I see this meme often on Slashdot but it isn't true. For example, you can copyright in the look of a new Ford as well as patent some aspect of its design.
Yes, but you cannot patent the look or copyright the part.
Since then we've seen the emergence of Google as a powerful challenger to Microsoft.
Dude, if software patents were around when google was coming together Lycos would have sued them into oblivion. What an ironic company to use as an example.
Your assertion that Iraq was not invaded for its oil because America isn't profiting from it assumes that the orchestrators of the war are/were in some way competent.
Guess what, you (apparently) get paid RIGHT AWAY for your work, not in royalties over a period of years.
You realize royalties are not part of copyright law. They are an outside agreement you make with a publisher in exchange for your work. Nobody forced you to sign that contract.
I have an even better idea, one that completely removes the ambiguity. After each letter of the acronym say the word it stands for. That will save all sorts of time!
So let me get this straight, you think warrantless wiretapping is a good thing?
FYI: This amendment was to _block_ telecom immunity. Obama voted to block immunity, Clinton didn't vote and McCain (as well as every other republican) voted for immunity. This link was posted up the thread a bit. It lists who voted how.
Don't know about you but I don't see films being done as concerts (as plays and films are entirely different mediums.) And of course, having reduced ability to do something is always good. Cutting back opportunity is always a benefit.
Now if only there was some sort of building where they could display films at. What they could do is charge a fee in exchange for permission to enter. This would allow them to make money off their effort without restricting my freedom of speech.
From the summary: 'An OS should never have been something that people (in general) really care about: it should be completely invisible and nobody should give a flying [expletive] about it except the technical people.'
It sounds like this Linus guy should focus his energy on the Linux kernel then huh?
This is the British Government we're talking about. They have shown themselves, time and time again, to be completely incapable of completing any IT project. Every time they try, they award the contract to EDS, it goes horrendously over-budget and ends up being cancelled. Expect the big brother database to go online some time around 2050, only be able to store first names, and crash losing all data the first time someone tries to run a query.
That sounds even worse. At least with a properly functioning system the "If you have nothing to hide..." defense has some truth to it.
Who gives two shits what a kook who believes in invisible super-beings things[sic]?
The majority of the human race who are not atheist? The vocal atheists here on Slashdot should realize that everything is not them.
So the majority of religious people are Catholic? Hardly.
In the very backwards state of Arizona, they still use paper ballots. Yet when those ballots are inserted into the ballot box, they go through a visual scanner that kicks the ballot back out immediately if it is improperly marked. While you can choose not to vote on any given ballot issue, accidentally marking more than one vote for an issue will reject the ballot immediately, and you can get a new one on the spot to correct. Paper ballots don't need to have the problems cited here, and obviously have some advantages in recounts afterwards.
Of course, by the ACLU rules, voting Republican is a source of voter error, and reason for the ballot to be rejected.
So, you support the ACLU in this lawsuit then because that is exactly what they are arguing for.
How is the previous post a troll? Believe what the AC is trying to say is that since there have been (apparently) no more attacks of 9-11 scope carried out in the US, perhaps, just perhaps, the program is working.
The thing is that you don't have any inherent right to watch movies or TV shows.
Actually, our inherent right to free speech does allow us to say or watch anything we want. It is this inherent right that is artificially restricted, for a limited time, in order to encourage the progress of arts and sciences.
It's also unclear whether the behaviour is properly labeled. "Learn from your mistakes" is a phrase that assumes your choice and its consequences are clear: do this or do that, and if "this" leads to bad consequences, why, you need to "learn from your mistake" and do "that" instead.
In this case the "rightness" was quantifiable. Later in the article they do mention real life is more complex.
FTA: At first, the volunteers were shown sets of two symbols and were asked to select one. Each choice was followed by positive or negative feedback represented by a smiling or frowning face, respectively. The researchers then tested whether the men had learnt to choose the symbol that had the most positive feedback and avoid the one that led to the most negative feedback.
This idiot fails to realize that labels have been selling DRM free music for the last 20 years. It's called a CD. Funny how the "digital economy" hasn't collapsed yet.
The "condemnations" of homosexuality on the one hand and shrimp on the other are not the same, using entirely different words. (Just because the 400 year-old language in the KJV uses the word "abomination" in both passages, doesn't mean the Hebrew is the same.)
What a great example of what the GP was talking about. You have to read those VERY creatively for there to be any difference.
So when you share your name, address and credit card number (commonly considered 'personal data') with Amazon, under the 'information wants to be free' principle they can share it with whoever they want?
The information still "wants" to be free in that, by its very nature, it is trivially easy to disseminate. The "but what about credit card information" edge case is not about the data itself. Sharing credit card information by itself is not harmful. It is when somebody commits the actual act of theft by stealing my money that we have a problem.
Ask any English teacher over the age of 50 what they think of today's literacy rates. They'll generally tell you that kids today are idiots, and most can't comprehend Shakespeare let alone the newspaper.
Ask any person, over the age of fity, at any time in the last 1000 years any question about "today's youth" and you will get the exact same answer.
Slashdot Mirror
I see this meme often on Slashdot but it isn't true. For example, you can copyright in the look of a new Ford as well as patent some aspect of its design.
Yes, but you cannot patent the look or copyright the part.
Since then we've seen the emergence of Google as a powerful challenger to Microsoft.
Dude, if software patents were around when google was coming together Lycos would have sued them into oblivion. What an ironic company to use as an example.
Your assertion that Iraq was not invaded for its oil because America isn't profiting from it assumes that the orchestrators of the war are/were in some way competent.
The assertion is false! Google oil profit.
Guess what, you (apparently) get paid RIGHT AWAY for your work, not in royalties over a period of years.
You realize royalties are not part of copyright law. They are an outside agreement you make with a publisher in exchange for your work. Nobody forced you to sign that contract.
Maybe. But very few people are willing to go to jail to fight for the right to share MP3s.
You can say that about pretty much any right these days.
I have an even better idea, one that completely removes the ambiguity. After each letter of the acronym say the word it stands for. That will save all sorts of time!
Why does someone in a low skill job deserve $30+ hour, full benefits, and a pension plan?
I work in a union steel mill. The starting rate is $14 per hour. At 5% raises yearly it would take 16 years to reach $30/hr.
She decided not to jeopardize her campaign and just didn't vote at all. Obama voted against immunity. Most "blue dog" democrats voted for immunity
Most Democrats (30/48=63%) voted against telecom immunity. Not that I am happy about the 18 who crossed the aisle but they aren't from my state.
So let me get this straight, you think warrantless wiretapping is a good thing?
FYI: This amendment was to _block_ telecom immunity. Obama voted to block immunity, Clinton didn't vote and McCain (as well as every other republican) voted for immunity. This link was posted up the thread a bit. It lists who voted how.
Don't know about you but I don't see films being done as concerts (as plays and films are entirely different mediums.) And of course, having reduced ability to do something is always good. Cutting back opportunity is always a benefit.
Now if only there was some sort of building where they could display films at. What they could do is charge a fee in exchange for permission to enter. This would allow them to make money off their effort without restricting my freedom of speech.
DirtyHerring (635192) == William Shatner
Well...does he or not?
That's what he's been doing for the last decade. Giving a few talks here and there doesn't mean 99% of his time isn't still devoted to the kernel.
I know, it was a joke pointing out the ridiculousness of the article premise.
From the summary:
'An OS should never have been something that people (in general) really care about: it should be completely invisible and nobody should give a flying [expletive] about it except the technical people.'
It sounds like this Linus guy should focus his energy on the Linux kernel then huh?
This is the British Government we're talking about. They have shown themselves, time and time again, to be completely incapable of completing any IT project. Every time they try, they award the contract to EDS, it goes horrendously over-budget and ends up being cancelled. Expect the big brother database to go online some time around 2050, only be able to store first names, and crash losing all data the first time someone tries to run a query.
That sounds even worse. At least with a properly functioning system the "If you have nothing to hide..." defense has some truth to it.
Who gives two shits what a kook who believes in invisible super-beings things[sic]?
The majority of the human race who are not atheist? The vocal atheists here on Slashdot should realize that everything is not them.
So the majority of religious people are Catholic? Hardly.
In the very backwards state of Arizona, they still use paper ballots. Yet when those ballots are inserted into the ballot box, they go through a visual scanner that kicks the ballot back out immediately if it is improperly marked. While you can choose not to vote on any given ballot issue, accidentally marking more than one vote for an issue will reject the ballot immediately, and you can get a new one on the spot to correct. Paper ballots don't need to have the problems cited here, and obviously have some advantages in recounts afterwards.
Of course, by the ACLU rules, voting Republican is a source of voter error, and reason for the ballot to be rejected.
So, you support the ACLU in this lawsuit then because that is exactly what they are arguing for.
How is the previous post a troll? Believe what the AC is trying to say is that since there have been (apparently) no more attacks of 9-11 scope carried out in the US, perhaps, just perhaps, the program is working.
Because there is no -1: Specious moderation.
The thing is that you don't have any inherent right to watch movies or TV shows.
Actually, our inherent right to free speech does allow us to say or watch anything we want. It is this inherent right that is artificially restricted, for a limited time, in order to encourage the progress of arts and sciences.
It's also unclear whether the behaviour is properly labeled. "Learn from your mistakes" is a phrase that assumes your choice and its consequences are clear: do this or do that, and if "this" leads to bad consequences, why, you need to "learn from your mistake" and do "that" instead.
In this case the "rightness" was quantifiable. Later in the article they do mention real life is more complex.
FTA:
At first, the volunteers were shown sets of two symbols and were asked to select one. Each choice was followed by positive or negative feedback represented by a smiling or frowning face, respectively. The researchers then tested whether the men had learnt to choose the symbol that had the most positive feedback and avoid the one that led to the most negative feedback.
This idiot fails to realize that labels have been selling DRM free music for the last 20 years. It's called a CD. Funny how the "digital economy" hasn't collapsed yet.
So, on what basis are you deciding that we have to read them "creatively" for them to be different? What do the two words mean? What's their usage?
They both mean bad. That is probably why every translation in the last 1000 years have used interchangeable words.
DTrace is hardly crippled, although these modifications are certainly not ideal.
Yeah, that guy in the wheelchair is not crippled either. It's just that the modifications the car crash made to his legs are certainly not ideal.
The "condemnations" of homosexuality on the one hand and shrimp on the other are not the same, using entirely different words. (Just because the 400 year-old language in the KJV uses the word "abomination" in both passages, doesn't mean the Hebrew is the same.)
What a great example of what the GP was talking about. You have to read those VERY creatively for there to be any difference.
So when you share your name, address and credit card number (commonly considered 'personal data') with Amazon, under the 'information wants to be free' principle they can share it with whoever they want?
The information still "wants" to be free in that, by its very nature, it is trivially easy to disseminate. The "but what about credit card information" edge case is not about the data itself. Sharing credit card information by itself is not harmful. It is when somebody commits the actual act of theft by stealing my money that we have a problem.
Ask any English teacher over the age of 50 what they think of today's literacy rates. They'll generally tell you that kids today are idiots, and most can't comprehend Shakespeare let alone the newspaper.
Ask any person, over the age of fity, at any time in the last 1000 years any question about "today's youth" and you will get the exact same answer.