Try telling your wife/girlfriend/other that the young ladies with whom you're playing those online video games are virtual. That loud slapping sound, followed by the sharp pain in your face, is actual.
If $SEARCH_ENGINE returns 1,000,000 results, and assuming I can sift through each result at an astonishing rate of 1 per second, it will take me 1,000,000/(60*60) = 278 hours, or 11 1/2 days to wade through the junk.
The number of results is largely irrelevant. Give me quality filtering instead. Fortunately, Google does that for the most part.
She replies that Oracle and others take Apache and create their own customized versions...
Score 1 for OSS there. If Apache wasn't an OSS application, Oracle would (likely) not be able to do this at all, or to a limited extent. Available source code = easier** customization.
Just because a product is Open Source, it doesn't mean that you have to run that application using the default settings/flags/code. You're free to modify it, as above, to give yourself a product that meets your own needs. Her example illustrates this benefit perfectly.
** Easier compared to an identical product, with no source provided.
With IT workers so commonly producing some of our best work 'after hours,' even at home or in restaurants/bars, will this ruling come back to bite employers in the IT industry?
If your employer "bans" you from meeting up with your colleagues after work, then complains about how no work is getting done outside of the workplace, doesn't (s)he deserve it?
Can they really stop you from talking with your cubicle neighbor on the bus home?
They can try, but I imagine that a lawsuit or two will quickly change their minds.
Just because it isn't a physical thing doesn't make it any less stealing.
If you are not depriving the entitled owner of possession of some object, how is it stealing? The owner still has it, the owner can still make money off of it, and (in this case) the owner can rest assured that you are not profitting yourself off of his/her work. Changing the details of your situation slightly -- for example, the person takes the painting, the person takes a picture and mounts it in his/her own museum -- might alter the charge. But that's changing the situation.
It is a discussion about what is "right" and what the law should be.
There are a lot of things that are "right" and "wrong" that aren't "stealing" too. Speeding down a busy street is illegal, but isn't "theft" in any way. There are different labels for things. In this case, unlawfully viewing art is "trespassing", which roughly translates to "being in a place without permission", where permission is granted after paying $50.
when you sneak in and view the art, you are stealing something
What, exactly, are you stealing?
you are depriving the person of a payment for their services
And what "service" is that? The experience of walking through a hallway, and receiving sensory input to your retinas? Can I really take that away from you?
The management of your hypothetical museum has every right, upon catching said intruder, to throw him out and prevent him from reentering in the future. They can even try and claim their $50 entry fee before setting him/her free. But nobody is entitled to be paid for their services in this situation. It's their duty to enforce their rules, and collect on them. Their inability to do so does not change the definition of the charge.
If you find a way to sneak in through the back door and view the art, aren't you really stealing.
You still have the art, so no. I just didn't give you any money.
You're in "potential sale" territory. If 10 people pay $50/each, you make $500. If an 11th person sneaks in, you still make $500. You haven't lost anything, you've only failed to gain an extra $50.
Well, I'm a Canuck, so I'm not 100% aware of the US's legal system. Is there really a law prohibiting "downloading" an artist's work? Again, I was under the impression that the uploader was violating the terms of the copyright clause, i.e. "do not share or reproduce".
Perhaps it falls under a similar "library" clause? For example, many books have notices reading "you are permitted to use this for $SOME_PURPOSE only..." Is this the case?
You're not alone. The GAC link leads to a minimal MindPixel front page, which reads "Digital Mind Modeling Project" and prompts me to log in. The blog link informs me that MindPixel is "a map of common sense". The 80,000 link initially crashed Firefox on my Win2K machine here at work, but on a retry, gave me a page which begins "Is ice cream cold? Is earth a planet? Is green a color?"
Fortunately, Wikipedia gave some insight. But yeah, the article summary was a bit too vague for my liking.
Re:Looks like they've got their focus...
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
Hardly anything that requires major changes.
That was my impression too, yet the "administrator by default" installation setting hasn't changed, even on the latest batch of WinXP SP2 CDs. One simple fix would prevent 90% of mal-/spy-/adware related problems.
I do agree that there are some apps that insist on running as admin, and that they cause hassles for users. But I also believe you're overstating the number of apps that require this. For example, my wife runs XP with Office, Firefox/IE, instant messaging, DigiCam software, a schoolboard-related application, jukebox, and various games. She runs in restricted mode, at my request, and has never been promted to run anything as admin. I set up a machine for her parents -- he uses AutoCAD, she uses specialized accounting software. Again, no problems in restricted mode. In fact, the only time I log on to her machine as admin is to use Windows Update or to install software.
That's because Linux is trying really hard to mimic Windows-isms
True enough. Even the screenshots for SkyOS and Syllable, the two discussed in the article, look like conventional GUIs (using GTK and Be respectively).
Changing your OS changes everything about your computing environment.
"Everything" is a rather broad statement. When I switched my main machine from Windows to SuSE/KDE, most things worked in nearly identical ways. Click an icon to start a program, drag-and-drop things to folders or applications, even Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V to cut/paste works in nearly all applications. As for the applications themselves, I use OpenOffice.org, GIMP, Firefox... all of the same apps that I run on my Win2K machine at work.
Software installation was a semi-major difference, albeit an easy one to get used to. Manual hardware configuration is a bit tricky, but I rarely change components, so I only have to do it once. The rest was fairly trivial.
If you must know, I'm +2 whereas you're still default at 1.
How impressive. I wish I could achieve that same badge of honour. Oh wait, I have it -- I just uncheck that "karma bonus" button at the bottom. Something about not having to boost my karma, I guess. But for your sake, here's a demonstration. Can I be part of your club now?
If you believe this moderation mumbo-jumbo actually works... then my posts are consistently more insightful than yours.
Clearly. Because anyone who is, say, unfairly moderated by stating political/dissenting views must automatically be less "insightful" by people who get modded up by group-think. But you now know I'm a +2 anyway, so where does that leave you?
(you have to, otherwise your AC argument is moot)
My argument was that you didn't want to leave yourself vulnerable to down-modding by posting under your real ID. By posting AC, you can criticize all you like without being penalized. It does not conflict with any pre-existing views of the usefulness of the moderation system, but provides a means for regular users to troll away under the stelthful protection of anonymity.
a simple tactic to "win" an argument is to resort to ad hominem and then resort to labelling a "troll." I'm not the least bit surprised you did both.
You mean like trying to win an argument by claiming "when you cry troll, you lose by default"? Gotcha.
In any case, if you took the "bubble" comment personally, so be it. I state my mind, under my real ID, as it comes. If you want to view it as a personal attack, suit yourself. As an AC, you have no comment history, no association to stories or users. I can't identify you with any meaningful personality. Certainly nothing to lose sleep over.
If you have a need for such a device as a "one-click" order processing system... then simply create it.
I would, but Amazon holds a patent which allows them to sue anyone who creates a similar system. Didn't we discuss this already? I'm sure we did. I believe it was the point of this entire discussion.
the mechanism between your ears (supposing you have said mechanism)
What was that you said about ad hominem again? Does this mean you've won the argument or something?
I do not live in fear of the government granting patents no matter how silly or trivial they seem.
Of course. Because you suffer from "it will never happen to me" syndrome. It's common these days. But when something does inconvenience you in some way, you'll probably be at the head of the line shouting "unfair!"
I thought the hallmark of every Slashdot "debate" was posting as AC, so you can disassociate yourself from your views later. Hey, look at that!
I fail to see how any patent interferes with your ability to perform "simple programming tasks."
If I implement a "one-click" type online ordering system, Amazon has a government-issued piece of paper giving it complete rights to said process. This simple fact prevents me -- "interferes" if you will -- from implementing such a system.
When a patent interferes with my ability to perform simple programming tasks, then yes, I like to be in the know. I like reading about things that affect my field, and not just those things that are immediately at hand. You may enjoy living in a limited bubble. I don't.
Plus, the more you talk about something, the more people hear it and (potentially) do something about it. What a novel idea.
hardly news for "nerds"... it seems it was 1999 when legal matters became news for "nerds"
Well then, there you go. Since 1999, it's been news for nerds. Thanks.
i think that was mostly so the editors could generate more flamebait
Seeing as I was the one who submitted that quip, I fail to see how the editors are at fault in this case.
Slashdot Mirror
> how can we square c?
.__
|
|__
That ought to do it. Pesky formatting seems to insist on the period, but it looks *far* more squared to my eyes than "c".
Define actual.
Try telling your wife/girlfriend/other that the young ladies with whom you're playing those online video games are virtual. That loud slapping sound, followed by the sharp pain in your face, is actual.
What is the output of the following?
"Be Sure To Drink Your Ovaltine." What the...?
RIAA is reported to be lobbying heavily against the speaker industry.
I'd join in the modding-post-as-Funny mindset, if I hadn't read this gem a while back. Saddening.
If $SEARCH_ENGINE returns 1,000,000 results, and assuming I can sift through each result at an astonishing rate of 1 per second, it will take me 1,000,000/(60*60) = 278 hours, or 11 1/2 days to wade through the junk.
The number of results is largely irrelevant. Give me quality filtering instead. Fortunately, Google does that for the most part.
FedEx doesn't want to be providing thousands to millions of boxes to people who won't be paying to use them to ship items via FedEx.
She replies that Oracle and others take Apache and create their own customized versions ...
Score 1 for OSS there. If Apache wasn't an OSS application, Oracle would (likely) not be able to do this at all, or to a limited extent. Available source code = easier** customization.
Just because a product is Open Source, it doesn't mean that you have to run that application using the default settings/flags/code. You're free to modify it, as above, to give yourself a product that meets your own needs. Her example illustrates this benefit perfectly.
** Easier compared to an identical product, with no source provided.
For future generations? So they can grow up and not be able to accomplish their goals because they have to conserve too?
Under conservation, future generations will be able to grow up.
If your employer "bans" you from meeting up with your colleagues after work, then complains about how no work is getting done outside of the workplace, doesn't (s)he deserve it?
They can try, but I imagine that a lawsuit or two will quickly change their minds.
Just because it isn't a physical thing doesn't make it any less stealing.
If you are not depriving the entitled owner of possession of some object, how is it stealing? The owner still has it, the owner can still make money off of it, and (in this case) the owner can rest assured that you are not profitting yourself off of his/her work. Changing the details of your situation slightly -- for example, the person takes the painting, the person takes a picture and mounts it in his/her own museum -- might alter the charge. But that's changing the situation.
It is a discussion about what is "right" and what the law should be.
There are a lot of things that are "right" and "wrong" that aren't "stealing" too. Speeding down a busy street is illegal, but isn't "theft" in any way. There are different labels for things. In this case, unlawfully viewing art is "trespassing", which roughly translates to "being in a place without permission", where permission is granted after paying $50.
when you sneak in and view the art, you are stealing something
What, exactly, are you stealing?
you are depriving the person of a payment for their services
And what "service" is that? The experience of walking through a hallway, and receiving sensory input to your retinas? Can I really take that away from you?
The management of your hypothetical museum has every right, upon catching said intruder, to throw him out and prevent him from reentering in the future. They can even try and claim their $50 entry fee before setting him/her free. But nobody is entitled to be paid for their services in this situation. It's their duty to enforce their rules, and collect on them. Their inability to do so does not change the definition of the charge.
Yep, you'd be free to slap a trespassing fine on me. Of course, that wouldn't net you any money either. :)
If you find a way to sneak in through the back door and view the art, aren't you really stealing.
You still have the art, so no. I just didn't give you any money.
You're in "potential sale" territory. If 10 people pay $50/each, you make $500. If an 11th person sneaks in, you still make $500. You haven't lost anything, you've only failed to gain an extra $50.
If every single byte of technology for windows, Linux and MAcs [was] the same ...
... then I imagine viruses would be cross-"platform", and easily interchangable among all three.
Well, I'm a Canuck, so I'm not 100% aware of the US's legal system. Is there really a law prohibiting "downloading" an artist's work? Again, I was under the impression that the uploader was violating the terms of the copyright clause, i.e. "do not share or reproduce".
Perhaps it falls under a similar "library" clause? For example, many books have notices reading "you are permitted to use this for $SOME_PURPOSE only..." Is this the case?
The solution will alleviate network bottlenecks caused by illegal music downloads...
Funny, I thought that uploading (sharing) copyrighted music files was the illegal part.
You're not alone. The GAC link leads to a minimal MindPixel front page, which reads "Digital Mind Modeling Project" and prompts me to log in. The blog link informs me that MindPixel is "a map of common sense". The 80,000 link initially crashed Firefox on my Win2K machine here at work, but on a retry, gave me a page which begins "Is ice cream cold? Is earth a planet? Is green a color?"
Fortunately, Wikipedia gave some insight. But yeah, the article summary was a bit too vague for my liking.
Hardly anything that requires major changes.
That was my impression too, yet the "administrator by default" installation setting hasn't changed, even on the latest batch of WinXP SP2 CDs. One simple fix would prevent 90% of mal-/spy-/adware related problems.
I do agree that there are some apps that insist on running as admin, and that they cause hassles for users. But I also believe you're overstating the number of apps that require this. For example, my wife runs XP with Office, Firefox/IE, instant messaging, DigiCam software, a schoolboard-related application, jukebox, and various games. She runs in restricted mode, at my request, and has never been promted to run anything as admin. I set up a machine for her parents -- he uses AutoCAD, she uses specialized accounting software. Again, no problems in restricted mode. In fact, the only time I log on to her machine as admin is to use Windows Update or to install software.
Cheers.
That's because Linux is trying really hard to mimic Windows-isms
True enough. Even the screenshots for SkyOS and Syllable, the two discussed in the article, look like conventional GUIs (using GTK and Be respectively).
Cheers.
Changing your OS changes everything about your computing environment.
"Everything" is a rather broad statement. When I switched my main machine from Windows to SuSE/KDE, most things worked in nearly identical ways. Click an icon to start a program, drag-and-drop things to folders or applications, even Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V to cut/paste works in nearly all applications. As for the applications themselves, I use OpenOffice.org, GIMP, Firefox... all of the same apps that I run on my Win2K machine at work.
Software installation was a semi-major difference, albeit an easy one to get used to. Manual hardware configuration is a bit tricky, but I rarely change components, so I only have to do it once. The rest was fairly trivial.
IHBT, it would seem. But you, you HAND Mrs. mopslik.
Comedy gold. I think I've found my new sig.
If you must know, I'm +2 whereas you're still default at 1.
How impressive. I wish I could achieve that same badge of honour. Oh wait, I have it -- I just uncheck that "karma bonus" button at the bottom. Something about not having to boost my karma, I guess. But for your sake, here's a demonstration. Can I be part of your club now?
If you believe this moderation mumbo-jumbo actually works ... then my posts are consistently more insightful than yours.
Clearly. Because anyone who is, say, unfairly moderated by stating political/dissenting views must automatically be less "insightful" by people who get modded up by group-think. But you now know I'm a +2 anyway, so where does that leave you?
(you have to, otherwise your AC argument is moot)
My argument was that you didn't want to leave yourself vulnerable to down-modding by posting under your real ID. By posting AC, you can criticize all you like without being penalized. It does not conflict with any pre-existing views of the usefulness of the moderation system, but provides a means for regular users to troll away under the stelthful protection of anonymity.
a simple tactic to "win" an argument is to resort to ad hominem and then resort to labelling a "troll." I'm not the least bit surprised you did both.
You mean like trying to win an argument by claiming "when you cry troll, you lose by default"? Gotcha.
In any case, if you took the "bubble" comment personally, so be it. I state my mind, under my real ID, as it comes. If you want to view it as a personal attack, suit yourself. As an AC, you have no comment history, no association to stories or users. I can't identify you with any meaningful personality. Certainly nothing to lose sleep over.
If you have a need for such a device as a "one-click" order processing system ... then simply create it.
I would, but Amazon holds a patent which allows them to sue anyone who creates a similar system. Didn't we discuss this already? I'm sure we did. I believe it was the point of this entire discussion.
the mechanism between your ears (supposing you have said mechanism)
What was that you said about ad hominem again? Does this mean you've won the argument or something?
I do not live in fear of the government granting patents no matter how silly or trivial they seem.
Of course. Because you suffer from "it will never happen to me" syndrome. It's common these days. But when something does inconvenience you in some way, you'll probably be at the head of the line shouting "unfair!"
The hallmark of every slashbot debate.
I thought the hallmark of every Slashdot "debate" was posting as AC, so you can disassociate yourself from your views later. Hey, look at that!
I fail to see how any patent interferes with your ability to perform "simple programming tasks."
If I implement a "one-click" type online ordering system, Amazon has a government-issued piece of paper giving it complete rights to said process. This simple fact prevents me -- "interferes" if you will -- from implementing such a system.
Clear as mud. Next troll, please.
Did they feed them pi?
Pi are round. They don't provide square meals.
Actually, the one-click patent cited in the GNU link was really not so obvious after all.
It was obvious.
It wasn't documented, but it was obvious.
you like talking about patents and copyright?
When a patent interferes with my ability to perform simple programming tasks, then yes, I like to be in the know. I like reading about things that affect my field, and not just those things that are immediately at hand. You may enjoy living in a limited bubble. I don't.
Plus, the more you talk about something, the more people hear it and (potentially) do something about it. What a novel idea.
hardly news for "nerds"... it seems it was 1999 when legal matters became news for "nerds"
Well then, there you go. Since 1999, it's been news for nerds. Thanks.
i think that was mostly so the editors could generate more flamebait
Seeing as I was the one who submitted that quip, I fail to see how the editors are at fault in this case.