This is the biggest joke of a story ever. I'm once again astounded by the stupid people of slashdot. For people that look so highly on themselves you guys have to be the biggest grouping of idiots I've ever seen.
The EU is trash. They're just posturing to try and make themselves feel important. Reality of the situation is they can't enforce anything on MS, all they can do is hurt all the businesses in Europe that use MS products by banning their sale.
Missed or uncounted votes on an electronic machine is analagous to someone turning in a blank voting card on one that isn't completed correctly. Get over yourselves. Using electronic voting isn't going to make the sky fall.
Good thing we have only experts writing the HOWTOs. Now when newbies are trying to use samba they can read difficult language written by people who can't relate to simple end users, tied with a bunch of information we don't need! Thanks Linux community, this is so helpful:D
Making the best of something is always the incentive, it's called competition, you make more money if your product is the best. If people didn't like someone's music, they wouldn't steal it. If they like the music they're stealing, they should be paying for it. Either pay for it or don't listen to it.
Copyrights create property where there isn't inherently a tangable item you can claim posession of. Key words being "create property where there isn't.
The reason why no prosecutors are actively looking out for corporate copyright violators is because you're blind and are living in a hole. Corporations are fined every day for license violations. If you think corporations arn't run by people, you're blind as well. The reason why SCO doesn't have the "FBI knocking on their door" is because no one is suing. The government doesn't just go around to people's doors and check to make sure everything is ok, someone has to bring it to their attention in the form of a lawsuit. So as much as you GPL toating socialists like the idea of free software, you're contributing to your own licensing demise. You guys don't make a profit on your software therefore you're unable to sue. And why should you be able to sue? You shouldn't be able to. If your business model is so poor that you can't make any money, why should you waste the time and money of the public in order to enforce your license? Either learn how to make money to enforce your license or learn to take it in the rear.
You are depriving the artists of something. You're depriving them of the money that they requested in return for their music. The problem with your car analogy is that no one would ever produce the initial car if they knew that no one was going to pay for it since it would be duplicated millions of times as soon as it was made. The cost of producing the car would go up because of lack of economies of scale, there is a high probability that only one type of car would be produced because if there is one type, why make another type? No one is going to pay you for it.
Being an acessory to a crime is illeagal. Just because you're a getaway car driver doesn't mean you can't be charged with bank robbery. The RIAA is run by ordinary people, the government is run by ordinary people, the artists are ordinary people, and every day people make millions of copies of their work without giving the artist a little compensation, which is all they asked for in return.
You can't look at the name of a patent to know what they're patenting. It's called a "Patent title" and has no bearing on what the claims contain.
I can't stand any of you people. Every single time one of you kiddies does a search on the USPTO's site and find something that remotly sounds like something that already exists you come here and post it. I can't believe slashdot lets such stupid articles get posted.
Anything that has to do with taxes that doesn't involve the public good of everyone is a bad idea. Not only is this system highly abusable:
Anything can be considered art, therefore anyone who does anything can register for vouchers, therefore everyone can voucher themselves.
and exploitable by anyone with good business sense:
I'll pay everyone 99.99$ for them to give me their 100$ voucher. I make 5,000$ for moving money around.
but it has to do with taxes, which means if we're paying 500,000 people 40,000$ a year, that's going to be a 20,000,000$ tax increase. That price will be divided up among all tax payers.
Bad bad bad BAD idea.
Tell me that when you're the CEO of a company or a private inventor that has invested millions or billions of dollars researching something, only to find that once you made a breakthrough you can't make any of your money back because someone else copied your idea and is making money off of it with no investment in research.
The problem with your incorrect philosophy is that no one in their right mind would undertake a big research project like that because in the end they would get screwed with a big debt and no way to make money.
Patents are around for a reason, go to Russia if you like your ideas taken from you.
If a company or person invested billions of dollars of research developing or discovering this virus(Didn't happen in this case), why shouldn't these people deserve a patent? The purpose of a patent is so these people can get their R&D money back exclusivly for a period of time. Most people who get patents don't sit on them, they sell them. I can assure you there would be no problem getting a hold of the cure. I don't see any problem with people having to shell out 1,000 or 10,000 for a cure for cancer for a while until these people who developed it get their invested money back. There are real people behind the development of these things, they have families and mouths to feed too.
The reason why we want more addresses isn't because we want more nodes, it's because we want simpler routing. If every single node was at a different place on earth, the routing for them all would be a mess; the way IPv4 is designed the routing tables on routers would be huge. The more open space you have between addresses, the simpler routing is.
NAT is *not* a solution to IP address shortage, it is a hack. NAT does not provide true connectivity. People don't want to be on unroutable addresses, they do it because they have to.
IPv6 solves a lot more problems than ip address shortage. Don't even think of posting your opinion here until you've gone through the entirety of www.6bone.net
Auto address configuration, security, simpler routing.
Once again, I hate most slashdot users. People who post "We're not running out of addresses, we don't need IPv6" have about the mentality of a 15 year old script kiddie. Learn what the problem means before you try to answer it.
bigHairyDog is right, this patent is very specific and covers a lot less than the assinine blog submitter let on.
Even if this guy somehow snuck a patent through that had prior art, patents mean nothing until they are tested in court. So if the patent filer did in fact file something that had prior art it that was somehow covered by tar or ftp or something, it would be easy to prove in court and get the patent struck down.
I'm so glad slashdotters don't control the USPTO because some of you guys have to be the stupidest people in the world. You don't know how patents work or even how to read them to see what they cover. Stick to software writing because you guys have no clue how law works.
Slashdot Mirror
Having to customize everything with a command line text editor on my Linux computers is a pain in the ass.
This is the biggest joke of a story ever. I'm once again astounded by the stupid people of slashdot. For people that look so highly on themselves you guys have to be the biggest grouping of idiots I've ever seen.
The EU is trash. They're just posturing to try and make themselves feel important. Reality of the situation is they can't enforce anything on MS, all they can do is hurt all the businesses in Europe that use MS products by banning their sale.
Missed or uncounted votes on an electronic machine is analagous to someone turning in a blank voting card on one that isn't completed correctly. Get over yourselves. Using electronic voting isn't going to make the sky fall.
Memory bound functions are the answer to spam, hands down. http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~naor/PAPERS/mem_ abs.html
Open source software is not immune from litigation and lawsuits no matter how frivilous. Get used to it, this is the real world.
[Slashdot]
You shouldn't use MS products for such a critical system.
What? It was a unix system?
Must have been a hardware failure then.
[/slashdot]
A DRM format. I won't be able to hook the output up to my computer and be able to save it in another format. Oh wait :(
Stop stealing other people's ideas.
Good thing we have only experts writing the HOWTOs. Now when newbies are trying to use samba they can read difficult language written by people who can't relate to simple end users, tied with a bunch of information we don't need! Thanks Linux community, this is so helpful :D
Making the best of something is always the incentive, it's called competition, you make more money if your product is the best. If people didn't like someone's music, they wouldn't steal it. If they like the music they're stealing, they should be paying for it. Either pay for it or don't listen to it.
Copyrights create property where there isn't inherently a tangable item you can claim posession of.
Key words being "create property where there isn't.
The reason why no prosecutors are actively looking out for corporate copyright violators is because you're blind and are living in a hole. Corporations are fined every day for license violations.
If you think corporations arn't run by people, you're blind as well.
The reason why SCO doesn't have the "FBI knocking on their door" is because no one is suing. The government doesn't just go around to people's doors and check to make sure everything is ok, someone has to bring it to their attention in the form of a lawsuit.
So as much as you GPL toating socialists like the idea of free software, you're contributing to your own licensing demise. You guys don't make a profit on your software therefore you're unable to sue.
And why should you be able to sue? You shouldn't be able to. If your business model is so poor that you can't make any money, why should you waste the time and money of the public in order to enforce your license?
Either learn how to make money to enforce your license or learn to take it in the rear.
Whew, I'm glad I'm not one of those people.
You are depriving the artists of something. You're depriving them of the money that they requested in return for their music.
The problem with your car analogy is that no one would ever produce the initial car if they knew that no one was going to pay for it since it would be duplicated millions of times as soon as it was made. The cost of producing the car would go up because of lack of economies of scale, there is a high probability that only one type of car would be produced because if there is one type, why make another type? No one is going to pay you for it.
Being an acessory to a crime is illeagal. Just because you're a getaway car driver doesn't mean you can't be charged with bank robbery.
The RIAA is run by ordinary people, the government is run by ordinary people, the artists are ordinary people, and every day people make millions of copies of their work without giving the artist a little compensation, which is all they asked for in return.
People are paid what they're worth, unless it's a government subsidised job. Welcome to America, leave if you want to complain.
People who steal go to jail. Despite what most Slashdot readers think, just because a lot of people are doing it doesn't mean it's leagal.
You can't look at the name of a patent to know what they're patenting. It's called a "Patent title" and has no bearing on what the claims contain. I can't stand any of you people. Every single time one of you kiddies does a search on the USPTO's site and find something that remotly sounds like something that already exists you come here and post it. I can't believe slashdot lets such stupid articles get posted.
Anything that has to do with taxes that doesn't involve the public good of everyone is a bad idea. Not only is this system highly abusable:
Anything can be considered art, therefore anyone who does anything can register for vouchers, therefore everyone can voucher themselves.
and exploitable by anyone with good business sense:
I'll pay everyone 99.99$ for them to give me their 100$ voucher. I make 5,000$ for moving money around.
but it has to do with taxes, which means if we're paying 500,000 people 40,000$ a year, that's going to be a 20,000,000$ tax increase. That price will be divided up among all tax payers.
Bad bad bad BAD idea.
I don't even know with where to start on you. I'm very very glad you have no power to change laws, your ideas are terrible.
Tell me that when you're the CEO of a company or a private inventor that has invested millions or billions of dollars researching something, only to find that once you made a breakthrough you can't make any of your money back because someone else copied your idea and is making money off of it with no investment in research.
The problem with your incorrect philosophy is that no one in their right mind would undertake a big research project like that because in the end they would get screwed with a big debt and no way to make money.
Patents are around for a reason, go to Russia if you like your ideas taken from you.
If a company or person invested billions of dollars of research developing or discovering this virus(Didn't happen in this case), why shouldn't these people deserve a patent?
The purpose of a patent is so these people can get their R&D money back exclusivly for a period of time. Most people who get patents don't sit on them, they sell them. I can assure you there would be no problem getting a hold of the cure.
I don't see any problem with people having to shell out 1,000 or 10,000 for a cure for cancer for a while until these people who developed it get their invested money back. There are real people behind the development of these things, they have families and mouths to feed too.
The reason why we want more addresses isn't because we want more nodes, it's because we want simpler routing. If every single node was at a different place on earth, the routing for them all would be a mess; the way IPv4 is designed the routing tables on routers would be huge. The more open space you have between addresses, the simpler routing is. NAT is *not* a solution to IP address shortage, it is a hack. NAT does not provide true connectivity. People don't want to be on unroutable addresses, they do it because they have to. IPv6 solves a lot more problems than ip address shortage. Don't even think of posting your opinion here until you've gone through the entirety of www.6bone.net Auto address configuration, security, simpler routing. Once again, I hate most slashdot users. People who post "We're not running out of addresses, we don't need IPv6" have about the mentality of a 15 year old script kiddie. Learn what the problem means before you try to answer it.
bigHairyDog is right, this patent is very specific and covers a lot less than the assinine blog submitter let on. Even if this guy somehow snuck a patent through that had prior art, patents mean nothing until they are tested in court. So if the patent filer did in fact file something that had prior art it that was somehow covered by tar or ftp or something, it would be easy to prove in court and get the patent struck down. I'm so glad slashdotters don't control the USPTO because some of you guys have to be the stupidest people in the world. You don't know how patents work or even how to read them to see what they cover. Stick to software writing because you guys have no clue how law works.