Well said. The public pays the taxes that support all of the government necessary to enable Copyright. The public, therefore, rightfully owns those works after a limited time. By extending Copyright, they effectively robbed all of us of our rightful property. What hypocrisy for them to crack down on "piracy".
Copyright doesn't just grant ownership to the creator. It grants him the right to give copies to other people and still tell them what they're allowed to do with them. That is not some inherent right. It requires lots of laws and government infrastructure to make it work. Consequently, even the content creator should not really "own" what he creates. All of us that help pay for the infrastructure to make that work with our taxes deserve a piece of that ownership. That's what the public domain is all about. When they extended Copyright, they robbed many years worth of valuable content from the public that rightly owns it. As one who was blatantly robbed of my rightful property by my government, am I supposed to now be happy about them cracking down on people that copy information? I think not.
Just project Kolourpaint (or MS-Paint if you use Windows) onto the screen. It's better than a chalk-board. You can type text right onto the screen. You can draw lines, ellipses, etc. You can even select things and drag them around for cheap animation effects. And you can save your scratchings and pass them out. Is there anything you can do on a whiteboard that you can't do with a simple paint program?
I hate regulation. I'm so sick of Comcast regulating my Internet habits that I want my government to regulate Comcast. Net Neutrality is the least-regulation possible.
I worked under Brian (bal) when he left.NET. He accepted a position as an architect in another division. I left a couple of years later (but that's another story--I'd love to tell it). It seemed to me at the time that he was just moving upward, not really taking a stand against Microsoft's bad practices....or maybe they were just really good at keeping those kind of things quiet. He was always too clear-headed to fully drink the MS kool-aid. Hmm. I suppose I could believe that they gagged him as part of the terms of his new position. Do you have any sources on this information? I'd really like to hear about it.
Historically, universities ignore "research" done by any person w/o a Ph.D. To the extent that this is a useful bias, your question is well posed and these guys will never emerge from the shadow of University research. To the extent that the usefulness of such a bias is becoming antiquated, this is how reform begins and how those that cling to dying models become irrelevant.
So what's the half-life of one of these bottles when full of water? Eventually, most of the BPA will be leached out, and the bottle will become safer. Does this take months, or years?
If a big monopoly starts pulling out their big guns, that should a good reason to people to seriously consider whether it is worth their time to support it. I'm glad that the great men responsible for the freedoms I now have didn't have your defeated attitude.
...Then it becomes a target for eventual cuts in public spending and one day may quietly disappear...
Wow! I want to live in a world where governments naturally regulate their own size, where legislatures throw out unnecessary and outdated cruft, and where there is no major problem with out-of-control government spending. Where do I sign up?
Good idea! Let's give the media industry authority to have anything stricken from search engines with a mere accusation. They'll never abuse that power. The whole burden of proof thing is overrated anyway. (NOT!)
Time to stop letting Hollywood think for you. People are smart, yet humanity is not currently enslaved. Why? Because people are intelligent enough to know that's a bad idea. If robots are ever more intelligent than us, they'll also be intelligent enough to make good decisions. Frankly, I'd rather have the more intelligent beings in charge. They would actually make more intelligent decisions! It's humans that should not be trusted. They're just consistently intelligent enough.
...that's quite a statement to make with nothing to back it up.
Good point. Considering Microsoft's long history of consistently putting the user's best interest at the forefront of all their new product releases, we need some pretty strong reasons to *not* trust them implicitly.
"Security" that gets in people's way is a security threat, because people will find a way to work around it, and be worse off because of it. Never try to lock down everything, or you'll have no control over what is compromised. Figure out what you really need to secure, and lock that down. Really. Trying to secure everything is a sure sign that someone lacks the knowledge to make security decisions.
That's the beauty of a simple package manager. If it's easy, even trivial, to install functionality, then there is no need to install even things that "most" people will use. There's no reason that the few people who never print need to have it installed.
...Every one of them let's you install any package you like and do whatever you want. Now, let's take a look at the various versions of windows...
So, one of them limits the number of socket connections that you can host. I definately don't want that b/c I like to run servers. Which version limits that? One version limits the number of apps that can be simultaneously open. Now that's really evil! I definitely don't want that one. Which version let's you do whatever you want? How much does that version cost? Now let's talk about the price...
True, but perceived value is not real value. Companies that sell perceived value will only make money in the short run. It looks like VMWare is willing to throw away something with short-term value to rub out some competition. That's something that can give long-term benefit to a company. This world has too many companies trying to sell perceived value already. I wouldn't diss VMWare for making a move away from there.
I expect there's a positive correlation between businesses that do well and businesses that don't hang on to their dead weight. For the same reason, I would expect that the U.S. economy will do poorly in the long run precisely because we bailed out all of the companies that made the economy collapse.
There's a tool that tries to create a network of reviews, rather than just citations. In this case, the reviewer actually specifies the level of endorsement, whereas citations can mean anything. One of the most common reasons to cite a paper is to say "Our idea is way better than this lame idea", or "These guys did something similar, but it comparatively sucked". Sometimes the worst implementations get cited the most because they are so easy to improve upon. Why should that build up a paper?
In the 90's there was an email circulating around claiming that the US Post Office was going to charge a fifteen cent tax on every email sent. I laughed myself silly about people that were actually stupid enough to believe it. If it ever happened, I was sure we could just encode emails so they wouldn't recognize them. Now, that I see people are actually stupid enough to *PAY* fifteen cents to send a message over the same lines on which they speak for free, it's not quite so funny anymore.
Why can't they just put a Faraday cage around the cabin and let the passengers use whatever electronics they want? If planes are so delicate, does that mean we can shoot them out of the sky with a radio and a dish?
The trend is that employers don't believe IT is really needed (*ducks). When the economy is booming, IT jobs are abundant and pay very well. When it's not, they're among the first to go. The barrier to entry in IT is lower than many other fields. There's an old saying "easy come, easy go". If you want both money and longterm stability, you need to be more than just an IT guy. You gotta get a real education and become a real expert at what you do. Economic busts don't touch the people that companies *really* can't survive without.
Slashdot Mirror
Well said. The public pays the taxes that support all of the government necessary to enable Copyright. The public, therefore, rightfully owns those works after a limited time. By extending Copyright, they effectively robbed all of us of our rightful property. What hypocrisy for them to crack down on "piracy".
Copyright doesn't just grant ownership to the creator. It grants him the right to give copies to other people and still tell them what they're allowed to do with them. That is not some inherent right. It requires lots of laws and government infrastructure to make it work. Consequently, even the content creator should not really "own" what he creates. All of us that help pay for the infrastructure to make that work with our taxes deserve a piece of that ownership. That's what the public domain is all about. When they extended Copyright, they robbed many years worth of valuable content from the public that rightly owns it. As one who was blatantly robbed of my rightful property by my government, am I supposed to now be happy about them cracking down on people that copy information? I think not.
Just project Kolourpaint (or MS-Paint if you use Windows) onto the screen. It's better than a chalk-board. You can type text right onto the screen. You can draw lines, ellipses, etc. You can even select things and drag them around for cheap animation effects. And you can save your scratchings and pass them out. Is there anything you can do on a whiteboard that you can't do with a simple paint program?
I hate regulation. I'm so sick of Comcast regulating my Internet habits that I want my government to regulate Comcast. Net Neutrality is the least-regulation possible.
I worked under Brian (bal) when he left .NET. He accepted a position as an architect in another division. I left a couple of years later (but that's another story--I'd love to tell it). It seemed to me at the time that he was just moving upward, not really taking a stand against Microsoft's bad practices. ...or maybe they were just really good at keeping those kind of things quiet. He was always too clear-headed to fully drink the MS kool-aid. Hmm. I suppose I could believe that they gagged him as part of the terms of his new position. Do you have any sources on this information? I'd really like to hear about it.
Who is the problem here? The universities who tell it like it is? Or the morons in congress who make it the way it is?
This comes just weeks after Microsoft announces they're opening a center less than a mile from there. Coincidence? I'm not so sure that Novell is the big winner here.
Historically, universities ignore "research" done by any person w/o a Ph.D. To the extent that this is a useful bias, your question is well posed and these guys will never emerge from the shadow of University research. To the extent that the usefulness of such a bias is becoming antiquated, this is how reform begins and how those that cling to dying models become irrelevant.
So what's the half-life of one of these bottles when full of water? Eventually, most of the BPA will be leached out, and the bottle will become safer. Does this take months, or years?
If a big monopoly starts pulling out their big guns, that should a good reason to people to seriously consider whether it is worth their time to support it. I'm glad that the great men responsible for the freedoms I now have didn't have your defeated attitude.
Wow! I want to live in a world where governments naturally regulate their own size, where legislatures throw out unnecessary and outdated cruft, and where there is no major problem with out-of-control government spending. Where do I sign up?
Good idea! Let's give the media industry authority to have anything stricken from search engines with a mere accusation. They'll never abuse that power. The whole burden of proof thing is overrated anyway. (NOT!)
Time to stop letting Hollywood think for you. People are smart, yet humanity is not currently enslaved. Why? Because people are intelligent enough to know that's a bad idea. If robots are ever more intelligent than us, they'll also be intelligent enough to make good decisions. Frankly, I'd rather have the more intelligent beings in charge. They would actually make more intelligent decisions! It's humans that should not be trusted. They're just consistently intelligent enough.
I hereby accuse you of terrorism. Would you like to face the punishment now, or do you think that due process is important now?
Good point. Considering Microsoft's long history of consistently putting the user's best interest at the forefront of all their new product releases, we need some pretty strong reasons to *not* trust them implicitly.
"Security" that gets in people's way is a security threat, because people will find a way to work around it, and be worse off because of it. Never try to lock down everything, or you'll have no control over what is compromised. Figure out what you really need to secure, and lock that down. Really. Trying to secure everything is a sure sign that someone lacks the knowledge to make security decisions.
That's the beauty of a simple package manager. If it's easy, even trivial, to install functionality, then there is no need to install even things that "most" people will use. There's no reason that the few people who never print need to have it installed.
Let's see...
...Every one of them let's you install any package you like and do whatever you want. Now, let's take a look at the various versions of windows...
Fedora (not crippled), CentOS (not crippled), Red Hat (not crippled), Suse (not crippled), Debian (not crippled), Ubuntu (not crippled), Kubuntu (not crippled), Xubuntu (not crippled), Mandrake (not crippled), Slackware (not crippled), Gentoo (not crippled)
So, one of them limits the number of socket connections that you can host. I definately don't want that b/c I like to run servers. Which version limits that? One version limits the number of apps that can be simultaneously open. Now that's really evil! I definitely don't want that one. Which version let's you do whatever you want? How much does that version cost? Now let's talk about the price...
True, but perceived value is not real value. Companies that sell perceived value will only make money in the short run. It looks like VMWare is willing to throw away something with short-term value to rub out some competition. That's something that can give long-term benefit to a company. This world has too many companies trying to sell perceived value already. I wouldn't diss VMWare for making a move away from there.
I expect there's a positive correlation between businesses that do well and businesses that don't hang on to their dead weight. For the same reason, I would expect that the U.S. economy will do poorly in the long run precisely because we bailed out all of the companies that made the economy collapse.
There's a tool that tries to create a network of reviews, rather than just citations. In this case, the reviewer actually specifies the level of endorsement, whereas citations can mean anything. One of the most common reasons to cite a paper is to say "Our idea is way better than this lame idea", or "These guys did something similar, but it comparatively sucked". Sometimes the worst implementations get cited the most because they are so easy to improve upon. Why should that build up a paper?
In the 90's there was an email circulating around claiming that the US Post Office was going to charge a fifteen cent tax on every email sent. I laughed myself silly about people that were actually stupid enough to believe it. If it ever happened, I was sure we could just encode emails so they wouldn't recognize them. Now, that I see people are actually stupid enough to *PAY* fifteen cents to send a message over the same lines on which they speak for free, it's not quite so funny anymore.
Why can't they just put a Faraday cage around the cabin and let the passengers use whatever electronics they want? If planes are so delicate, does that mean we can shoot them out of the sky with a radio and a dish?
Do I have to accept it in order to proceed? If I do, it's a EULA no matter what you call it.
The trend is that employers don't believe IT is really needed (*ducks). When the economy is booming, IT jobs are abundant and pay very well. When it's not, they're among the first to go. The barrier to entry in IT is lower than many other fields. There's an old saying "easy come, easy go". If you want both money and longterm stability, you need to be more than just an IT guy. You gotta get a real education and become a real expert at what you do. Economic busts don't touch the people that companies *really* can't survive without.