When you exchange property (say money) for other property (say software, or rights to that software) and both parties are willing participants, it's not usually called stealing.
Yes, we know Gates didn't write MS-DOS. Perhaps he's a better businessman than programmer. Still, he's got more money than either of us, so he must be doing something right.
No point in stopping the evil terrorist after he has killed people is there?
Well, there's a few points...
If you fail to stop him now, he may kill again, and
Being stopped may help deter people who would do the same thing.
The fear of being stopped (punished, killed) may prevent him from doing it in the first place.
Granted, I think that banning laser pointers is downright stupid, but there certainly is value in finding and punishing criminals (I realize that you said terrorists, but terrorists are generally criminals as well, and I'd rather not limit this to terrorists.)
I guess the ideal justice system would use magic to stop people before they committed their crimes, but since we don't have precognition that works quite that well (and even if we did, that would be a serious minefield of issues) we'll have to stick with our reactive (instead of proactive) justice system.
If I ask you to design some futuristic looking armor for some soldiers, and you do so without much more input from me beyond `I like it!', then you'd own the copyright on that. If we both worked on it equally, we'd probably both own the copyright.
If I paid you to design and make the design for the armor, then the contract would probably say who owned the copyright. If there's no written contract, then there's probably some law (`work for hire') that covers the situation, but I'm not so sure about that.
In this case, I would have expected that Lucas paid to have the design made, and there was probably a written contract and it probably assigned complete ownership of the final work (including the copyrights) to Lucas. But perhaps Lucas didn't fully lawyer up and there's some holes in this theory...
What's sad is that it's probably geeks who went to see the movies he made. Granted, Doom didn't make much money, but it did make some money -- and it wasn't grandma who went to go see it.
To be fair, if the list does hit one million, he'll just claim fraud. And based on your comment, he'd actually be right.
Way to go! Uwe Boll will continue making video game movies, even if the petition reaches one million signatures -- and it'll be YOUR, peragrin's, fault.
(Granted, I don't expect him to stop even if the petition does hit one million unique, verifiable signatures, but still, I'll blame you.)
I'm not sure it's entirely his fault. After all, video game movies have a history of sucking, even before Uwe started making them.
But you would think he'd either 1) get the hint and stop, or 2) find out why they suck and fix it and if #2 is impossible, there's always #1.
As reasonable as that sounds, it's not going to happen. Microsoft wants to *sell* you new OSs every few years, and letting you use the same OS for a decade, no matter how well it works, just doesn't make them enough (or any, really) money. Unless they do a subscription type service, which they have said that they're looking to do...
Oh, come on what? The car really did take 45 seconds to get to 60 mph, and it really did peter out at 75 mph. (I once got it to 94 down a long steep hill, however.) These values are not exaggerated.
I think their requirements are a little steep. 0-60 in 30 seconds and top speed of 80 should be plenty for a practical, real world car. 75 mph top speed is a little slow, however -- back in 1981 we had the Nationally mandated 55 mph speed limit, and now we don't (though we might see it again, the way gas prices are going up...)
"Operating Systems: Interoperable with Sun(TM) Solaris(TM) on SPARC(TM) and x86... Key word: interoperable.
It doesn't run Solaris, AIX, HPUX, Linux -- it can work with them. I don't think it even has any hard disks, or if it does, they're small and used only for cache and the OS.
Basically, it runs Java programs. You run a stub-JVM of sorts on your normal computer, and it feeds work to the Azul box over the network, which does all the heavy lifting. And even the modest Azul boxes does this heavy lifting really really fast.
I don't know about a console -- perhaps you can do a little configuration that way, but I doubt you can log in and do *nix-y stuff.
An Azul Vega 2 7280 can have up to 768 MB of RAM -- and fits in 14U of rack space. It also has up to 16 cpus giving you a total of 768 cores. Crazy stuff!
Granted, it doesn't run Linux (or if it does, it's kept hidden from the user.) But with these awesome specifications, I have to wonder why they don't just sell general purpose computers -- people would port Linux to them, and they'd clean up! Is there something special about their processors that they're good at doing java or what?
Sorry, but jokes about emacs memory usage are old and busted. Emacs, even xemacs, is memory frugal by today's standards! (And yes, vi is even more so.)
The new hotness in memory suckage is anything based on java.
My 1981 Rabbit Diesel literally took 45 seconds to go 0 to 60, and couldn't go over 75 mph without a hill or tailwind -- so I'm guessing it's not going to win this. On the other hand, it did get 52 mph if you drove it right -- not ultra-efficient, but not bad at all for a real world car, especially considering that it was made 27 years ago.
I hated that car at the time (gas was cheap, and I was a teenager), but I think I'd feel differently about it now if I could have it back:/
Knowing the platform would make this question far easier to answer in a useful way.
Jokes about Fortran might be funny, but without knowing what your platform is, we can only answer in very vague ways. If you can't find anybody to work on this platform, and can't train anybody, then you need to replace the platform now and you have no choice. But this probably isn't really true -- what's more likely is that people who know this platform are hard to find or want to be well paid and it becomes a tradeoff. How much is invested in the platform? How much work to move to something else? And what to move to? We need more details...
Obama will likely fare slightly better in the caucus in Texas, only because the core of the Democrat party--the baby boomers who constitute the majority of Hillary supporters--had families to get back to and jobs they had to get up for the next morning.
Actually, at the caucus I went to, the Clinton mob was 80% women (yes, I counted) and mostly middle aged to elderly, with only a few younger people. The Obama mob was twice as big, roughly 50/50 men/women, with a much larger range in ages (they weren't all young, but the average age was certainly less.) And many people brought their kids.
The people who showed up for the Clinton caucus were mostly old enough that they probably didn't have young children at home. The Obama supporters had a lot of people who were the right age to have kids at home (including myself.)
If the problem is that the Clinton supporters all had families to take care of, it's funny that the Obama supporters did too -- and yet they made it out anyways. I saw _zero_ children in the Clinton camp, but perhaps 15 in the Obama camp.
To be fair, I live in Travis county, which is traditionally an island of blue in a state of red, and Travis county voted for Obama vs Clinton by a large margin. But if I recall correctly, the number of delegates per area is based on the voter turnout in the last election -- and the urban areas (and Travis especially) voted in very large numbers, so they'll get more delegates. And the urban areas are generally supporting Obama.
Ultimately, it looks like even if Clinton wins the popular vote in Texas (well, not if -- she has), it appears that she will not get more delegates. Which is pretty weird if you ask me, but it's the way it is. So, both Clinton and Obama will declare victory in Texas...
Dunno, when I was called up for jury duty, I was looking forward to it. It was something different, something I'd never done before. (Or, perhaps I could have tried to avoid it, so I could keep working on code in my cubicle...)
(I'm not sure if I'm agreeing with you, DNS-and-BIND, or not.)
Alas, they turned out not needing me. Maybe next time.
A transparent cache wouldn't help with a video service anyway, because of the DRM. No? Depends on the DRM. If the files are encrypted, but served normally, a cache would work fine.
If someone decides to watch internet traffic, a cache is not going to help or hinder them. Privacy concerns are not with the cache, but with the ISP. A cache is an easy place to monitor. But yes, if they want to monitor, they don't need to do it at a cache -- but a cache might lead them to monitor where they wouldn't monitor otherwise.
I like your idea of an "optional" or opt-out cache where using it will reduce your bill. I agree that would probably benefit all sides. If they're selling bandwidth by the byte, and it reduces the number of bytes billed for, it might reduce their revenue. And sometimes caches can cache data that shouldn't have been cached, and leak it out to the wrong users. And of course it can break in other ways. It might not benefit everybody.
Either way, I'm currently a TWRR customer in Texas. There may be a switch to DSL in my near future -- it wasn't available when I first moved here, but it is now...
It wouldn't take many subscribers using a service before caching paid off. If caching is forced upon users (done transparently) then it will invariably break things that can't be cached (and yes, there are things that the server can do to keep it's data from being cached but 1) some sites misuse/abuse that and so some caches ignore it, and 2) it's outside the control of the user of the site, and if things break only for a small % of users of the site, they may not bother to fix it at all.) If caching is not forced upon users (i.e. they need to set up their browser to use the proxy) then few users will use it.
These issues are well known and have been for years...
And then there's the privacy issue -- if all your traffic goes through the cache, how do you know it isn't logging it all? Sure, the logging could be done without having a cache in place, but with the cache in place it becomes much more likely that everything is logged.
Though if the caching proxy is optional, making it's traffic free or cheaper when all traffic costs money will probably greatly increase it's usage.
Imagine if hundreds of people buy shitty detectors that can be tripped by high NOX counts(A car emission). Suddenly on a hot afternoon during rush hour, 100+ counters register a large nuclear presence. Thats a big worry. Thinking about how a geiger counter works, it seems very unlikely that NOX could trigger it, no matter what the concentration.
Perhaps if you ingested enough NOX yourself to make you think it was funny if you called the police to tell them you had a nuclear weapon? (Of course, if this NOX came from cars, you'd probably be long dead from CO, but let's not worry about that right now...)
I'm not arguing with your clarification of the purpose of the bill, but your example given was poor.
The first computer game I ever played was when my uncle set me down at a VT-52 (or similar -- this was around 30 years ago) connected to an acoustic coupled modem and fired up Adventure on the university computer system (ok, I don't remember exactly what flavor of Adventure it was...) and sat me at it.
In any event, I was hooked. I wonder if he ever realized what an effect this would have on me, the first time I used a computer (I think, anyways) and he was probably just looking for a way to get me out of his hair. I'll have to mention it to him sometime...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, we know Gates didn't write MS-DOS. Perhaps he's a better businessman than programmer. Still, he's got more money than either of us, so he must be doing something right.
- If you fail to stop him now, he may kill again, and
- Being stopped may help deter people who would do the same thing.
- The fear of being stopped (punished, killed) may prevent him from doing it in the first place.
Granted, I think that banning laser pointers is downright stupid, but there certainly is value in finding and punishing criminals (I realize that you said terrorists, but terrorists are generally criminals as well, and I'd rather not limit this to terrorists.)I guess the ideal justice system would use magic to stop people before they committed their crimes, but since we don't have precognition that works quite that well (and even if we did, that would be a serious minefield of issues) we'll have to stick with our reactive (instead of proactive) justice system.
If I ask you to design some futuristic looking armor for some soldiers, and you do so without much more input from me beyond `I like it!', then you'd own the copyright on that. If we both worked on it equally, we'd probably both own the copyright.
If I paid you to design and make the design for the armor, then the contract would probably say who owned the copyright. If there's no written contract, then there's probably some law (`work for hire') that covers the situation, but I'm not so sure about that.
In this case, I would have expected that Lucas paid to have the design made, and there was probably a written contract and it probably assigned complete ownership of the final work (including the copyrights) to Lucas. But perhaps Lucas didn't fully lawyer up and there's some holes in this theory ...
What's sad is that it's probably geeks who went to see the movies he made. Granted, Doom didn't make much money, but it did make some money -- and it wasn't grandma who went to go see it.
Way to go! Uwe Boll will continue making video game movies, even if the petition reaches one million signatures -- and it'll be YOUR, peragrin's, fault.
(Granted, I don't expect him to stop even if the petition does hit one million unique, verifiable signatures, but still, I'll blame you.)
(Not that I'm saying his movies haven't sucked. Or that video game movies didn't have a history of suckage even before he started making them.)
I'm not sure it's entirely his fault. After all, video game movies have a history of sucking, even before Uwe started making them. But you would think he'd either 1) get the hint and stop, or 2) find out why they suck and fix it and if #2 is impossible, there's always #1.
As reasonable as that sounds, it's not going to happen. Microsoft wants to *sell* you new OSs every few years, and letting you use the same OS for a decade, no matter how well it works, just doesn't make them enough (or any, really) money. Unless they do a subscription type service, which they have said that they're looking to do ...
(Seriously, it looks like the web server is patched to feed data as if you were on a slow dialup ...)
I think their requirements are a little steep. 0-60 in 30 seconds and top speed of 80 should be plenty for a practical, real world car. 75 mph top speed is a little slow, however -- back in 1981 we had the Nationally mandated 55 mph speed limit, and now we don't (though we might see it again, the way gas prices are going up ...)
Basically, it runs Java programs. You run a stub-JVM of sorts on your normal computer, and it feeds work to the Azul box over the network, which does all the heavy lifting. And even the modest Azul boxes does this heavy lifting really really fast.
I don't know about a console -- perhaps you can do a little configuration that way, but I doubt you can log in and do *nix-y stuff.
Granted, it doesn't run Linux (or if it does, it's kept hidden from the user.) But with these awesome specifications, I have to wonder why they don't just sell general purpose computers -- people would port Linux to them, and they'd clean up! Is there something special about their processors that they're good at doing java or what?
The new hotness in memory suckage is anything based on java.
I hated that car at the time (gas was cheap, and I was a teenager), but I think I'd feel differently about it now if I could have it back
Jokes about Fortran might be funny, but without knowing what your platform is, we can only answer in very vague ways. If you can't find anybody to work on this platform, and can't train anybody, then you need to replace the platform now and you have no choice. But this probably isn't really true -- what's more likely is that people who know this platform are hard to find or want to be well paid and it becomes a tradeoff. How much is invested in the platform? How much work to move to something else? And what to move to? We need more details
The people who showed up for the Clinton caucus were mostly old enough that they probably didn't have young children at home. The Obama supporters had a lot of people who were the right age to have kids at home (including myself.)
If the problem is that the Clinton supporters all had families to take care of, it's funny that the Obama supporters did too -- and yet they made it out anyways. I saw _zero_ children in the Clinton camp, but perhaps 15 in the Obama camp.
To be fair, I live in Travis county, which is traditionally an island of blue in a state of red, and Travis county voted for Obama vs Clinton by a large margin. But if I recall correctly, the number of delegates per area is based on the voter turnout in the last election -- and the urban areas (and Travis especially) voted in very large numbers, so they'll get more delegates. And the urban areas are generally supporting Obama.
Ultimately, it looks like even if Clinton wins the popular vote in Texas (well, not if -- she has), it appears that she will not get more delegates. Which is pretty weird if you ask me, but it's the way it is. So, both Clinton and Obama will declare victory in Texas ...
Personally, I liked the piece.
(I'm not sure if I'm agreeing with you, DNS-and-BIND, or not.)
Alas, they turned out not needing me. Maybe next time.
Either way, I'm currently a TWRR customer in Texas. There may be a switch to DSL in my near future -- it wasn't available when I first moved here, but it is now ...
These issues are well known and have been for years
And then there's the privacy issue -- if all your traffic goes through the cache, how do you know it isn't logging it all? Sure, the logging could be done without having a cache in place, but with the cache in place it becomes much more likely that everything is logged.
Though if the caching proxy is optional, making it's traffic free or cheaper when all traffic costs money will probably greatly increase it's usage.
Perhaps if you ingested enough NOX yourself to make you think it was funny if you called the police to tell them you had a nuclear weapon? (Of course, if this NOX came from cars, you'd probably be long dead from CO, but let's not worry about that right now
I'm not arguing with your clarification of the purpose of the bill, but your example given was poor.
Though DEFCON does look pretty close.
In any event, I was hooked. I wonder if he ever realized what an effect this would have on me, the first time I used a computer (I think, anyways) and he was probably just looking for a way to get me out of his hair. I'll have to mention it to him sometime
`If we save just one life it will have been worth it!'