The problem of some random personal web page perhaps 2 people ever looked at disappearing. The problem is that web pages actually referenced by others are disappearing, thus breaking the big web of knowledge that has been forming for as long as we've had printed press.
There really should be a permanent way of storing web pages, and storing them at the state they were at one given moment of time. So the archiving would naturally be the responsibility of the referer.
We just need a web service for that. It could even be profitable business, charge for every URI permanently stored there, perhaps by byte, which would also largely solve the issue of abuse. Only hinderance is copyright law I think., so it should get the status of public library...
I think you're in violation of copyright law! Please stand still and wait for a strike team from local lawyer station to arrive and arrest you, while their research team finds out who's copyright you're infringing upon, ie who should get 10% of the profit of suing you.
Nah. There was a time when only very very few could even read, let alone write, let alone keep any kind of records...
But get your point. Too bad there are some restrictions on copying the web pages you are referencing...
There should be some service, a bit like google's cache, you could use to store the referenced pages. I submit the page to the service, then provide two links in my own document, one to the original page (which will likely expire eventually) and one to the cached version. I wonder if they could get around copyright issues the same way google cache gets around them, even though this is a bit more permanent storage than google cache... Most web page authors certainly would not have any problem with having their pages archived there, quite the opposite, most would be happy to have their work referenced by others...
Also, the students probably don't have enough "disposable income" to buy any more CDs or DVDs they already do, even if they couldn't get them from the 'net. So effectively they're only cutting students' access to some music (and not very successfully at that, I presume), thus basically hurting their own marketing exposure and future sales. Well, I suppose that's a good thing:-)
There *is* a point in critizising GE stuff. You talk about understanding what they were trying to do. But the point is precisely that it's far from well understood how genes behave in nature, and especially what happens when in natural population new genes appear (in this case from another species, in evolution through mutation) is very poorly understood. We may have some grasp of what happens in sterile lab conditions, but we really don't know if there are any hidden hazards in having lots of GE-altered organisms in the wild.
I'm not worried about end of world or anything like that, but consider something like many species of fish becoming poisonous due new genes introduced by a virus made by us and accidentally leaked outside a lab. And then this gene spreding through the fish populations since it'd certainly be a significant survival trait in our over-fished oceans... Which in turn would reduce food production, bringing regional famine and economic trouble for entire world etc.
So bad things certainly *could* happen if we screw up. Better keep research in secure labs, and delay opening this can of worms (having GE organisms freely in the wild) until we have a bit better grasp of these things.
Re:What do you make it out of?
on
Son of Concorde
·
· Score: 1
Indeed, maybe some day. But maybe that "some day" has arrived, and things are advanced enough to make it work. Then again, maybe not, this will fail miserably and hopefully something will be learned from it for the next attampt.
However, I would not critizise them for trying. Unless they're actually just dishonest, knowing they don't have the tech to make it work, just trying to pump money from investors... But I don't think so.
Re:Oh Really...
on
Son of Concorde
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Well, cut the baggage. If you're on business or weekend trip, take only cabin baggage. What you can't fit into it, buy it when you get there. It may cost a bit more, but I can guarantee it makes a world of difference in travelling comfort, especially the time when they manage to lose your baggage and you are stuck with your cabin baggage for the first day at destination anyway.
A supersonic planet discussed could even capitalize that, and charge extra for normal baggage, since majority of passengers would either not need it, or be filthy rich enough to not mind paying extra for it. Perhaps even provide "integrated" courier service to send big stuff separately a day before, "guaranteed" to be ready to be picked up from airport when you arrive. After all what's the point of putting anything except people in a fuel-guzzling supersonic jet...
Re:Doesn't seem to be much of a market for this
on
Son of Concorde
·
· Score: 1
If it saves you 1 workday (with travel extra pay) and a hotel night, it can cost quite a bit and still be cheaper for your company than using current subsonic passenger jets. Especially so if you're a "high-value employee" who's about to drown in work and at a brink of mental breakdown due to excessive flying between timezones;-)
Yes, basically this event was what gave room for dinosaurs (and other new families) to develop. Much like whatever event caused dinosaurs to disappear gave room for development of more advanced mammals, eventually humans.
I wonder what will take the dominant role after we humans are finished with Earth (we're in a perioid of very rapid extinction of species, thanks to human activity, and I don't really see the direction changing any time soon...)
And even if he wins, can he expect to get enough in damages to that the "big guy" really cares? In other words, does that do anything to stop the "big guys" like RIAA from randomly suing people, in RIAA's case just for the PR scare value? In other words, is there *anything* in the US legal system that would actually discourage the kind of suing practices RIAA has atm?
The RIAA isn't abusing any system by suing people, they are using the system in the way it was designed.
(I'm assuming you're American here, sorry if I'm wrong.) So, you are admititng that the US legal system is designed to allow rich (RIAA in this case) to throw pocket money at suing less rich (eg some single parent in low-paid job and his/her child) and essentially forcing them to settle (pay "protection money") unless they want to go out of their way to show that they're innocent, which will probaby cost them more money (lost wages, stress, lawyer fees) even if they'd win in the court, which is far from certain in a US civil court against a team of top lawyers the rich one hired...?
And you make it sound like it's good it was designed this way? I'm glad there's an ocean between me and the US...
I would hope that the Consortium Of Anti-Spyware Technology Vendors would promote Linux, Mac and other operating systems that are better equipped to rebuff malware attacks.
Maybe I'm being overly cynical here, but would it not make much more sense for them to promote platforms where spyware is a problem? After all, it's the classical problem of any organization with an agenda: if the problem goes away, they become irrelevant themselves...
I guess that's the way it's in the US, and in the international satellite channels etc. But at least around here (not US) the only cable "channel" that has *any* content provided by "my cable company" is one that shows an oscilloscope display (presumably showing cable signal for troubleshooting purposes)...
Anyway, you do have a point, but it's a matter of scale that makes the crucial difference. MS Windows and IE have only marginal competition globally, unlike any cable company (or newspaper, or TV channel, or whatever else). So your cable company doing something questionable has little impact worldwide. But MS giving out biased news and search results semi-automatically to majority of PC users does have a lot of potential for global impact.
...so when average user uses the net, he will automatically use MS services, unless he goes to the Special-dialog in the Advanced-tab in some obscure settings windows...
It's really a bit like TV makers would have their own TV channels where they would show content made by themselves, and TV sets of their make would only display those channels... Oh, and using a microwave oven that could heat your standard TV dinner would require having their TV set as well or the result would look all funky.
Also crucial is the avoidance of making falsifiable statements, and vigorous defense of initially safe claims which centuries later turn out to be falsifiable and/or blatantly wrong.
Actually, now that you brought it up, science does make some unfalsifiable statements, generally called the "scientific method". You have to believe in it, if you believe in science. I mean stuff like, experiments can be repeated, natural laws are same everywhere etc... That even if we've got it wrong now, there *is* an underlying pattern we can discover (because if there isn't, scientific research would be pointless).
Now I do believe that, and our current understanding of the world around us is pretty convincing argument that it's true. But I think it's wise to realize that it's still based on belief that universe works in rational manner.
Well, they are suing sharers so they get the money to pay for collecting and analyzing the data. Perfectly sensible, how can anybody say there's something wrong with doing it like that?
Publishers of books don't complain that they have to make the text of the book available.
Well... Expect to have electronic books you can only read once, or for limited time... "Sorry, you have already used your license to view that chapter. Please insert your Credit Card to renew you license."
Well... There are a lot loonier religions about. Oh, and tithes would be easy too, for every 9 lines of working code you write at work, you have to contribute at least 1 line of working code to open source...
Have any open source "gurus" died yet, so we could start praying to their spirits to guide our fingers and deliver us from bugs? (Term 'spirit' can be interpreted literally as a spirit/soul, or as the legacy of their software and writings.)
Slashdot Mirror
Teach most web developers to use CVS first... Or for starters teach 'em to know what CVS is ;)
The problem of some random personal web page perhaps 2 people ever looked at disappearing. The problem is that web pages actually referenced by others are disappearing, thus breaking the big web of knowledge that has been forming for as long as we've had printed press.
There really should be a permanent way of storing web pages, and storing them at the state they were at one given moment of time. So the archiving would naturally be the responsibility of the referer.
We just need a web service for that. It could even be profitable business, charge for every URI permanently stored there, perhaps by byte, which would also largely solve the issue of abuse. Only hinderance is copyright law I think., so it should get the status of public library...
I think you're in violation of copyright law! Please stand still and wait for a strike team from local lawyer station to arrive and arrest you, while their research team finds out who's copyright you're infringing upon, ie who should get 10% of the profit of suing you.
Nah. There was a time when only very very few could even read, let alone write, let alone keep any kind of records...
But get your point. Too bad there are some restrictions on copying the web pages you are referencing...
There should be some service, a bit like google's cache, you could use to store the referenced pages. I submit the page to the service, then provide two links in my own document, one to the original page (which will likely expire eventually) and one to the cached version. I wonder if they could get around copyright issues the same way google cache gets around them, even though this is a bit more permanent storage than google cache... Most web page authors certainly would not have any problem with having their pages archived there, quite the opposite, most would be happy to have their work referenced by others...
Also, the students probably don't have enough "disposable income" to buy any more CDs or DVDs they already do, even if they couldn't get them from the 'net. So effectively they're only cutting students' access to some music (and not very successfully at that, I presume), thus basically hurting their own marketing exposure and future sales. Well, I suppose that's a good thing :-)
There *is* a point in critizising GE stuff. You talk about understanding what they were trying to do. But the point is precisely that it's far from well understood how genes behave in nature, and especially what happens when in natural population new genes appear (in this case from another species, in evolution through mutation) is very poorly understood. We may have some grasp of what happens in sterile lab conditions, but we really don't know if there are any hidden hazards in having lots of GE-altered organisms in the wild.
I'm not worried about end of world or anything like that, but consider something like many species of fish becoming poisonous due new genes introduced by a virus made by us and accidentally leaked outside a lab. And then this gene spreding through the fish populations since it'd certainly be a significant survival trait in our over-fished oceans... Which in turn would reduce food production, bringing regional famine and economic trouble for entire world etc.
So bad things certainly *could* happen if we screw up. Better keep research in secure labs, and delay opening this can of worms (having GE organisms freely in the wild) until we have a bit better grasp of these things.
Indeed, maybe some day. But maybe that "some day" has arrived, and things are advanced enough to make it work. Then again, maybe not, this will fail miserably and hopefully something will be learned from it for the next attampt.
However, I would not critizise them for trying. Unless they're actually just dishonest, knowing they don't have the tech to make it work, just trying to pump money from investors... But I don't think so.
Well, cut the baggage. If you're on business or weekend trip, take only cabin baggage. What you can't fit into it, buy it when you get there. It may cost a bit more, but I can guarantee it makes a world of difference in travelling comfort, especially the time when they manage to lose your baggage and you are stuck with your cabin baggage for the first day at destination anyway.
A supersonic planet discussed could even capitalize that, and charge extra for normal baggage, since majority of passengers would either not need it, or be filthy rich enough to not mind paying extra for it. Perhaps even provide "integrated" courier service to send big stuff separately a day before, "guaranteed" to be ready to be picked up from airport when you arrive. After all what's the point of putting anything except people in a fuel-guzzling supersonic jet...
If it saves you 1 workday (with travel extra pay) and a hotel night, it can cost quite a bit and still be cheaper for your company than using current subsonic passenger jets. Especially so if you're a "high-value employee" who's about to drown in work and at a brink of mental breakdown due to excessive flying between timezones ;-)
It also appears over North Pole I think, it's just much smaller (lucky for Nordic countries, Russia, Canada and Alaska).
Yes, basically this event was what gave room for dinosaurs (and other new families) to develop. Much like whatever event caused dinosaurs to disappear gave room for development of more advanced mammals, eventually humans.
I wonder what will take the dominant role after we humans are finished with Earth (we're in a perioid of very rapid extinction of species, thanks to human activity, and I don't really see the direction changing any time soon...)
And what if he loses the countersuit?
And even if he wins, can he expect to get enough in damages to that the "big guy" really cares? In other words, does that do anything to stop the "big guys" like RIAA from randomly suing people, in RIAA's case just for the PR scare value? In other words, is there *anything* in the US legal system that would actually discourage the kind of suing practices RIAA has atm?
No no. They are trying to break in to *insert* patented code into Linux code, so they'd have a leg to stand on in the court ;)
Perhaps that was the first step of trying to effect the distribution... Luckily (hopefully...) they got caught before they could do any real damage.
(I'm assuming you're American here, sorry if I'm wrong.)
So, you are admititng that the US legal system is designed to allow rich (RIAA in this case) to throw pocket money at suing less rich (eg some single parent in low-paid job and his/her child) and essentially forcing them to settle (pay "protection money") unless they want to go out of their way to show that they're innocent, which will probaby cost them more money (lost wages, stress, lawyer fees) even if they'd win in the court, which is far from certain in a US civil court against a team of top lawyers the rich one hired...?
And you make it sound like it's good it was designed this way? I'm glad there's an ocean between me and the US...
Maybe I'm being overly cynical here, but would it not make much more sense for them to promote platforms where spyware is a problem? After all, it's the classical problem of any organization with an agenda: if the problem goes away, they become irrelevant themselves...
Owning a legal gun is not against the law.
;-)
Shooting copyright lawyers is.
Disclaimer: Anybody is free to interpret this post as any combination of anti/pro-guns, anti/pro-file, anti/pro-piracy and anti/pro-shooting
I guess that's the way it's in the US, and in the international satellite channels etc. But at least around here (not US) the only cable "channel" that has *any* content provided by "my cable company" is one that shows an oscilloscope display (presumably showing cable signal for troubleshooting purposes)...
Anyway, you do have a point, but it's a matter of scale that makes the crucial difference. MS Windows and IE have only marginal competition globally, unlike any cable company (or newspaper, or TV channel, or whatever else). So your cable company doing something questionable has little impact worldwide. But MS giving out biased news and search results semi-automatically to majority of PC users does have a lot of potential for global impact.
...so when average user uses the net, he will automatically use MS services, unless he goes to the Special-dialog in the Advanced-tab in some obscure settings windows...
It's really a bit like TV makers would have their own TV channels where they would show content made by themselves, and TV sets of their make would only display those channels... Oh, and using a microwave oven that could heat your standard TV dinner would require having their TV set as well or the result would look all funky.
But it wouldn't be fun at all if it wasn't moderated informative... Why doesn't meta-moderation have a 4th option, "funny"? :-)
If you can do that, you're eligile for either a Nobel or a Milbourne Christopher Award...
Actually, now that you brought it up, science does make some unfalsifiable statements, generally called the "scientific method". You have to believe in it, if you believe in science. I mean stuff like, experiments can be repeated, natural laws are same everywhere etc... That even if we've got it wrong now, there *is* an underlying pattern we can discover (because if there isn't, scientific research would be pointless).
Now I do believe that, and our current understanding of the world around us is pretty convincing argument that it's true. But I think it's wise to realize that it's still based on belief that universe works in rational manner.
Well, they are suing sharers so they get the money to pay for collecting and analyzing the data. Perfectly sensible, how can anybody say there's something wrong with doing it like that?
Well... Expect to have electronic books you can only read once, or for limited time...
"Sorry, you have already used your license to view that chapter. Please insert your Credit Card to renew you license."
Well... There are a lot loonier religions about. Oh, and tithes would be easy too, for every 9 lines of working code you write at work, you have to contribute at least 1 line of working code to open source...
;-)
Have any open source "gurus" died yet, so we could start praying to their spirits to guide our fingers and deliver us from bugs? (Term 'spirit' can be interpreted literally as a spirit/soul, or as the legacy of their software and writings.)
Yes, I think it'd make a fine religion...