This all assumes the service provider knows how to contact X.
What about anonymous speech?
The way you describe it, the DMCA can easily be misused to sensor anonymous free speech with bogus copyright claims.
The Scientology church just to name one example is known to have used questionable copyright claims on numerous occasions to suppress critics.
The possibility for anonymous speech is also vitally important to expose the misdeeds of miscreants like the Scientology church less they harass their critics in any imaginable way legal or otherwise.
Never said it was impossible, just informing that the action elrous0 suggested is not a legal venture in Sweden (and recently not in Norway either). And I think it was a rather relevant piece of information because SEK is after all the Swedish currency.
IANAL: But as I understand it selling is still legal, just not buying. But I guess this have had just about the same effect as outlawing drugs...
The lack of flash and possibly javascript is only two of the differences between pc's and mobile units.
My pc has an 20 inch screen an the iphone screen is about 3.5 inches. Very few mobile units have screens much bigger than this.
Creating web pages that works on both a huge and a tiny screen is certainly possible. But I would argue that it is in most cases much better for all to make two versions of the site. One for the PC and one for mobile units.
I do not think this is going to change in the near future because people simply does not want to carry around mobile units with much larger screens.
Sure, one can try. I was only pointing out in a slightly humorously way that our track record in implementing communism is not very good.
In fact I would say most attempts have been quite disastrous for the humans living in those societies.
Makes you wonder if it is at all possible to implement due to human nature.
Personally I think something in the middle between hard capitalism and socialism seems to be working much better. Like in the Scandinavian countries for instance. Norway, Sweden and Denmark is very nice countries to live in for almost all their citizens.
Of course it is far from perfect but I prefer it to any of the alternatives I have seen so far.
Disclaimer: I'm Norwegian myself so I guess I am a bit biased;-)
"Would a requirement that programs are released as open source make it more or less difficult to find someone to do the job?"
I do not think this will make it any harder. But if you approach commercial companies be prepared to pay a substantial extra to have them give up copyrights. They would also have to make damn sure they actually have the right to open source (or sign away the copyright for) all the code that goes into the project. In some cases this might be difficult.
I know for a fact the company I work for would at least double if not triple the price.
If you hire a developers directly "work for hire" and pay them from your own funds then you will own the copyright and it is not a problem.
As someone else pointed out this is exactly what the article is talking about.
Something influenced these galaxies around the time of inflation to give them a very high speed. Since then inflation has moved that something outside our observable universe (or lightcone if you will).
But what I was answering to was the claim that someone somehow was able to see something being influenced by something else outside our observable universe. I fail to see how this could be correct even considering inflation or the continuous expansion of time-space itself.
BTW: The article does not actually claim that anything outside our observable universe is still affecting these galaxies, only that something must have done at some time.
The article says that these far away galaxies are being observed to have an unexplained velocity not an unexplained acceleration.
The cause and effect took place a long time ago and that part of space time is probably not inside our observable universe anymore.
You assume that we can observe what happens far away in real time.
We cannot. There is no absolute frame of reference that your example need to make sense.
Information itself is limited by the speed of light so if light carrying the information about something happening far away has had time to reach us that also means light from the object causing the effect will have time to reach us.
Your hidden node problem is not a valid analogy because the visible horizon around a node is fairly constant because it is limited by radio range and not by time.
The radius of the observable universe is only limited by time and the speed of light.
In fact the size of the observable universe expands with exactly one light-year per year. This means that by the time we can see any effect on these far away galaxies then the light from what is causing it will also have time to reach us.
BTW: The article does in no place claim that these galaxies are still accelerating or still being affected by anything outside our observable universe.
As is quite common the person writing the summary did not quite understand what (s)he is summarizing.
What they claim is that they have detected a velocity (not an acceleration) that cannot be explained by anything in our observable universe.
And that the most likely explanation is that something affected these parts of the universe before (or during) the inflation stage of the Big Bang and that we still can see the remnants of this effect in the excess speed of these far away galaxies.
Nothing and that includes information can travel above the speed of light neither directly nor indirectly.
Yes, it it possible for something at the edge of our observable universe to be affected by something outside our observable universe right now.
But we do not (and cannot) observe what happens at the edge right now, but rather when light left that place heading in our direction a very long time ago.
So in effect we are seeing what happened at the edge in the past. This also means that the light from anything capable of affecting that part of the universe at that time would also by now had time to reach us and so we would be able to see it.
The summary is (as usual) a bit misleading.
What the article is suggesting is not that something outside the observable universe is affecting something else inside it right now and that we can see the effect but not the cause, but rather that something influenced a part of the universe around the time of the great inflation shortly after the big bang.
At that time those parts of the universe would have been close enough together that they could have affected each other. The inflation stage which was an extremely fast expansion of time and space itself has since moved some parts (in fact probably most of it) outside our observable universe so we cannot see this part.
What they see is something having a great speed due to an earlier influence by something we cannot see now, not that it is still being accelerated because that would have been a violation of the speed of light.
I hope I am not to unclear on this but English is not my first language so I find it a bit hard to explain any clearer.
However the radius of the observable universe increases with time.
The time it took for light to travel from these distant galaxies should equal the additional time it will take for light from the cause of the movement to travel from the galaxies to us.
This means that if we can see the action we should also be able to see the cause.
Information cannot travel faster than light neither directly nor indirectly.
The only explanation I can see is that this speed (or flow) was caused by a gravitational tug that happened around the time of inflation.
But if this is the case we should not register any current (or rather at the time we see now light departed from the galaxies toward us) acceleration of these distant galaxies apart from what can be expected from the general expansion of the universe.
Yes, in the US i suppose you would expect to risk your life. At least if I should believe guys like you on./, what I read in the newspapers and what we see in American movies and television shows.
I still hope it is a bit exaggerated, and not really representative for the majority of cases. If not I feel truly sorry for your people.
In most of Europe (in fact most of the world) the police would chase after you but will not open fire unless you start shooting back at them. If they have reason to believe you are dangerous they will still warn you, usually several times before opening fire.
And at least in my country I know for a fact they have instructions to shoot to disable and not to kill.
After all we are not barbarians and have done away with the death penalty a long long time ago.
BTW: The man in question here was unarmed and had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks or any other criminal activities.
It has also been established that he never ran from the police as they initially claimed. The police later issued an official apology after this fact leaked to the press.
He did however resemble slightly the man they were looking for. So does a lot of people in London.
The fact of the case is that the police officers in question were jumping the gun in this case. Perhaps understandable after the bombings but that is a poor excuse.
If we surrender our rights, freedom and justice system because of the threat of terrorist then the terrorist have won and we may be safe but not free.
One should also remember that the terrorist threat might be spectacular and frightening but in reality it is relatively trivial.
Many many more people die every year in traffic accidents than are being killed by terrorist.
In fact there is a much higher probability that either of us will commit suicide than become victims of a terrorist attack.
It is a sorry state of affairs but people seems to have lost all perspective about this.
Most of those patents are hardware patents totally irrelevant for OpenGL (or Direct3D for that matter).
Also, Microsoft is not a member of the group that actually writes the OpenGL specification. They have no vote on what gets in OpenGL or don't.
Of course this might give them leverage on some of the hardware vendors (like Nvidia) that will have to implement the new OpenGL standard in the future. But history does not show them trying to use this in any way against OpenGL.
Almost all 3D models used in 3D animation are textured.
By "textured" they mean you sort of wrap a 2D image around the model that specifies surface properties like color with the different pixels of the image. (Simplified explanation for the masses). It is also common to use different textures (images) to specify different surface properties.
This technique is very important because it permits you to have great surface details without the need of an extremely dense polygon mesh to describe all surface details and thus crate 3D animations that are much less costly computational wise to render than they would have been otherwise.
So even if it might seems counter intuitive to the uninitiated, access to a high quality image manipulation editing is very important when working with 3D also.
Disclaimer: I do not work with 2D image editing or 3D modeling/animation but I do work with programming 3D/VR real time systems and have to work closely with people that do both 2D and 3D work so I know what I'm talking about;-)
I don't know much about the Human Genome Project (wasn't it an International collaboration project?) but the Internet is a bad example. It ceased to be a pure US project more than 20 years ago.
Even the html and http protocol which I use now to communicate with you was developed in Europe (at CERN if I remember correctly).
The majority of the development of the next generation Internet is also done outside of the US.
Slashdot Mirror
This all assumes the service provider knows how to contact X.
What about anonymous speech?
The way you describe it, the DMCA can easily be misused to sensor anonymous free speech with bogus copyright claims.
The Scientology church just to name one example is known to have used questionable copyright claims on numerous occasions to suppress critics.
The possibility for anonymous speech is also vitally important to expose the misdeeds of miscreants like the Scientology church less they harass their critics in any imaginable way legal or otherwise.
Please note the submission date:
Semiclassical instability of dynamical warp drives
Doh! That is just a coincidence.
He subtracted all the copyrighted combinations, that is because your not allowed to use them ;-)
Nothing at all ;-)
Never said it was impossible, just informing that the action elrous0 suggested is not a legal venture in Sweden (and recently not in Norway either). And I think it was a rather relevant piece of information because SEK is after all the Swedish currency.
IANAL: But as I understand it selling is still legal, just not buying. But I guess this have had just about the same effect as outlawing drugs...
Actually, that is illegal in Sweden ;-)
The lack of flash and possibly javascript is only two of the differences between pc's and mobile units.
My pc has an 20 inch screen an the iphone screen is about 3.5 inches. Very few mobile units have screens much bigger than this.
Creating web pages that works on both a huge and a tiny screen is certainly possible. But I would argue that it is in most cases much better for all to make two versions of the site. One for the PC and one for mobile units.
I do not think this is going to change in the near future because people simply does not want to carry around mobile units with much larger screens.
>Germany, Italy, Egypt... the list goes on.
He was asking for countries difficult to get into not countries easier than the US.
Sure, one can try. I was only pointing out in a slightly humorously way that our track record in implementing communism is not very good.
In fact I would say most attempts have been quite disastrous for the humans living in those societies.
Makes you wonder if it is at all possible to implement due to human nature.
Personally I think something in the middle between hard capitalism and socialism seems to be working much better. Like in the Scandinavian countries for instance. Norway, Sweden and Denmark is very nice countries to live in for almost all their citizens.
Of course it is far from perfect but I prefer it to any of the alternatives I have seen so far.
Disclaimer: I'm Norwegian myself so I guess I am a bit biased ;-)
Communism as a standard is not so bad.
It is all the implementations that sucks.
"Would a requirement that programs are released as open source make it more or less difficult to find someone to do the job?"
I do not think this will make it any harder. But if you approach commercial companies be prepared to pay a substantial extra to have them give up copyrights. They would also have to make damn sure they actually have the right to open source (or sign away the copyright for) all the code that goes into the project. In some cases this might be difficult.
I know for a fact the company I work for would at least double if not triple the price.
If you hire a developers directly "work for hire" and pay them from your own funds then you will own the copyright and it is not a problem.
As someone else pointed out this is exactly what the article is talking about.
Something influenced these galaxies around the time of inflation to give them a very high speed. Since then inflation has moved that something outside our observable universe (or lightcone if you will).
But what I was answering to was the claim that someone somehow was able to see something being influenced by something else outside our observable universe. I fail to see how this could be correct even considering inflation or the continuous expansion of time-space itself.
BTW: The article does not actually claim that anything outside our observable universe is still affecting these galaxies, only that something must have done at some time.
The article says that these far away galaxies are being observed to have an unexplained velocity not an unexplained acceleration.
The cause and effect took place a long time ago and that part of space time is probably not inside our observable universe anymore.
You are wrong.
You assume that we can observe what happens far away in real time.
We cannot. There is no absolute frame of reference that your example need to make sense.
Information itself is limited by the speed of light so if light carrying the information about something happening far away has had time to reach us that also means light from the object causing the effect will have time to reach us.
Your hidden node problem is not a valid analogy because the visible horizon around a node is fairly constant because it is limited by radio range and not by time.
The radius of the observable universe is only limited by time and the speed of light.
In fact the size of the observable universe expands with exactly one light-year per year. This means that by the time we can see any effect on these far away galaxies then the light from what is causing it will also have time to reach us.
BTW: The article does in no place claim that these galaxies are still accelerating or still being affected by anything outside our observable universe.
As is quite common the person writing the summary did not quite understand what (s)he is summarizing.
What they claim is that they have detected a velocity (not an acceleration) that cannot be explained by anything in our observable universe.
And that the most likely explanation is that something affected these parts of the universe before (or during) the inflation stage of the Big Bang and that we still can see the remnants of this effect in the excess speed of these far away galaxies.
That is wrong I am afraid.
Nothing and that includes information can travel above the speed of light neither directly nor indirectly.
Yes, it it possible for something at the edge of our observable universe to be affected by something outside our observable universe right now.
But we do not (and cannot) observe what happens at the edge right now, but rather when light left that place heading in our direction a very long time ago.
So in effect we are seeing what happened at the edge in the past. This also means that the light from anything capable of affecting that part of the universe at that time would also by now had time to reach us and so we would be able to see it.
The summary is (as usual) a bit misleading.
What the article is suggesting is not that something outside the observable universe is affecting something else inside it right now and that we can see the effect but not the cause, but rather that something influenced a part of the universe around the time of the great inflation shortly after the big bang.
At that time those parts of the universe would have been close enough together that they could have affected each other. The inflation stage which was an extremely fast expansion of time and space itself has since moved some parts (in fact probably most of it) outside our observable universe so we cannot see this part.
What they see is something having a great speed due to an earlier influence by something we cannot see now, not that it is still being accelerated because that would have been a violation of the speed of light.
I hope I am not to unclear on this but English is not my first language so I find it a bit hard to explain any clearer.
True.
However the radius of the observable universe increases with time.
The time it took for light to travel from these distant galaxies should equal the additional time it will take for light from the cause of the movement to travel from the galaxies to us.
This means that if we can see the action we should also be able to see the cause.
Information cannot travel faster than light neither directly nor indirectly.
The only explanation I can see is that this speed (or flow) was caused by a gravitational tug that happened around the time of inflation.
But if this is the case we should not register any current (or rather at the time we see now light departed from the galaxies toward us) acceleration of these distant galaxies apart from what can be expected from the general expansion of the universe.
You know, "Anonymous Coward" fits you real well ;-)
Blame me, it was always my fault.
Sorry...
Yeah, so I f...ed up linux, what have you done then? ehh?
Yes, in the US i suppose you would expect to risk your life. At least if I should believe guys like you on ./, what I read in the newspapers and what we see in American movies and television shows.
I still hope it is a bit exaggerated, and not really representative for the majority of cases.
If not I feel truly sorry for your people.
In most of Europe (in fact most of the world) the police would chase after you but will not open fire unless you start shooting back at them. If they have reason to believe you are dangerous they will still warn you, usually several times before opening fire.
And at least in my country I know for a fact they have instructions to shoot to disable and not to kill.
After all we are not barbarians and have done away with the death penalty a long long time ago.
BTW: The man in question here was unarmed and had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks or any other criminal activities.
It has also been established that he never ran from the police as they initially claimed. The police later issued an official apology after this fact leaked to the press.
He did however resemble slightly the man they were looking for. So does a lot of people in London.
The fact of the case is that the police officers in question were jumping the gun in this case. Perhaps understandable after the bombings but that is a poor excuse.
If we surrender our rights, freedom and justice system because of the threat of terrorist then the terrorist have won and we may be safe but not free.
One should also remember that the terrorist threat might be spectacular and frightening but in reality it is relatively trivial.
Many many more people die every year in traffic accidents than are being killed by terrorist.
In fact there is a much higher probability that either of us will commit suicide than become victims of a terrorist attack.
It is a sorry state of affairs but people seems to have lost all perspective about this.
I don't know how it is in the UK.
But in most the rest of Europe we do not have summarily public executions on just the suspicion of being a terrorist.
Please stop modding up this troll.
That article is 6 years old.
Most of those patents are hardware patents totally irrelevant for OpenGL (or Direct3D for that matter).
Also, Microsoft is not a member of the group that actually writes the OpenGL specification. They have no vote on what gets in OpenGL or don't.
Of course this might give them leverage on some of the hardware vendors (like Nvidia) that will have to implement the new OpenGL standard in the future. But history does not show them trying to use this in any way against OpenGL.
But claiming they "own OpenGL" is nonsense.
Why ask slashdot? You could read the article ;-)
It gives non tech examples to research that shows this is actually a common psychological trait in humans when they feel strongly about any subject.
From the article: "Our feeling is that D.R.M. is not actually doing anything to prevent piracy," said Ms. McIntosh of Random House Audio.
:-)
Wtf? A business person actually seeing whats been f...king obvious for years now?
You sir are not a true geek ;-)
He did it because he could, all other reasons would be redundant.
Almost all 3D models used in 3D animation are textured.
;-)
By "textured" they mean you sort of wrap a 2D image around the model that specifies surface properties like color with the different pixels of the image. (Simplified explanation for the masses). It is also common to use different textures (images) to specify different surface properties.
This technique is very important because it permits you to have great surface details without the need of an extremely dense polygon mesh to describe all surface details and thus crate 3D animations that are much less costly computational wise to render than they would have been otherwise.
So even if it might seems counter intuitive to the uninitiated, access to a high quality image manipulation editing is very important when working with 3D also.
Disclaimer: I do not work with 2D image editing or 3D modeling/animation but I do work with programming 3D/VR real time systems and have to work closely with people that do both 2D and 3D work so I know what I'm talking about
I don't know much about the Human Genome Project (wasn't it an International collaboration project?) but the Internet is a bad example. It ceased to be a pure US project more than 20 years ago.
Even the html and http protocol which I use now to communicate with you was developed in Europe (at CERN if I remember correctly).
The majority of the development of the next generation Internet is also done outside of the US.
BZZZT, wrong. Total failure to get the point.
;-)
;-)
Look, I will try to make it really simple for you, only two bullet points
* I can handle that.
* 90% of the worlds population cannot.
Is it really that hard to understand the difference?
Perhaps you should think a little harder before you whip out that STFU gun