>Again, this is not fundamentaly different than France or Britain spending government money on churches.
wtf? are you on drugs?
maybe in uk some public money goes to upkeep of churches along with other old buildings of historical or architectural importance? is that what you're referring to, i can't think of anything else.
in france this does not happen - it would be against the law. the strong anticlerical people (including anticlerical catholics) would go apeshit.
they take the sep. of church and state very seriously. no public money goes to churches or the church whatsoever. it's the french equivalent of 'unconstitutional'.
[please note i'm not weighing in on the GP complaining about israel building roads for the orthodx, that was total flamebait. just setting you straight.]
look, the OP took to task a statement in the summary:
>>"Akamai, with its tens of thousands of servers spread in an intelligent topology, still can't serve more than 150,000 concurrent streams"
[notice the word "can't", indicative of the PRESENT FUCKING TENSE.]
>Assuming Akamai has only 10,000 servers, that's 15 streams per server. C'mon now, we're not that stupid.
eipgam challenged his challenge of that statement, by saying 'servers will have a hard time serving 15 of the future's dynamically generated streams now being researched'
this maybe true, it has fuck all to do with what was being discussed.
he made the same redundant point twice. now you've just made it again. wtf? are you all on drugs?
I had thought that, like Cliff Richard, he is homosexual only inasmuch as he is sexually attracted only to himself (a person of the same sex), and noone else.
if they started a subscription-only business model for slashdot? Even if it was only a dollar a month. Within a month all the idiots, trolls, losers, wannabes, time-rich clue-poor teenagers, bored employees, grammer nazis, crapflooders, karma whores, spammers, paranoids, extremists, fanboys and the unclassified braindead would have moved on to the next public forum. The only people left would be a polite community of intelligent and knowledgeable open-minded professionals.
They would probably all stop reading after about two more weeks, even though they were paid up for the rest of the quarter.
noone wants to hear your podcast not even your 'friends' and family. if you could admit this to yourself, you'd be happy hosting it publicly to watch noone subscribe. you might as well host it on/dev/null
and thank you Hemos for displaying your ignorance on the front page.
This is exactly the crucial difference between copyrights and patents.
A copyright restricts you only from copying the work in question. There is absolutely no restriction on coming up with the same work independently, and using it. Thus like George Harrison's suit mentioned in the sibling post, many copyright suits depend on showing that someone did / didn't have access to the work in question.
A patent on the other hand gives the holder the exclusive right to an invention or idea. Like the other guy who invented the telephone independently of Bell, you will have absolutely no rights to your own invention if it has been previously patented, for the life of the patent anyway.
A defence of independent discovery works for copyright infringements, not for patents. This has always been the case, so I'm not sure why it's news today.
The copyright on the lyrics and music is held by its writers eg Lennon and McCartney in this case, along with their publishers. The 'publishing' rights are held by Michael Jackson who may have hocked them to Sony (?) which means that they collect all songwriting royalties payable on them, for the Beatles' own recordings and anyone else's cover versions. Publishers then pay writers a percentage of the gross royalty, usually 50%, but probably a bit more in McCartney's case.
The copyright on the recordings is held by the record company, in this case EMI. They collect on sales and performances (eg on radio or TV) of the actual record, and pay a set royalty to the artists, and also the producer. This is the copyright that is going to expire.
So, when it does, Ringo won't collect anymore on his royalties for drumming on the album, and since he didn't write the songs, won't get any of that money either. Paul will still collect on songwriting royalties for this and all other versions of the tunes on the album, but obviously won't get any royalties for having played on the album either.
Thought I would clarify since about 3 people above and below have got it wrong.
But the Nazi-comparison meme popped up elsewhere as well - in general discussions of law in misc.legal, for example, or in the EFF conference on the Well. Stone libertarians were ready to label any government regulation as incipient Nazism. And, invariably, the comparisons trivialized the horror of the Holocaust and the social pathology of the Nazis. It was a trivialization I found both illogical (Michael Dukakis as a Nazi? Please!) and offensive (the millions of concentration-camp victims did not die to give some net.blowhard a handy trope).
So, I set out to conduct an experiment - to build a counter-meme designed to make discussion participants see how they are acting as vectors to a particularly silly and offensive meme...and perhaps to curtail the glib Nazi comparisons.
The ones who think that sales of Apple hardware are dependent on noone being able to run the amazing OS X operating system on any other hardware, and that apple are therefore extremely preoccupied with preventing OSX from being run on anything else..
And the ones who think that the success of OSX depends entirely on the brilliant exclusive Apple hardware it runs on, and so that Apple's major concern is stopping anyone running anything else on their great hardware.
Having never used or cared about any of this hardware or software, I really am utterly mystified as to why this is so, or what apple's 'business model' really is, except to sell loads of ipods. Anyone?
put down the crackpipe please. Do you have a disease? you think everyone on the internet is talking about you?
Neither the GP nor its sibling post are implying anything about your conduct. Both are making the same point - for some people extortion isn't an option. They're not suggesting YOU engage in extortion.
No possible reading of their posts suggests anything different to me.
Besides, if you can't take a few cheap digs and insinuations without wetting yourself, you shouldn't be here, pinhead.
Slashdot Mirror
welcome to missing the joke, brainthrust.
have a nice day
>Again, this is not fundamentaly different than France or Britain spending government money on churches.
wtf? are you on drugs?
maybe in uk some public money goes to upkeep of churches along with other old buildings of historical or architectural importance? is that what you're referring to, i can't think of anything else.
in france this does not happen - it would be against the law. the strong anticlerical people (including anticlerical catholics) would go apeshit.
they take the sep. of church and state very seriously. no public money goes to churches or the church whatsoever. it's the french equivalent of 'unconstitutional'.
[please note i'm not weighing in on the GP complaining about israel building roads for the orthodx, that was total flamebait. just setting you straight.]
thanks for your bullshit, irrelevant input.
i am not entering into debate about these points of fact.
you and the OP are wrong.
>Enigma wasn't cracked because of weaknesses in the algorithm
if you know shit about shit, why not keep your mouth shut?
the need to say something that's crap from start to finish just in order to have something to say is starting to really get me down about this place.
>Win2k never did that kinda crap
this is a feature from windows 9x.
look, the OP took to task a statement in the summary:
>>"Akamai, with its tens of thousands of servers spread in an intelligent topology, still can't serve more than 150,000 concurrent streams"
[notice the word "can't", indicative of the PRESENT FUCKING TENSE.]
>Assuming Akamai has only 10,000 servers, that's 15 streams per server. C'mon now, we're not that stupid.
eipgam challenged his challenge of that statement, by saying 'servers will have a hard time serving 15 of the future's dynamically generated streams now being researched'
this maybe true, it has fuck all to do with what was being discussed.
he made the same redundant point twice. now you've just made it again. wtf? are you all on drugs?
the subject is what's happening now.
no assumptions about how things might be different in the future are needed or implied.
Is he 'out'?
I had thought that, like Cliff Richard, he is homosexual only inasmuch as he is sexually attracted only to himself (a person of the same sex), and noone else.
>Extreme Republicans, on the other hand, are most likely in it for personal enrichment.
>They are not going to do something if they will get caught.
What about the ones who think they're not going to get caught?
You missed out the 0th word, dude.
if they started a subscription-only business model for slashdot? Even if it was only a dollar a month.
Within a month all the idiots, trolls, losers, wannabes, time-rich clue-poor teenagers, bored employees, grammer nazis, crapflooders, karma whores, spammers, paranoids, extremists, fanboys and the unclassified braindead would have moved on to the next public forum. The only people left would be a polite community of intelligent and knowledgeable open-minded professionals.
They would probably all stop reading after about two more weeks, even though they were paid up for the rest of the quarter.
well you're an idiot then aren't you.
>The "American Public" could remove the CIA from existence in the next pair of elections if it wanted.
I'm glad you think so. The american military could wipe the american public off the map in the next two minutes 'if it wanted to'.
noone wants to hear your podcast not even your 'friends' and family. /dev/null
if you could admit this to yourself, you'd be happy hosting it publicly to watch noone subscribe.
you might as well host it on
and thank you Hemos for displaying your ignorance on the front page.
This is exactly the crucial difference between copyrights and patents.
A copyright restricts you only from copying the work in question. There is absolutely no restriction on coming up with the same work independently, and using it. Thus like George Harrison's suit mentioned in the sibling post, many copyright suits depend on showing that someone did / didn't have access to the work in question.
A patent on the other hand gives the holder the exclusive right to an invention or idea. Like the other guy who invented the telephone independently of Bell, you will have absolutely no rights to your own invention if it has been previously patented, for the life of the patent anyway.
A defence of independent discovery works for copyright infringements, not for patents. This has always been the case, so I'm not sure why it's news today.
>When it is bad, it is still good.
Only if you're not getting much of it..
TFA refers to the Beatles first album, Please Please Me.
Ringo did not write any of the songs on this album.
The copyright on the lyrics and music is held by its writers eg Lennon and McCartney in this case, along with their publishers. The 'publishing' rights are held by Michael Jackson who may have hocked them to Sony (?) which means that they collect all songwriting royalties payable on them, for the Beatles' own recordings and anyone else's cover versions. Publishers then pay writers a percentage of the gross royalty, usually 50%, but probably a bit more in McCartney's case.
The copyright on the recordings is held by the record company, in this case EMI. They collect on sales and performances (eg on radio or TV) of the actual record, and pay a set royalty to the artists, and also the producer. This is the copyright that is going to expire.
So, when it does, Ringo won't collect anymore on his royalties for drumming on the album, and since he didn't write the songs, won't get any of that money either. Paul will still collect on songwriting royalties for this and all other versions of the tunes on the album, but obviously won't get any royalties for having played on the album either.
Thought I would clarify since about 3 people above and below have got it wrong.
me, too!
Klootzak is an extortionist!!
Klootzak smokes crack for breakfast!!
Klootzak jumps to conclusions!!
see, noone cares about you, your sad life or your pathetic insecurities.
..seem to split 50/50 down the middle between.
The ones who think that sales of Apple hardware are dependent on noone being able to run the amazing OS X operating system on any other hardware, and that apple are therefore extremely preoccupied with preventing OSX from being run on anything else..
And the ones who think that the success of OSX depends entirely on the brilliant exclusive Apple hardware it runs on, and so that Apple's major concern is stopping anyone running anything else on their great hardware.
Having never used or cared about any of this hardware or software, I really am utterly mystified as to why this is so, or what apple's 'business model' really is, except to sell loads of ipods. Anyone?
put down the crackpipe please.
Do you have a disease? you think everyone on the internet is talking about you?
Neither the GP nor its sibling post are implying anything about your conduct. Both are making the same point - for some people extortion isn't an option. They're not suggesting YOU engage in extortion.
No possible reading of their posts suggests anything different to me.
Besides, if you can't take a few cheap digs and insinuations without wetting yourself, you shouldn't be here, pinhead.
Mac switches to Windows.
MS switch to Linux.
Then the 'linux community' switches to 'leet, cracked OS-X86.
He's talking about the Slashdot Effect.