Actually I predict if this kind of asshattery is allowed that all the sites like Slashdot will simply be moved out of the USA to a place with more sane copyright laws.
Except you forget that this sort of asshattery (love that word) will not persist due to the internet friendly US Supreme Court.
Linking is not a copyright violation because it does not contain any part the content. A brief summary is specifically allowed by US Copyright law.
So the end result is this Appeals Court Judge gets bitchslapped by Supreme Court at the first opportunity. But more to the point, since he has published his opinion in the open press before a case is even brought before him he will have to recuse himself from any such case, or get turfed by the lawyers involved.
So CALM DOWN. Before rushing to assume there is a more internet friendly country, at least propose one.
The entire EU is courting three stikes. Australia and Britain are attempting to engage in massive filtering. China already filters, Iran is trying its damnedest, as are most islamic majority countries.
For all this whining about Diebold, most people don't have a problem using Diebold's ATMs for banking.
You know immediately if your banking transaction worked. You know at the end of the month if it worked for someone else, and there are bank guarantees. (Why did you think all the ATMs have cams?)
All they can steal with from your bank is some of your money. Not your country.
If you seriously believe you have offered a good analogy I submit you are clueless about the problem at issue.
Some Counties in Washington State use All Mail voting.
Ballots mailed out. Sent back in un-numbered un-signed inner envelope which is inside of a bar coded and signed outer envelope. You mail it back in, or take it to ballot drop off places.
Its still a secret ballot. As secret as you want it to be. No one knows what you voted unless you let them stand there and watch.
Secrecy is always by choice.
An enforced secret ballot (in the voting booth) hasn't exactly forestalled vote buying, or tomb-stoning.
> Online viewers have to actively seek out the > program they want to watch, so advertisers end up > with a guaranteed audience for their commercial
This is a pretty flaky argument if you ask me.
People have to actively seek out a program to watch on TV as well. On TV, this is known as applying rule of the "least horsehit" while channel surfing.
But unlike TV, where an advertisement in a lame program usually drives me away to a different channel, never to return, on the web, I just launch another browser, kill the sound, and skip the commercials (mentally if not actually). People who have a computer and know how to use it well enough to find hulu are not dumb enough to watch some crazy commercial.
If anything, the channel surfers do not stumble upon HULU content, like they might while avoiding commercials on the TV.
Its a good price to ding the advertisers if you can get it, but it has to translate into sales or it is a waste.
On line ads used to be sold on a cost per impression basis. Advertisers woke up to that scam, and the current scam is cost per click. (Advertisers are waking up to that scam too.)
I seriously doubt you will long be able to demand enhanced revenue based on cost per impression.
It means Return ON Investment. Not Return OF Investment.
No money will be saved on this scheme until AFTER 10 or 12 years.
However even this is optimistic, because what is eventually returned on this investment will be worth far less than an equivalent amount today.
Further, maintenance costs will start to accrue well before that, and replacement parts will be needed for stuff that was obsolete the day it was installed, and may not even be available then.
There may be better equipment and cheaper equipment then. But more likely the failing part will be some obscure little piece requiring the replacement of some expensive big piece.
This is the risk of buying into a developing technology. The payoff is a long way down the road. Usually beyond the next generational change in the technology.
Still, it takes people like Loyd to go out there and do it with what is available, because we can't wait for the perfect solution or we would all still be living in Caves.
And if you don't like the direction that some Free Software project is heading in, you cannot fork it without forking the entire organization behind it. And it's so much easier to just switch to something else.
Damn! I wish I had mod points.
The common answer shouted back to the users by the KDE team has been fork 3.5 and STFU. They know full well this is essentially impossible.
What few patches that are released for 3.5 usually involve gutting what was there and substituting KDE4 apps. Konqueror file manager has been gutted and in its place you get the foisted, half functional Dolphin dressed up in a window that says Konqueror.
This bait and switch is accompanied with the gratuitous claim that Dolphin does everything Kong does. Well DAH!
For a long time, SUSE was KDE centric, but since Novell took over they started forcing Gnome onto their SLED (Enterprise Desktop).
And no sooner had they done this than the KDE team decided to trash everything and start from scratch which set that desktop back 3 years in terms of functionality. They "pulled a Microsoft" and put look and feel years ahead of functionality.
Novell sent out this horribly broken version of KDE in their community opensuse product and destroyed their own credibility and that of KDE.
It is doubtful that Opensuse will ever regain the popularity it once had even tho it is technically superior to Ubuntu.
So at this juncture, NO DISTRO TRUSTS KDE anymore, as they have burned the distros so badly.
It will take KDE two more releases to get back to where they were with KDE 3.5, but no one will be waiting at the station by the time that happens.
But intermediaries are never going to go away. A model where millions of creators market directly to hundreds of millions of customers just isn't going to work; the good stuff will be buried in the dreck (even worse than it is in the current system).
Agreed. And further, having Boing Boing editor Cory Doctorow decry intermediaries when that is the job definition of an Editor seems more than a little disingenuous.
The carriers are always caught flat footed and demanding handset manufacturers disable features in their phones because the carriers don't know how to follow the standards.
I'm not aware of a single carrier that EVER came up with a handset design, innovative, or otherwise, unless you consider demanding lobotomies before letting them on the network.
Yes, I'm talking about you Verizon, and you too ATT.
Had Adobe not steadfastly refused to put any end user controls or setting in Flash no one would have bothered to develop alternatives.
But because they wanted to cater to the jumping monkey segment of the web advertising world, they stonewalled every request for end-user controls, such as no looping, no animation, no sound, etc.
Besides the fact that it is bloatware, its just end user un-friendly.
In order to control Flash, you needed to kill Flash and millions of web browsers would like to do exactly that.
Being an open standard HTML5 is open for development of end-user controls, such as animate only while cursor hovers, sound off till I say so, etc.
Bring on HTML5. This is a market Adobe deserves to lose.
Well, humorous as "The Thing" reference was meant to be, one has to wonder how controlled the lab environment was when this thing was discovered passing thru filters.
And the fact that a bug not seen in 102,000 years is known not to be a pathogen (when virtually NOTHING else is known about it) seems of little comfort.
Well, given that they infected other people, and eventually epidemiologists tracked them down via the people they infected...
Sorry, but that does not wash when talking about a airborne or causal contact transmission. Its not like they spent 20 minutes in the aircraft lavatory joining the mile high club.
Epidemiologists will be the first to tell you that when it comes to Flu, finding patient zero is a guessing game at best. In fact, finding Plane-Load zero is a it iffy.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I predict if this kind of asshattery is allowed that all the sites like Slashdot will simply be moved out of the USA to a place with more sane copyright laws.
Except you forget that this sort of asshattery (love that word) will not persist due to the internet friendly US Supreme Court.
Linking is not a copyright violation because it does not contain any part the content. A brief summary is specifically allowed by US Copyright law.
So the end result is this Appeals Court Judge gets bitchslapped by Supreme Court at the first opportunity. But more to the point, since he has published his opinion in the open press before a case is even brought before him he will have to recuse himself from any such case, or get turfed by the lawyers involved.
So CALM DOWN. Before rushing to assume there is a more internet friendly country, at least propose one.
The entire EU is courting three stikes.
Australia and Britain are attempting to engage in massive filtering.
China already filters, Iran is trying its damnedest, as are most islamic majority countries.
Jail is a pretty good deterrent.
For all this whining about Diebold, most people don't have a problem using Diebold's ATMs for banking.
You know immediately if your banking transaction worked. You know at the end of the month if it worked for someone else, and there are bank guarantees. (Why did you think all the ATMs have cams?)
All they can steal with from your bank is some of your money. Not your country.
If you seriously believe you have offered a good analogy I submit you are clueless about the problem at issue.
Some Counties in Washington State use All Mail voting.
Ballots mailed out.
Sent back in un-numbered un-signed inner envelope which is inside of a bar coded and signed outer envelope.
You mail it back in, or take it to ballot drop off places.
Its still a secret ballot. As secret as you want it to be. No one knows what you voted unless you let them stand there and watch.
Secrecy is always by choice.
An enforced secret ballot (in the voting booth) hasn't exactly forestalled vote buying, or tomb-stoning.
Because he took a job that requires him to do so by federal law.
He made his choice when he took the CEO job.
http://healthcare.zdnet.com/?p=2381&tag=nl.e539
> Online viewers have to actively seek out the
> program they want to watch, so advertisers end up > with a guaranteed audience for their commercial
This is a pretty flaky argument if you ask me.
People have to actively seek out a program to watch on TV as well. On TV, this is known as applying rule of the "least horsehit" while channel surfing.
But unlike TV, where an advertisement in a lame program usually drives me away to a different channel, never to return, on the web, I just launch another browser, kill the sound, and skip the commercials (mentally if not actually). People who have a computer and know how to use it well enough to find hulu are not dumb enough to watch some crazy commercial.
If anything, the channel surfers do not stumble upon HULU content, like they might while avoiding commercials on the TV.
Its a good price to ding the advertisers if you can get it, but it has to translate into sales or it is a waste.
On line ads used to be sold on a cost per impression basis. Advertisers woke up to that scam, and the current scam is cost per click.
(Advertisers are waking up to that scam too.)
I seriously doubt you will long be able to demand enhanced revenue based on cost per impression.
Every time I'm in that predicament, its because I am trying to code too early.
Sit down and design each module, each interface, each file, and then the next steps will become obvious.
No, sorry. Wrong.
Once he takes a job as an OFFICER of a PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANY, he surrenders some measure of his privacy.
It seems impossible to me to attribute All Things To Chairman Steve, and at the same time suggest that serious illness of the CEO, Chief Designer, Head Boffin, and the virtual Persona of Apple Inc is not a material event, and is something the company can glibly lie about. http://valleywag.gawker.com/5028508/steve-jobss-health-leads-top-apple-flack-to-contract-common-bug-with-the-truth
If true that Jobs had liver replacement, why is this not a violation of reporting requirements?
Exactly.
It means Return ON Investment.
Not Return OF Investment.
No money will be saved on this scheme until AFTER 10 or 12 years.
However even this is optimistic, because what is eventually returned on this investment will be worth far less than an equivalent amount today.
Further, maintenance costs will start to accrue well before that, and replacement parts will be needed for stuff that was obsolete the day it was installed, and may not even be available then.
There may be better equipment and cheaper equipment then. But more likely the failing part will be some obscure little piece requiring the replacement of some expensive big piece.
This is the risk of buying into a developing technology. The payoff is a long way down the road. Usually beyond the next generational change in the technology.
Still, it takes people like Loyd to go out there and do it with what is available, because we can't wait for the perfect solution or we would all still be living in Caves.
> Have you Americans already started to pretend the patriot act doesn't exist?
For all intents and purposes, it doesn't.
It certainly does not affect anyone I know and deal with. There is no problem finding port or violent content or gambling or illegal drugs on the web.
For all the hue and cry, no one has been inconvenienced by the Patriot Act. We don't like it, and it will eventually be changed.
But it is nothing at all like what is happening in China no matter how loudly you harangue us with your silly moral equivalence argument.
while proprietary scratch someone's own financial itch.
Proprietary software has to CARE about the user's itch.
And if you don't like the direction that some Free Software project is heading in, you cannot fork it without forking the entire organization behind it. And it's so much easier to just switch to something else.
Damn! I wish I had mod points.
The common answer shouted back to the users by the KDE team has been fork 3.5 and STFU. They know full well this is essentially impossible.
What few patches that are released for 3.5 usually involve gutting what was there and substituting KDE4 apps. Konqueror file manager has been gutted and in its place you get the foisted, half functional Dolphin dressed up in a window that says Konqueror.
This bait and switch is accompanied with the gratuitous claim that Dolphin does everything Kong does. Well DAH!
For a long time, SUSE was KDE centric, but since Novell took over they started forcing Gnome onto their SLED (Enterprise Desktop).
And no sooner had they done this than the KDE team decided to trash everything and start from scratch which set that desktop back 3 years in terms of functionality. They "pulled a Microsoft" and put look and feel years ahead of functionality.
Novell sent out this horribly broken version of KDE in their community opensuse product and destroyed their own credibility and that of KDE.
It is doubtful that Opensuse will ever regain the popularity it once had even tho it is technically superior to Ubuntu.
So at this juncture, NO DISTRO TRUSTS KDE anymore, as they have burned the distros so badly.
It will take KDE two more releases to get back to where they were with KDE 3.5, but no one will be waiting at the station by the time that happens.
See foot, shoot foot.
>" To hell with you and to hell with the Internet.
>It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real.
>It's in the air somewhere.'"
Its amazing given the amount of sifi he's written that he takes this approach to the single most futuristic invention of mankind.
But intermediaries are never going to go away. A model where millions of creators market directly to hundreds of millions of customers just isn't going to work; the good stuff will be buried in the dreck (even worse than it is in the current system).
Agreed.
And further, having Boing Boing editor Cory Doctorow decry intermediaries when that is the job definition of an Editor seems more than a little disingenuous.
Its also proprietary, requiring a license to use their tools.
Its an abusive technology, allowing no view controls other than blocking or de-installing flash all together.
With the advent of HTML5, flash is NOT the way to go.
Exactly.
The carriers are always caught flat footed and demanding handset manufacturers disable features in their phones because the carriers don't know how to follow the standards.
I'm not aware of a single carrier that EVER came up with a handset design, innovative, or otherwise, unless you consider demanding lobotomies before letting them on the network.
Yes, I'm talking about you Verizon, and you too ATT.
Sooner or later they will.
Had Adobe not steadfastly refused to put any end user controls or setting in Flash no one would have bothered to develop alternatives.
But because they wanted to cater to the jumping monkey segment of the web advertising world, they stonewalled every request for end-user controls, such as no looping, no animation, no sound, etc.
Besides the fact that it is bloatware, its just end user un-friendly.
In order to control Flash, you needed to kill Flash and millions of web browsers would like to do exactly that.
Being an open standard HTML5 is open for development of end-user controls, such as animate only while cursor hovers, sound off till I say so, etc.
Bring on HTML5.
This is a market Adobe deserves to lose.
You might as well complain that clothes make us prone to bad weather or that being rich makes you prone to being poor.
Mr BadAnalogyGuy, is that you?
Thanks for undoing a hundred years of medical research with that deft application of insight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibody
> and since they found it surviving in ice, I doubt our nice warm bodies are it's preferred climate.
It was dormant in Ice. After 11 months of gradual warming it started to reproduce. Who knows what its optimal temperature is.
> There are thousands of different species in a gram of dirt,
And we are exposed to these daily, and have built up immunity.
> I think our odds are plenty safe in assuming this microbe won't hurt us.
I hope you are right, because we have no exposure to this one, and no immunity.
Well, humorous as "The Thing" reference was meant to be, one has to wonder how controlled the lab environment was when this thing was discovered passing thru filters.
And the fact that a bug not seen in 102,000 years is known not to be a pathogen (when virtually NOTHING else is known about it) seems of little comfort.
Its a bacteria. What viruses live inside it?
What could Possibly Go Wrong here?
Well, given that they infected other people, and eventually epidemiologists tracked them down via the people they infected...
Sorry, but that does not wash when talking about a airborne or causal contact transmission. Its not like they spent 20 minutes in the aircraft lavatory joining the mile high club.
Epidemiologists will be the first to tell you that when it comes to Flu, finding patient zero is a guessing game at best. In fact, finding Plane-Load zero is a it iffy.