Since it's defined in trial as vaginal intercourse. Are you dense?
Please read and respond to what I actually said rather than resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
If he had said "I did not have sex with that woman", with the word sex being specifically defined in the context of the trial as vaginal intercourse, he would have been technically correct. However, because he used the words sexual relations, he was being technically incorrect, since a blowjob is something sexual, while not actualy being sex (in the same way that strawberry jam is fruity without actually being a fruit).
Sex was defined as vaginal intercourse, so blowjobs didn't count.
Clinton did not say "I did not have sex with that woman".
He said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman".
Since when is a blowjob not something sexual?
Fair use is not a right. It's a defence to copyright infringement
The only reason that copyright conventions got passed in the first place was that they EXPLICITLY made provisions for fair use.
If you buy a book, can you lend it to a friend? Can you invite you friends over to watch a DVD? Can you donate your unwanted books to a library? Can you even play a music CD with others in the room? Without Fair Use, the answer to all of these would be NO.
Personally, I don't see why they need "higher paid" sales guys at circuit city anyways. Most high school kids know enough about technology to answer grandma's questions
One of my biggest laments about trying to buy things retail (and this applies to most things, not just electronics) is that, when I go to a store, I NEED the sales personnel to be more knowledgeable about their stock than I am. Otherwise, they are totally useless to me. When I ask "Where can I find X, I can't find it on the shelf", I need a knowledgeable salesman who can tell me "It's over there next to Y" or "We usually carry it, but we're out, and won't get any more in until next Tuesday", or "What is your configuration? Maybe you should be using Y instead". What I usually get is a minimum wage high school dropout who walks over to the same shelf I just looked at for 10 minutes, does the same search I just did, then says "Uh, I guess we're sold out" or "Uh, I guess we don't carry it" or "Uh, I can't help you", without so much as looking at an inventory control screen.
When you have seasoned sales staff who have been working somewhere for years, and care about the products, they can give quality service. When you have someone who has never been at any job for longer than 6 months, it's likely that the customer (who has likely been shopping at that store longer than the employee has been employed ther) has a better knowledge of the merchandise than the employee does.
Of course, on paper, firing the highest people looks good (most financial gain for least impact), but the quality of service you get will suffer. I have gotten shafted by that twice (gotten laid off because I had much more experience than everyone else, and was hence being paid more than everyone else) so perhaps I'm a little biased:)
Oh? What is this asm instruction of which you speak? Could it possibly be assembler? Even if the facility is included in the compiler as a matter of convenience, it is useless to the devloper unless he also has an understanding of the machine/assembler level model of the architecture (as opposed to the C/C++ level abstraction thereof).
What gives them the right to charge that price to fix a problem with a product that a consumer has already bought and should have support for.
Well, consumer protection laws, for one. They say that software has to be supported for 5 years. Windows 2000 came out in 2000. It was replaced by Windows XP which came out in 2002. It's now 2007. Microsoft no longer has any obligation to support Windows 2000.
At this point, support is entirely their option. It's a win/win for them. If somebody choses to pay, it's another $4000 in their pocket. If someone choses NOT to pay, and merely takes the much cheaper path of upgrading to XP or Vita, Microsoft wins again, by selling a second product to someone who already owns one.
From TFA: 2) In determining whether a person has acted contrary to subsection (1), the court shall take into account any evidence that the person has used, in any language,
(a) a combination of expressions set out in Part 1 of Schedule 3; or
(b) the combination of an expression set out in Part 1 of Schedule 3 with an expression set out in Part 2 of that Schedule. ...
1. Games, 2010, Twenty-ten, 21st, Twenty-first, XXIst, 10th, Tenth, Xth, Medals
2. Winter, Gold, Silver, Bronze, Sponsor, Vancouver, Whistler
This means you can fully well say "Winter" or "Games" all you want - you just can't say "Winter Games", "2010 Games", "Games Sponsor", "Vancouver Games", etc.
This does not seem as ridiculous as, say, trademarking the word "Winter", which is the FUD implied by the original article and many posters seem to imply.
I have no problem with the practiality or reasonableness of patronage in the arts.
What I was commenting on was the impracticality of the parent's post. Funding a $6M grass-roots by finding a thousand patrons willing to front $6K is not unreasonable. However, the parent wrote amortized over 6,578,462,507 [census.gov] people, and having every person on the planet contribute a tenth of a penny is unreasonable.
Re:Isn't that what they want?
on
DRM Causes Piracy
·
· Score: 2, Funny
You forgot the (totally appropriate in this case) cliche:
Exactly. The truth of the matter is, that if all music is DRMd, and there is no other way to get it, there will be NO piracy
I am not aware of any currently-used commercial DRM system that has not been broken eventually (just look at HD-DVD and Blu-Ray). If everything is DRMed, there will be no legitimate DRM-free music, but you can be sure that illegitimate music with the DRM stripped from it will still be commonplace.
Even in an era of "uncrackaable DRM", itt will still always be possible to record sounds or video in the analog domain (at least until they remove our eyes and ears and put digital implants in our heads to remove that "security loophole", and I can't see the public acquiescing to that any time soon).
College textbooks are unlike science fiction books because they're extremely expensive, the target audience doesn't have any choice about whether to choose a particular book, and the same title typically sells steadily for many years.
This was not my experience when I was in school. People were constantly complaining that they had to pay outrageous amounts for textbooks, and then the following year, when they were finished with them, they were stuck with an expensive albatross, because they couldn't resell them used, since a different book was used the next year. This also meant that you had to buy all your books new, at full retail price, because they weren't available used, since different books were used the year before.
| Keep your military and your CIA at home, and there will be no terrorism.
Absolutely right. It wasn't until the US pulled out of Northern Ireland that the terrorism there and in the UK stopped.
To be fair, while the US non-involvment in Northern Ireland has not stopped terrorism there, most of the terrorism there is not directed at the "evil United States". If the US stopped meddling in other people's affairs, other people would still keep klling each other, but they wouldn't have any reason to attack the US in the process. (Unless it's a case of "you promised to protect us in this war, but you didn't, you bastards!")
And that energy, when amortized over 6,578,462,507 [census.gov] people approaches zero, a fact that copyright fanatics like to ignore.
So, next time you want to make a $6 million dollar movie, you can distribute it for free as long as you can get everyone on the planet to mail you 1/10 of a cent up front to help you produce it. Good luck with that.
Instead of immediately resorting to ad-hominem attacks, perhaps you might do better to look deeper into the post and perhaps you might detect a subtle amount of sarcasm mixed in with the comments.
It has nothing to do with negative signed integers and all to do with reserved kernel address space.
Do I know for a fact that the 2GB limit is a signed integer limitation? No I do not. However, I have seen enough similar things from Microsoft in the past, that that conclusion is a plausible assumption.
Right now, I am running a dual-core Athlon CPU. I notice that sometimes when I run PING from a command prompt, I get slightly negative values (which appears to be due to a bug in the Athlon's internal clocks on the two cores being slightly out of sync). If I run TRACERT, however, those same times are in the 4-billion range. Apparently the Microsoft engineers can't decide whether ping times should be signed or unsigned integers. With these kinds of design ambiguities, anything that exceeds the 2GB limit is BOUND to encounter the kind of glitchy weirdness that happened around Y2K or any of the other similar boundary conditions.
From TFA: Windows and the applications that run on it have bumped their heads on the address space limits of 32-bit processors. The Windows kernel is constrained by default to 2GB
In English, this means two things:
1) Our developers haven't figured out how to deal with negative signed integers in a 32-bit address space, so we leave it to third-party developers to figure that one out
2) The Vista kernel alone requires more RAM than all the disk space used by Windows 98 and all its accessories combined
He said "you have to sign up for the $19.95 service to get your data back".
He didn't say "We have your data, and you can get it back for $19.95, but you had better act quick or in 48 hours it's all going into the shredder".
He gave her no indication that there was a short time limit during which she could recover her data. And a simple two-message email exchange can easily take two days if the two people are not sitting at their computers at exactly the same moment.
Do you use Yahoo Messenger, or any other services (like Yahoo Groups)? It might consider accessing those with the same account name as the same as logging in.
Yes, because the $5-$35 registration of a domain has become such a problem.
Yes, but what if it wasn't $5 per domain, it was $5 per distinct object instead? If you have a web site with 100 pages, and each page has 20 objects (HTML, animated GIFs, style sheets, etc.) that is now $10,000 to register the whole kit and kaboodle. Is it still casually affordable now?
At the very least, I could see killing 50% of the pop-ups I run into, simply by blocking all.xxx domains
Good. This will block all porn hosted in the United States. How about goatse.cx and its ilk? Laws passed in the United States have no jurisdiction on web sites hosted in other countries.
Unless, of course, hosting porn is considering a Terrorist Act, and the US government decides to send troops in to secure every foreign root server to prevent this...
"ho honey, no I just wanted to learn more about how to solve multiple-body physics interraction and I accidentally clicked onn that porn link" won't hold water if all link end with.xxx
The gravity equations, adjusted for relativistic effects, provide a concise solution to the <href="http://www.orgy.xxx">multiple-body problem</a>
How many people scan every single URL they click-through? (and with Javascript, even that isn't enough).
If you bought a computer with 486-SX (with no floating-point prococessor), but for logictical reasons, the manufacturer installed a 486-DX instead (with a floating point processor, which they then disabled), you still got exactly what you paid for. If they later offered you an optional upgrade for $10 to re-enable the disabled functionality, are you being cheated? No, because you got exactly the functionality you paid for. The fact that there was more, inactive hardware under the hood did not damage your use of the computer in any way.
Look at any car - there will be place on the front panel, and doors, etc. where there are pre-drilled holes for various options that are not installed. The manufacturer is not cheating you by not installing those options - you didn't ask for them, they didn't tell you they were installed, and you didn't pay for them. If you later choose to buy the options, you are fortunae to not have to pay to have holes drilled, because they were conveniently already given to you free when you bought the car.
There are many products that are built in ranges - for example, motherboards which have sockets for some components that are present in highe-end models, but absent in low-end models.
In some cases, however, it is cheaper to build in the functionality and disable it, rather than to leave it out (Remember the iOpener? It was a web-TV like appliance sold by Circuit City, and did not have a hard drive. However, rather than custom design a diskless motherboard, the manufacturer used an off-the-shelf motherboard that had an on-board IDE controller, even though no drives were present (or envisioned, until some enterprising hacker caused much embarrassment by figuring out that with a bit of tweaking, you could add your own hard drive and run Linux on the box - this forced the manufacturer to redesign the motherboard to leave out the IDE controller)).
What? You don't make micropayments whenever you listen to a song or watch a movie? Everyone else does.
Without even thinking about it, you are using electricity to run your DVD player or iPod, so every time you play a song or a movie, you are already paying for it by the minute. But the cost is sufficiently reasonable that you do it without even thinking about it (unless you use a totally battery-operated unit where you keep having to replace the batteries, but even then, people who use such devices are willing to pay the cost to do so).
In an ideal world, the cost of the content itself would be in the same range, so people would be willing to pay for it without question, and the content creators (i.e. artists, NOT the distribution companies like the RIAA and MPAA) would get their microscopic cuts each time.
The very fact that Apple did NOT in any way promise 802.11n legitimizes them charging for this feature. Customers have no legitimate reason to whine that they're not getting it free, since they didn't pay for it, and weren't promised it.
The fact that Apple's engineering design is clever, in having hardware flexible enough to add the feature without a hardware modification, works in Apple's favor. It means they COULD do this for free if they wanted to, but it doesn't obligate them to do so (any more than any software vendor is obligated to provide lifetime upgrades for a single payment of a 1.0 version - you have to fund the software development SOMEHOW).
When I was in high school, we had an IBM 1130 system. We had a slow line printer. IBM sold two different versions of that printer - a slow one, and a fast one. The fast one cost several thousand dollars more. The difference? one jumper (which, if you switched manually, you voided the warranty).
Often, manufacturers will sell a range of products, and it's cheaper for them to sell artificially castrated versions of the expensive versions as cheap ones, rather than manufacturing a cheaper product separately.
If you pay for a cheap unit and they give you an expensive one with the additional features disabled instead, you have no cause to whine about it being disabled, since you didn't pay for it - you got it for free.
Slashdot Mirror
Since it's defined in trial as vaginal intercourse. Are you dense?
Please read and respond to what I actually said rather than resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
If he had said "I did not have sex with that woman", with the word sex being specifically defined in the context of the trial as vaginal intercourse, he would have been technically correct. However, because he used the words sexual relations, he was being technically incorrect, since a blowjob is something sexual, while not actualy being sex (in the same way that strawberry jam is fruity without actually being a fruit).
Sex was defined as vaginal intercourse, so blowjobs didn't count.
Clinton did not say "I did not have sex with that woman". He said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman". Since when is a blowjob not something sexual?
Fair use is not a right. It's a defence to copyright infringement
The only reason that copyright conventions got passed in the first place was that they EXPLICITLY made provisions for fair use.
If you buy a book, can you lend it to a friend? Can you invite you friends over to watch a DVD? Can you donate your unwanted books to a library? Can you even play a music CD with others in the room? Without Fair Use, the answer to all of these would be NO.
Personally, I don't see why they need "higher paid" sales guys at circuit city anyways. Most high school kids know enough about technology to answer grandma's questions
:)
One of my biggest laments about trying to buy things retail (and this applies to most things, not just electronics) is that, when I go to a store, I NEED the sales personnel to be more knowledgeable about their stock than I am. Otherwise, they are totally useless to me. When I ask "Where can I find X, I can't find it on the shelf", I need a knowledgeable salesman who can tell me "It's over there next to Y" or "We usually carry it, but we're out, and won't get any more in until next Tuesday", or "What is your configuration? Maybe you should be using Y instead". What I usually get is a minimum wage high school dropout who walks over to the same shelf I just looked at for 10 minutes, does the same search I just did, then says "Uh, I guess we're sold out" or "Uh, I guess we don't carry it" or "Uh, I can't help you", without so much as looking at an inventory control screen.
When you have seasoned sales staff who have been working somewhere for years, and care about the products, they can give quality service. When you have someone who has never been at any job for longer than 6 months, it's likely that the customer (who has likely been shopping at that store longer than the employee has been employed ther) has a better knowledge of the merchandise than the employee does. Of course, on paper, firing the highest people looks good (most financial gain for least impact), but the quality of service you get will suffer. I have gotten shafted by that twice (gotten laid off because I had much more experience than everyone else, and was hence being paid more than everyone else) so perhaps I'm a little biased
#define mtdcr(r,v) asm("mtdcr %0,%1" : "r", "v")
Oh? What is this asm instruction of which you speak? Could it possibly be assembler? Even if the facility is included in the compiler as a matter of convenience, it is useless to the devloper unless he also has an understanding of the machine/assembler level model of the architecture (as opposed to the C/C++ level abstraction thereof).
What gives them the right to charge that price to fix a problem with a product that a consumer has already bought and should have support for.
Well, consumer protection laws, for one. They say that software has to be supported for 5 years. Windows 2000 came out in 2000. It was replaced by Windows XP which came out in 2002. It's now 2007. Microsoft no longer has any obligation to support Windows 2000.
At this point, support is entirely their option. It's a win/win for them. If somebody choses to pay, it's another $4000 in their pocket. If someone choses NOT to pay, and merely takes the much cheaper path of upgrading to XP or Vita, Microsoft wins again, by selling a second product to someone who already owns one.
From TFA:
...
2) In determining whether a person has acted contrary to subsection (1), the court shall take into account any evidence that the person has used, in any language,
(a) a combination of expressions set out in Part 1 of Schedule 3; or
(b) the combination of an expression set out in Part 1 of Schedule 3 with an expression set out in Part 2 of that Schedule.
1. Games, 2010, Twenty-ten, 21st, Twenty-first, XXIst, 10th, Tenth, Xth, Medals
2. Winter, Gold, Silver, Bronze, Sponsor, Vancouver, Whistler
This means you can fully well say "Winter" or "Games" all you want - you just can't say "Winter Games", "2010 Games", "Games Sponsor", "Vancouver Games", etc.
This does not seem as ridiculous as, say, trademarking the word "Winter", which is the FUD implied by the original article and many posters seem to imply.
I have no problem with the practiality or reasonableness of patronage in the arts.
What I was commenting on was the impracticality of the parent's post. Funding a $6M grass-roots by finding a thousand patrons willing to front $6K is not unreasonable. However, the parent wrote amortized over 6,578,462,507 [census.gov] people, and having every person on the planet contribute a tenth of a penny is unreasonable.
You forgot the (totally appropriate in this case) cliche:
Step 6: Profit!
Exactly. The truth of the matter is, that if all music is DRMd, and there is no other way to get it, there will be NO piracy
I am not aware of any currently-used commercial DRM system that has not been broken eventually (just look at HD-DVD and Blu-Ray). If everything is DRMed, there will be no legitimate DRM-free music, but you can be sure that illegitimate music with the DRM stripped from it will still be commonplace.
Even in an era of "uncrackaable DRM", itt will still always be possible to record sounds or video in the analog domain (at least until they remove our eyes and ears and put digital implants in our heads to remove that "security loophole", and I can't see the public acquiescing to that any time soon).
College textbooks are unlike science fiction books because they're extremely expensive, the target audience doesn't have any choice about whether to choose a particular book, and the same title typically sells steadily for many years.
This was not my experience when I was in school. People were constantly complaining that they had to pay outrageous amounts for textbooks, and then the following year, when they were finished with them, they were stuck with an expensive albatross, because they couldn't resell them used, since a different book was used the next year. This also meant that you had to buy all your books new, at full retail price, because they weren't available used, since different books were used the year before.
| Keep your military and your CIA at home, and there will be no terrorism.
Absolutely right. It wasn't until the US pulled out of Northern Ireland that the terrorism there and in the UK stopped.
To be fair, while the US non-involvment in Northern Ireland has not stopped terrorism there, most of the terrorism there is not directed at the "evil United States". If the US stopped meddling in other people's affairs, other people would still keep klling each other, but they wouldn't have any reason to attack the US in the process. (Unless it's a case of "you promised to protect us in this war, but you didn't, you bastards!")
And that energy, when amortized over 6,578,462,507 [census.gov] people approaches zero, a fact that copyright fanatics like to ignore.
So, next time you want to make a $6 million dollar movie, you can distribute it for free as long as you can get everyone on the planet to mail you 1/10 of a cent up front to help you produce it. Good luck with that.
You're retarded.
Instead of immediately resorting to ad-hominem attacks, perhaps you might do better to look deeper into the post and perhaps you might detect a subtle amount of sarcasm mixed in with the comments.
It has nothing to do with negative signed integers and all to do with reserved kernel address space.
Do I know for a fact that the 2GB limit is a signed integer limitation? No I do not. However, I have seen enough similar things from Microsoft in the past, that that conclusion is a plausible assumption.
Right now, I am running a dual-core Athlon CPU. I notice that sometimes when I run PING from a command prompt, I get slightly negative values (which appears to be due to a bug in the Athlon's internal clocks on the two cores being slightly out of sync). If I run TRACERT, however, those same times are in the 4-billion range. Apparently the Microsoft engineers can't decide whether ping times should be signed or unsigned integers. With these kinds of design ambiguities, anything that exceeds the 2GB limit is BOUND to encounter the kind of glitchy weirdness that happened around Y2K or any of the other similar boundary conditions.
From TFA:
Windows and the applications that run on it have bumped their heads on the address space limits of 32-bit processors. The Windows kernel is constrained by default to 2GB
In English, this means two things:
1) Our developers haven't figured out how to deal with negative signed integers in a 32-bit address space, so we leave it to third-party developers to figure that one out
2) The Vista kernel alone requires more RAM than all the disk space used by Windows 98 and all its accessories combined
He said "you have to sign up for the $19.95 service to get your data back".
He didn't say "We have your data, and you can get it back for $19.95, but you had better act quick or in 48 hours it's all going into the shredder".
He gave her no indication that there was a short time limit during which she could recover her data. And a simple two-message email exchange can easily take two days if the two people are not sitting at their computers at exactly the same moment.
Do you use Yahoo Messenger, or any other services (like Yahoo Groups)? It might consider accessing those with the same account name as the same as logging in.
Yes, because the $5-$35 registration of a domain has become such a problem.
Yes, but what if it wasn't $5 per domain, it was $5 per distinct object instead? If you have a web site with 100 pages, and each page has 20 objects (HTML, animated GIFs, style sheets, etc.) that is now $10,000 to register the whole kit and kaboodle. Is it still casually affordable now?
At the very least, I could see killing 50% of the pop-ups I run into, simply by blocking all .xxx domains
Good. This will block all porn hosted in the United States. How about goatse.cx and its ilk? Laws passed in the United States have no jurisdiction on web sites hosted in other countries.
Unless, of course, hosting porn is considering a Terrorist Act, and the US government decides to send troops in to secure every foreign root server to prevent this...
"ho honey, no I just wanted to learn more about how to solve multiple-body physics interraction and I accidentally clicked onn that porn link" won't hold water if all link end with .xxx
The gravity equations, adjusted for relativistic effects, provide a concise solution to the <href="http://www.orgy.xxx">multiple-body problem</a>
How many people scan every single URL they click-through? (and with Javascript, even that isn't enough).
If you bought a computer with 486-SX (with no floating-point prococessor), but for logictical reasons, the manufacturer installed a 486-DX instead (with a floating point processor, which they then disabled), you still got exactly what you paid for. If they later offered you an optional upgrade for $10 to re-enable the disabled functionality, are you being cheated? No, because you got exactly the functionality you paid for. The fact that there was more, inactive hardware under the hood did not damage your use of the computer in any way.
Look at any car - there will be place on the front panel, and doors, etc. where there are pre-drilled holes for various options that are not installed. The manufacturer is not cheating you by not installing those options - you didn't ask for them, they didn't tell you they were installed, and you didn't pay for them. If you later choose to buy the options, you are fortunae to not have to pay to have holes drilled, because they were conveniently already given to you free when you bought the car.
There are many products that are built in ranges - for example, motherboards which have sockets for some components that are present in highe-end models, but absent in low-end models.
In some cases, however, it is cheaper to build in the functionality and disable it, rather than to leave it out (Remember the iOpener? It was a web-TV like appliance sold by Circuit City, and did not have a hard drive. However, rather than custom design a diskless motherboard, the manufacturer used an off-the-shelf motherboard that had an on-board IDE controller, even though no drives were present (or envisioned, until some enterprising hacker caused much embarrassment by figuring out that with a bit of tweaking, you could add your own hard drive and run Linux on the box - this forced the manufacturer to redesign the motherboard to leave out the IDE controller)).
What? You don't make micropayments whenever you listen to a song or watch a movie? Everyone else does.
Without even thinking about it, you are using electricity to run your DVD player or iPod, so every time you play a song or a movie, you are already paying for it by the minute. But the cost is sufficiently reasonable that you do it without even thinking about it (unless you use a totally battery-operated unit where you keep having to replace the batteries, but even then, people who use such devices are willing to pay the cost to do so).
In an ideal world, the cost of the content itself would be in the same range, so people would be willing to pay for it without question, and the content creators (i.e. artists, NOT the distribution companies like the RIAA and MPAA) would get their microscopic cuts each time.
The very fact that Apple did NOT in any way promise 802.11n legitimizes them charging for this feature. Customers have no legitimate reason to whine that they're not getting it free, since they didn't pay for it, and weren't promised it.
The fact that Apple's engineering design is clever, in having hardware flexible enough to add the feature without a hardware modification, works in Apple's favor. It means they COULD do this for free if they wanted to, but it doesn't obligate them to do so (any more than any software vendor is obligated to provide lifetime upgrades for a single payment of a 1.0 version - you have to fund the software development SOMEHOW).
When I was in high school, we had an IBM 1130 system. We had a slow line printer. IBM sold two different versions of that printer - a slow one, and a fast one. The fast one cost several thousand dollars more. The difference? one jumper (which, if you switched manually, you voided the warranty).
Often, manufacturers will sell a range of products, and it's cheaper for them to sell artificially castrated versions of the expensive versions as cheap ones, rather than manufacturing a cheaper product separately.
If you pay for a cheap unit and they give you an expensive one with the additional features disabled instead, you have no cause to whine about it being disabled, since you didn't pay for it - you got it for free.