/* The GOP did something similar a few years back for the presidental elections. Howard (the Scream) Dean had this supposed huge following by people on the internet. Suddenly, out of nowhere, hundreds of blogs showed up supporting Bush/Cheney. */
Wasn't DCI involved with that Bush/Cheney campaign?
In Europe we had great fun with TechCentralStation, a Service of DCI, a propaganda machine for the US industry whoc also took part in election campaigns.
In my opinion DCI is a company the European intelligence community should look at as they spill hate propaganda against EU muslims and the French nation. DCI does a lot in the area of astroturfing.
When I said, fun, I meant fun.
Or could you take campaigns like this one here serious?
http://www.techcentralstation.be/supersizecon.html
"The disaster need never have happened if managers and workers had clung to known principles of safely operating on the edge of extreme hazards -- nothing was learned by the disaster that hadn't already been learned, and then forgotten."
I think this is flawed. And unfortunately it did happen again.
Desaster is part of technology. Currently my Linux is broken. Was it inevitable? I don't know. Was it my fault? I don't think so.
Keep technology simple. Fix bugs. Know the risk. But don't say "The disaster need never have happened if Linux developers had clung to known principles of safely operating on the edge of extreme hardware"
The question is not whether a patent granted is "obvious" or not, the question is whether the object which gets patented has any meaningful role.
Ideas for software are not rare. Therefore we do not need an incentive system (with high barriers and costs) to get more ideas about software. In fact ideas in software are useless unless you get an implementation. There even is a software idea overflow and an implementation lag ("software crisis").
Patents for software exist in the US because there is no movement against Software Patents. http://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/us-parl Give me 500k $ for a campaign and US software patents will be gone soon.
The fight against software patenting in Europe is won. Now the action is related to the community patent and of course it could be a indirect way to get swpat through. At least the people like Jonathan Zuck claim so, because they make their money from Software patent lobbying. As persons like Jonathan Zuck are very counter-productive in lobbying I do not feel very much afraid. We will prevent this as long as you support our action in Europe. At least this time "industry" seems to misunderstand the content of the proposal and a noise strategy will not help them. Do you think Members of Parliament trust a an organisation named "Progress & Freedom Foundation"? No.
The bridge position is between having no copyright protection for software at all, and having no ability to write free software at all.
Bullshit! It is about patents and patenting. Not about software copyright.
But in fact opponents of the patent system in the field of software think that copyright-style regulation could be needed for a conceptual protection of software.
We had such a proposal based on Hartmut Pilch's 10 core clarifications. Also the Europarl proposal of Michel Rocard aimed at the right direction. Yes, we are involved in legal drafting.
--- If software patents get introduced via that compat path it will be very indirect. And we will make sure through the political process that safeguards are provided.
The movement is strong enough and does not need cheap propaganda.
The article is wrong as it implies a strategy towards software patents but software patents are gone. The dice is cast. It is all about making it bullet-proof that no software patents get granted via case law once the ECJ gets in charge.
In general MEPs are our friends. You do not buy politicians but you can invest in software patent lobbyism.
Think of the patent system as an incentive system.
The problem is not obviousness but lies in the "object" which gets patent protection.
In the field of software ideas are not rare, so you do not need this inefficient instrument to incite people to have ideas. Plus the transaction costs imposed on the market. Having software ideas is everyday's business and less complicated and costly than obtaining a patent. So we get the patent-knowledge divide: There are people specialised on making software and people specialised on getting software patents. Two seperated spheres.
I don't think the Taiwanese government regards Taiwan as a part of Red China.
They insist on beeing an independend state.
Now, the Red Chinese Government questions that. So this is an existent international conflict.
What we believe is irrelevant. Of course there is no reason to regard Taiwan as a part of the current chinese state.
And Microsoft is caught in between and has to be very careful when it deals with Red China. Because otherwise the Taiwanese government will kick Ms in the ass.
It is probably more the conflict of Taiwan with China and Microsoft's recent moves to take part in the biggest party in the world. And that MS lobbyists are nuts.
In fact "China" is a universe of different nations and cultures. Taiwan is a seperate state and belonged to China in history. Taiwan is no part of China and a totally different political system and culture. Today a reunification of china and Taiwan is as absurd as a reunification of India and Pakistan.
MS has serious corporate affairs problems and its lobbying strategies are part of the game.
E.g. in Europe: When MS gets the scum of US lobbying to Europe and they are unable to adapt to Europe, no wonder parliament rejects them. Even EU-Commissioner Wallström spoke negatively about Microsoft: "And I was very disappointed to learn that Microsoft has agreed to block Chinese blog entries that use words like democracy, freedom, human rights and demonstration." It seems like Microsoft is not alone in "bad company"." -- which implies the Commissioner openly called MS a "bad company".
Guess Taiwan will also be excited about those MS-"relations" to China. --
I mean, look at political radicals like DCI/TechCentralStation, or persons like Jonathan Zuck or Hugo Lueders which served Microsoft's interests in lobbying. No wonder they lose.
Whenever Ms is in trouble they hire a whole universe of unsound lobbyists which poisons their reputation in Parliament. Like the tobacco industry.
Media hates Microsoft, loves anti-MS stories. Everybody knows Microsoft and its products. Good for nasty stories.
Microsoft lobbyists usually do serious mistakes which fire back on Microsoft.
What will those idiots do now? Hire everybody they can get and further ruin their reputation in Taiwan. Hire lobbyists which will execute the strategy the public expects. What will civil society do? Gratulate MS for the great aid to their lobbying efforts.
The WIPO broadcast treaty is not about Webcasters, currently. But an additional protocol is prepared which extends these regulations to the web. The basic broadcast treaty is a dublicate of the Rome Convention plus new protection rights.
"But the discussion only begins at Cato Unbound. It ends, if it ends at all, with you. Cato Unbound readers are encouraged to take up our themes, and enter into the conversation on their own websites, blogs, and even in good old-fashioned bound publications. "Trackbacks" will be enabled."
-- So... uhmmm. I may dicuss and Cato "enables" talkbacks.
Cato Unbound will scour the web for the best commentary on our monthly topic, and, with permission, publish it alongside our invited contributors. We also welcome your letters. (Send them to wwilkinson@cato.org.)
--- Ehemm. yieemm. eheemm: Never pay for comments. You are a thinktank, you are paid for propaganda but you cannot buy the blogger community. Just look at the success of the Campaign for Creativity.... (see: http://www.eulobbyaward.org/)
"Protection . . . against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough," wrote John Stuart Mill; "there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling." Here at Cato Unbound, we aim to do our part. "
--- So Cato wants to balance propaganda with Cato unbounc. Nice. Very Nice. A Think tank donates flowers to slashdot. They let a hippie write weird stuff because they thought we were like-minded.
We can buy gas on the world market, no problem. The problem in Ukraine was that they did not pay the Russians. It was highly overstated. The answer to one pipeline problem is more pipelines, no real problem though. Even per ship you can get a whole lot of gas.
Ressource supply is irrelevant, although geostrategist still live in that world. Like our ancestors worried about food supply and starvation which might still be a problem in parts of the world which do not suffer under overproduction in agrobusiness.
What really counts today is control over code and standards. We are aware of the problem, others e.g. politicians are not.
"One of the great unspokens within the black community is that many men have sex with one another in prison. Before the GNAA chimes in, you should understand many heterosexual men have sex with other men in prison. It's a different world no one can judge unless they've been there. It doesn't help condoms aren't distributed in prison. Homophobia, you understand. Don't want to look gay or anything. Same reason guys don't admit to it, same reason guys don't get tested, same reason guys give it to their girlfriends when they get out."
Hmm? What do prisons look like in your nation? I mean, do "heterosexual men have sex with other men" in the armed services, or what? Why should someone have sex with men just because he or she is imprisoned. Sorry, who told these stories?
"Same reason guys don't admit to it, same reason guys don't get tested" --> classical anti-Popper defense
You say it is common use to have sex with other men in prison. But they don't admit it in prison?
Oh, well. It will not happen in the next 15 years. Fact is that Nuclear power is not on the rise. And energy is well planned in Europe, we will not get accidential supply crisis.
The real question from my perspective is how to reduce demand or energy efficiency. Just imagine following TFT we get a kind of Plasma+ which burns 30% less energy.
Oil is more or less irrelevant for electric power supply but of course a substitute.
I further think that streams in the sea are an unexplored means to generate electric energy.
Solar energy? Why not expect the same as happened in the cell phone market? silicium technology offers great potential for cost reduction. 15 years are a long time.
And don't forget cold fusion, to be released just before duke Nukem forever.
Slashdot Mirror
This is like the old dropping the leaflets out of the planes with the "Surrender or you will be attacked" in different languages.
..and improve leaflet delivery systems. This includes wind-supported air delivery systems...
See page 65.
/* The GOP did something similar a few years back for the presidental elections. Howard (the Scream) Dean had this supposed huge following by people on the internet. Suddenly, out of nowhere, hundreds of blogs showed up supporting Bush/Cheney. */ Wasn't DCI involved with that Bush/Cheney campaign? In Europe we had great fun with TechCentralStation, a Service of DCI, a propaganda machine for the US industry whoc also took part in election campaigns. In my opinion DCI is a company the European intelligence community should look at as they spill hate propaganda against EU muslims and the French nation. DCI does a lot in the area of astroturfing. When I said, fun, I meant fun. Or could you take campaigns like this one here serious? http://www.techcentralstation.be/supersizecon.html
"The disaster need never have happened if managers and workers had clung to known principles of safely operating on the edge of extreme hazards -- nothing was learned by the disaster that hadn't already been learned, and then forgotten."
I think this is flawed. And unfortunately it did happen again.
Desaster is part of technology. Currently my Linux is broken. Was it inevitable? I don't know. Was it my fault? I don't think so.
Keep technology simple. Fix bugs. Know the risk. But don't say "The disaster need never have happened if Linux developers had clung to known principles of safely operating on the edge of extreme hardware"
what if the mistake was within the system, like Machlup wrote in 1958
Get organised so your vouice will get heard.
http://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/us-parl
The question is not whether a patent granted is "obvious" or not, the question is whether the object which gets patented has any meaningful role.
Ideas for software are not rare. Therefore we do not need an incentive system (with high barriers and costs) to get more ideas about software. In fact ideas in software are useless unless you get an implementation. There even is a software idea overflow and an implementation lag ("software crisis").
I am convinced the battle against software patenting can be won.
The Community Patent path is a rather obscure way to get patents through. They cannot win this and cannot be as ignorant as they were.
Sorry, this is wrong-wrong-wrong.
Patents for software exist in the US because there is no movement against Software Patents.
http://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/us-parl
Give me 500k $ for a campaign and US software patents will be gone soon.
The fight against software patenting in Europe is won. Now the action is related to the community patent and of course it could be a indirect way to get swpat through. At least the people like Jonathan Zuck claim so, because they make their money from Software patent lobbying. As persons like Jonathan Zuck are very counter-productive in lobbying I do not feel very much afraid. We will prevent this as long as you support our action in Europe. At least this time "industry" seems to misunderstand the content of the proposal and a noise strategy will not help them. Do you think Members of Parliament trust a an organisation named "Progress & Freedom Foundation"? No.
The bridge position is between having no copyright protection for software at all, and having no ability to write free software at all.
Bullshit! It is about patents and patenting. Not about software copyright.
But in fact opponents of the patent system in the field of software think that copyright-style regulation could be needed for a conceptual protection of software.
There is nothing wrong about this news.
If developers do not find the leaks attackers will also not find them. When leaks are found they are quickly fixed. So no problem.
The real question is how many leaks are left.
We had such a proposal based on Hartmut Pilch's 10 core clarifications. Also the Europarl proposal of Michel Rocard aimed at the right direction. Yes, we are involved in legal drafting.
---
If software patents get introduced via that compat path it will be very indirect. And we will make sure through the political process that safeguards are provided.
Why not subscribe to
http://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/us-parl
and stay in touch.
The movement is strong enough and does not need cheap propaganda.
The article is wrong as it implies a strategy towards software patents but software patents are gone. The dice is cast. It is all about making it bullet-proof that no software patents get granted via case law once the ECJ gets in charge.
In general MEPs are our friends. You do not buy politicians but you can invest in software patent lobbyism.
Think of the patent system as an incentive system.
The problem is not obviousness but lies in the "object" which gets patent protection.
In the field of software ideas are not rare, so you do not need this inefficient instrument to incite people to have ideas. Plus the transaction costs imposed on the market. Having software ideas is everyday's business and less complicated and costly than obtaining a patent. So we get the patent-knowledge divide: There are people specialised on making software and people specialised on getting software patents. Two seperated spheres.
I don't think the Taiwanese government regards Taiwan as a part of Red China. They insist on beeing an independend state. Now, the Red Chinese Government questions that. So this is an existent international conflict. What we believe is irrelevant. Of course there is no reason to regard Taiwan as a part of the current chinese state. And Microsoft is caught in between and has to be very careful when it deals with Red China. Because otherwise the Taiwanese government will kick Ms in the ass.
It is probably more the conflict of Taiwan with China and Microsoft's recent moves to take part in the biggest party in the world. And that MS lobbyists are nuts.
In fact "China" is a universe of different nations and cultures. Taiwan is a seperate state and belonged to China in history. Taiwan is no part of China and a totally different political system and culture. Today a reunification of china and Taiwan is as absurd as a reunification of India and Pakistan.
MS has serious corporate affairs problems and its lobbying strategies are part of the game.
E.g. in Europe: When MS gets the scum of US lobbying to Europe and they are unable to adapt to Europe, no wonder parliament rejects them. Even EU-Commissioner Wallström spoke negatively about Microsoft:
"And I was very disappointed to learn that Microsoft has agreed to block Chinese blog entries that use words like democracy, freedom, human rights and demonstration." It seems like Microsoft is not alone in "bad company"." -- which implies the Commissioner openly called MS a "bad company".
Guess Taiwan will also be excited about those MS-"relations" to China.
--
I mean, look at political radicals like DCI/TechCentralStation, or persons like Jonathan Zuck or Hugo Lueders which served Microsoft's interests in lobbying. No wonder they lose.
Whenever Ms is in trouble they hire a whole universe of unsound lobbyists which poisons their reputation in Parliament. Like the tobacco industry.
Media hates Microsoft, loves anti-MS stories. Everybody knows Microsoft and its products. Good for nasty stories.
Microsoft lobbyists usually do serious mistakes which fire back on Microsoft.
What will those idiots do now? Hire everybody they can get and further ruin their reputation in Taiwan. Hire lobbyists which will execute the strategy the public expects. What will civil society do? Gratulate MS for the great aid to their lobbying efforts.
What if Tim wrote the Wikipedia article?
The core is institutional interests of WIPO. They want urgently want something to codify.
Wrong. The article is wrong.
The WIPO broadcast treaty is not about Webcasters, currently. But an additional protocol is prepared which extends these regulations to the web. The basic broadcast treaty is a dublicate of the Rome Convention plus new protection rights.
Very bad stuff.
Don't believe the news, read the proposals.
Or is it the Cato revolution?
I nstitute
"But the discussion only begins at Cato Unbound. It ends, if it ends at all, with you. Cato Unbound readers are encouraged to take up our themes, and enter into the conversation on their own websites, blogs, and even in good old-fashioned bound publications. "Trackbacks" will be enabled."
-- So... uhmmm. I may dicuss and Cato "enables" talkbacks.
Cato Unbound will scour the web for the best commentary on our monthly topic, and, with permission, publish it alongside our invited contributors. We also welcome your letters. (Send them to wwilkinson@cato.org.)
--- Ehemm. yieemm. eheemm: Never pay for comments. You are a thinktank, you are paid for propaganda but you cannot buy the blogger community.
Just look at the success of the Campaign for Creativity.... (see: http://www.eulobbyaward.org/)
"Protection . . . against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough," wrote John Stuart Mill; "there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling." Here at Cato Unbound, we aim to do our part. "
--- So Cato wants to balance propaganda with Cato unbounc. Nice. Very Nice. A Think tank donates flowers to slashdot. They let a hippie write weird stuff because they thought we were like-minded.
http://www.cato-unbound.org/about-cato-unbound/
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Cato_
We can buy gas on the world market, no problem. The problem in Ukraine was that they did not pay the Russians. It was highly overstated. The answer to one pipeline problem is more pipelines, no real problem though. Even per ship you can get a whole lot of gas.
Ressource supply is irrelevant, although geostrategist still live in that world. Like our ancestors worried about food supply and starvation which might still be a problem in parts of the world which do not suffer under overproduction in agrobusiness.
What really counts today is control over code and standards. We are aware of the problem, others e.g. politicians are not.
"One of the great unspokens within the black community is that many men have sex with one another in prison. Before the GNAA chimes in, you should understand many heterosexual men have sex with other men in prison. It's a different world no one can judge unless they've been there. It doesn't help condoms aren't distributed in prison. Homophobia, you understand. Don't want to look gay or anything. Same reason guys don't admit to it, same reason guys don't get tested, same reason guys give it to their girlfriends when they get out."
Hmm? What do prisons look like in your nation? I mean, do "heterosexual men have sex with other men" in the armed services, or what? Why should someone have sex with men just because he or she is imprisoned. Sorry, who told these stories?
"Same reason guys don't admit to it, same reason guys don't get tested"
--> classical anti-Popper defense
You say it is common use to have sex with other men in prison. But they don't admit it in prison?
Oh, well. It will not happen in the next 15 years. Fact is that Nuclear power is not on the rise. And energy is well planned in Europe, we will not get accidential supply crisis.
The real question from my perspective is how to reduce demand or energy efficiency. Just imagine following TFT we get a kind of Plasma+ which burns 30% less energy.
Oil is more or less irrelevant for electric power supply but of course a substitute.
I further think that streams in the sea are an unexplored means to generate electric energy.
Solar energy? Why not expect the same as happened in the cell phone market? silicium technology offers great potential for cost reduction. 15 years are a long time.
And don't forget cold fusion, to be released just before duke Nukem forever.
Abiword is very nice but not ready yet, too many bugs.