Because there is such thing as souvereignity. Countries are separate and if you are a citizen of your country, you need to comply with your own laws only. Of course, if you travel abroad, you may become subject to laws of other countries as well. But when you sit at home and suddenly someone in another country desides you broke some law, this is just wrong. This is doubly wrong when your country doesn't have a spine or balls and has long become the bitch of the Uncle Sam.:(
Are we seeing the day when college students make their school of choice not based solely on academics or athletics, but also on tech freebies like these? Hopefully not. These technological amenities are a must for a modern school. As noted, 90% offer wireless access - so it's not really possible for a college to differentiate from others based on the wireless alone - everyone must have it. Things related to actual teaching are more difficult to do and will influence the student decisions in the future - the ability to actually use the technology for better, faster, easier, cheaper and overall more efficient teaching.
But you must admit that his submissions are very consistent in quality. There are no speling errors, he has a relevant link, his blog always has an illustration (even when the primary source doesn't), etc. If you ignore who makes his submissions, there appears no reason for editors to reject them.
Unfortunately there is no way to know what to change it to so it can be "fixed." There is an extremely simple and obvious solution to this. On middle clicking (or right clicking and selecting Add Bookmark, etc.) the javascript link the browser should execute the script with all objects and their properties set to read-only. The script will not be able to actually change anything, but as soon as there is an attempt to open a new window (or load an URL into some window), the broswer will catch the URL and then act as if this was a simple A HREF="http://..." link.
I may be paranoid, but I don't want adverts influencing my decisions, and it's easier to ignore them when they promote something I am not interested in. When they tell me about cheap RAM, the information records and will influence me when I am buying it. That's why I am personally opposed to such ads.
Another reason is that (as you mentioned) this is a stepping stone for more intrusive advertisements, which gives us another reason to loathe it.
Does anyone remember a short film, presumably based on some Asimov's story, about one advertising robot that was too annoying and ended up in front of a subway train?
I think I saw it when I was a kid (i.e. in 1980s), but the details escape my memory.
It's not that simple. The problem is other people don't mind being fucking in the ass by marketdroids. So even though you are not interested in that kind of message and that company, you still suffer.
Re:It ends when they get some tech folks in there
on
More Microsoft Patents
·
· Score: 1
This silliness ends when the Patent Office puts together a group specifically to deal with technology patents.
Techology patents?.. As opposed to what?
But, seriously, don't kid yourself. The "silliness" as you so eloquently put it (I would have outright called it corruption or sabotage) will only end when the conflict is resolved by means of confrontation.
The only reason for them to mend their ways would be a giant smack on the head by the society - something on the scale of Enron. Unfortunately, the public seems unwilling to be cross with the Patent Office even in spite of the most ridiculous patent mishaps.
So, given that the publicity fiasco seems unlikely, the other possibility is economic fiasco. When (and only when) the patents truly and obviously grind the American economy to a halt (and not before) will something be done. Needless to say, it will probably be too late.:(
In most of the world people buy cellphones for themselves, they don't get them with the contract (in many places it's actually the other way round with the cellular contract with any major operator being thrown in for free with every new phone purchase).
So people can choose the phone based on the features and phone manufacturers make phones to appeal to the end-users. American users just need to rebel against limitations imposed on them by telcos.
"Motivation, determination, and good work ethic" are important but they do not determine productivity directly. They influence whether you will WANT to work, but education/training (and experience) determine how well you CAN work.
I had a great education, so I can be extremely productive, but I don't want to be that way - I'd rather slack and have fun doing whatever tickles my fancy right now (including doing nothing at all). Fortunately, one doesn't need to work all the time to have enough money. I think if more people realise it and understand that working 20 or so hours can be enough, the world will be a happier place (the Western world, that is - developing countries need to work harder to build up capital).
This is an excellent demonstration of why copy protection is bad. I will get Half-Life 2 the day it is released (or a few days after), on CDs or on DVD, in my favourite game store. Of course, it will play without any Internet connection at all, much less Steam account. That user-friendly experience will be provided by pirate groups that will break the copy protection. Meanwhile the legitimate customers will have to put up with Steam and all its glitches. What was the copy-protection supposed to be encouraging, again?
In Russia it's apparently illegal to operate your business when you don't have change. It's also illegal to refuse taking roubles as payment (except when this particular note appears illegitimate). Russian companies also don't have a right to deny service when they operate a business open to the public.
The "penalty of perjury" bit only applies to the belief that they represent the copyright holder. It's a common misconception (propagated by the DMCA creators) to think they need to be sure before sending threats.
I can send a DMCA to any ISP and claim that a) I think a particular file contains copyrighted work written (shot/drawn) by my sister b) under penalty of perjury I promise that I represent my sister
The only lie I can be made responsible for in the court is that I don't represent my sister (if I don't). I can always say I was mistaken about that photo/text and get away with it.
Other countries, like Russia, give you even greater rights. Confirmed. Among other things we are legally allowed to buy pirated CDs/DVDs, we also have legitimate online music stores that sell tracks for a few cents a piece. We also have almost legal online libraries.
P.S. Don't despair, though, we've got the copyright law updated a month ago, extending the copyright term and making computers illegal.
P.P.S. Still, the strictness of the laws in Russia is always compensated by the lack of enforcement.:)
Just shows why Creative's monopoly sucks. They didn't innovate quickly enough and dedicated sound hardware is nearly replaced with built-in audio. And now this... There isn't much point to upgrade even decade old SoundBlaster 16, because it does it's job (the few reasons to change are 5.1 audio, irrelevant if you use stereo speakers or headphones, and EAX, which is nothing like the leap graphics cards make every year).
More tech people employed? I guess if you take back your complaints about "one person being rich", Microsoft PR department might want to buy the rights to your comment to use in their FUD attacks agains Open Source.:)
Some people are willing to work for free on OSS projects. Others are willing to exploit this in order to make a profit. There is nothing bad about it. RedHat (and other distro companies) are taking an OSS product and trying to make a buck from it. They aren't necessarily paying Linux programmers a LOT. CA is creating a new open product, contributing to the OSS world and they are contributing money too. They are not forcing anyone to work on it, they are not taking anything from anybody. They are just making an honest offer that some people might be willing to accept. What's wrong with that?
And the USA is not a massive aggressive country with ongoing gross human rights violations and a stated desire to^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H long history of invading other democratic countries.
You seem to be pretty confused. China didn't attack anyone, despite having several separatist territories that rightfully belong to China (though they respectfully disagree) and human rights violations in China are not that serious, once you ignore the lack of political freedom. Thus there is no reason for anyone to "liberate" them, much less the US.
And of course there is the fact that China has nukes. The USA doesn't attack countries with nukes, as any North Korean dictator will tell you.:) Deterrence and stuff.
I think this question was actually among those answered quite well. I'll try to clarify his response.
He means that the $1 million is not meant to just buy the code, probably because Open Source is different from traditional commercial contracted development. It's meant to provide the stimulus sufficient for the OSS development model. There are already enough people willing to work on database code, the prizes are to provide additional motivation and compensate the best developers. Just like Ansari promised to pay $10 million to the X Prize winner. It's irrelevant that "normally" it would (and it does) cost billions to send a ship up high. Your indignation over CA getting something "on the cheap" is completely unfounded.
It is possible that the idiot is your parent. May be the book by this Robert is a rational and logical treatise on a very real problem of pseudo-science and some valid critique of the original "science by press-conference" practice. It is entirely possible that he is a good scientist and will rejoice in his next column over the fact that scientific process is returning to the field of cold fusion.
Oops, it seems you are already 50% sold on the law. You already took it for granted that we need some form of Induce Act, now we only need to agree on the specific text.
The truth is that there is no problem to solve with this law, except for the problem of failing business models. Have you actually seen or heard about those strange and dangerous people that go and induce people to break copyright law? Other than on Hatch's/RIAA speeches, of course...
I haven't. There is no need for this law, regardless of how vague/specific it is.
I was always confused about this whole lawmaking thing. It seems to me there are already too many laws and there is no need for thousands of people working full-time on making more. It's not like we need a law for every goddamn possible situation.
The problem is when there is no need for lawmakers, they invent that need themselves, simply because by making themselves useful they can get bribes from campaign contributors. They are just like bureaucracy in this sense.
According to the arctile, it kinda does. The neural nertwok models decsribe that the brain recognises the lettres and then determines the correct word based mostly on these lettres, not on their order or shape. So if you just shuflfe some lrettes around, it still works almost as well as reading normal txet.
Slashdot Mirror
Because there is such thing as souvereignity. Countries are separate and if you are a citizen of your country, you need to comply with your own laws only. Of course, if you travel abroad, you may become subject to laws of other countries as well. But when you sit at home and suddenly someone in another country desides you broke some law, this is just wrong. This is doubly wrong when your country doesn't have a spine or balls and has long become the bitch of the Uncle Sam. :(
Are we seeing the day when college students make their school of choice not based solely on academics or athletics, but also on tech freebies like these?
Hopefully not. These technological amenities are a must for a modern school. As noted, 90% offer wireless access - so it's not really possible for a college to differentiate from others based on the wireless alone - everyone must have it. Things related to actual teaching are more difficult to do and will influence the student decisions in the future - the ability to actually use the technology for better, faster, easier, cheaper and overall more efficient teaching.
But you must admit that his submissions are very consistent in quality. There are no speling errors, he has a relevant link, his blog always has an illustration (even when the primary source doesn't), etc. If you ignore who makes his submissions, there appears no reason for editors to reject them.
Mode parent down, he is a free ipod spammer.
Unfortunately there is no way to know what to change it to so it can be "fixed."
There is an extremely simple and obvious solution to this. On middle clicking (or right clicking and selecting Add Bookmark, etc.) the javascript link the browser should execute the script with all objects and their properties set to read-only. The script will not be able to actually change anything, but as soon as there is an attempt to open a new window (or load an URL into some window), the broswer will catch the URL and then act as if this was a simple A HREF="http://..." link.
I may be paranoid, but I don't want adverts influencing my decisions, and it's easier to ignore them when they promote something I am not interested in. When they tell me about cheap RAM, the information records and will influence me when I am buying it. That's why I am personally opposed to such ads.
Another reason is that (as you mentioned) this is a stepping stone for more intrusive advertisements, which gives us another reason to loathe it.
Does anyone remember a short film, presumably based on some Asimov's story, about one advertising robot that was too annoying and ended up in front of a subway train?
I think I saw it when I was a kid (i.e. in 1980s), but the details escape my memory.
It's not that simple. The problem is other people don't mind being fucking in the ass by marketdroids. So even though you are not interested in that kind of message and that company, you still suffer.
This silliness ends when the Patent Office puts together a group specifically to deal with technology patents.
:(
Techology patents?.. As opposed to what?
But, seriously, don't kid yourself. The "silliness" as you so eloquently put it (I would have outright called it corruption or sabotage) will only end when the conflict is resolved by means of confrontation.
The only reason for them to mend their ways would be a giant smack on the head by the society - something on the scale of Enron. Unfortunately, the public seems unwilling to be cross with the Patent Office even in spite of the most ridiculous patent mishaps.
So, given that the publicity fiasco seems unlikely, the other possibility is economic fiasco. When (and only when) the patents truly and obviously grind the American economy to a halt (and not before) will something be done. Needless to say, it will probably be too late.
In most of the world people buy cellphones for themselves, they don't get them with the contract (in many places it's actually the other way round with the cellular contract with any major operator being thrown in for free with every new phone purchase).
So people can choose the phone based on the features and phone manufacturers make phones to appeal to the end-users. American users just need to rebel against limitations imposed on them by telcos.
"Motivation, determination, and good work ethic" are important but they do not determine productivity directly. They influence whether you will WANT to work, but education/training (and experience) determine how well you CAN work.
I had a great education, so I can be extremely productive, but I don't want to be that way - I'd rather slack and have fun doing whatever tickles my fancy right now (including doing nothing at all). Fortunately, one doesn't need to work all the time to have enough money. I think if more people realise it and understand that working 20 or so hours can be enough, the world will be a happier place (the Western world, that is - developing countries need to work harder to build up capital).
This is an excellent demonstration of why copy protection is bad. I will get Half-Life 2 the day it is released (or a few days after), on CDs or on DVD, in my favourite game store. Of course, it will play without any Internet connection at all, much less Steam account. That user-friendly experience will be provided by pirate groups that will break the copy protection. Meanwhile the legitimate customers will have to put up with Steam and all its glitches. What was the copy-protection supposed to be encouraging, again?
In Russia it's apparently illegal to operate your business when you don't have change. It's also illegal to refuse taking roubles as payment (except when this particular note appears illegitimate). Russian companies also don't have a right to deny service when they operate a business open to the public.
The "penalty of perjury" bit only applies to the belief that they represent the copyright holder. It's a common misconception (propagated by the DMCA creators) to think they need to be sure before sending threats.
I can send a DMCA to any ISP and claim that
a) I think a particular file contains copyrighted work written (shot/drawn) by my sister
b) under penalty of perjury I promise that I represent my sister
The only lie I can be made responsible for in the court is that I don't represent my sister (if I don't). I can always say I was mistaken about that photo/text and get away with it.
Other countries, like Russia, give you even greater rights.
:)
Confirmed. Among other things we are legally allowed to buy pirated CDs/DVDs, we also have legitimate online music stores that sell tracks for a few cents a piece. We also have almost legal online libraries.
P.S. Don't despair, though, we've got the copyright law updated a month ago, extending the copyright term and making computers illegal.
P.P.S. Still, the strictness of the laws in Russia is always compensated by the lack of enforcement.
Just shows why Creative's monopoly sucks. They didn't innovate quickly enough and dedicated sound hardware is nearly replaced with built-in audio. And now this... There isn't much point to upgrade even decade old SoundBlaster 16, because it does it's job (the few reasons to change are 5.1 audio, irrelevant if you use stereo speakers or headphones, and EAX, which is nothing like the leap graphics cards make every year).
Yep. Steal customers away from competition. Just like Linux does with Windows (and other unices) and like Firebird does with IE.
What's wrong with that? It's not like they are forcing you (or anyone else) to buy their support contracts...
More tech people employed? I guess if you take back your complaints about "one person being rich", Microsoft PR department might want to buy the rights to your comment to use in their FUD attacks agains Open Source. :)
Some people are willing to work for free on OSS projects. Others are willing to exploit this in order to make a profit. There is nothing bad about it. RedHat (and other distro companies) are taking an OSS product and trying to make a buck from it. They aren't necessarily paying Linux programmers a LOT. CA is creating a new open product, contributing to the OSS world and they are contributing money too. They are not forcing anyone to work on it, they are not taking anything from anybody. They are just making an honest offer that some people might be willing to accept. What's wrong with that?
And the USA is not a massive aggressive country with ongoing gross human rights violations and a stated desire to^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H long history of invading other democratic countries.
:) Deterrence and stuff.
You seem to be pretty confused. China didn't attack anyone, despite having several separatist territories that rightfully belong to China (though they respectfully disagree) and human rights violations in China are not that serious, once you ignore the lack of political freedom. Thus there is no reason for anyone to "liberate" them, much less the US.
And of course there is the fact that China has nukes. The USA doesn't attack countries with nukes, as any North Korean dictator will tell you.
I think this question was actually among those answered quite well. I'll try to clarify his response.
He means that the $1 million is not meant to just buy the code, probably because Open Source is different from traditional commercial contracted development. It's meant to provide the stimulus sufficient for the OSS development model. There are already enough people willing to work on database code, the prizes are to provide additional motivation and compensate the best developers. Just like Ansari promised to pay $10 million to the X Prize winner. It's irrelevant that "normally" it would (and it does) cost billions to send a ship up high. Your indignation over CA getting something "on the cheap" is completely unfounded.
It is possible that the idiot is your parent. May be the book by this Robert is a rational and logical treatise on a very real problem of pseudo-science and some valid critique of the original "science by press-conference" practice. It is entirely possible that he is a good scientist and will rejoice in his next column over the fact that scientific process is returning to the field of cold fusion.
Let's be optimistic.
In the next Slashdot story perpetual motion is shown to be possible.
And how do you know? Was the story about time travel posted too?
On second thought, you might simply be a subscriber...
Still is too vague
Oops, it seems you are already 50% sold on the law. You already took it for granted that we need some form of Induce Act, now we only need to agree on the specific text.
The truth is that there is no problem to solve with this law, except for the problem of failing business models. Have you actually seen or heard about those strange and dangerous people that go and induce people to break copyright law? Other than on Hatch's/RIAA speeches, of course...
I haven't. There is no need for this law, regardless of how vague/specific it is.
I was always confused about this whole lawmaking thing. It seems to me there are already too many laws and there is no need for thousands of people working full-time on making more. It's not like we need a law for every goddamn possible situation.
The problem is when there is no need for lawmakers, they invent that need themselves, simply because by making themselves useful they can get bribes from campaign contributors. They are just like bureaucracy in this sense.
According to the arctile, it kinda does. The neural nertwok models decsribe that the brain recognises the lettres and then determines the correct word based mostly on these lettres, not on their order or shape. So if you just shuflfe some lrettes around, it still works almost as well as reading normal txet.