Here is the disconnect for most people. If someone does something to me physically (assault, etc.), I can call the cops and they will handle the charges and deal with it. If someone is harassing me in a business sense, there is no entity in the US I can go explain what is going on and get some advice. Why can't I file a non-criminal complaint against them? They are the wrong doer, but I need to pay for justice. This is bull.
Surely the answer is a list of the specific things that they believe their product can achieve better than their competitors
uhm - that is pretty much saying the same thing I said. They believe they have a better solution. Some people like to list specific things. Some people think in terms of a different approach. Both groups believe they have a "better" solution in there point of view.
Does someone always have to bring up the "we already have X, why do we need Y" argument every-time someone announces a program? The answers is these people do not believe the current solution is the right solution, and they have something they believe is better.
That and the OLPC people being so dead set against the general public having any of these laptops keeps me away. I would probably cough up the $300 (I am doing OK this year), but all the information on the hardware they chose leads me to believe the chances of switching the OS are pretty much nil.
If you want a project to succeed, what is the problem with selling a commercial version?
Do you really think societies money is better spent to keep such a person behind bars than to spend it in more productive ways?
I have no moral problem with capital punishment, but (due to court costs and such) it is actually cheaper to keep them in jail for the rest of the criminal's life then to kill them. I seem to remember the cost of keeping someone in jail for a year is less than $30k. On the other hand, it is several million $ to get through the appeals process. (I need to find the $ reference, it is a couple of years old).
The problem is most of us assume that if they aren't executed, then they get a life sentence that really isn't.
All the evidence suggests that the severity of punishments have little to NO impact on the number of those crimes perpetrated. So why do you want to do this again? Revenge? An eye for an eye? Is that it?
I hear this a lot, but have never seen it backed up with a study and/or datasets. Does anyone have an actual reference? I get a little worried about thing stated with "All".
Then that is a poor trade. Many businesses have been started based on papers submitted during a degree program. People are employed by the businesses and the University owning the copyright does not serve anyone expect the University who is already being paid.
My big problem with this is people willingness to hand student IP over to a for profit company. A business that cannot survive with using the student's IP. I could live if it was a non-profit gathering of schools and had strict rules against data mining for other uses, but I have a sick feeling that papers submitted are not exactly anonymous and this place could make good money as a head hunter or pre-screening agency for companies. It seems like a really, really bad thing for students, even beyond the IP.
I agree with your restatement, paying does not guarantee success (luckily), but I guess my point was that the primary reason for a University (as far as students are concerned) is to provide that opportunity.
I do love on slashdot how people try very hard to make people seem like they are supporting things they are not. For instance, the crap about MATLAB, etc. has nothing to do with what I said. I also in no way advocate talking during tests as a "right". I am simply not happy with the IP rights of students being abused by a company that is making money off them. I might have a different opinion if this was a non-profit consortium that would do no other data mining, but I sure don't like this.
I also have problems with Unversities taking ownership of works produced when they are being payed for teaching, not to acquire property. I seem to remember that the business plan for FedEx was handed in as an assignment. I am sure glad for all those FedEx employees that the university did gain ownership and rights to that.
I also earned my degree in an honest manner. I am not happy with cheating and have taught classes at a University. I did change my tests, assignments, and questions each semester to keep a lot of this stuff at bay.
wouldn't it be more like: "the student pays to earn a degree". The University is being paid, they are not (looking at my Student Loan payment) doing it for free.
on a side note...
I've come to the conclusion that the phrase "Won't someone think of the children!" actually means "I have no logical argument". I think in the upcoming election (US), I will vote against anyone who uses that phrase.
If you are a fed running a grant, you make sure one of the sites is in New Mexico and you make sure to do your site visit during a major local holiday (take a guess). It is sometimes really that simple. Almost as bad as the HUD conference in Hawaii (where there was no HUD housing at the time - neutral ground I guess).
Yeah, distributing their anti-military software on a network originated by the military is too choice. Guess it goes with the lack of reading comprehension demonstrated in propagating the 3 laws. History is hard.
now that is just plain the dumbest interpretation of what I said. I guess it is a slow day in politics...
I'm talking basic printing of something that turns out to be untrue and you come up with some wild PHYSICAL / DANGER TO LIFE AND LIMB scenario involving guns. Scratch that, must be a CNN/FOX thing.
If you print or say something to a group of people and then find it to be untrue, it is generally polite to tell the same audience the new information. This is called a retraction.
Neither would this have happened if the maintenance tech had followed procedure and just switched the damned thing off. I don't see how this is any different from a normal industrial accident with something like a sheet metal press
you are so right, the only difference is:
A manufacture slapped the "robot" label on a piece of industrial equipment.
A worker fails to observe safety procedure as is killed in industrial machine accident
Author, failing to grasp difference between "sci-fi robot" and modern, industrial "robot" - writes dumb article
Worse, 3 laws being advocated, were not terribly effective in book (plot device)
Does this robot even have sensors that would pick up a human in its area? I kinda doubt it since that would make it more expensive for no gain over normal safety procedures.
Actually the trademark is for "Web 2.0" in relation to any conference, gathering, etc. They didn't just trademark their own conference name, they went for the term in any context involving conferences. Big difference.
Slashdot Mirror
uhm - that is pretty much saying the same thing I said. They believe they have a better solution. Some people like to list specific things. Some people think in terms of a different approach. Both groups believe they have a "better" solution in there point of view.
Does someone always have to bring up the "we already have X, why do we need Y" argument every-time someone announces a program? The answers is these people do not believe the current solution is the right solution, and they have something they believe is better.
or we could fix the FDA process and fix liability (every drug will kill someone).
If you want a project to succeed, what is the problem with selling a commercial version?
I have no moral problem with capital punishment, but (due to court costs and such) it is actually cheaper to keep them in jail for the rest of the criminal's life then to kill them. I seem to remember the cost of keeping someone in jail for a year is less than $30k. On the other hand, it is several million $ to get through the appeals process. (I need to find the $ reference, it is a couple of years old).
The problem is most of us assume that if they aren't executed, then they get a life sentence that really isn't.
I hear this a lot, but have never seen it backed up with a study and/or datasets. Does anyone have an actual reference? I get a little worried about thing stated with "All".
look up "lend lease programs" as related to WWII. That is not giving someone the finger.
My big problem with this is people willingness to hand student IP over to a for profit company. A business that cannot survive with using the student's IP. I could live if it was a non-profit gathering of schools and had strict rules against data mining for other uses, but I have a sick feeling that papers submitted are not exactly anonymous and this place could make good money as a head hunter or pre-screening agency for companies. It seems like a really, really bad thing for students, even beyond the IP.
I agree with your restatement, paying does not guarantee success (luckily), but I guess my point was that the primary reason for a University (as far as students are concerned) is to provide that opportunity.
I also have problems with Unversities taking ownership of works produced when they are being payed for teaching, not to acquire property. I seem to remember that the business plan for FedEx was handed in as an assignment. I am sure glad for all those FedEx employees that the university did gain ownership and rights to that.
I also earned my degree in an honest manner. I am not happy with cheating and have taught classes at a University. I did change my tests, assignments, and questions each semester to keep a lot of this stuff at bay.
wouldn't it be more like: "the student pays to earn a degree". The University is being paid, they are not (looking at my Student Loan payment) doing it for free.
let me get this straight, I am paying them to take my rights away.
I've come to the conclusion that the phrase "Won't someone think of the children!" actually means "I have no logical argument". I think in the upcoming election (US), I will vote against anyone who uses that phrase.
Ego and need to feed that ego is why Theo and the OpenBSD / OpenSSH developers have made OpenSSH so good.
I wouldn't hold the rail roads up as Great American Private Ventures. The amount of tax subsidies and free land was kinda staggering.
If you are a fed running a grant, you make sure one of the sites is in New Mexico and you make sure to do your site visit during a major local holiday (take a guess). It is sometimes really that simple. Almost as bad as the HUD conference in Hawaii (where there was no HUD housing at the time - neutral ground I guess).
sign of the future -> actually "Back to the Future Part 2"
Yeah, distributing their anti-military software on a network originated by the military is too choice. Guess it goes with the lack of reading comprehension demonstrated in propagating the 3 laws. History is hard.
I'm talking basic printing of something that turns out to be untrue and you come up with some wild PHYSICAL / DANGER TO LIFE AND LIMB scenario involving guns. Scratch that, must be a CNN/FOX thing.
If you print or say something to a group of people and then find it to be untrue, it is generally polite to tell the same audience the new information. This is called a retraction.
Because it is the right thing to do if you make remarks about someone or something that are untrue.
you are so right, the only difference is:
- A manufacture slapped the "robot" label on a piece of industrial equipment.
- A worker fails to observe safety procedure as is killed in industrial machine accident
- Author, failing to grasp difference between "sci-fi robot" and modern, industrial "robot" - writes dumb article
- Worse, 3 laws being advocated, were not terribly effective in book (plot device)
Does this robot even have sensors that would pick up a human in its area? I kinda doubt it since that would make it more expensive for no gain over normal safety procedures.Actually the trademark is for "Web 2.0" in relation to any conference, gathering, etc. They didn't just trademark their own conference name, they went for the term in any context involving conferences. Big difference.
Actually, sometimes a sign is not good enough. Check out some of the cases of "Attractive Nuisance" cases.