Photoshop used to be great, but I haven't used it since version 5. I use painter. It's a much better program. Better (as in more useful, not more) features, better brush engine.
If that's the case then why make all the grandiose statements about intelectual property? If they need tax money like most countries do, why not just say they need tax money?
This is a problem in a lot of countries. I think it stems from the idea that governments shouldn't make money. And so they go on collecting taxes and not really going out of their way to take part in other money making enterprises. The result is thousands of nickle and dime taxes. I wish I could say this is unusual, but it's really not.
Well, according to the good senator, there is simply no excuse for copyright infringement. No really. No excuse.
I think the Good Mr. Hatch needs to be tought a nice tough lesson in copyright inforcement. His web site, should be the first to go. He should also be liable for damages.
And someone should take out an order forcing him to stop wasting plastic with his folk music. That part would just be a public service.
You can't fault her for that. The RIAA is a terrible organization. Even in her position, I would imagine that there isn't much she could have done to change things.
I mean would you want to work with a consortium that takes more pleasure in suing defensless college studants than actually producing a viable product? I don't blame her for stepping down. Any other sensible person would have done the same.
Given her experience with the RIAA though, I would be curious to see what stance she takes as a commentator.
Something like this would certainly solve the speed vs. weight problem faced by the current set up. The only problem I could see is space. Unless you have a hell of a lot of space, or some super powerful mechisms for building such a thing, it could be impractical.
Absolutely. Kind of like the idea of trying to get blood from a water melon. You're welcome to try. In fact, you're welcome to decide anything you want about it. That doesn't mean anything's going to happen to make that a reality.
I wouldn't worry about it.
In fact, I would say that Mcbride is a big fat weeny.
What's he going to do sue me? Well, I can make any litigation against me very pointless real quick.
Anyway, yesterday we were talking about comparing sources. With this wouldn't you say that checking and comparing source code so we can get sco out of linux becomes a lot more possible? Probable even? This could be the break that the open source community has been looking for.
I could see compulsive coffee drinkers like myself using something like this to get that caffiene tolerence back down to normal levels. And a generically decafinated coffee means that it should still taste like normal coffee.
Unlike current decaf.
It also simplifies the (expensive)process of decaffinating coffee over all, which means that the cofee companies will have less overhead, and in turn lower prices. It's the economic circle of life.
Let them. The economic implications of this are kind of silly. I mean $4.00 per blank CD? Sounds like something Greece would try to pull.
This is the second such offensive article on this topic today. I'm a firm believer in technocracy. Seriously. People who know nothing about technical issues shouldn't be making laws that govern them. Just think how well we would be doing in the area of intelectual property if reasonably educated programmers were in charge.
I don't know about that. SPAM is a lot more harmful to network infrastructure than the users themselves. Sure, it's annoying. But SPAM costs Microsoft (and every other ISP OSP) real money.
And it's a really nice way to look good in the press.
Funny you should mention that. Someone posted a link to the sco contract in question on slashdot last weekend, so I read it. There are no illegal countries. There are about a dozen or so mentioned, including west germany, but it's open ended. "with more countries to be added at IBM's descretion" It's on the first or second page of the 1985 contract between IBM and AT&T wish I still had the link.
As far as I know Microsoft has been patching leaks in windows like crazy to prevent this sort of thing from being possible under windows.
Short of deploying a virus or using long horn with the proper hardware, you should be safe. I was under the impression that Linux has strict controls to prevent this as well. Am I wrong?
Stupid hypocrite law makers aside, how technically feasible would something like this be?
Now, assuming it was possible from a technical perspective, how do you protect the copyright owners from liability? Say for example, someone's downloading mp3's at an air traffic control center and the riaa decides that their computer needs to be destroyed. They wipe the system, planes crash, RIAA suddenly becomes liable to the families of the people that died in the crash. This might be a bad example, but I'm sure there are hundreds of scenarios where that could apply.
This strikes me as nothing more than vandalism. You can't just go around destroying computers when so much critical stuff happens on them.
Could this also constitute illegal search and siezure? I bet a case could be made for that as well.
That's a good point. I would bet that IBM has someone tracking all the stupid things (lie, misinformation, paradox's) that SCO's been putting out since march. I've been paying pretty close attention to mr. mcbride, and it looks like he can't keep his story straight.
Remember initially this was all about methods and trade secrets that IBM had managed to put into linux because they had the same people working on AIX and Linux. Then they said that there might be code shared between the to operating systems. Then Linux had "some infringing code" but they did not know the extent of it. Now it's hundreds of thousands of lines of code.
I believe Linux could have AT&T code in it. It's certainly possible. But does AT&T code a law suit make? That remains to be seen. I just hope IBM has it as together as I think they do.
Of course not. And I don't think they're going to. This whole thing is starting to remind me of the trash talking pro wrestlers do before they get in the ring. It's loud, but means little in the big scheme of things.
Uhm, I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but this has been tried already. It was called DIVX. It was miserable failure. People hated it. It's still ridiculed today by the few of us that remember it.
Slashdot Mirror
Drats, guess I'll have to try the brain pluger I have in the back...
I feel your pain... I don't know. Being shocked and offended gets kind of boring after awhile.
Yes, but this one dictates that they already have taken action, not that they are about to take action. This story should scare and offend you.
Photoshop used to be great, but I haven't used it since version 5. I use painter. It's a much better program. Better (as in more useful, not more) features, better brush engine.
If that's the case then why make all the grandiose statements about intelectual property? If they need tax money like most countries do, why not just say they need tax money?
This is a problem in a lot of countries. I think it stems from the idea that governments shouldn't make money. And so they go on collecting taxes and not really going out of their way to take part in other money making enterprises. The result is thousands of nickle and dime taxes. I wish I could say this is unusual, but it's really not.
Well, according to the good senator, there is simply no excuse for copyright infringement. No really. No excuse.
I think the Good Mr. Hatch needs to be tought a nice tough lesson in copyright inforcement. His web site, should be the first to go. He should also be liable for damages.
And someone should take out an order forcing him to stop wasting plastic with his folk music. That part would just be a public service.
You can't fault her for that. The RIAA is a terrible organization. Even in her position, I would imagine that there isn't much she could have done to change things.
I mean would you want to work with a consortium that takes more pleasure in suing defensless college studants than actually producing a viable product? I don't blame her for stepping down. Any other sensible person would have done the same.
Given her experience with the RIAA though, I would be curious to see what stance she takes as a commentator.
Something like this would certainly solve the speed vs. weight problem faced by the current set up. The only problem I could see is space. Unless you have a hell of a lot of space, or some super powerful mechisms for building such a thing, it could be impractical.
Absolutely. Kind of like the idea of trying to get blood from a water melon. You're welcome to try. In fact, you're welcome to decide anything you want about it. That doesn't mean anything's going to happen to make that a reality.
Yes, it comes in frosted and honey nut.
What's he going to do sue me? Well, I can make any litigation against me very pointless real quick.
Anyway, yesterday we were talking about comparing sources. With this wouldn't you say that checking and comparing source code so we can get sco out of linux becomes a lot more possible? Probable even? This could be the break that the open source community has been looking for.
I could see compulsive coffee drinkers like myself using something like this to get that caffiene tolerence back down to normal levels. And a generically decafinated coffee means that it should still taste like normal coffee.
Unlike current decaf.
It also simplifies the (expensive)process of decaffinating coffee over all, which means that the cofee companies will have less overhead, and in turn lower prices. It's the economic circle of life.
Let them. The economic implications of this are kind of silly. I mean $4.00 per blank CD? Sounds like something Greece would try to pull. This is the second such offensive article on this topic today. I'm a firm believer in technocracy. Seriously. People who know nothing about technical issues shouldn't be making laws that govern them. Just think how well we would be doing in the area of intelectual property if reasonably educated programmers were in charge.
I don't know about that. SPAM is a lot more harmful to network infrastructure than the users themselves. Sure, it's annoying. But SPAM costs Microsoft (and every other ISP OSP) real money.
And it's a really nice way to look good in the press.
They need it.
I like monkeys...
Funny you should mention that. Someone posted a link to the sco contract in question on slashdot last weekend, so I read it. There are no illegal countries. There are about a dozen or so mentioned, including west germany, but it's open ended. "with more countries to be added at IBM's descretion" It's on the first or second page of the 1985 contract between IBM and AT&T wish I still had the link.
As far as I know Microsoft has been patching leaks in windows like crazy to prevent this sort of thing from being possible under windows.
Short of deploying a virus or using long horn with the proper hardware, you should be safe. I was under the impression that Linux has strict controls to prevent this as well. Am I wrong?
Stupid hypocrite law makers aside, how technically feasible would something like this be?
Now, assuming it was possible from a technical perspective, how do you protect the copyright owners from liability? Say for example, someone's downloading mp3's at an air traffic control center and the riaa decides that their computer needs to be destroyed. They wipe the system, planes crash, RIAA suddenly becomes liable to the families of the people that died in the crash. This might be a bad example, but I'm sure there are hundreds of scenarios where that could apply.
This strikes me as nothing more than vandalism. You can't just go around destroying computers when so much critical stuff happens on them.
Could this also constitute illegal search and siezure? I bet a case could be made for that as well.
That's a good point. I would bet that IBM has someone tracking all the stupid things (lie, misinformation, paradox's) that SCO's been putting out since march. I've been paying pretty close attention to mr. mcbride, and it looks like he can't keep his story straight.
Remember initially this was all about methods and trade secrets that IBM had managed to put into linux because they had the same people working on AIX and Linux. Then they said that there might be code shared between the to operating systems. Then Linux had "some infringing code" but they did not know the extent of it. Now it's hundreds of thousands of lines of code.
I believe Linux could have AT&T code in it. It's certainly possible. But does AT&T code a law suit make? That remains to be seen. I just hope IBM has it as together as I think they do.
Of course not. And I don't think they're going to. This whole thing is starting to remind me of the trash talking pro wrestlers do before they get in the ring. It's loud, but means little in the big scheme of things.
How about combustable dvds? Use them to generate quick puffs of smoke when you need to get away quickly! Hoo ha! {poof}
Sounds about right.
That's strange. I could have sworn it was a word. Online dictionary seems to agree that it isn't. Must be a slang term.
Could be. Still a silly idea though. I don't see how this would privde any benefit to the customer at all.
Uhm, I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but this has been tried already. It was called DIVX. It was miserable failure. People hated it. It's still ridiculed today by the few of us that remember it.
Interesting. Does anyone know how Dennis Ritchie feels about the Unix debockle?