It's not entirely as clear cut as that. Let's say you get a tattoo. Now try selling it. Or get a nice paint job on your car, and try selling that (without selling the entire car).
By buing a (certain kind of) DRM music track, you are buing something "unique" in the same sense as if you buy a special paint job on your car, even if the only unique thing is the DRM signature in the file. Though of course that DRM stuff is a bit more artifical limitation than the difficulty of transferring paint from one car to another...
But anyway it's not as if you are not *allowed* to sell DRM music you've bought (as long as you're not breaking plain old copyright law in the process). It's that nobody else is willing to buy it 'cos it's of no use to them.
Thus the right of resale, and the ability to buy it cheaper second hand is gone.
Is this necessarily an inherent right? It certainly doesn't apply to, say, concert tickets. I guess it's a question of if you handle the piece of music as an object, in which case duplicating that object, a CD, is certainly somewhat questionable practice, but re-selling it is obiviously ok.
Or if you think of buying music buying a license to play that music (for personal use) when you want, where ever you want, how ever you want (and different license for playing it in radio, and different license for playing it for public audience etc).
In the license case you could of course think of selling the license, if you at the same time commit on destroying any copies of the piece you have made... But technically the license is irrevocable, the file says it's yours (I assume, didn't RTFA;), so how would you revoke or transfer that license without having extra costs somewhere, thus making the whole point of re-sale a bit moot?.
It's a conspiracy! They are trying to harden the immune systems of their own people, and then as soon as most of them are resistant, they'll unleash horrific viral diseases that will wipe out the unsuspecting western upstart civilization! Sars is just a harmless test of the concept, the real mean bugs are yet to be released!
Yes, US should clearly intervene, before it's too late! China's evil communist regime must be stopped!
Swap parts in and out of computer...
I don't want to sound boring, but that's what the mobo/computer makers designed ISA, PCI etc for...
And generic parts and cheap mass-production don't really go hand-in-hand. For cheap mass-manufacturing you want one ASIC, minimal amount of support components, and a production line in a cheap labor country.
So this guy (the one who's article this is) is onto something we might see going away soon. For most "smart appliance" stuff, the parts won't be salvageable, 'cos there won't be any generic components. Sad.
Yes, but the people who put the file there cannot really claim that they didn't know that the file would be downloaded without the knowlage of computer users onto their machine. They could have just deleted the file.
I guess that would make them liable to pay damages if their removal code did some damage, and doing something like that is sticking their necks out to be chopped off. Which makes them either unselfish and brave, or stupid.
Too bad there really isn't any "real-world" analogy for this case... I'm having hard time deciding if they did wrong or right. I guess I consider myself to be enough of an anarchist that I must support this kind of positive activism;)
But this isn't "mandated" in any way. If you have a computer that automatically downloads and executes a file from a URL, then that's *your* problem, isn't it? Especially since there are ways to avoid such things from happening...
(Starting with personal firewall that blocks IE from accessing the network, and use some other browser...)
Common sense says, that the user (or a software on his computer) does everything. Having the file up in the net isn't illegal, especially if it is linked form a web page explaining what it is (that the worm code chooses to just download it, well, that's the problem of the worm code, isn't it).
However, common sense doesn't have anything to do with suing somebody to get some cash off him, even if he actually did a favor for you...
As it is, even programs running on the *same* computer can't access each others memory. I don't see how they could create a network-shared memory that would unintentionally get around this.
Ok, Mr.Troll, here's a bit more petrol to the flames;)
> I shouldn't have to argue why I shouldn't have a gun, any more than I should have to argue why I should have a computer or a car.
Should you need to argue why you shouldn't have a ready-to-use HMG mounted at the back of your pickup truck?
How is that different from arguing why you shouldn't have a gun?
It's got all to do with entire ecosphere equilibrium. And at least I don't particularily want to live in a time when that global equilibrium is in a state of change. Just imagine if the most densely populated area of US East Coast became a hurricane area, with regular hurricanes sweeping over the big cities. My personal fear (living in North Europe) is that Golf Stream turns south, and our now moderately temperate climate changes into something like Greenland. It might be ok in a 100-year time span when a new equilibrium is reached, but that doesn't help me personally...
And then there's of course the bogey-man called something like "run-off global warming". What if there isn't anything that will stop the global warming, that instead the increase in temperature will result in bigger release of greenhouse gasses (say, from the melting swamps at Arctic tundra, or bottom of the ocean because of warmer sea water)? Sun is now sligtly hotter than it was at the time of dinosaurs I believe (and slowly getting hotter as it gets older). There can be more CO2 deposits in the ground and in the oceans now than back then etc.
So even if 10 degrees higher temperature was ok a few hundred million years ago, I'd rather not take my chances on it being ok under current conditions. The chance of turning Earth into Venus may be tiny, but it's also pretty final if it happens...
But how do you do this in RedHat?
'cos every now and then I'd need to get that one package on a random redhat machine somewhere, but never had the time nor motivation to learn how it's done (from command line).
Re:Rumors of even *more* advanced stuff..
on
First HDTV Camcorder
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
But the thing is, you don't have to surpass or even reach the quality of real film for consumer use. Other factors, like
- ease of storing lot of pictures
- ease of duplicating pictures at home
- ability to shoot as much as you want for free
- ease of putting pictures to 'net, sending as email etc
-...
And the quality is alread good enough so regular folks just taking pictures won't notice the difference anyway.
Hard to say. A lot of Slashdotters are young, and have still several decades to produce offspring...
Besides, by that time all/.ers will have 'net implants in their brains, and can actually read slashdot and, er... try to get offspring started, all at the same time!
Re:Sounds interesting, but
on
The Cg Tutorial
·
· Score: 3, Informative
The shader programs are totally different anyway, they're not x86 (or whatever) assembly, they run in the graphics chip and have their own specialized assembly language suited for the stuff they do.
So it can't be "just an extra library", it needs to be a new compiler and all that. The regular C-library part (which would be done through DirectX anyway) would be just for copying the shader programs to the graphics chip.
But I'm not an expert, somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
Thinking ahead, if we could alter our genetic code(ie. create enhanced humans) really we would only be starting back up the process we stopped. The way I see it, through society humans have slowly stopped natural selection from occuring within our own population.
Of course natural selection still goes on. Some of us humans are more successful at getting offspring. They are the ones natural selection is "selecting" as individuals. On population level it's more complex, as there aren't any really isolated human populations left (I mean isolated for several generatons).
But IANAB.
Slashdot Mirror
By buing a (certain kind of) DRM music track, you are buing something "unique" in the same sense as if you buy a special paint job on your car, even if the only unique thing is the DRM signature in the file. Though of course that DRM stuff is a bit more artifical limitation than the difficulty of transferring paint from one car to another...
But anyway it's not as if you are not *allowed* to sell DRM music you've bought (as long as you're not breaking plain old copyright law in the process). It's that nobody else is willing to buy it 'cos it's of no use to them.
Is this necessarily an inherent right? It certainly doesn't apply to, say, concert tickets. I guess it's a question of if you handle the piece of music as an object, in which case duplicating that object, a CD, is certainly somewhat questionable practice, but re-selling it is obiviously ok.
Or if you think of buying music buying a license to play that music (for personal use) when you want, where ever you want, how ever you want (and different license for playing it in radio, and different license for playing it for public audience etc).
In the license case you could of course think of selling the license, if you at the same time commit on destroying any copies of the piece you have made... But technically the license is irrevocable, the file says it's yours (I assume, didn't RTFA ;), so how would you revoke or transfer that license without having extra costs somewhere, thus making the whole point of re-sale a bit moot?.
I mean, same way as ordinary cube can be thought of as just 2 squares with corners connected, or 6 squares.
Perhaps it's best to use both models to have a clearer mental image of how a hypercube behaves when you turn it.
Yes, US should clearly intervene, before it's too late! China's evil communist regime must be stopped!
Hmm mm, now that thought had never occured to me... That anything you can implement game of life on is turing complete.
Swap parts in and out of computer... I don't want to sound boring, but that's what the mobo/computer makers designed ISA, PCI etc for... And generic parts and cheap mass-production don't really go hand-in-hand. For cheap mass-manufacturing you want one ASIC, minimal amount of support components, and a production line in a cheap labor country. So this guy (the one who's article this is) is onto something we might see going away soon. For most "smart appliance" stuff, the parts won't be salvageable, 'cos there won't be any generic components. Sad.
I guess that would make them liable to pay damages if their removal code did some damage, and doing something like that is sticking their necks out to be chopped off. Which makes them either unselfish and brave, or stupid.
Too bad there really isn't any "real-world" analogy for this case... I'm having hard time deciding if they did wrong or right. I guess I consider myself to be enough of an anarchist that I must support this kind of positive activism ;)
But this isn't "mandated" in any way. If you have a computer that automatically downloads and executes a file from a URL, then that's *your* problem, isn't it? Especially since there are ways to avoid such things from happening... (Starting with personal firewall that blocks IE from accessing the network, and use some other browser...)
Common sense says, that the user (or a software on his computer) does everything. Having the file up in the net isn't illegal, especially if it is linked form a web page explaining what it is (that the worm code chooses to just download it, well, that's the problem of the worm code, isn't it). However, common sense doesn't have anything to do with suing somebody to get some cash off him, even if he actually did a favor for you...
As it is, even programs running on the *same* computer can't access each others memory. I don't see how they could create a network-shared memory that would unintentionally get around this.
> I shouldn't have to argue why I shouldn't have a gun, any more than I should have to argue why I should have a computer or a car.
Should you need to argue why you shouldn't have a ready-to-use HMG mounted at the back of your pickup truck?
How is that different from arguing why you shouldn't have a gun?
Ok, I didn't RTFA, but can you explain to me, why the court order doesn't count as "any judical process"?
- Which display card?
- Which sound card?
- Which distro gets them to work without tweaking, or at least with minimal tweaking?
And then there's of course the bogey-man called something like "run-off global warming". What if there isn't anything that will stop the global warming, that instead the increase in temperature will result in bigger release of greenhouse gasses (say, from the melting swamps at Arctic tundra, or bottom of the ocean because of warmer sea water)? Sun is now sligtly hotter than it was at the time of dinosaurs I believe (and slowly getting hotter as it gets older). There can be more CO2 deposits in the ground and in the oceans now than back then etc.
So even if 10 degrees higher temperature was ok a few hundred million years ago, I'd rather not take my chances on it being ok under current conditions. The chance of turning Earth into Venus may be tiny, but it's also pretty final if it happens...
(Some bacteria produce eg methane instead of CO2, but then that's a lot more effective greenhouse gas per molecule than CO2.)
But how do you do this in RedHat? 'cos every now and then I'd need to get that one package on a random redhat machine somewhere, but never had the time nor motivation to learn how it's done (from command line).
- ease of storing lot of pictures
- ease of duplicating pictures at home
- ability to shoot as much as you want for free
- ease of putting pictures to 'net, sending as email etc
-
And the quality is alread good enough so regular folks just taking pictures won't notice the difference anyway.
Besides, by that time all /.ers will have 'net implants in their brains, and can actually read slashdot and, er... try to get offspring started, all at the same time!
The shader programs are totally different anyway, they're not x86 (or whatever) assembly, they run in the graphics chip and have their own specialized assembly language suited for the stuff they do. So it can't be "just an extra library", it needs to be a new compiler and all that. The regular C-library part (which would be done through DirectX anyway) would be just for copying the shader programs to the graphics chip. But I'm not an expert, somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
Thinking ahead, if we could alter our genetic code(ie. create enhanced humans) really we would only be starting back up the process we stopped. The way I see it, through society humans have slowly stopped natural selection from occuring within our own population. Of course natural selection still goes on. Some of us humans are more successful at getting offspring. They are the ones natural selection is "selecting" as individuals. On population level it's more complex, as there aren't any really isolated human populations left (I mean isolated for several generatons). But IANAB.