documentary series. Mr. Wizard 3-2-1 Contact! Cosmos on the Science Channel
http://radian.org/notebook/first-deployment
Ivan Krstic just posed from Uruguay, where the the first production deployment of the XO just happened.
This is what the Globe should be reporting on, not a frivolous lawsuit!
I find it interesting that this lawsuit is happening just before the first production launch and as Peru signs a deal for 260K machines!
To bad that is not being picked up by major media.
I am sorry, but your post reads like FUD.
Neither language is greater than the other. Each has its strengths and weaknesses.
Please describe the part where Python is lacking? What can you do in perl that you can not in python? I love and use both languages on a daily basis. I know their strengths and weaknesses. While there are many tasks for which I feel perl is better, I know of none that can not also be done in python.
both groups are going through major redesigns (Perl6 Python3000) and both will excel in solving the types of problems they are good at.
You mention internationalization. Python has full unicode support, and yes there are some issues which older libraries. Perl has these same problems. As for perl surpassing python, I find this an odd statement. Each language has its strengths. Do you see perl surpassing haskell? Do you expect erlang to surpass perl? what does it mean to surpass?
As for your question: YES python is in all those places you mentioned, and more. ITA software (the banner add currently), Google, YouTube, Yahoo, Red Hat (python2.3 required to boot the OS!), NASA, VMWare (currently hiring python developers and uses python extensively), Sony Online Entertainment, Dreamworks, ILM, PyGame, EVE Online, Never Winter Nights, S5 (Symbian OS w/python native and most apps written in python). Did you know there is a Scientific conference SciPy dedicated to scientific computing in python with a larger attendance that the PHP conference? Did you know that python has over 500K cross platform add on libraries? Did you know that while the kernel for the OLPC XO laptop is a micro kernel based on Fedora, the OS layer including the file system and all applications is written in python? obviously not.
As for web sites, there are more based on python than on perl. all the old perl sites migrated to PHP years ago, and PHP is not perl. Boston.com, oxfam, youtube, parts of Yahoo, not to mention all the Plone, Zope, Django, and TurboGears sites out there. Ruby has one web framework, python has 4 core frameworks. Perl has none unless you count PHP, which as I stated, is not perl.
Seriously, where is python missing something that perl has? What problem is perl being used for that python is not? This is a serious question, and as a member of both the Perl organization and the Python Software Foundation I am curious to know your answer so we can work on it.
Intel is NOT interested in providing computing access to underprivileged youths. They are interested in keeping 30Million children from learning to use AMD based devices which htey previously called a 'toy', a 'joke', and 'of little interest to Intel's business'. In short, they are scared they will loose money, and they are correct. Competition in the market is not bad. The practices Intel is employing to kill off a humanitarian effort to protect their bottom line is.
OLPC is a humanitarian project which is trying to provide educational devices to third world countries. These devices are 100% open (open hardware and software) with minimal maintainance. They are designed for the harsh environments and to have minimal environmental impact.
Intel at first dismissed and made fun of the project, then realized that it could be a threat to their business.
Instead of developing a better product with humanitarian goals, they created a piece of closed hardware junk with huge environmental impacts. These devices are not designed for third world environments, have a 2 hour battery life, etc, etc, etc. They are being sold well below cost, and Intel is flying all over the world to the governments which approached OLPC and spending millions to sell these devices to them. Not out of a humanitarian effort, but as a business transaction. While on the surface this may seem like competition in an open market, that is just not the case.
OLPC is not a market driven business project. OLPC did not go to governments to sell their program, they announced the program and the governments came to them. In order to provide the devices cheaply, and allow the governments to develop the devices themselves, OLPC needs 3Mil units ordered. They were close to having that before Intel came along and started lobbying only these governments, and offering these junk replacements (internal cost estimate at $400, NOT the $200 under priced value, nor the $50 'introductory' price).
The sole purpose of this is a predatory act to stop an AMD based device from gaining acceptance. This also ignores the software effort. The hardware laptop is only 50% of the OLPC project. The other half is the revolutionary new operating system and GUI being developed as part of OLPC, specifically for child learning. Intel doesn't want to be bothered, because they are not in the business of providing a learning device, they are in the buisness of selling intel chips.
So yes its predatory. VERY predatory, because that is what the computer business is, and that is what Intel is. The stock holders and board members would not have it any other way. OLPC is something completely different, and is being hurt by their actions.
Is this bad for the children? Just look at the two devices, and I think you have your answer.
Please go read up on the OLPC project.
Start with the mission statement:
OLPC is not, at heart, a technology program, nor is the XO a product in any conventional sense of the word. OLPC is a non-profit organization providing a means to an end--an end that sees children in even the most remote regions of the globe being given the opportunity to tap into their own potential, to be exposed to a whole world of ideas, and to contribute to a more productive and saner world community.
Q: why doesn't OLPC make a $100 laptop for the US Market?
A: That is not the purpose of the OLPC project. They do not have the resources nor the infrastructure to pursue such a commercial, non-humanitarian effort, nor the desire.
Q: Why do companies like Dell and Intel make a sub-$100 laptop for the US market?
A: There is very little profit in it.
'so you will be able to develop and test webpages across almost all major browsers (IE 5-7, Firefox, Opera) on one Linux box!'
I want to write a web page and test it on all the browsers. Currently you cant have IE7 and an earlier IE on the same windows machine. Here we have 1 machine with all browsers. Your other options are having multiple machines or not testing.
1. The benchmark testing and posting applies to.NET Framework components.
Yes it is limited, but if you have been paying attention to the reviews of Ruby on Rails, J2EE, Mono, etc. this does become a huge issue. 'We would like to sell you this better product/service/PIM/POS(I can name 30 others), but I cant tell you it's better than my competition built on.NET, nor can I give you numbers to say its better than the MS caned products. This effects industries ranging from point of sale register/inventory solutions (like the one the Halmark Paper Store uses) to the Medical Transcription Service, to even 911 call center software.
3. The Virtualization argument is pointless. How many home users do virtualization? How many business (which do the most virtualization) actually use XP Home licenses? I really think this is a non-issue like #1.
Most software businesses. Every company which has any form of good automated QA will use virtualization, OS images, and test automation to do QA and MS certification testing under all of the different varients. We are doing it here at work. We would not be able to get our products certified, QA'd, and released without it.
4..... Most home users keep a machine for several years. If you assume a home user is on a 3-year replacement cycle (the most common business practice I have found), they will probably only need a single transfer before the new OS is out (though after this, you never know.) Also, how many new PC purchases do not come with a new license?
This will cause problems from the modding/gaming community. Modders pay a high premium and help keep the price for other components cheap for the rest of us. The added cost of the OS for thier leet upgrade (many times the Motherboard, added core, etc, so its really a transfer) will harm this very large dollar, but small consumer market.
b
The REAL name is the SanDisk Sensa and is the #2 player on the market. The name 'e280' is the internal model number for the 8GB version.
Also not mentioned on the site (though it is for other players):
FM recorder Video player Voice recorder EXPANSION SLOT (sandisk also anounced 4gb micro sd cards for Q1 2007 for a total of 12GB)
I love mine and it was essential to a long plane trip with a 2yo. Can't spend 6 hours sitting w/o some Backyardagains.
Setting 'Not Vandalized' can be done by ANYONE.
on
More Wiki Than Ever
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I think you are missing the point of this change and how it is making things MORE Wiki. Previously only Administrators could make a page me protected, or semi-protected (which wont change). That mechanism meant it was the Adimistrators which determined what the anonymous or new users would see and be able to edit.
This new system will be controlled by the internet community at large. The permissions are in a sence becomming Wiki'd. (granted the protection editing is semi-protected;-) Welcome to meta-recursion.
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20060807/2006-08- 07T162044Z_01_L06301298_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-MIDEAST-REU TERS-DC.html
There are many many blogs covering this. The more people look the more thy find. Including obviously staged events (same 2 people carying the same body, in different locations, from attacks weeks apart). Even the reported 'origional' photo looks like it is doctored (professionally this time) to make poorly doctored image look like the edits were minor.
Minor OT quibble.
Sorry, but your calculations are a little off. It says 1.4Mil per day for 4.2Mil subscribers. You are correct in that it works out to "3", but your units are wrong. It is 1 movie per subscriber every 3 days which is in keeping with my personal use.
From TFA 'Also available is a programming module that will allow you to hook your robot up to a computer and download a program for adding autonomous capabilities.'
I believe the 'irony' is that as devout Christians they believe in the commandment 'thou shall not lie' (bear false wittness), yet were doing just that. They want to enforce these beliefs and rules which they themselves do not follow, and don't realise their hypocrocy.
One problem, what if there are 3 prisoners and lets just say K is 2...
What if the king knowing this picks 2 of the prisoners and alternates them (and makes sure one is an upper, and one is a downer...).
he then calls just those two prisoners alternating, 7 times each....
I think this is on the right track though. You just also need to factor in taht the king will call every one the same number of times and can't stop until someone says 'yes'.
First off, this is not a troll. Im my experience it has always been easier to sell reactive solutions to DDoS, worms, and virii.
Working on OpenVision*SecureMAX and Securify(kerberos) back at OpenVision (bought by veritas, products sold to PlatniumGroup, then who knows where), we had a very very hard time selling our prevenative security software (for all the *nix platforms of the time and Windows NT). Everyone wanted virus removal software. Even when Satan was released, people didn't want to have an audit of which machines were vulnerable in the company.
I left the computer security buisness back in '97. At which point did it become easier to sell prevenative measures? Was it just this past year or two with all the outbreaks? Or did veritas make a huge mistake is selling off its aquired security products when it did?
After reading the language, it looks like you could write a 'software pattent' for the 'process' of collecting taxes, or even the process of voting. Because the language doesn't limit this to being applied to a single program or executable (presumably to pattent office suite style interactions between software packages,) this could be applied to the use of the software the EU currently uses to conduct elections and collect taxes. Even if one did not write any one, or even any of the applications used. Using them together for an expressed end is patentable.
I am actually being serious here. Patent parts of the Govt. and charge them. The easiest way to show the harm these patents can do is to inflict that harm on those who allowed it to happen.
Here was my favorite quote: 'There is no right in the copyright law to make backup copies of motion pictures, so the whole argument that people should have the right to make backup copies of DVDs has no legal support whatsoever,' said Fritz Attaway, executive vice president of the MPAA."
I am sitting here readding 'Free Culture' and this Gem pops up on/.
It is nice to see the MPAA is rewritting the foundations of the Constitution for us. Makes me believe in big, bad, heartless, corporations out to get us all. The copyright law is a law of restrictions on works. The law lists restrictions on the use and copying of copyrighted works. It does not list all allowed uses of copyright works. It was origionally intended to allow publishers a limited monopoly on a work for a limited time (14 years renewable twice). Big lobby's have gotten this to be extended to 75 years retroactive. And in 15 years when Micky Mouse(c) is ready to go public domain again, I bet that will be expanded to 95 years.
Now this is where things get really scary. We have a law that restricts the copying of works for a time but allows for 'fair use'. With the advent of technology some of these 'fair use' cases which used to be expensive to do are much easier. (so are many of the non-fair use, but Im not talking about those). In order to limit this fair use, big media is using technology to try to make it hard (CSS/marcovision/etc) to make a personal copy etc. Unfortunatly for them, technology adapts faster than their outdated thinking. So they loby for new law, the DMCA. This makes it Illegal to circumvent the technology used to make it hard to use copyright materials which you paid for in a 'fair-use' way which is permitted under copyright law! Its a Meta-Law.
Some people in Congress seem to have caught on that this is not in the public's best intrest and are trying to fix the problem by saying that obvious fair use is indeed legal. Now this [censored] comes out and says that because copyright law does not expressly allow for this type of digital fair use, it has no legal merit? The copyright law doesnt expressly allow me to use the book I bought as a doorstop. It doesn't expressly allow the giving said book to another person after reading it. Or the DVD I bought to another person after watching it. It does not even expressly allow me to READ copyrighted material! These are fair use! Copyright law explicitly restricts and implicitly allows.
So If I am to follow the MPAA's train of thought I should not be allowed to do anything that the Constitution and its ammendments does not expressly allow. I hope they all follow this bright new intrepretation of the law and all stop breathing (it says the right to live, not breath).
Slashdot Mirror
I used to have a 4U rackmount with 8 JBOD drives + a master drive, etc, etc, etc. that I built up over two years wasting about 3K on it. It died.
I ended up replacing it all for about $1000 shipped (1.7T Raid 5). It can support 4 2T HD's and
The NAS server is the 409+ non-rackmount from Synology (same-as/replaced-by the 410):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822108050&cm_re=synology-_-22-108-050-_-Product
http://www.synology.com/us/products/ds410/index.php
I spent quite some time researching the HD's to use and settled on these:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152185
The newegg support was quite nice in helping m get drives from different batches (overkill, but nice).
It has worked fantastic. Supports timemachine and itunes naively, is a media server (integrates with my segate freeagent theater+ and PS3 seamlessly), the download manager rocks, and all our photo's are served up to the extended family (yea dyndns integration). Also integrates with UPS, external drives, and broadcasts the UPS issue to all my machines on the network. support for everything (and I mean everything.)
the admin interface this thing comes with is fantastic (linux on it with busybox and the ability to add your own packages):
http://www.synology.com/us/products/features/index.php
little box seriously rocks.
Big Bang Sample Clip
Mr. Wizard, and 3 2 1 Contact are fantastic programs. They should be still on TV in syndication now, but sadly they are not. I would also recommend Cosmos w/ Carl Sagan. The Science Cannel has been re broadcasting that series. Hands down the best introductory science documentary series.
Mr. Wizard
3-2-1 Contact!
Cosmos on the Science Channel
http://radian.org/notebook/first-deployment
Ivan Krstic just posed from Uruguay, where the the first production deployment of the XO just happened. This is what the Globe should be reporting on, not a frivolous lawsuit!
I find it interesting that this lawsuit is happening just before the first production launch and as Peru signs a deal for 260K machines! To bad that is not being picked up by major media.
I am sorry, but your post reads like FUD. Neither language is greater than the other. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Please describe the part where Python is lacking? What can you do in perl that you can not in python? I love and use both languages on a daily basis. I know their strengths and weaknesses. While there are many tasks for which I feel perl is better, I know of none that can not also be done in python. both groups are going through major redesigns (Perl6 Python3000) and both will excel in solving the types of problems they are good at. You mention internationalization. Python has full unicode support, and yes there are some issues which older libraries. Perl has these same problems. As for perl surpassing python, I find this an odd statement. Each language has its strengths. Do you see perl surpassing haskell? Do you expect erlang to surpass perl? what does it mean to surpass? As for your question: YES python is in all those places you mentioned, and more. ITA software (the banner add currently), Google, YouTube, Yahoo, Red Hat (python2.3 required to boot the OS!), NASA, VMWare (currently hiring python developers and uses python extensively), Sony Online Entertainment, Dreamworks, ILM, PyGame, EVE Online, Never Winter Nights, S5 (Symbian OS w/python native and most apps written in python). Did you know there is a Scientific conference SciPy dedicated to scientific computing in python with a larger attendance that the PHP conference? Did you know that python has over 500K cross platform add on libraries? Did you know that while the kernel for the OLPC XO laptop is a micro kernel based on Fedora, the OS layer including the file system and all applications is written in python? obviously not. As for web sites, there are more based on python than on perl. all the old perl sites migrated to PHP years ago, and PHP is not perl. Boston.com, oxfam, youtube, parts of Yahoo, not to mention all the Plone, Zope, Django, and TurboGears sites out there. Ruby has one web framework, python has 4 core frameworks. Perl has none unless you count PHP, which as I stated, is not perl. Seriously, where is python missing something that perl has? What problem is perl being used for that python is not? This is a serious question, and as a member of both the Perl organization and the Python Software Foundation I am curious to know your answer so we can work on it.
Intel is NOT interested in providing computing access to underprivileged youths. They are interested in keeping 30Million children from learning to use AMD based devices which htey previously called a 'toy', a 'joke', and 'of little interest to Intel's business'. In short, they are scared they will loose money, and they are correct. Competition in the market is not bad. The practices Intel is employing to kill off a humanitarian effort to protect their bottom line is.
OLPC is a humanitarian project which is trying to provide educational devices to third world countries. These devices are 100% open (open hardware and software) with minimal maintainance. They are designed for the harsh environments and to have minimal environmental impact.
Intel at first dismissed and made fun of the project, then realized that it could be a threat to their business. Instead of developing a better product with humanitarian goals, they created a piece of closed hardware junk with huge environmental impacts. These devices are not designed for third world environments, have a 2 hour battery life, etc, etc, etc. They are being sold well below cost, and Intel is flying all over the world to the governments which approached OLPC and spending millions to sell these devices to them. Not out of a humanitarian effort, but as a business transaction. While on the surface this may seem like competition in an open market, that is just not the case.
OLPC is not a market driven business project. OLPC did not go to governments to sell their program, they announced the program and the governments came to them. In order to provide the devices cheaply, and allow the governments to develop the devices themselves, OLPC needs 3Mil units ordered. They were close to having that before Intel came along and started lobbying only these governments, and offering these junk replacements (internal cost estimate at $400, NOT the $200 under priced value, nor the $50 'introductory' price).
The sole purpose of this is a predatory act to stop an AMD based device from gaining acceptance. This also ignores the software effort. The hardware laptop is only 50% of the OLPC project. The other half is the revolutionary new operating system and GUI being developed as part of OLPC, specifically for child learning. Intel doesn't want to be bothered, because they are not in the business of providing a learning device, they are in the buisness of selling intel chips.
So yes its predatory. VERY predatory, because that is what the computer business is, and that is what Intel is. The stock holders and board members would not have it any other way. OLPC is something completely different, and is being hurt by their actions.
Is this bad for the children? Just look at the two devices, and I think you have your answer.
Please go read up on the OLPC project.
Start with the mission statement:
OLPC is not, at heart, a technology program, nor is the XO a product in any conventional sense of the word. OLPC is a non-profit organization providing a means to an end--an end that sees children in even the most remote regions of the globe being given the opportunity to tap into their own potential, to be exposed to a whole world of ideas, and to contribute to a more productive and saner world community.
Q: why doesn't OLPC make a $100 laptop for the US Market?
A: That is not the purpose of the OLPC project. They do not have the resources nor the infrastructure to pursue such a commercial, non-humanitarian effort, nor the desire.
Q: Why do companies like Dell and Intel make a sub-$100 laptop for the US market?
A: There is very little profit in it.
'so you will be able to develop and test webpages across almost all major browsers (IE 5-7, Firefox, Opera) on one Linux box!'
I want to write a web page and test it on all the browsers.
Currently you cant have IE7 and an earlier IE on the same windows machine.
Here we have 1 machine with all browsers.
Your other options are having multiple machines or not testing.
FireFox 2.0 has a good builtin RSS reader, but FF2.0 has other problems (so I have heard). I personally perfer Sage: http://sage.mozdev.org/
The Django web framework added support for 'google sitemaps' over a month ago. Google anounced the details of sitemaps over 3 months ago. Django Sitemaps: http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/sitemap s/
Most software businesses. Every company which has any form of good automated QA will use virtualization, OS images, and test automation to do QA and MS certification testing under all of the different varients. We are doing it here at work. We would not be able to get our products certified, QA'd, and released without it.
This will cause problems from the modding/gaming community. Modders pay a high premium and help keep the price for other components cheap for the rest of us. The added cost of the OS for thier leet upgrade (many times the Motherboard, added core, etc, so its really a transfer) will harm this very large dollar, but small consumer market. b
The REAL name is the SanDisk Sensa and is the #2 player on the market.
The name 'e280' is the internal model number for the 8GB version.
Also not mentioned on the site (though it is for other players):
FM recorder
Video player
Voice recorder
EXPANSION SLOT (sandisk also anounced 4gb micro sd cards for Q1 2007 for a total of 12GB)
I love mine and it was essential to a long plane trip with a 2yo.
Can't spend 6 hours sitting w/o some Backyardagains.
I think you are missing the point of this change and how it is making things MORE Wiki.
;-)
Previously only Administrators could make a page me protected, or semi-protected (which wont change).
That mechanism meant it was the Adimistrators which determined what the anonymous or new users would see and be able to edit.
This new system will be controlled by the internet community at large.
The permissions are in a sence becomming Wiki'd.
(granted the protection editing is semi-protected
Welcome to meta-recursion.
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20060807/2006-08- 07T162044Z_01_L06301298_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-MIDEAST-REU TERS-DC.html
There are many many blogs covering this. The more people look the more thy find. Including obviously staged events (same 2 people carying the same body, in different locations, from attacks weeks apart). Even the reported 'origional' photo looks like it is doctored (professionally this time) to make poorly doctored image look like the edits were minor.
Minor OT quibble.
Real Networks entered into an agreement with Mozilla Foundation to bundle Firefox into downloads of Real Network Applications.
Firefox will NOT come with any Real Network applications.
Sorry, but your calculations are a little off. It says 1.4Mil per day for 4.2Mil subscribers.
You are correct in that it works out to "3", but your units are wrong.
It is 1 movie per subscriber every 3 days which is in keeping with my personal use.
12.6Mil per day would be 3 movies per subscriber.
The Crushinator (http://tfp.killbots.com/scans/223_crushinator.png ) is real.
From TFA 'Also available is a programming module that will allow you to hook your robot up to a computer and download a program for adding autonomous capabilities.'
I believe the 'irony' is that as devout Christians they believe in the commandment 'thou shall not lie' (bear false wittness), yet were doing just that. They want to enforce these beliefs and rules which they themselves do not follow, and don't realise their hypocrocy.
At least thats the way I saw it.
One problem, what if there are 3 prisoners and lets just say K is 2...
What if the king knowing this picks 2 of the prisoners and alternates them (and makes sure one is an upper, and one is a downer...).
he then calls just those two prisoners alternating, 7 times each....
I think this is on the right track though. You just also need to factor in taht the king will call every one the same number of times and can't stop until someone says 'yes'.
The puzzle actually looked really easy, but I was having a hard time visualizing it so I used my sons MegaBlocks(tm) to work it out.
Key: (blocks numbered 1-9 starting upper left, to bottom right)
1 2x2
2 1x2
3 2x1
4 2x1
5 2x1 (bottom left)
6 1x2
7 1x1
8 1x2 (bottom center)
9 1x1 (bottom right)
> left >> double left
< right << double right
^ up ^^ double up
v down vv double down
1 v
2 <
3 ^
4 ^
7 ^
7 <
4 vv
3 >
7 ^^
1 >
5 ^^
6 <
8 <
9 <
9 ^
8 >>
6 v
9 <<
1 v
7 v
7 <
3 <
4 ^^
1 >
9 >
9 ^
6 ^
8 <<
1 v
In the end it took longer to type this up than it took me to solve this. The 15x15 is much harder in my opinion.
First off, this is not a troll.
Im my experience it has always been easier to sell reactive solutions to DDoS, worms, and virii.
Working on OpenVision*SecureMAX and Securify(kerberos) back at OpenVision (bought by veritas, products sold to PlatniumGroup, then who knows where), we had a very very hard time selling our prevenative security software (for all the *nix platforms of the time and Windows NT). Everyone wanted virus removal software. Even when Satan was released, people didn't want to have an audit of which machines were vulnerable in the company.
I left the computer security buisness back in '97. At which point did it become easier to sell prevenative measures? Was it just this past year or two with all the outbreaks? Or did veritas make a huge mistake is selling off its aquired security products when it did?
Pick one. There is a PHP interface to SOAP.
o ap/
Personally I like ZOPE, but the python 'php' package is not even in alpha.
here is the link for PHP SOAP:
http://phpsoaptoolkit.sourceforge.net/phps
After reading the language, it looks like you could write a 'software pattent' for the 'process' of collecting taxes, or even the process of voting. Because the language doesn't limit this to being applied to a single program or executable (presumably to pattent office suite style interactions between software packages,) this could be applied to the use of the software the EU currently uses to conduct elections and collect taxes. Even if one did not write any one, or even any of the applications used. Using them together for an expressed end is patentable.
I am actually being serious here. Patent parts of the Govt. and charge them. The easiest way to show the harm these patents can do is to inflict that harm on those who allowed it to happen.
Here was my favorite quote: 'There is no right in the copyright law to make backup copies of motion pictures, so the whole argument that people should have the right to make backup copies of DVDs has no legal support whatsoever,' said Fritz Attaway, executive vice president of the MPAA."
/.
I am sitting here readding 'Free Culture' and this Gem pops up on
It is nice to see the MPAA is rewritting the foundations of the Constitution for us. Makes me believe in big, bad, heartless, corporations out to get us all. The copyright law is a law of restrictions on works. The law lists restrictions on the use and copying of copyrighted works. It does not list all allowed uses of copyright works. It was origionally intended to allow publishers a limited monopoly on a work for a limited time (14 years renewable twice). Big lobby's have gotten this to be extended to 75 years retroactive. And in 15 years when Micky Mouse(c) is ready to go public domain again, I bet that will be expanded to 95 years.
Now this is where things get really scary. We have a law that restricts the copying of works for a time but allows for 'fair use'. With the advent of technology some of these 'fair use' cases which used to be expensive to do are much easier. (so are many of the non-fair use, but Im not talking about those). In order to limit this fair use, big media is using technology to try to make it hard (CSS/marcovision/etc) to make a personal copy etc. Unfortunatly for them, technology adapts faster than their outdated thinking. So they loby for new law, the DMCA. This makes it Illegal to circumvent the technology used to make it hard to use copyright materials which you paid for in a 'fair-use' way which is permitted under copyright law! Its a Meta-Law.
Some people in Congress seem to have caught on that this is not in the public's best intrest and are trying to fix the problem by saying that obvious fair use is indeed legal. Now this [censored] comes out and says that because copyright law does not expressly allow for this type of digital fair use, it has no legal merit? The copyright law doesnt expressly allow me to use the book I bought as a doorstop. It doesn't expressly allow the giving said book to another person after reading it. Or the DVD I bought to another person after watching it. It does not even expressly allow me to READ copyrighted material! These are fair use! Copyright law explicitly restricts and implicitly allows.
So If I am to follow the MPAA's train of thought I should not be allowed to do anything that the Constitution and its ammendments does not expressly allow. I hope they all follow this bright new intrepretation of the law and all stop breathing (it says the right to live, not breath).