1) many judges have a known track record, and the da is able to manipulate which judge will hear which case. 2) many judges have been corrupted. 3) most defense lawyers are incompetent relative to most district attorneys. 4) some combination of the above 5) ??? (somthing I haven't thought of)
Sorry, but from what I've seen, most recent gun legislation is trying to do just that - focus on the people and not the guns. Yes, there is legislation about guns themselves (such as outlawing assault weapons), the majority of legislation is about background checks and the such.
Actually, recent gun control efforts on the federal level have been targetted at the weapons, rather than the people.
Generally speaking, there have been six major actions in the past 15 years or so.
1986 gave us the Firearms Owners Protection Act, which included a nasty amendment (expected to be a poison pill) banning the civillian possession of machine guns manufactured after 1986. Incidentially, only one legally owned machine gun has been used to commit a murder since 1934--and that was committed by a police officer. In 1989, three years after the ban.
1989 gave us an executive order by George Bush (the elder) banning the import of certain foreign made "assault weapons" (on the grounds they have no "sporting purpose.")
1994 gave us both the Brady Law and the Omnibus Crime Control Act--the former specifies background checks on all firearm sales through dealers. The latter bans possession of certain named "assault weapons" and other weapons by cosmetic features.
1998 gave us an Executive Order by Bill Clinton and the Lautenberg Amendment. The former bans the import of certain foreign made assault weapons. The latter bans the possession of firearms by anyone with a domestic violence conviction.
Six major laws, and four are targetted at the guns themselves, rather than people. 33% would be a minority, not a majority.
I wonder if there is a Moore's law equivalent for computer shrinkage rates. Would miniaturization be a good measure for progress?
Err...
You're talking about Moore's Law itself, which does NOT state that the speed of computers will double every 18 months as you're assuming, but rather that the number of transistors that will fit into a given die area will double every 18 months.
You're also forgetting the costs the retailers factor in (for floor-space, rents, power, staff, pure-profit, etc.) What is the retail mark-up, 40%? 50%?
Considering that both CDs and tapes both take up a similar amount of floor space (CD cases, while larger, are also thinner than casettes) the above doesn't even enter into the equation--what's your point?
The point being missed is that the cost of a CD has to cover much more than just the manufacturing and distribution of that disk. It has to cover the expenses in finding and developing talent, recording and touring, marketing and advertising. These expenses far exceed the costs of pressing a CD.
You're ignoring the fact that tapes, while costing much more to produce, have significantly lower retail prices than CDs. Yet tapes are still produced so obviously must still be profitable for the record companies, despite the indirect costs you bring up...
If you decide to pay Bill, it's because he has added value to it that you decide is worth paying for.
OR, you pay Bill because he has made changes to it that make it incompatible with the public domain version--which, thanks to Microsoft's monopoly power, makes it the de facto new standard.
I think they might structure their buisiness model around this sort of deal: Patent something you know a big company is going to need soon, wait until they've completely commited to it, and beat a few million out of them in court. Would anybody call this a legitimate revenue model?
Bzzzz, thank you for playing.
One of Intergraph's major businesses is 3D industrial design--currently software, but in the past, also hardware (3d accelerators, custom designed workstations, etc) which is where this patent came from.
There business model is CERTAINLY not composed of "suing intel."
1) Authors can wave it at anytime before it expires (and this does happen a lot, just check out the baen free library.
Works in the Baen Free Library are most certainly NOT in the public domain! The copyrights on those books are still owned by their AUTHORS, who have LOANED the works to the library for purposes of distribution to all.
This loan can be revoked at will, and in fact, the libary asks its authors to not have more than five or six works loaned to the library at any one time.
Were those works truly in the public domain, anyone could publish, say, On Basilisk Station in paper form, competing with Baen's version.
MTBF numbers are computed in a rather sneaky fashion--the number is NOT a representation of the reliability of a single drive, but rather the entire installed population.
i.e. if your MTBF number is one million hours, and you have one million drives installed in the field, you can expect one to fail every hour--tough luck for you if it's yours!:)
The ironic thing is, some commercial software actually costs that much! sometimes just for one license. Its amazing how much money people will pay if they think its going to work better (and if their company is writing the cheque:)
Or if their company is REQUIRED to use said software because it's the standard for their industry, or a contract requires it.
Re:But can you ask it for directions?
on
Shop Till It Drops
·
· Score: 2
Besides, of the "four C's" mentioned in the article (cigarettes, cold drinks, candy, and coffee) three of them already have dedicated vending machines, and the fourth did for a long time until they became illegal (at least in CA). There's still a place for convenience stores.
Actually, the comment about "the four C's" was that vending machines had been unsuccessful wrt moving BEYOND them, which this device hopes to do.
Most obviously, it's not better. However, a fractional T1, etc more than enouth for the expected bandwith.
Agreed, but your original comment was that a big corporation had more money, and would thus be able to outspend the guys doing it for free--your example of how the deeper pockets would be of use, however, was to spend LESS than the free service...
Well, that's why I said "potential". At first they may try to save money with cheapo connections. If it gets down to a dirty fight, the corporate types will have the $$ on their side, and they would be able to afford a Frac/T1 or Biz DSL into the shop if they thought it would be profitable to win the war.
I fail to see how "Frac/T1 or Biz DSL" would be better than the dual load balanced T1s mentioned in the very post you're replying to...
Copying a CD, making a mix disc for your girlfriend, having a group of people watch one copy of a videotape, loaning CDs to friends, these are all legally fuzzy
No, they aren't. All of the above is perfectly legal. For information about the first two, see the Audio Home Recording Act.
The reason that people cannot sue makers of guns over the use to which they are put is that the gun lobby got bills passed in several states to block them.
This is not a manufacturing defect case however...
I just can't let that comment stand. Are you actually one of those people who contends that if I point a loaded handgun at someone and pull the trgger, and it goes bang, it's a design DEFECT? Funny, I thought that was why I bought guns to begin with!
Damn you waldo, now I'm going to have to resist tearing into my cable box when I get home from work. Hmm.. Or maybe I'll just bust up my roommate's. Heh.
If you're being serious, I'd be careful. A large number of (leased) cable boxes include an anti tamper circuit. Take the screws out and pop the cover in the wrong way, the unit gets zorched. This could incur liability when you attempt to get the cable company to replace your box ("You opened it?! You pirate!")
Encryption and encryption algorithms have long been legally considered "munitions". By this same logic, it is our second amendment right to have encryption software and to encrypt anything we wish. We also have the opposing decryption algorithm. So having DeCSS would be no different than owning a 9mm pistol. The same could be applied to the cracking of the watermarks.
In US v. Miller in 1934, the Supreme Court rather clearly stated that the 2nd ammendment applies only to arms that are suitable for militia use (which is why the weapon in question, a sawed-off shotgun, was deemed unprotected).
One could, however, make the point that secure communications are invaluable to the militia and thus encryption algorythms would be a protected "arm"--this would certainly not include DeCSS however, as it serves no military purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
1) many judges have a known track record, and the da is able to manipulate which judge will hear which case.
:)
2) many judges have been corrupted.
3) most defense lawyers are incompetent relative to most district attorneys.
4) some combination of the above
5) ??? (somthing I haven't thought of)
6) Profit!!!
Sorry, but from what I've seen, most recent gun legislation is trying to do just that - focus on the people and not the guns. Yes, there is legislation about guns themselves (such as outlawing assault weapons), the majority of legislation is about background checks and the such.
Actually, recent gun control efforts on the federal level have been targetted at the weapons, rather than the people.
Generally speaking, there have been six major actions in the past 15 years or so.
1986 gave us the Firearms Owners Protection Act, which included a nasty amendment (expected to be a poison pill) banning the civillian possession of machine guns manufactured after 1986. Incidentially, only one legally owned machine gun has been used to commit a murder since 1934--and that was committed by a police officer. In 1989, three years after the ban.
1989 gave us an executive order by George Bush (the elder) banning the import of certain foreign made "assault weapons" (on the grounds they have no "sporting purpose.")
1994 gave us both the Brady Law and the Omnibus Crime Control Act--the former specifies background checks on all firearm sales through dealers. The latter bans possession of certain named "assault weapons" and other weapons by cosmetic features.
1998 gave us an Executive Order by Bill Clinton and the Lautenberg Amendment. The former bans the import of certain foreign made assault weapons. The latter bans the possession of firearms by anyone with a domestic violence conviction.
Six major laws, and four are targetted at the guns themselves, rather than people. 33% would be a minority, not a majority.
Yes you can. Move to a different state, or visit a state without a waiting period.
Well, yes, he could--but that would be a felony.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 makes it a crime for an individual to acquire a handgun outside his state of residence.
I wonder if there is a Moore's law equivalent for computer shrinkage rates. Would miniaturization be a good measure for progress?
Err...
You're talking about Moore's Law itself, which does NOT state that the speed of computers will double every 18 months as you're assuming, but rather that the number of transistors that will fit into a given die area will double every 18 months.
It mostly reminds me of Horation Hornblower in space
That Horatio Hornblower and Honor Harrington have the same initials is not coincidental.
The books are something of a tribute to CS Forrester--in fact, the first book is actually dedicated to him.
Yes, this is true -- but guess what? Halo wasn't meant to be played online.
:)
Err, yes it was, just like it was meant to be played on Macs. Of course, Microsoft bought Bungie, and the above changed.
You're also forgetting the costs the retailers factor in (for floor-space, rents, power, staff, pure-profit, etc.)
What is the retail mark-up, 40%? 50%?
Considering that both CDs and tapes both take up a similar amount of floor space (CD cases, while larger, are also thinner than casettes) the above doesn't even enter into the equation--what's your point?
The point being missed is that the cost of a CD has to cover much more than just the manufacturing and distribution of that disk. It has to cover the expenses in finding and developing talent, recording and touring, marketing and advertising. These expenses far exceed the costs of pressing a CD.
You're ignoring the fact that tapes, while costing much more to produce, have significantly lower retail prices than CDs. Yet tapes are still produced so obviously must still be profitable for the record companies, despite the indirect costs you bring up...
If you decide to pay Bill, it's because he has added value to it that you decide is worth paying for.
OR, you pay Bill because he has made changes to it that make it incompatible with the public domain version--which, thanks to Microsoft's monopoly power, makes it the de facto new standard.
Of course, that would never happen, right...?
I just got a mental image of Steve Jobs as Louis Farrakhan.
My own mental image was a guy running around calling himself "Malcolm OS X"
I think they might structure their buisiness model around this sort of deal: Patent something you know a big company is going to need soon, wait until they've completely commited to it, and beat a few million out of them in court. Would anybody call this a legitimate revenue model?
Bzzzz, thank you for playing.
One of Intergraph's major businesses is 3D industrial design--currently software, but in the past, also hardware (3d accelerators, custom designed workstations, etc) which is where this patent came from.
There business model is CERTAINLY not composed of "suing intel."
A simpsons movie? That's unpossible!
It's a perfectly cromulent idea.
Greedy mother fucking bastard cum-lapping whore dicks.
Only on slashdot could the above EVER be considered "+5, Insightful."
1) Authors can wave it at anytime before it expires (and this does happen a lot, just check out the baen free library.
Works in the Baen Free Library are most certainly NOT in the public domain! The copyrights on those books are still owned by their AUTHORS, who have LOANED the works to the library for purposes of distribution to all.
This loan can be revoked at will, and in fact, the libary asks its authors to not have more than five or six works loaned to the library at any one time.
Were those works truly in the public domain, anyone could publish, say, On Basilisk Station in paper form, competing with Baen's version.
A joke is funny when someone suffers.
I first heard that 10 years ago and have yet to hear a counter example.
Heinlein made this point in Stranger in a Strange Land, and I've got to agree with you--I've never found a counter-example either.
MTBF numbers are computed in a rather sneaky fashion--the number is NOT a representation of the reliability of a single drive, but rather the entire installed population.
:)
i.e. if your MTBF number is one million hours, and you have one million drives installed in the field, you can expect one to fail every hour--tough luck for you if it's yours!
The ironic thing is, some commercial software actually costs that much! sometimes just for one license. Its amazing how much money people will pay if they think its going to work better (and if their company is writing the cheque :)
Or if their company is REQUIRED to use said software because it's the standard for their industry, or a contract requires it.
Besides, of the "four C's" mentioned in the article (cigarettes, cold drinks, candy, and coffee) three of them already have dedicated vending machines, and the fourth did for a long time until they became illegal (at least in CA). There's still a place for convenience stores. Actually, the comment about "the four C's" was that vending machines had been unsuccessful wrt moving BEYOND them, which this device hopes to do.
Most obviously, it's not better. However, a fractional T1, etc more than enouth for the expected bandwith.
Agreed, but your original comment was that a big corporation had more money, and would thus be able to outspend the guys doing it for free--your example of how the deeper pockets would be of use, however, was to spend LESS than the free service...
Well, that's why I said "potential". At first they may try to save money with cheapo connections. If it gets down to a dirty fight, the corporate types will have the $$ on their side, and they would be able to afford a Frac/T1 or Biz DSL into the shop if they thought it would be profitable to win the war.
I fail to see how "Frac/T1 or Biz DSL" would be better than the dual load balanced T1s mentioned in the very post you're replying to...
Copying a CD, making a mix disc for your girlfriend, having a group of people watch one copy of a videotape, loaning CDs to friends, these are all legally fuzzy
No, they aren't. All of the above is perfectly legal. For information about the first two, see the Audio Home Recording Act.
This is not a manufacturing defect case however...
I just can't let that comment stand. Are you actually one of those people who contends that if I point a loaded handgun at someone and pull the trgger, and it goes bang, it's a design DEFECT? Funny, I thought that was why I bought guns to begin with!
Hmm, a new project for the HardOCP? :)
If you're being serious, I'd be careful. A large number of (leased) cable boxes include an anti tamper circuit. Take the screws out and pop the cover in the wrong way, the unit gets zorched. This could incur liability when you attempt to get the cable company to replace your box ("You opened it?! You pirate!")
In US v. Miller in 1934, the Supreme Court rather clearly stated that the 2nd ammendment applies only to arms that are suitable for militia use (which is why the weapon in question, a sawed-off shotgun, was deemed unprotected).
One could, however, make the point that secure communications are invaluable to the militia and thus encryption algorythms would be a protected "arm"--this would certainly not include DeCSS however, as it serves no military purpose.