I believe it does. To not provide source code of GPL derived work when asked is in direct violation of the GPL. Every person who has ever contributed to the Linux kernel should be file a legal action for violating their IP rights.
I have had the WORST experience with OpenCores! That place does nothing but point to company website who either want the core or have it and want to sell it to you! OpenCores is nothing but a front!
Actually, scarcity of music IS limited to easy to reproduce it. If there were zero copyright or IP laws, music would be in overabundance in the world. Music is art, and art is made by people not to get money, but to express themselves. It's like an itch to them, and the only way to scratch it is to create. So, there would still be music produced, and with no laws keeping people from reproducing it, it would spread far and wide. Sure, we wouldn't have the Brittany Spears or Nysnc groups we have today, but I think most of us could agree that that would be a Good Thing(tm). But with IP laws in place, the music industry can limit the amount of music released, and even the styles released. Why do you think that %2 of the RIAA's artists make up %98 of their revenue? Not because they are "the thing" right now and everyone is buying them, but because there is nothing else to buy! Peoples' tastes are very broad, and the music industry isn't catering to them. They only release certain artists in large quantities, with the rest either as special order or completly looked up. This creates an artificial scarcity. The scarcity isn't real since we can reproduce the music cheaply and easily right now, but that would remove the artificial scarcity that the music industry uses to keep a tight control over not only the artists, but our very culture.
Your talking about the aftermath and cleanup of an intrustion, which is also very important. But the idea behind these systems is that they are serving critial functions that CAN NOT be turned off, such as in a hospital or during combat. Keep functioning and running and let the humans worry about the clean up.
But shouldn't the consumer have the ability to void their warranty? Right now, I can take my hard drive out, pull the lid off, and sharpen a pencil on the platters while it is spinning. My warrenty is shot to hell and so is my drive, but because it is my hardware I should have the right to screw with it like that.
What these printing companies want to do is prevent you from even trying! There are good reasons to prevent the user from doing something that is physically dangerous, but preventing them from doing something that will only void their warranty is just Not Nice(tm). If I want to refill my ink cartrige from a thirdparty, I should be allowed to. I just can't go crying to the printer company when it starts printing poorly.
The ONLY reason the companies are trying to inforce this is to protect their profit margins. Most of their profit is from ink, which people need to buy over and over. So sell the printer cheap since most people don't buy new printers very often and then charge an arm and a leg for the one thing that they do need to buy often. Makes good business sense. But they want to US Government to step in and say "No one is allowed to mess with their business model. Anyone who does, has to face me". Businesses that can't stay afloat without these kind of government protections just shouldn't exist, IMHO.
It's because MS has shown in the past that they would rather have security through obscurity, and have intentionally not released information about existing vulnerablilities to the general public. While some would say that this prevents hackers from using the exploit, most here would say it prevents administrators from protecting themselves from the few smart hackers that already know about the exploit. Do we really know how long MS has known about this bug? They could have released information saying "Hey, block port 135 on all machines until we finish working on a patch". But they didn't. And this is a bug that has been in their OS's since NT! It would be equivalent to finding a bug in Linux that has been around since the 1.0 days.
Linux has a history of being VERY open about their problems. The practically advertise them! This allows users of Linux to know exactly where there are problems and what to avoid.
All it takes is a route into the internal network for a black hat hacker with any skills (that means not script kiddies) to dig his way to that database. And if the same vulnerablility exists on ALL the machines on the network, he can basicly go where he wants when he wants. Scary, isn't it?
I'm lucky, I installed Firebird here on my work computer. No popups, no Gator install, jus the site. Makes me wonder why corporation don't install Mozilla/Firebird by default these days.
But that is in line with past actions by this administration to cut beuracracy: do a little reshuffling and add another layer of adminitrators to over see the final mess.
That's really hard to predict. If you take the reaction of the American people right after 9-11, there was a lot of unity and flag waving and such. So the people have shown that we can band together around a common idea/action. But, on the other hand, most of the people in this country seem to be blindly following Bush, not for any concrete reasons, just because he's the president during 9-11 and he let America blow some countries up. If you take those reactions of the American people, I would say that most wouldn't believe the evidence, even if it was screamed into their face by all of Congress. But I now I remember that America loves America, and they'll hate/fight anything that they preceive as a threat to America as they know it. If evidence came out that BushCo really did know or even did it, then I would think there would be a revolution overnight.
You analogy is wrong, so so wrong. I'd completely agree if 2 CDs had been bought, and someone stole the money from the till. Now the selling is out both the PHYSICAL CD, the cash it took to buy that CD from the distributor, AND the cash to pay for the store,sales people, etc. There is real, measurable loss there and almost everyone here would never do something like that.
Copying a CD does not deprive anyone of money or physcial property. I copy a CD, a CD doesn't disappear off the shelf from some store. That store still has that CD to sell to get money to pay for buying that CD from the distributer and for running the store and a little left over for profit. If everyone did that, yes it would put everyone out of business, but it would also show that what was being sold was being sold for a higher price than the demand warrented. They can either a) ignore the demand and continue to sell the CDs at higher prices or b) reduce the prices and increase the supply until demand is met. Putting your hand over the mouth of a screaming child may quiet the noise, but it doesn't fix the underlying problem.
But then the RIAA will just blame the complete lack on music sales as overwhelming proof that the online piracy threat is real and that they should be allowed to hack into peoples' computers and blow them up if they feel like it. This would be a bad thing!
Yes, we all know that Congress and the President are in no way ever working together toward a common goal. I mean, just look at our current Congress and president. They practically hate each other and are trying to undermine each other at every opportunity. Everytime the president wants to do something, he has to battle a Congress that doesn't want to give him money to do what he wants to do. And everytime Congress send a bill to the president to sign, he vetos it. At this rate the government will never spend a dime since it can't get anything done!
/sarcasm
Let's be realistic here for a moment. The President and Congress can and do work together to get bills passed and funds allocated. If you think that the president doesn't influence how and what Congress does, then you just aren't paying attention. Especially now when both Congress and the Presidency are controlled by the same political group, the checks and balances are removed. The president can ask for more money for the military, and the controlling political group in Congress can get the money allocated either through flat out majority votes or because the committies controling the allocations are control by the same political group as the president. That was how Reagan increased our debt. He said jump and Congress said how high.
Reagan an Gorbitchoff (sp?) met in the middle of the 80's, alone, at a summit. At that summit, they basicly got to the point that they were BOTH willing to give up ALL nuclear weapons, on both sides, immediatly. This would have ended the Cold War, right there. But the Russians also wanted the US to scrap Star Wars as they saw it as a very real threat. Reagan said he couldn't do that because he had promised the people he would do Star Wars. That was the only point they disagreed on, and it caused the entire thing to collapse. So, Reagan did have it within his power to end the Cold War with one move, and even turn the Russians into friends, but he instead wanted to keep his image of power and strength in the minds of the people, and so he kept the Cold War going. The moment I learned that, I lost complete respect for the man. His selfrighteousness kept the Cold War going, and led to a nastier collapse of the USSR, which left more people without the resources to survive.
First of all, he didn't end the Cold War. Russia defeated themselves with their crappy domestic programs and lacking infastructure. The people had no food, no water, and no heat. It was only a matter of time before they collapsed. All Reagan did was kill MORE civilians by not allowed the Russian government to drop all the military posturing, thus taking even more the little money they had away from the people and putting it into the military (gee, sound a little familiar?). He the the chance to end the war YEARS earlier, without the massive loss of the life that occured because of starvation of freezing, but he had to have his Star Wars program, which the Russian government viewed as a threat (and rightly so). So, in the end, Reagan just prolonged the conflict, caused more civilians to die, and increased our debt. This is why I agree with the parent that he was one of the worst presidents ever. But I'm one of the few INFORMED citizens it seems, so I'm in the minority on that view. Sad this is is that Bush had learned from Reagan, and his daddy, and is trying very hard to repeat the dog and poney show. So far, it's been working since the population doesn't want to be informed for fear of learning that they are wrong.
Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America by naming the most expensive carrier ever built after him?
I think it's kind of fitting to name the most expensive carrier ever built after the man who increased our national debt more than all the previous presidents combined.
I must have happened at least once, or they never would have done the recall. Basic formula, if the cost of a recall is less than the legal bills, they do a recall. Guess someone got zapped pretty good to scare them into a recall.
This is a gaming consol, and as such you are not required to buy it. If they do almost no business, and the number 1 reason the marketing department sights is the nasty DRM employeed in the device, both they and another companies thinking of doing something similar will sit up and take notice. Vote with your wallet. It's the quickest way to get a company's attention.
As someone mentioned above, NASA may be short on funds to explore space, but they probably have a glut of funds for donating to organizations such as SETI. The point I'm making is that NASA and another government agencies don't just get a big check from Congress once a month to do with as they please. They are given several checks, each designated for specific area/task, and none of those funds may be moved to any other department/project. Add on top of that the typical beuracratic mindset that Congress has (if you don't spend it all, you must need that much next time), and NASA pretty much has to spend this money on SETI, else they might have even more budget cuts. It's nice to think that all the government agencies get X amount of money each month, and what they don't spend they can give back to help with other areas that are overbudget, but that's not they way our government works. It's not even the way stat governments works, nor a lot of large corporations. It's all about the people in charge being lazy. They don't want to actually think and plan and work. They just want to add some columns in Excel and say "You get $X this time and $Y next time (with $X > $Y)".
Slashdot Mirror
I believe it does. To not provide source code of GPL derived work when asked is in direct violation of the GPL. Every person who has ever contributed to the Linux kernel should be file a legal action for violating their IP rights.
EVERY time I went there looking for something, I would find nothing. That has been my experience, which is why I said what I said.
I have had the WORST experience with OpenCores! That place does nothing but point to company website who either want the core or have it and want to sell it to you! OpenCores is nothing but a front!
Actually, scarcity of music IS limited to easy to reproduce it. If there were zero copyright or IP laws, music would be in overabundance in the world. Music is art, and art is made by people not to get money, but to express themselves. It's like an itch to them, and the only way to scratch it is to create. So, there would still be music produced, and with no laws keeping people from reproducing it, it would spread far and wide. Sure, we wouldn't have the Brittany Spears or Nysnc groups we have today, but I think most of us could agree that that would be a Good Thing(tm). But with IP laws in place, the music industry can limit the amount of music released, and even the styles released. Why do you think that %2 of the RIAA's artists make up %98 of their revenue? Not because they are "the thing" right now and everyone is buying them, but because there is nothing else to buy! Peoples' tastes are very broad, and the music industry isn't catering to them. They only release certain artists in large quantities, with the rest either as special order or completly looked up. This creates an artificial scarcity. The scarcity isn't real since we can reproduce the music cheaply and easily right now, but that would remove the artificial scarcity that the music industry uses to keep a tight control over not only the artists, but our very culture.
Your talking about the aftermath and cleanup of an intrustion, which is also very important. But the idea behind these systems is that they are serving critial functions that CAN NOT be turned off, such as in a hospital or during combat. Keep functioning and running and let the humans worry about the clean up.
Did you get permission to post that? If not, the feds are on their way to your house right now :)
But shouldn't the consumer have the ability to void their warranty? Right now, I can take my hard drive out, pull the lid off, and sharpen a pencil on the platters while it is spinning. My warrenty is shot to hell and so is my drive, but because it is my hardware I should have the right to screw with it like that.
What these printing companies want to do is prevent you from even trying! There are good reasons to prevent the user from doing something that is physically dangerous, but preventing them from doing something that will only void their warranty is just Not Nice(tm). If I want to refill my ink cartrige from a thirdparty, I should be allowed to. I just can't go crying to the printer company when it starts printing poorly.
The ONLY reason the companies are trying to inforce this is to protect their profit margins. Most of their profit is from ink, which people need to buy over and over. So sell the printer cheap since most people don't buy new printers very often and then charge an arm and a leg for the one thing that they do need to buy often. Makes good business sense. But they want to US Government to step in and say "No one is allowed to mess with their business model. Anyone who does, has to face me". Businesses that can't stay afloat without these kind of government protections just shouldn't exist, IMHO.
It's because MS has shown in the past that they would rather have security through obscurity, and have intentionally not released information about existing vulnerablilities to the general public. While some would say that this prevents hackers from using the exploit, most here would say it prevents administrators from protecting themselves from the few smart hackers that already know about the exploit. Do we really know how long MS has known about this bug? They could have released information saying "Hey, block port 135 on all machines until we finish working on a patch". But they didn't. And this is a bug that has been in their OS's since NT! It would be equivalent to finding a bug in Linux that has been around since the 1.0 days.
Linux has a history of being VERY open about their problems. The practically advertise them! This allows users of Linux to know exactly where there are problems and what to avoid.
All it takes is a route into the internal network for a black hat hacker with any skills (that means not script kiddies) to dig his way to that database. And if the same vulnerablility exists on ALL the machines on the network, he can basicly go where he wants when he wants. Scary, isn't it?
If you are developing it on THEIR time with THEIR equipment, without their permission, they own your creation and you can not GPL it. Sorry.
I'm lucky, I installed Firebird here on my work computer. No popups, no Gator install, jus the site. Makes me wonder why corporation don't install Mozilla/Firebird by default these days.
But that is in line with past actions by this administration to cut beuracracy: do a little reshuffling and add another layer of adminitrators to over see the final mess.
Yes, it's called Washington DC.
That's really hard to predict. If you take the reaction of the American people right after 9-11, there was a lot of unity and flag waving and such. So the people have shown that we can band together around a common idea/action. But, on the other hand, most of the people in this country seem to be blindly following Bush, not for any concrete reasons, just because he's the president during 9-11 and he let America blow some countries up. If you take those reactions of the American people, I would say that most wouldn't believe the evidence, even if it was screamed into their face by all of Congress. But I now I remember that America loves America, and they'll hate/fight anything that they preceive as a threat to America as they know it. If evidence came out that BushCo really did know or even did it, then I would think there would be a revolution overnight.
if(Government == Business) { Extend_Copyrights(current*1.1); } else { /* Will Never Get Here, just ignore */
}
Someone mod this up. He summed up the basic thinking in this country from the lowest person to the highest government offical in one nice sentence.
You analogy is wrong, so so wrong. I'd completely agree if 2 CDs had been bought, and someone stole the money from the till. Now the selling is out both the PHYSICAL CD, the cash it took to buy that CD from the distributor, AND the cash to pay for the store,sales people, etc. There is real, measurable loss there and almost everyone here would never do something like that.
Copying a CD does not deprive anyone of money or physcial property. I copy a CD, a CD doesn't disappear off the shelf from some store. That store still has that CD to sell to get money to pay for buying that CD from the distributer and for running the store and a little left over for profit. If everyone did that, yes it would put everyone out of business, but it would also show that what was being sold was being sold for a higher price than the demand warrented. They can either a) ignore the demand and continue to sell the CDs at higher prices or b) reduce the prices and increase the supply until demand is met. Putting your hand over the mouth of a screaming child may quiet the noise, but it doesn't fix the underlying problem.
But then the RIAA will just blame the complete lack on music sales as overwhelming proof that the online piracy threat is real and that they should be allowed to hack into peoples' computers and blow them up if they feel like it. This would be a bad thing!
Yes, we all know that Congress and the President are in no way ever working together toward a common goal. I mean, just look at our current Congress and president. They practically hate each other and are trying to undermine each other at every opportunity. Everytime the president wants to do something, he has to battle a Congress that doesn't want to give him money to do what he wants to do. And everytime Congress send a bill to the president to sign, he vetos it. At this rate the government will never spend a dime since it can't get anything done!
/sarcasm
Let's be realistic here for a moment. The President and Congress can and do work together to get bills passed and funds allocated. If you think that the president doesn't influence how and what Congress does, then you just aren't paying attention. Especially now when both Congress and the Presidency are controlled by the same political group, the checks and balances are removed. The president can ask for more money for the military, and the controlling political group in Congress can get the money allocated either through flat out majority votes or because the committies controling the allocations are control by the same political group as the president. That was how Reagan increased our debt. He said jump and Congress said how high.
Reagan an Gorbitchoff (sp?) met in the middle of the 80's, alone, at a summit. At that summit, they basicly got to the point that they were BOTH willing to give up ALL nuclear weapons, on both sides, immediatly. This would have ended the Cold War, right there. But the Russians also wanted the US to scrap Star Wars as they saw it as a very real threat. Reagan said he couldn't do that because he had promised the people he would do Star Wars. That was the only point they disagreed on, and it caused the entire thing to collapse. So, Reagan did have it within his power to end the Cold War with one move, and even turn the Russians into friends, but he instead wanted to keep his image of power and strength in the minds of the people, and so he kept the Cold War going. The moment I learned that, I lost complete respect for the man. His selfrighteousness kept the Cold War going, and led to a nastier collapse of the USSR, which left more people without the resources to survive.
First of all, he didn't end the Cold War. Russia defeated themselves with their crappy domestic programs and lacking infastructure. The people had no food, no water, and no heat. It was only a matter of time before they collapsed. All Reagan did was kill MORE civilians by not allowed the Russian government to drop all the military posturing, thus taking even more the little money they had away from the people and putting it into the military (gee, sound a little familiar?). He the the chance to end the war YEARS earlier, without the massive loss of the life that occured because of starvation of freezing, but he had to have his Star Wars program, which the Russian government viewed as a threat (and rightly so). So, in the end, Reagan just prolonged the conflict, caused more civilians to die, and increased our debt. This is why I agree with the parent that he was one of the worst presidents ever. But I'm one of the few INFORMED citizens it seems, so I'm in the minority on that view. Sad this is is that Bush had learned from Reagan, and his daddy, and is trying very hard to repeat the dog and poney show. So far, it's been working since the population doesn't want to be informed for fear of learning that they are wrong.
I must have happened at least once, or they never would have done the recall. Basic formula, if the cost of a recall is less than the legal bills, they do a recall. Guess someone got zapped pretty good to scare them into a recall.
This is a gaming consol, and as such you are not required to buy it. If they do almost no business, and the number 1 reason the marketing department sights is the nasty DRM employeed in the device, both they and another companies thinking of doing something similar will sit up and take notice. Vote with your wallet. It's the quickest way to get a company's attention.
As someone mentioned above, NASA may be short on funds to explore space, but they probably have a glut of funds for donating to organizations such as SETI. The point I'm making is that NASA and another government agencies don't just get a big check from Congress once a month to do with as they please. They are given several checks, each designated for specific area/task, and none of those funds may be moved to any other department/project. Add on top of that the typical beuracratic mindset that Congress has (if you don't spend it all, you must need that much next time), and NASA pretty much has to spend this money on SETI, else they might have even more budget cuts. It's nice to think that all the government agencies get X amount of money each month, and what they don't spend they can give back to help with other areas that are overbudget, but that's not they way our government works. It's not even the way stat governments works, nor a lot of large corporations. It's all about the people in charge being lazy. They don't want to actually think and plan and work. They just want to add some columns in Excel and say "You get $X this time and $Y next time (with $X > $Y)".