If you believe something you haven't proven yourself, you are exercising faith. If you think otherwise, you are exercising ego. It really isn't that complicated.
Not according to Merriam Webster.
Main Entry: Faith
1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
The only entry that even mentions proof merely states that it must exist, not that you have to manually re-prove everything.
No, they need to just throw in the towel if they can't compete with their core product, because if they can't even do plain old cars decently, they're certainly not going to succeed at anything more grandiose.
If Nintendo followed this advice they would have gone bankrupt printing playing cards.
I don't care whether you agree or disagree with those laws, the current state of the law makes a mockery of any argument that IP rights are "imaginery." Score another one for Slashdot as propaganda tool.
So you are saying that a unique string of words (for example) is physical property?
If it was a choice made by the citizens of the United States, how come this bill was put at the very end of this huge Safe Port Act bill? One that was definitive and would - with almost no doubt - pass through to the pen of George W. Bush?
It was a choice made by the citizens to give the power of veto to that very pen of GW's. One that I definitely disagree with but that is a whole other issue.
A 2% increase over playing the 360 is better than nothing? Yeah the way having 2 pennies in your pocket is better than being flat broke. A far cry from it? Please.
Having 100% of you hypothetical sum isn't much better than being broke either.
I would expect my company to use every legal pressure available to safeguard our trade secrets. Furthermore, it isn't censorship, because it isn't the government. But I like your sarcasm none-the-less.
Main Entry:
censor
Function:
transitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
censored; censoring Listen to the pronunciation of censoring \sen(t)-s-ri, sen(t)s-ri\
Date:
1882
: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
The oped peice refers to religious faith as "belief without evidence." I believe this definition to be false. Certainly the characters who wrote in and were described by the Bible would not consider religious faith to be "belief without evidence." Rather they wrote what they considered to be personal evidence, with the hopes that readers of their words would likewise seek for their own personal evidence. Of course this area is, in the eyes of many, frought with difficulties. So certainly Dr. Davies can claim that these people have no evidence, but that doesn't make it true or untrue.
Okay, but how long does it last? Given the fact that I am not very likely to take off my shoe and bludgeon the person in front of me in the theater to death,
I know, that is so ridiculous!
It is the ass behind me kicking my chair that I am going to bludgeon to death.
IANAL, but why don't OSS developers offer a GPL-free version of their software for some really high price. That way, when big-media tries to steal (their words, not mine) their creative works, the developers can sue them for legitimate damages, citing a stratospheric market price per copy, then multiply the number of CDs they've distributed by their stratospheric market price to get damages from them?
You jest, but the damages they arrive at are statutory. The ruse, technically, is unnecessary.
"The problem if you get rid of the ability of slandering while anonymous you also remove the ability to tell the truth while being anonymous."
If this premise is true, then the rest of the argument follows. Can you provide evidence that this is the case? Citing examples of outright oppression does not provide any support to your assumption, as there was an absolutely no intent to separate truth from fiction in those cases.
What? To get semantic, the premise was a tautology so it is obviously true. I guess, therefore, you agree with parent.
The common sense answer would be that he listed a bunch of examples where anonymous speech is helpful.
What they're really talking about is (legitimately) re-visiting code that you or other people have written, and then picking and modularizing bite-sized chunks. In other words, you would design a large program (mark I) and then go back and pick out useful parts, clean/debug them and have working modules (mark II) for the next project.
Exactly! You can visualize these modular chunks of code as actual objects actually. Each object could have a series of methods that you could manipulate to make it do things. I call this theory manipulation orientated programming (or MOP) and am filing for the patent presently. Prepare to hear from my laywer.
I disagree. AFAICT, you actually use your early subscription privileges to compulsively scan every new article on slashdot to find those that are in any way critical of centralized government authority or Apple computers. Then, no matter what the particulars of the issue, no matter how benign or draconian the actions in question, you write a long multiple paragraph f1rst p0st where you express your staunch support of each and every case of expanded government authority or surveillance powers. Blissfully ignoring the lessons of the brutal history of the 20th century, your post invariably dismisses any and all concerns about each issue, regardless of their validity, as nothing more than paranoid ranting.
Moreover, I ask: If you bought a book on, say, ASP and it had sample code that did exactly what you wanted, would you then rewrite that code so it was not what was in the book? Of course you wouldn't!
Most programming books give you an explicit license for any examples. It is usually located in the back or on any discs that come with the book.
Normally, such a redundant comment does not add to the discussion but I have seen several posts in this thread with factually incorrect legal information modded up. I would exercise liberal salt usage...
They really seem to be pushing 3D interfaces in the article. While that's neat and all, I suspect there's a reason not every book is a pop-up book. Flat, 2D representations of data are typically the most efficient for our brain and eyeballs. For entertainment and representing 3D data, it can make sense. I just don't plan on coding in 3D any time soon.
I doubt 2d is inherently more efficient for the brain/eyeballs. It is more efficient when you are stuck with a 2d display (think paper and monitors) though.
Define native and then tell me how you can be more native.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
native/netv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ney-tiv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective
1. being the place or environment in which a person was born or a thing came into being: one's native land.
2. belonging to a person by birth or to a thing by nature; inherent: native ability; native grace.
3. belonging by birth to a people regarded as indigenous to a certain place, esp. a preliterate people: Native guides accompanied the expedition through the rain forest.
4. of indigenous origin, growth, or production: native pottery.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of the indigenous inhabitants of a place or country: native customs; native dress.
6. born in a particular place or country: a native New Yorker.
1. That was easy.
2. You could say someone born in New Jersey is less a native of New York than someone born in Manhattan.
With absolutely NO IP protection then movies just won't get made.
Doubtful. Plenty of "IP" was created before copyright even existed. To say that no content, regardless of medium, would be created without copyright is not supported at best, flat-out fraudulent at worst.
Slashdot Mirror
If you believe something you haven't proven yourself, you are exercising faith. If you think otherwise, you are exercising ego. It really isn't that complicated.
Not according to Merriam Webster.
Main Entry: Faith
1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
The only entry that even mentions proof merely states that it must exist, not that you have to manually re-prove everything.
No, they need to just throw in the towel if they can't compete with their core product, because if they can't even do plain old cars decently, they're certainly not going to succeed at anything more grandiose.
If Nintendo followed this advice they would have gone bankrupt printing playing cards.
Is a web spider not a "dispatch-able search agent?"
I don't care whether you agree or disagree with those laws, the current state of the law makes a mockery of any argument that IP rights are "imaginery." Score another one for Slashdot as propaganda tool.
So you are saying that a unique string of words (for example) is physical property?
Re:A Good DVD Writer For Most People (Score:5, Insightful)
A dvd-writer isn't feasible to backup nearly 300gb.
"Most People" don't have nearly 300gb.
If it was a choice made by the citizens of the United States, how come this bill was put at the very end of this huge Safe Port Act bill? One that was definitive and would - with almost no doubt - pass through to the pen of George W. Bush?
It was a choice made by the citizens to give the power of veto to that very pen of GW's. One that I definitely disagree with but that is a whole other issue.
A 2% increase over playing the 360 is better than nothing? Yeah the way having 2 pennies in your pocket is better than being flat broke. A far cry from it? Please.
Having 100% of you hypothetical sum isn't much better than being broke either.
I would expect my company to use every legal pressure available to safeguard our trade secrets. Furthermore, it isn't censorship, because it isn't the government. But I like your sarcasm none-the-less.
Main Entry:
censor
Function:
transitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
censored; censoring Listen to the pronunciation of censoring \sen(t)-s-ri, sen(t)s-ri\ Date: 1882
: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
Merriam Webster says you are wrong.
Since when is "protecting trade secrets" the same as "censorship". I think it's time for /. to abandon the tag feature.
No kidding. It is not as if they used legal pressure to suppress speech they didn't approve of.
The same people giving money to both sides... Almost as if they don't care who wins. Funny that, eh...
Because companies absolutely love spending twice the money necessary for these favors?
The oped peice refers to religious faith as "belief without evidence." I believe this definition to be false. Certainly the characters who wrote in and were described by the Bible would not consider religious faith to be "belief without evidence." Rather they wrote what they considered to be personal evidence, with the hopes that readers of their words would likewise seek for their own personal evidence. Of course this area is, in the eyes of many, frought with difficulties. So certainly Dr. Davies can claim that these people have no evidence, but that doesn't make it true or untrue.
Do you have any evidence for this belief?
Okay, but how long does it last? Given the fact that I am not very likely to take off my shoe and bludgeon the person in front of me in the theater to death,
I know, that is so ridiculous!
It is the ass behind me kicking my chair that I am going to bludgeon to death.
IANAL, but why don't OSS developers offer a GPL-free version of their software for some really high price. That way, when big-media tries to steal (their words, not mine) their creative works, the developers can sue them for legitimate damages, citing a stratospheric market price per copy, then multiply the number of CDs they've distributed by their stratospheric market price to get damages from them?
You jest, but the damages they arrive at are statutory. The ruse, technically, is unnecessary.
"The problem if you get rid of the ability of slandering while anonymous you also remove the ability to tell the truth while being anonymous."
If this premise is true, then the rest of the argument follows. Can you provide evidence that this is the case? Citing examples of outright oppression does not provide any support to your assumption, as there was an absolutely no intent to separate truth from fiction in those cases.
What? To get semantic, the premise was a tautology so it is obviously true. I guess, therefore, you agree with parent.
The common sense answer would be that he listed a bunch of examples where anonymous speech is helpful.
Sorry, this is not true. ISPs are not common carriers. They lobbied very hardly to not be saddled by such restrictions.
In A Deepness in the Sky, Vernor Vinge posited Programmer Archaeologists would replace all new development. http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=760521
Thanks, I already know Python.
What they're really talking about is (legitimately) re-visiting code that you or other people have written, and then picking and modularizing bite-sized chunks. In other words, you would design a large program (mark I) and then go back and pick out useful parts, clean/debug them and have working modules (mark II) for the next project.
Exactly! You can visualize these modular chunks of code as actual objects actually. Each object could have a series of methods that you could manipulate to make it do things. I call this theory manipulation orientated programming (or MOP) and am filing for the patent presently. Prepare to hear from my laywer.
Why when you buy a 100GB hard drive does it only have about 96GB available on it?
Great example. You were listing examples of fraud correct?
Because Western Digital just settled a lawsuit over this.
I disagree. AFAICT, you actually use your early subscription privileges to compulsively scan every new article on slashdot to find those that are in any way critical of centralized government authority or Apple computers. Then, no matter what the particulars of the issue, no matter how benign or draconian the actions in question, you write a long multiple paragraph f1rst p0st where you express your staunch support of each and every case of expanded government authority or surveillance powers. Blissfully ignoring the lessons of the brutal history of the 20th century, your post invariably dismisses any and all concerns about each issue, regardless of their validity, as nothing more than paranoid ranting.
Moreover, I ask: If you bought a book on, say, ASP and it had sample code that did exactly what you wanted, would you then rewrite that code so it was not what was in the book? Of course you wouldn't!
Most programming books give you an explicit license for any examples. It is usually located in the back or on any discs that come with the book.
Ask a lawyer, not Slashdot
Normally, such a redundant comment does not add to the discussion but I have seen several posts in this thread with factually incorrect legal information modded up. I would exercise liberal salt usage...
But wouldn't the RIAA have to prove the songs were pulled down that many times to get that number?
Why is anyone entertaining the notion that you could be held responsible for somebody else's copyright infringement?
They really seem to be pushing 3D interfaces in the article. While that's neat and all, I suspect there's a reason not every book is a pop-up book. Flat, 2D representations of data are typically the most efficient for our brain and eyeballs. For entertainment and representing 3D data, it can make sense. I just don't plan on coding in 3D any time soon.
I doubt 2d is inherently more efficient for the brain/eyeballs. It is more efficient when you are stuck with a 2d display (think paper and monitors) though.
Define native and then tell me how you can be more native.
/netv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ney-tiv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
native
-adjective 1. being the place or environment in which a person was born or a thing came into being: one's native land.
2. belonging to a person by birth or to a thing by nature; inherent: native ability; native grace.
3. belonging by birth to a people regarded as indigenous to a certain place, esp. a preliterate people: Native guides accompanied the expedition through the rain forest.
4. of indigenous origin, growth, or production: native pottery.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of the indigenous inhabitants of a place or country: native customs; native dress.
6. born in a particular place or country: a native New Yorker.
1. That was easy.
2. You could say someone born in New Jersey is less a native of New York than someone born in Manhattan.
With absolutely NO IP protection then movies just won't get made.
Doubtful. Plenty of "IP" was created before copyright even existed. To say that no content, regardless of medium, would be created without copyright is not supported at best, flat-out fraudulent at worst.