Neither is anything spewed at me from a web server.
You think I agreed to TOS? Fine: show me my signature on a piece of paper saying so. Otherwise, fuck off because I could just as well claim that by serving bytes to my machine you agreed to my TOS that nullifies yours, assigns all your copyrights to me, and declares me Lord and Master of the Universe. What, you say you never agreed to that? Well, it was right there in the "X-mrchaotica's-TOS" HTTP header! If you didn't like it, you should have configured your server not to respond!
A distinction without a difference. "Downloading" a video puts a file in/Downloads. "Streaming" a video puts a file in/Temp. Maybe/Temp isn't "intended" for long-term storage, but the things put there are files on the drive just the same.
WTF is an "illegal download?" There is no such thing!
If Google makes a video available on Youtube, they've made it available. Period. Splitting semantic hairs over "streaming" or "downloading" is trying to create a difference that doesn't actually exist! All streams are downloads, and all downloads are streams. The Internet cannot work any other way. If you don't want your shit downloaded, don't post it on the Internet to begin with.
The fact that Sanders has fewer votes is itself entirely due to the fact that the system is rigged. If it weren't for the (establishment) media deceitfully portraying him as if he had no chance from the beginning, and if it weren't for the fact that the DNC convention schedule was designed to favor Clinton, Sanders would have been getting a lot more votes in the early races. The rigged system wasn't enough to shut Sanders out of the race entirely, but it was certainly enough to give Clinton a gigantic head start.
Technically the choice exists, but because first-past-the-post voting creates a kind of prisoners' dilemma it's unreasonable to expect people to make that choice.
(I'd point out how the fact that Windows 10 is spying malware is the problem, not whether it "runs better" or not, but you know that already and are whoring for Microsoft anyway.)
Not my problem. If the copyright holder cares, he's the one who can [try to] prove I still have it.
There'd need to be some sort of licensing/registration in place where if you sell your copy, you need to transfer the license or copy to the other party.
Why? I don't have to "license" or "register" anything to "prove" I didn't photocopy a book before selling it, so there's no justification for requiring it for digital works either!
I think I would have gotten bored instantly. I learned programming not as a subject, but on my own as a tool to solve problems that I wanted to solve.
That's fine -- self-starters like you don't really need the teacher's help anyway! (Hopefully the teacher would be decent enough to exempt you from paying attention and let you do your own thing, but I'll concede that not all teachers are decent.) The problem is all the other dumbass kids who don't have the faintest clue about how to think algorithmically, how to break down a complex problem into multiple simple problems, how to reason with propositional logic, etc.
Your suggestion to "give them a problem from that area and help them figure it out themselves" wouldn't work because (a) they have no programming-related "area of interest" and (b) they have no hope of figuring it out for themselves because they get stumped on basic concepts like assigning to a variable. That's not even an exaggeration: it's literally why "between 30% and 60% of every university computer science department's intake fail the first programming course". (And that's people who have self-selected to become college CS majors! I expect trying to do this with high-school kids to be much, much worse.)
If you want to have any chance whatsoever of turning those "non-programming goats" into "programming sheep" (to use the paper's terminology) you can't start out teaching the to program; you have to teach them to think first! Even then, I'm not convinced success is possible.
You want to teach coding? How about do it holistically - teach CS
Exactly. If I were teaching computing to kids, I probably wouldn't even give them a computer for the first couple of months! Instead, we'd be doing things like cooking and writing recipes to learn how algorithms work (e.g. student: "Why did you pour the flour on the table?" teacher: "because your instructions didn't specify where to pour it. If I'm a computer, I don't know how to assume it goes in the mixing bowl." student: "Oh, I get it now..."), playing with logic puzzles, learning about Boolean logic and computer architecture with pencil-and-paper exercises, etc.
Microsoft says they'll give "an additional opportunity for cancelling the upgrade" -- because respecting the user's choice the first (or second, or fifth, or 20th) time clearly isn't considered by those assholes to be an option!
Liability? LOLWUT? Liability is irrelevant! The execs' cut is already in an offshore bank somewhere, so who cares if some meaningless paper entity has to declare bankruptcy? Privatize the profits, socialize the liabilities!
Funny thing is, the Streisand Effect will most likely kick-in hard for them, especially once it made the papers there.
That's great for this instance, but the vast majority of this sort of bullying doesn't make the news. The Streisand Effect doesn't solve the underlying problem.
While I'm at it, I should also mention that we in the Southeast are much more diverse in one way Silly Valley is not: by age. Lots of my coworkers have been in their 40s and 50s (probably a few in their 60s too) and, as far as I can tell, they aren't discriminated against. I'd say at least half of the software developers I've worked with in my career so far have been over 40.
Maybe, but more importantly, it's different outside of the West Coast. Where I am in the southeast, Asian tech workers are much less common and almost everybody is a natural-born citizen. At my previous job there were more black programmers than Asian ones (which isn't saying much: it was the difference between "a few" and "maybe one?"). The breakdown among tech workers was probably something like 90% white male, 5% female of any race, 3% black, 2% Asian. At my current job it's hard to tell because I work in a remote office, but I think the main office demographic is similar. (Of the four local employees, all are male. Two are white non-Hispanic, one is white Hispanic from Argentina, and one is Asian.)
Exactly. A ruling that APIs are copyrightable would set off a legal Armageddon. There'd be nothing left allowed to access the Internet except NSCA Mosaic running on Unix (including BSD derivatives, but not Linux) because the makers of those pieces of software would hold the copyright on TCP/IP and HTTP!
A video of someone playing a game (and especially commenting on their experience doing so, although I don't know if that happened in this particular video) is not the same as a game. It is transformative and thus fair use.
Furthermore, the law you quote says that copyright does not extend to work "employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully," but fair use is not unlawful.
Therefore, sw1tched legitimately owns the copyright of the video, not Konami.
I'd like to know why the host is required to take down alleged-infringing material immediately but can drag their feet for two-to-three weeks before reinstating it.
Because the DMCA is complete excrement shat directly from the diseased asses of the MAFIAA lawyers and that's the way they wanted it.
Of course, it doesn't work that way in reverse: if us "little people" were to issue a DMCA notice for a video hosted on some big studio's official account, their counter-notice would be processed immediately. That's where Google becomes complicit in the matter.
In response to the fact that this audio fingerprinting -- at least the researcher's implementation of it -- relies on ajax.googleapis.com, I'm thinking that hosting all that shit locally and redirecting googleapis.com to 127.0.0.1. I have no idea if it would work, but it seems necessary. : (
Also, I don't trust "smart" blockers like Privacy Badger (or Ghostery, or Disconnect). Instead I use RequestPolicy Continued to block all cross-site requests by default and whitelist things manually.
I use requestpolicy [continued] too, but I had ajax.googleapis.com whitelisted because almost every damn site needs it so the test worked on my browser. : (
The experimental rocket in the trial on Wednesday reached an altitude of 278 kilometers and a target speed of Mach 7.5, Australia's defense department said.
Outer space starts at an altitude of 100 km. Why the fuck would they make a test of an air-breathing engine suborbital?
(Yes, I know the pressure at 100 km isn't zero. However, if the scientists are actually claiming that.032 Pa is enough to prevent flame-out in a scramjet, I'll be very surprised.)
Slashdot Mirror
Neither is anything spewed at me from a web server.
You think I agreed to TOS? Fine: show me my signature on a piece of paper saying so. Otherwise, fuck off because I could just as well claim that by serving bytes to my machine you agreed to my TOS that nullifies yours, assigns all your copyrights to me, and declares me Lord and Master of the Universe. What, you say you never agreed to that? Well, it was right there in the "X-mrchaotica's-TOS" HTTP header! If you didn't like it, you should have configured your server not to respond!
Well, it's an Intel chip, so it goes to 10.999739068902037589.
HTTP cache control directives -- just like everything else sent by a web server of any kind whatsoever -- are nothing more than suggestions.
A distinction without a difference. "Downloading" a video puts a file in /Downloads. "Streaming" a video puts a file in /Temp. Maybe /Temp isn't "intended" for long-term storage, but the things put there are files on the drive just the same.
WTF is an "illegal download?" There is no such thing!
If Google makes a video available on Youtube, they've made it available. Period. Splitting semantic hairs over "streaming" or "downloading" is trying to create a difference that doesn't actually exist! All streams are downloads, and all downloads are streams. The Internet cannot work any other way. If you don't want your shit downloaded, don't post it on the Internet to begin with.
The fact that Sanders has fewer votes is itself entirely due to the fact that the system is rigged. If it weren't for the (establishment) media deceitfully portraying him as if he had no chance from the beginning, and if it weren't for the fact that the DNC convention schedule was designed to favor Clinton, Sanders would have been getting a lot more votes in the early races. The rigged system wasn't enough to shut Sanders out of the race entirely, but it was certainly enough to give Clinton a gigantic head start.
Technically the choice exists, but because first-past-the-post voting creates a kind of prisoners' dilemma it's unreasonable to expect people to make that choice.
Fuck off, shill.
(I'd point out how the fact that Windows 10 is spying malware is the problem, not whether it "runs better" or not, but you know that already and are whoring for Microsoft anyway.)
Not my problem. If the copyright holder cares, he's the one who can [try to] prove I still have it.
Why? I don't have to "license" or "register" anything to "prove" I didn't photocopy a book before selling it, so there's no justification for requiring it for digital works either!
That's fine -- self-starters like you don't really need the teacher's help anyway! (Hopefully the teacher would be decent enough to exempt you from paying attention and let you do your own thing, but I'll concede that not all teachers are decent.) The problem is all the other dumbass kids who don't have the faintest clue about how to think algorithmically, how to break down a complex problem into multiple simple problems, how to reason with propositional logic, etc.
Your suggestion to "give them a problem from that area and help them figure it out themselves" wouldn't work because (a) they have no programming-related "area of interest" and (b) they have no hope of figuring it out for themselves because they get stumped on basic concepts like assigning to a variable. That's not even an exaggeration: it's literally why "between 30% and 60% of every university computer science department's intake fail the first programming course". (And that's people who have self-selected to become college CS majors! I expect trying to do this with high-school kids to be much, much worse.)
If you want to have any chance whatsoever of turning those "non-programming goats" into "programming sheep" (to use the paper's terminology) you can't start out teaching the to program; you have to teach them to think first! Even then, I'm not convinced success is possible.
Exactly. If I were teaching computing to kids, I probably wouldn't even give them a computer for the first couple of months! Instead, we'd be doing things like cooking and writing recipes to learn how algorithms work (e.g. student: "Why did you pour the flour on the table?" teacher: "because your instructions didn't specify where to pour it. If I'm a computer, I don't know how to assume it goes in the mixing bowl." student: "Oh, I get it now..."), playing with logic puzzles, learning about Boolean logic and computer architecture with pencil-and-paper exercises, etc.
Microsoft says they'll give "an additional opportunity for cancelling the upgrade" -- because respecting the user's choice the first (or second, or fifth, or 20th) time clearly isn't considered by those assholes to be an option!
Liability? LOLWUT? Liability is irrelevant! The execs' cut is already in an offshore bank somewhere, so who cares if some meaningless paper entity has to declare bankruptcy? Privatize the profits, socialize the liabilities!
I hope you posted in the thread to inform them, then!
That's great for this instance, but the vast majority of this sort of bullying doesn't make the news. The Streisand Effect doesn't solve the underlying problem.
While I'm at it, I should also mention that we in the Southeast are much more diverse in one way Silly Valley is not: by age. Lots of my coworkers have been in their 40s and 50s (probably a few in their 60s too) and, as far as I can tell, they aren't discriminated against. I'd say at least half of the software developers I've worked with in my career so far have been over 40.
Maybe, but more importantly, it's different outside of the West Coast. Where I am in the southeast, Asian tech workers are much less common and almost everybody is a natural-born citizen. At my previous job there were more black programmers than Asian ones (which isn't saying much: it was the difference between "a few" and "maybe one?"). The breakdown among tech workers was probably something like 90% white male, 5% female of any race, 3% black, 2% Asian. At my current job it's hard to tell because I work in a remote office, but I think the main office demographic is similar. (Of the four local employees, all are male. Two are white non-Hispanic, one is white Hispanic from Argentina, and one is Asian.)
A protocol is nothing more than an API, "on the Internet."
Exactly. A ruling that APIs are copyrightable would set off a legal Armageddon. There'd be nothing left allowed to access the Internet except NSCA Mosaic running on Unix (including BSD derivatives, but not Linux) because the makers of those pieces of software would hold the copyright on TCP/IP and HTTP!
A video of someone playing a game (and especially commenting on their experience doing so, although I don't know if that happened in this particular video) is not the same as a game. It is transformative and thus fair use.
Furthermore, the law you quote says that copyright does not extend to work "employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully," but fair use is not unlawful.
Therefore, sw1tched legitimately owns the copyright of the video, not Konami.
Because the DMCA is complete excrement shat directly from the diseased asses of the MAFIAA lawyers and that's the way they wanted it.
Of course, it doesn't work that way in reverse: if us "little people" were to issue a DMCA notice for a video hosted on some big studio's official account, their counter-notice would be processed immediately. That's where Google becomes complicit in the matter.
In response to the fact that this audio fingerprinting -- at least the researcher's implementation of it -- relies on ajax.googleapis.com, I'm thinking that hosting all that shit locally and redirecting googleapis.com to 127.0.0.1. I have no idea if it would work, but it seems necessary. : (
Also, I don't trust "smart" blockers like Privacy Badger (or Ghostery, or Disconnect). Instead I use RequestPolicy Continued to block all cross-site requests by default and whitelist things manually.
I use requestpolicy [continued] too, but I had ajax.googleapis.com whitelisted because almost every damn site needs it so the test worked on my browser. : (
Outer space starts at an altitude of 100 km. Why the fuck would they make a test of an air-breathing engine suborbital?
(Yes, I know the pressure at 100 km isn't zero. However, if the scientists are actually claiming that .032 Pa is enough to prevent flame-out in a scramjet, I'll be very surprised.)
Not all pedestrians are homeless, especially in places outside of the "bubble."