I just thought I'd say I have Ampzilla pre amp and amp, linked to a pair of stereo speakers my father built. It's great, damn fantastic sound. Don't know why, I can just tell, if I play a CD on my computer (Audigy + Creative DT5.1 - absolutely nothing special) or a 192kbps MP3 via DAC into Ampzilla, Ampzilla sounds foine.
Why should liability be software or hardwar based?
If i design a system to move some gears via an operator pressing big electronic buttons as a mechanical engineery, why should an electronic engineer who designs a program to operate the gears be exempt?
We are both designing a system to do a job. As an electronic engineer, I make my system based on some OS, so either I or the OS manufacturer (which, I add, licences an OS, if it is used against the license terms, it is my liability) has the liability.
I wasn't pro nor anti - the unrestircted bookstore is a favourite for ppl who suggest the internet and the real world are somewhat different.
I don't have kids yet - but you seem to have a really good attitude to yours. I don't want to impose my opinions on others (including my future children), bravo for your actions.
But what i applaud most of all is the attitude "if my kids want to do something, I'll give my attention and do it with them." If only more parents were like this.
Surprisingly, i never thought to look at the code... i guessed if it is *.jpq, IE will load it as a picture else return an error... guess i was wrong again... it really is a html page called *.jpg but IE interprets all and passes no judgement.
So Canada [democratic], Hong Kong [democratic weighted towards capitalism, no communism in sight], and Singapore [democratic capitalism] are socialist?
That about Cuba [communist socialist] the UK [a socialist party in government, you know socialist isn't equal to communist huh???!!!] France [socialist] Germany [socialist] Finland [socialist] Sweden [socialist]....... all don't have SARS
And Hong Kong, Singapore are far more capitalist than most western european countires.
I guess they all have yellow skin so must be socialist, huh?
Did you they the traceroot program. Yeah they're always available... but looking at others' traceroots is just more interesting... like a guy in Bangkok had been routed via the same route as me (I'm in the UK) across the US.
But, if the bidders pay for it, why would they pay for it if they knew i was available for free? They either pay for it because they did not know it existed. so the seller is bringing it to a new market, or they dodn't have the time to download it.
I think this guy selling on eBay should give credit to the original author. For sure.
But because it is sold does not make it bad.
Like linux distros... I buy them but Linus does not get the cash. The distros give credit to him/them as they should (morally and legally). The eBay seller should be the same.
I say sue them, if you could, there are so many fly-by-night traders on eBay.
r.e. DCMA though, I don't even know if I myself am in favour or against. It has good points and bad. I suppose my moral view is that culture should be free for all, but that if culture is free, why will someone spend time producing art (i know there can be a love, but this is only part of it, one has to put bread on the table), when they don't get paid? Can governments really subsidise funding well? Not really.
Looking back at rennaisance artists (musicians, writers, etc), most were chummy doing requested compositions for the ruling classes - we don't have that anymore. If art cannot be paid for we risk no art. If art is paid for we serve the highest bidder or the lowest common denominator. This is a true dilemma.
This was released under conditions. Just because you do not pay does not mean there are no conditions.
These efforts are due to a person, and as long as they licenced their product they have a right for that licence to be upheld.
A parasite is someone who leeches off others for their own benefit. In this case the guy is selling stuff he does not have a right to do.
When you download music, you do absorb the property of others. But the use, imho, is all important.
Downloading music, for example, spreads culture (no matter how bad the taste of a 15 year old NSYNC fan), where as packaging something up restricts it.
The counterfactuals - should culture be paid for if the author intended (as in copyright, as creators of culture have a 'right' to their rewards, as thats why they did it). Or the bidders on ebay clearly did not know your product was freely available, so what does it hurt if it is sold? Are you only after personal satisfaction... i.e. EGO?
Should creation of culture be accountable? If you allow it under 'open' licences why is that more valid than 'closed' copyright? hmmmm, I think culture should be freely shared between all, if it is distributed for a price or for free is equal in my eyes, but if that disencentivises culture creation, but demanding payment becomes questionable. Of course, my opinion is not that of the law.
Mod parent down or don't mod at all (why mod up something that is wrong??????)
Chatting sh1t is not informative, it is flamebait/trolling.
> Carbon monoide is not poisonous Uh, no.
> Carbon monoxide is not a problem... we have the technology You have the technology? We have the technology to make diamonds from dust... how about using it instead of creating more CO???
> Carbon dioxide... the normal result of combustion. (That means it's unavoidable) Yes, it is not the same or as disasterous as CO, but CO2 is still a problem. And it is avoidable - use energy sources which do not combust where alternatives exist. There is a big difference between normal bodily functions (breathing) and burning millions of tons of oil and coal every day. Do you understand that?
> Your problem is that you are not only ignorant So, are you not ignorant and talking rubbish, or you are ignorant?
Its a pity you clouded some reasonable points such a lens effect and conflicts of different global warning theories (indeed, whether they really exist) with such ridiclous cr4p.
why is it better than an iPod? A dedicated lower cost dedicated function device. The usefulness of this type of thing must be in its adaptability (or complex function, like a firewall or fancy router etc), rather than a narrow simple dedicated function.
Re:Good but...
on
Mini-Box M-100
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yes, why pay more for a small computer that ca have some dedicated function when you can get custom hardware to do it smaller for less with less redundancy.
I think the real use for these (and low power CPU mini-itxs etc) is for a multi-use function, perhaps as a flexible terminal to your main computer in the closet.
They make money from it. If they did 'magically' disapear, then 180 more would replace them and make they money they were making.
The spammers are bad, but they are only permitted to be so by those that pay them. If we stop those that pay them, there'd be a whole lot less spam. [a bit like the war on drugs, drug lords replace killed drug lords... but at the end of the day if there we could stop the addicts being the addicts there'd be no drug lords... a bit circular].
I agree, good idea, its a good way of incentivising parents to act 'within the system'.
Another option would be to sue (or seperate) any parents that let their children browse the web unsupervised... don't want to be old fashioned, but would you let your 10 year old child to read what they liked in an unrestricted bookstore? The parents would be seperated from their kids. And that's what the internet is (much as AOL may try to disagree). Any parents who view their children as impressionable but let them run amock on the internet should be locked up themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
A surpremely ironic post, sir.
I just thought I'd say I have Ampzilla pre amp and amp, linked to a pair of stereo speakers my father built. It's great, damn fantastic sound. Don't know why, I can just tell, if I play a CD on my computer (Audigy + Creative DT5.1 - absolutely nothing special) or a 192kbps MP3 via DAC into Ampzilla, Ampzilla sounds foine.
> The odds are absurd, of course, but it is possible
No, this is not mutually exclusive. Infact, it is impossible for them to be mutually exclusive, because:
1. If it is not possible, the odds are not absurd, they don't exist as there is only one state.
2. If the odds are absurd, some odds exist, so if small are absurd.
So you statement is false, no QED necessary, and the parent is true, QED.
Tens of thousands? The problem is that it'll take hundreds and possibly a few million, which is too much of a risky liability.
liar
Why don't they just use Hi-8?
Network sharing... hmmmmm
Imagine a Beowolf cluster of these!!!
IS UNSTOPPABLE.
A continous force in our universe... better we act within it than futile attampts against it.
Is this modded as +4 100% interesting???
Why why why?
Pity there is no -1 100% wrong choice huh?
Why should liability be software or hardwar based?
If i design a system to move some gears via an operator pressing big electronic buttons as a mechanical engineery, why should an electronic engineer who designs a program to operate the gears be exempt?
We are both designing a system to do a job. As an electronic engineer, I make my system based on some OS, so either I or the OS manufacturer (which, I add, licences an OS, if it is used against the license terms, it is my liability) has the liability.
Don't be lazy allocating responsibility.
I wasn't pro nor anti - the unrestircted bookstore is a favourite for ppl who suggest the internet and the real world are somewhat different.
I don't have kids yet - but you seem to have a really good attitude to yours. I don't want to impose my opinions on others (including my future children), bravo for your actions.
But what i applaud most of all is the attitude "if my kids want to do something, I'll give my attention and do it with them." If only more parents were like this.
Sounds like a combination of a joystick [tilting] and conventional mouse [moving], just with the stick part removed.
SUrely you are the troll?
The parent post hasn;t even been modded yet.
You are a sad sad sad troll troll troll. loser.
Surprisingly, i never thought to look at the code... i guessed if it is *.jpq, IE will load it as a picture else return an error... guess i was wrong again... it really is a html page called *.jpg but IE interprets all and passes no judgement.
Cheers, thanks for the info.
So Canada [democratic], Hong Kong [democratic weighted towards capitalism, no communism in sight], and Singapore [democratic capitalism] are socialist?
That about Cuba [communist socialist] the UK [a socialist party in government, you know socialist isn't equal to communist huh???!!!] France [socialist] Germany [socialist] Finland [socialist] Sweden [socialist]....... all don't have SARS
And Hong Kong, Singapore are far more capitalist than most western european countires.
I guess they all have yellow skin so must be socialist, huh?
This pic makes my cd drive eject... hmmm
http://www.redcoat.net/pics/cupholder.jpg
Did you they the traceroot program. Yeah they're always available... but looking at others' traceroots is just more interesting... like a guy in Bangkok had been routed via the same route as me (I'm in the UK) across the US.
Hmmm, saying that makes it all seem a bit sad.
But, if the bidders pay for it, why would they pay for it if they knew i was available for free? They either pay for it because they did not know it existed. so the seller is bringing it to a new market, or they dodn't have the time to download it.
I think this guy selling on eBay should give credit to the original author. For sure.
But because it is sold does not make it bad.
Like linux distros... I buy them but Linus does not get the cash. The distros give credit to him/them as they should (morally and legally). The eBay seller should be the same.
I say sue them, if you could, there are so many fly-by-night traders on eBay.
r.e. DCMA though, I don't even know if I myself am in favour or against. It has good points and bad. I suppose my moral view is that culture should be free for all, but that if culture is free, why will someone spend time producing art (i know there can be a love, but this is only part of it, one has to put bread on the table), when they don't get paid? Can governments really subsidise funding well? Not really.
Looking back at rennaisance artists (musicians, writers, etc), most were chummy doing requested compositions for the ruling classes - we don't have that anymore. If art cannot be paid for we risk no art. If art is paid for we serve the highest bidder or the lowest common denominator. This is a true dilemma.
This was released under conditions. Just because you do not pay does not mean there are no conditions.
These efforts are due to a person, and as long as they licenced their product they have a right for that licence to be upheld.
A parasite is someone who leeches off others for their own benefit. In this case the guy is selling stuff he does not have a right to do.
When you download music, you do absorb the property of others. But the use, imho, is all important.
Downloading music, for example, spreads culture (no matter how bad the taste of a 15 year old NSYNC fan), where as packaging something up restricts it.
The counterfactuals - should culture be paid for if the author intended (as in copyright, as creators of culture have a 'right' to their rewards, as thats why they did it). Or the bidders on ebay clearly did not know your product was freely available, so what does it hurt if it is sold? Are you only after personal satisfaction... i.e. EGO?
Should creation of culture be accountable? If you allow it under 'open' licences why is that more valid than 'closed' copyright? hmmmm, I think culture should be freely shared between all, if it is distributed for a price or for free is equal in my eyes, but if that disencentivises culture creation, but demanding payment becomes questionable. Of course, my opinion is not that of the law.
Mod parent down or don't mod at all (why mod up something that is wrong??????)
Chatting sh1t is not informative, it is flamebait/trolling.
> Carbon monoide is not poisonous
Uh, no.
> Carbon monoxide is not a problem... we have the technology
You have the technology? We have the technology to make diamonds from dust... how about using it instead of creating more CO???
> Carbon dioxide... the normal result of combustion. (That means it's unavoidable)
Yes, it is not the same or as disasterous as CO, but CO2 is still a problem. And it is avoidable - use energy sources which do not combust where alternatives exist. There is a big difference between normal bodily functions (breathing) and burning millions of tons of oil and coal every day. Do you understand that?
> Your problem is that you are not only ignorant
So, are you not ignorant and talking rubbish, or you are ignorant?
Its a pity you clouded some reasonable points such a lens effect and conflicts of different global warning theories (indeed, whether they really exist) with such ridiclous cr4p.
why is it better than an iPod? A dedicated lower cost dedicated function device. The usefulness of this type of thing must be in its adaptability (or complex function, like a firewall or fancy router etc), rather than a narrow simple dedicated function.
Yes, why pay more for a small computer that ca have some dedicated function when you can get custom hardware to do it smaller for less with less redundancy.
I think the real use for these (and low power CPU mini-itxs etc) is for a multi-use function, perhaps as a flexible terminal to your main computer in the closet.
Damn right, you expressed it really well.
They make money from it. If they did 'magically' disapear, then 180 more would replace them and make they money they were making.
The spammers are bad, but they are only permitted to be so by those that pay them. If we stop those that pay them, there'd be a whole lot less spam. [a bit like the war on drugs, drug lords replace killed drug lords... but at the end of the day if there we could stop the addicts being the addicts there'd be no drug lords... a bit circular].
Of course, removing the source is not easy.
I agree, good idea, its a good way of incentivising parents to act 'within the system'.
Another option would be to sue (or seperate) any parents that let their children browse the web unsupervised... don't want to be old fashioned, but would you let your 10 year old child to read what they liked in an unrestricted bookstore? The parents would be seperated from their kids. And that's what the internet is (much as AOL may try to disagree). Any parents who view their children as impressionable but let them run amock on the internet should be locked up themselves.
I have no sympathy with parents like this.