Nope, per step 3 (if you can get to the front page):
The money you earn is deposited into your Amazon.com account, where you can turn it into cash at any time by transferring it to your personal checking account.
Even checking up on things like Electric Universe, Wikipedia has a reference to Phil Platt's Bad Astronomy page. (They should also have a reference to Crank.net.) The Wikipedia reference to Aleister Crowley, is far more accurate than, (At least pervious versions), of Britannica.
Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but doesn't para 3 specifically allow the person who has acquired the information in paras 1 and 2 to publish those findings? From what you've pasted here, I see hardly any prohibitve language except the "as long as it does not constitute infringement" stuff.
I'm in the market for an HDTV. Now it won't be a Sony. I will not buy another Sony product of any kind. I can vote with my wallet.
Eh, well, I'd disagree there. I like their TVs too much. I'd go ahead and buy the idiotbox, but refrain from purchasing (emphasis on purchasing) any DVDs or CDs to play in the obligatory DVD player. Just my $0.02.
Under the new solution, tracks ripped and burned from a copy-protected disc are copied to a blank CD in Microsoft's Windows Media Audio format. The DRM embedded on the discs bars the burned CD from being copied.
Last time I checked, CDex or EAC won't copy anything in WMA to a blank CD.
Precisely. How exactly is this supposed to work? Perhaps I've been shielded from the burning software used by the masses, but all I've ever used is DAE through one package or another. It goes straight to WAV. How does this technology force the WMA format? I can't find that in the article.
So, you would never have the whole torrent? Why download then? If you mean that your client only uploads a portion of the torrent while you still have the whole thing insulated from what you are offiering, there is still the valid assumption that you have the entire work. I doubt it would pass muster.
But from the bank's perpective, that's irrelevant. Let's say this was all of his money; he may also run his business in such a manner where he regularly empties his business bank account to pay for these ink cartridges he hawks.
I keep seeing references to "a large amount" of money and "$90,000" as if there is some magic amount where the bank is supposed to say, "whoa there!" Looking at the article, I cannot see any claim that this was an amount out of the ordinary. The article plainly states that Lopez "often" made wire transfers into and out of the country. We cannot assume the bank should have stopped this from the information presented in the article.
If I remember correctly, you can also quickly dispose of the tank drivers (however many stars you may have) with a carefully-placed sniper shot.
First, hole up somewhere where you have fire cover, then choose whichever tank you think you can back out easily without the cops yanking you out of the door. Kill the driver with the sniper (the passenger leaves automatically, I think), choose your moment and run for the tank.
Re:IIS vs J2EE Servers
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Nothing groundbreaking? What about DataGrid1.DataBind() or built-in viewstate management? I love it to bits when I think back at how horrible stuff like that was in PHP.
I see your point, but those are features of the.NET framework, not C# as a language. Also, aren't these things available in JSF?
I don't know what your IIS issues are but on my win2003 servers we've not had a single problem.
You've been lucky then. We just started to have issues with our ASP applications that *only* manifest themselves with 2003.
Re:Limitations of Generics in Java.
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 1
I used to say that about properties, but am really finding them window dressing. Just provide accessors and/or mutators.
global.asax.cs (or.vb) in each application root folder. It's not fun to have to re-compile each app (if you built it code-behind), but not a re-write as said before.
Ask people about the CD they just bought. Stand outside a record store.
Ask them if they think they own that CD they just bought, or whether its just a license to use it. Go ahead.
I am missing your point here. The purchaser's opinion of the ownership of the copyrighted CD they just bought is irrelevant. If they offer them for download without prior authorization from the holder of the copyright, they are violating that copyright.
As to "battery", it depends; if I punch you in the nose and knock you down, I'll be arrested, the judge will issue a stern warning and I'll be sent on my way. If there's a fine, it will be well under $500. It will not be a felony.
It appears I am mistaken about the penalty for battery (at least as it applies to me in Florida, USA).
First offenders are guilty of a first-degree misdemeanor and are, at the very least,
fined $1,000. They could also be imprisoned for up to 1 year. If I required medical attention after you punching me in my nose, you would also apparently be liable for double my pecuniary loss (for medical costs). You are right, it would not be a felony the first time. But I'm being pedantic and I'll digress.
But you put a couple of CD's up on Kazaa, and you are threated with literally millions of dollars and basically economic ruin.
Where is the justice here?
My original post mentioned nothing about whether I felt the law or its implementation was flawed. It was that just because people violate laws en masse doesn't mean they believe the law is flawed, as if it is some valiant cause.
Perhaps we can just agree to disagree. I suppose in the end all I can know are my own motives, all the while believing (perhaps just hoping) that I am somewhat normal and that some of my basic human frailties are also commonplace in others.
When I drive faster than the speed limit (which is often), it is not because I believe that the law is wrong and I believe I should be able to drive as fast as I want. It is for a selfish reason: I want to get home faster and I am willing to take the chance of receiving a ticket for speeding. One may say that that is a rather foolish chance to take, but I take it anyway, as well as many other drivers.
I also realize that the laws prohibiting speeding are there to protect me and others. I also understand the fact that speeding fines go into the coffers of the government. I do not misconstrue this as some conspiracy of the government, choosing to speed because I believe therefore that the law (or its implementation) is somehow flawed.
I choose to break the law because I wanted the benefit and am willing to risk the possible cost. Isn't it logical to apply this same mindset to copyright infringement?
If that was true, we'd have people shoplifting and committing physical violence in order to get economic gain.
Is not economic gain (not monetarily, but materially) the driving force behind shoplifting? Not the sole force; there are thrillseekers and cleptomaniacs, but wouldn't you say most shoplifters do it because they are getting something (read: getting economic gain) for nothing? And do criminals not injure or kill to steal money or goods, thereby getting economic gain?
But most people will not harm another person, even if they knew they probably wouldn't get caught, and even if they knew they could grab $1M.
Why? Because people may not do the right thing, but they have a sense of right and wrong. And copying a CD fails that test of being "wrong".
It appears we just fundamentally disagree on what right and wrong here is. I don't quite understand your point about killing someone for $1M, but I do believe copying a CD is wrong and I think that most other folks do as well. This is an opinion based upon the people with whom I have spoken.
Copyright on this scale is an unnatural law, because it goes against a basic human virtue...sharing is good. Unless we pass a law that says it isn't? Might as well pass a law that a sunny day shouldn't be enjoyed.
Sharing of things which you own is good. But again, it appears we just have a fundamental difference on right and wrong. Equating sunshine with a person's work is nonsense.
Does it bother you in the slightest that file-sharers are subject to higher penalties than people who commit battery?
What are the penalties for each where you live? I'm not being argumentative; I'm curious because I do not know. All I have seen is a figure of $5,000 in regards to the settlements of these lawsuits.
I do know an acquaintance of mine was convicted of battery and had to pay a lot more than $5,000. He is also now a felon; I don't think you can put a price on that.
If you are correct, I would admit that that would definitely bother me.
The sheer number shows the public believes the existing laws are horribly flawed and won't follow them.
It shows no such thing. It simply shows that the public are willing to take the chance that they will not be caught and prosecuted for breaking those laws, however flawed they may be.
Slashdot Mirror
I see his problem now. Simply flushing the logs is insufficient. He should have been sure to subsequently wipe his system clean.
You can also grab this in PDF ("eBook") from Apress directly at half-price. Look to the "purchase as eBook" link on the right.
Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but doesn't para 3 specifically allow the person who has acquired the information in paras 1 and 2 to publish those findings? From what you've pasted here, I see hardly any prohibitve language except the "as long as it does not constitute infringement" stuff.
Eh, well, I'd disagree there. I like their TVs too much. I'd go ahead and buy the idiotbox, but refrain from purchasing (emphasis on purchasing) any DVDs or CDs to play in the obligatory DVD player. Just my $0.02.
(What's your point?)
No, we still have power here in Florida.
Don't you need those ports open for UDP as well, or was that just Azureus' implementation?
So, you would never have the whole torrent? Why download then? If you mean that your client only uploads a portion of the torrent while you still have the whole thing insulated from what you are offiering, there is still the valid assumption that you have the entire work. I doubt it would pass muster.
Indeed. It reminds me of the Chris Rock bit, "What do you want, a cookie?". It's what you're SUPPOSED to do.
But from the bank's perpective, that's irrelevant. Let's say this was all of his money; he may also run his business in such a manner where he regularly empties his business bank account to pay for these ink cartridges he hawks.
I keep seeing references to "a large amount" of money and "$90,000" as if there is some magic amount where the bank is supposed to say, "whoa there!" Looking at the article, I cannot see any claim that this was an amount out of the ordinary. The article plainly states that Lopez "often" made wire transfers into and out of the country. We cannot assume the bank should have stopped this from the information presented in the article.
What do you mean, like a figure-eight?
Yah, you'd have to have like a billion people to support that many!
Have you played with the "Brightness" in the display options?
If I remember correctly, you can also quickly dispose of the tank drivers (however many stars you may have) with a carefully-placed sniper shot.
First, hole up somewhere where you have fire cover, then choose whichever tank you think you can back out easily without the cops yanking you out of the door. Kill the driver with the sniper (the passenger leaves automatically, I think), choose your moment and run for the tank.
I used to say that about properties, but am really finding them window dressing. Just provide accessors and/or mutators.
global.asax.cs (or .vb) in each application root folder. It's not fun to have to re-compile each app (if you built it code-behind), but not a re-write as said before.
When I drive faster than the speed limit (which is often), it is not because I believe that the law is wrong and I believe I should be able to drive as fast as I want. It is for a selfish reason: I want to get home faster and I am willing to take the chance of receiving a ticket for speeding. One may say that that is a rather foolish chance to take, but I take it anyway, as well as many other drivers.
I also realize that the laws prohibiting speeding are there to protect me and others. I also understand the fact that speeding fines go into the coffers of the government. I do not misconstrue this as some conspiracy of the government, choosing to speed because I believe therefore that the law (or its implementation) is somehow flawed.
I choose to break the law because I wanted the benefit and am willing to risk the possible cost. Isn't it logical to apply this same mindset to copyright infringement?
I do know an acquaintance of mine was convicted of battery and had to pay a lot more than $5,000. He is also now a felon; I don't think you can put a price on that.
If you are correct, I would admit that that would definitely bother me.