When the movie you're watching has a good storyline, you'll have no time to spot that difference.
No matter what i'm watching, even the smallest imperfection in the movie will annoy me (besides, i did pay good money for it, or the medium i'm recording the show on). Especially if its repititious. I wouldn't buy it if i knew there would always be problems. I'm sure someone will figure out a chip that will kill the content protection tho. I'll wait untli then:)
Your work contract with your company almost certainly states that anything you do while being paid by them belongs to the company.
But surely your work contract cannot force you to break the license agreement on a piece of software. They accepted the license agreement before your work contract. And them asking you to turn over the copyright to the whole thing would be similar to them asking you to turn over your car. But yes you should ask the FSF, and probably the people at gnu.org
Well if the company modified it using another employee they'd have to put the changes to the code out anyway, correct? You don't have to give up your program to them either; i would think if you got fired b/c you didn't hand over the copyright to them, you'd have a lawsuit then. Do the changes (i mean they want them done, right?) and tell them in order to do it you have to merge them into source tree. I don't think they would like it if you tried to muscle one of their copyrights away from them.
we can try do to the good and inhibit our own dark side.
Who ever said thats how you should deal with it? Besides, you yourself said you would happily continue to put guns in peoples' hands. Isn't that a little hipocritical?
Of course - because US always organise its war overseas. Vietnam, Irak, Kosovo, Korea, etc...
Wow, you don't know your geography at all do you. First of all, i said Europe, second of all, i never claimed the US wasn't guilty of anything. We are, after all, an off shoot of the Western Europe. Vietnam and Korea should have never happened in my opinion. Iraq, well i wish people would be honest why we went there (oil), but on the other hand i suppose freeing K. was good too. And Kosovo was supposedly to stop things similar to what happened in WW2, but again i'm not foolish enough to believe exactly what the media tells us here. At any rate i never said we were not guilty of anything.
Own of the most perverted religion too BTW. I don't see why I should be responsible for Adam and Eves dark sides, it's not my problem. I take care of my own dark side, thank you, and I never needed a gun for that.
Again, i'd have to agree there. And i never said you were responsible for thier doings, i was just trying to point out that maybe all people are evil. And that maybe you are just as bad as the 'gun-nuts.' You still haven't told my why your high morals and hatred of guns doesn't seem to conflict with your statement that you will happily continue making and selling them. I mean, if you really wanted to get rid of them, shouldn't making them be illegal as well as owning them?
Well now they do - so the situation CHANGED. And the 2nd amendment is obsolete.
Cool, let me know when other RIGHTS become obsolete. Like the right to free speech and a speedy and fair trial by my peers. By the way, i would never live in Europe; i like my freedom thank you.
Well I think hunting is nut too, I mean which mentally sane human could enjoy killing - even animals ?
What i think is insane is the fact that you refuse to acknowledge that EVERY human has a dark side. We are a mix of both good and evil. Oh, and if i remember correctly, the 2 most horrific and horrible wars occured in Europe. Lets not forget that Christianity, probably the most popular religion in the world, has at its heart that man IS evil, period.
we Europeans will be more than happy to sell them the bullets they need to kill each others.
Odd that people so against guns are willing to make so many. Its comforting to know that you think making killing instruments so widely availble is wrong, yet you are will to make and sell them. Hipocrasy at its best.
This is a reference to external threats (such as England) NOT a defense against a corrupt governement
You are such a fool. When the Constitution was written, England WAS OUR GOV'T. The idea of a well regulated militia is the idea that individuals and communities be responsible for thier own safety, not the national army. Do you know what infringed even means? No, i didn't think so. Although the one point i do agree with you on is that there seems to be no meantion of militias, but then just look how the media treats anyone that tries to form one.
Actually, i think they did think ahead on this issue, as with many others. You forget the main reason they put this in, and spelled it out. It is to keep us safe in the event our own army is turned against us. Every really evil gov't that has existed has used its army against its own citizens. Thats also why housing army officers in your home is strictly forbidden. I also think its rather egotistic to think you are smarter and know more then those that founded the greatest country in the world.
Maybe they just don't want any gun sales going on this weekend. Thats the danger when you left gov't regulate your rights...but then if rights are regulated, are they really rights anymore?
Ever stop to think that maybe the reason the Netherlands has less killings is b/c they have a totaly different society, perhaps one that values other people more then ours does? No that couldn't be it...
Someone bought a 22 cal. in Meijer and went out into the parking lot an committed suicide. The family members sued Meijer for selling a firearm to someone so 'distressed'. I'm not sure how the case ended, but as a result of this case, Meijer now only carries Blackpowder guns and Air (pellet & BB) guns. This is very unfortunate!
Clerks at meijer are not theripists. Nor should they be. And being 'depressed' should not be a reason to refuse the sale of a gun to someone. If you really own your own life, you have every right to take it. People that far gone are very hard not to notice, if his family really cared maybe they should have been doing more to help him. Instead the blood sucking leaches sue a store and are now content with whatever settlement they got.
Judges generally aren't the type of people who will disagree with two hundred years of status quo.
That is where i'd have to disagree with you. Some of the most notable cases have upset the status quo. The ending of segragation and Row (sp?) v. Wade are 2 examples off the top of my head.
I'd have to agree with you. Publishing the whole thing out of spite was not the best thing to do. I don't think anyone here would argue for such a thing if it had been a book published. But taking pieces of it to comment on and such, well thats a whole other thing. That should most definatly be allowed, as well as linking (where was it ruled that a person is NOT accountable for simply linking to illegal material?). If the latter type of posts are also ruled illegal, well i guess so is the research paper i just handed it. It takes a few direct quotes from other works. All in all though, i do think copyright laws need to go, or at least be revised so that the original artist/publisher/whathaveyou can always retain it.
Hmm..speaking of stupid. You forgot to tell me what i mean. Also, i was not aware that the *nix dict command was the be all end all when it comes to english words. Ain't wasn't in the dictionary for a long time either, but that didn't stop people from using it.
Well reguardless it doesn't matter. Those images slow my browsing for whatever reason, so i blocked them. Besides i'm not too keen on the IE logo spinning forever while some stupid graphics load either.
Well when you're waiting forevre b/c of a slow ad server and thats keeping you from viewing the rest of the pages, thats a pretty damn good reason. And it was the first reason i started blocking in the first place. I surf alot faster now.
Fine, then the site will go to charging per month, and the probably die. Which probably means the content isn't that great to begin with. So i say good, let all these sites die. They won't be missed, thats for sure.
Don't give me that stealing crap. I have the right to choose what i see. By your logic its stealing to walk away from the tv during a commercial break. Shall we divise a chair that locks you into place so you can't? Besides, i view it as stealing from me. I'm paying for the bandwidth thier image is traveling down. And for those that pay per minute phone or isp charges, they are charging YOU to see thier ad. Fuck off please. I'll block whatever i want to.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because you think you are right, does not make you less of a common thief.
No, but the fact that he IS right does make him less then a thief. In fact, i believe it puts him on pretty high ground.
When the movie you're watching has a good storyline, you'll have no time to spot that difference.
:)
No matter what i'm watching, even the smallest imperfection in the movie will annoy me (besides, i did pay good money for it, or the medium i'm recording the show on). Especially if its repititious. I wouldn't buy it if i knew there would always be problems. I'm sure someone will figure out a chip that will kill the content protection tho. I'll wait untli then
Your work contract with your company almost certainly states that anything you do while being paid by them belongs to the company.
But surely your work contract cannot force you to break the license agreement on a piece of software. They accepted the license agreement before your work contract. And them asking you to turn over the copyright to the whole thing would be similar to them asking you to turn over your car. But yes you should ask the FSF, and probably the people at gnu.org
Well if the company modified it using another employee they'd have to put the changes to the code out anyway, correct? You don't have to give up your program to them either; i would think if you got fired b/c you didn't hand over the copyright to them, you'd have a lawsuit then. Do the changes (i mean they want them done, right?) and tell them in order to do it you have to merge them into source tree. I don't think they would like it if you tried to muscle one of their copyrights away from them.
we can try do to the good and inhibit our own dark side.
Who ever said thats how you should deal with it? Besides, you yourself said you would happily continue to put guns in peoples' hands. Isn't that a little hipocritical?
Of course - because US always organise its war overseas. Vietnam, Irak, Kosovo, Korea, etc...
Wow, you don't know your geography at all do you. First of all, i said Europe, second of all, i never claimed the US wasn't guilty of anything. We are, after all, an off shoot of the Western Europe. Vietnam and Korea should have never happened in my opinion. Iraq, well i wish people would be honest why we went there (oil), but on the other hand i suppose freeing K. was good too. And Kosovo was supposedly to stop things similar to what happened in WW2, but again i'm not foolish enough to believe exactly what the media tells us here. At any rate i never said we were not guilty of anything.
Own of the most perverted religion too BTW. I don't see why I should be responsible for Adam and Eves dark sides, it's not my problem. I take care of my own dark side, thank you, and I never needed a gun for that.
Again, i'd have to agree there. And i never said you were responsible for thier doings, i was just trying to point out that maybe all people are evil. And that maybe you are just as bad as the 'gun-nuts.' You still haven't told my why your high morals and hatred of guns doesn't seem to conflict with your statement that you will happily continue making and selling them. I mean, if you really wanted to get rid of them, shouldn't making them be illegal as well as owning them?
Seems to me that the devil's works have been pretty busy actually.
Well now they do - so the situation CHANGED. And the 2nd amendment is obsolete.
Cool, let me know when other RIGHTS become obsolete. Like the right to free speech and a speedy and fair trial by my peers. By the way, i would never live in Europe; i like my freedom thank you.
Well I think hunting is nut too, I mean which mentally sane human could enjoy killing - even animals ?
What i think is insane is the fact that you refuse to acknowledge that EVERY human has a dark side. We are a mix of both good and evil. Oh, and if i remember correctly, the 2 most horrific and horrible wars occured in Europe. Lets not forget that Christianity, probably the most popular religion in the world, has at its heart that man IS evil, period.
we Europeans will be more
than happy to sell them the bullets they need to kill each others.
Odd that people so against guns are willing to make so many. Its comforting to know that you think making killing instruments so widely availble is wrong, yet you are will to make and sell them. Hipocrasy at its best.
This is a reference to external threats (such as England) NOT a defense against a corrupt governement
You are such a fool. When the Constitution was written, England WAS OUR GOV'T. The idea of a well regulated militia is the idea that individuals and communities be responsible for thier own safety, not the national army. Do you know what infringed even means? No, i didn't think so. Although the one point i do agree with you on is that there seems to be no meantion of militias, but then just look how the media treats anyone that tries to form one.
Actually, i think they did think ahead on this issue, as with many others. You forget the main reason they put this in, and spelled it out. It is to keep us safe in the event our own army is turned against us. Every really evil gov't that has existed has used its army against its own citizens. Thats also why housing army officers in your home is strictly forbidden. I also think its rather egotistic to think you are smarter and know more then those that founded the greatest country in the world.
So then i guess the solution would be to legilize drugs and guns. Works for me :)
Yes it does; it also is the easiest place to find a hooker. go figure.
Maybe they just don't want any gun sales going on this weekend. Thats the danger when you left gov't regulate your rights...but then if rights are regulated, are they really rights anymore?
Ever stop to think that maybe the reason the Netherlands has less killings is b/c they have a totaly different society, perhaps one that values other people more then ours does? No that couldn't be it...
A gun has never walked up to me and tried to shoot at me.
Someone bought a 22 cal. in Meijer and went out into the parking lot an committed suicide. The
family members sued Meijer for selling a firearm to someone so 'distressed'. I'm not sure how the
case ended, but as a result of this case, Meijer now only carries Blackpowder guns and Air (pellet &
BB) guns. This is very unfortunate!
Clerks at meijer are not theripists. Nor should they be. And being 'depressed' should not be a reason to refuse the sale of a gun to someone. If you really own your own life, you have every right to take it. People that far gone are very hard not to notice, if his family really cared maybe they should have been doing more to help him. Instead the blood sucking leaches sue a store and are now content with whatever settlement they got.
Judges generally aren't the type of people who will disagree with two hundred years of status quo.
That is where i'd have to disagree with you. Some of the most notable cases have upset the status quo. The ending of segragation and Row (sp?) v. Wade are 2 examples off the top of my head.
I'd have to agree with you. Publishing the whole thing out of spite was not the best thing to do. I don't think anyone here would argue for such a thing if it had been a book published. But taking pieces of it to comment on and such, well thats a whole other thing. That should most definatly be allowed, as well as linking (where was it ruled that a person is NOT accountable for simply linking to illegal material?). If the latter type of posts are also ruled illegal, well i guess so is the research paper i just handed it. It takes a few direct quotes from other works. All in all though, i do think copyright laws need to go, or at least be revised so that the original artist/publisher/whathaveyou can always retain it.
Hmm..speaking of stupid. You forgot to tell me what i mean. Also, i was not aware that the *nix dict command was the be all end all when it comes to english words. Ain't wasn't in the dictionary for a long time either, but that didn't stop people from using it.
I'm suprised it was that low. There are ALOT of stupid people out there.
Well reguardless it doesn't matter. Those images slow my browsing for whatever reason, so i blocked them. Besides i'm not too keen on the IE logo spinning forever while some stupid graphics load either.
Well when you're waiting forevre b/c of a slow ad server and thats keeping you from viewing the rest of the pages, thats a pretty damn good reason. And it was the first reason i started blocking in the first place. I surf alot faster now.
Fine, then the site will go to charging per month, and the probably die. Which probably means the content isn't that great to begin with. So i say good, let all these sites die. They won't be missed, thats for sure.
Lost revenue to company if i do not see a banner ad: $0.02
Cost to me if i do see the banner ad: $0.05
Heh. thats ok, most of the content out there is crap anyway, even WITH the ad revenues..
Don't give me that stealing crap. I have the right to choose what i see. By your logic its stealing to walk away from the tv during a commercial break. Shall we divise a chair that locks you into place so you can't? Besides, i view it as stealing from me. I'm paying for the bandwidth thier image is traveling down. And for those that pay per minute phone or isp charges, they are charging YOU to see thier ad. Fuck off please. I'll block whatever i want to.