The big problem with term limits is that you may be rid of a particular individual, but the party remains in power. Mexico has "no re-election" and the corruption is as bad as ever. The only thing that can fix the problem is to use the old flight instructor's method of taking the fire extinguisher and whacking the student on the head when he does something stupid. That's what needs to be done with the voters.
The classical example is "You write a song and someone performed it and makes millions off of your work." Copyrights are what make that illegal, and what make the GPL and other "copyleft" schemes possible.
That's a load of bull. And the argument doesn't nor ever did wash. That's like saying if I fix a guy's car and he sells it for a million bucks, I should get a piece of that action. That's a no-go. I've been through all this before, and now it's just boring repetition. Check way back in my history for any clarification to the statement that I make right here, *You are wrong*. I have stated why many times. If you don't want to accept it, fine, but I know that you're wrong. Copyright and patent still fall under the generic heading of IP just like Christianity and Buddhism fall under the heading of religion. Amazingly similar concepts by the way. And that is the way I will continue to treat it. The simple fact is that without copyright nobody can legally close the source and keep me from it. I am free to do with my copy as I please, and I will enforce that right any way I can. And If you think that I use my ten year MMX only for slashdotting, well, that's just another error on your part. It also happens to run my local network experimental web/ftp/MySQL server. I use it to simulate how fast things work on dial up. My "real" work is on a P-III frankenstein(fronkensteen) soon to bump up to P-IV I picked out of the garbage, so I guess I am getting my money's worth.
PATENTS let you screw over everyone who didn't think of it first.
Copyright does the same. Many famous song writers got burned by some obscure copyright holder to a similar tune. The second guy who comes up with the same melody, quite independently from the first is SOL. Screw that. Unacceptable. Please don't try to tell me the same thing doesn't happen in software, or anywhere else affected by these insane laws.
You managed to post to slashdot despite using an x86 machine, didn't you?
Yeah, and I also walk instead of driving a car. So, I don't understand the statement. I simply use what's available. If I could post with a pencil and paper, I probably would. I'm just saying that IP law is limiting our choices, and that's not right. Never has been. It's too bad you can't draw an accurate picture of life without the absurd concept of IP, but there it is waiting for us to take the plunge, but I guess "you're just chicken, McFly". Scared the water might feel a little chilly at first. Okay, you go your way. I'll go mine. I will continue my work of getting rid of this abomination. Negative moderation be damned.
Oh, and thanks for the link, now I have some good reading to do.
Nope, not saying that at all. They free to go as they please. If they wish to blindly and without question, as IS happening, follow their leaders into battle, that is their prerogative. I'm saying they have no right to force me to follow their path. I will continue to show them the errors of blind obedience. If I appear harsh in my criticism, so be it. Those who call me "unpatriotic", for instance, for my refusal to go along are in the trap. I have a fairly unique position being able to observe from outside the circle, with no personal ambition* to clamber over others to reach some mystical advantage over them. And what I see is what I say. I been watching this steady decline for a long time. I'm not entirely without experience. Though I may be inarticulate in my observations, I have full faith in them, until someone can come along and prove otherwise. I am more than happy to admit my errors when they are presented to me or if I see them for myself. My mind, while possibly quite flaccid, is very wide open. So are my eyes as deteriorated as they may be.
Now, my only difference with JC is that he places the blame on external causes, where I place the blame squarely on my own shoulders. I alone an responsible for my own misfortunes. And all good fortune I ascribe to pure luck. In truth it all seems kind of chaotic. But so far I've been pretty lucky. I don't care who's conspiring what. They can only do such things when they have followers**. In light of that, now I can't figure out what you're talking about. Now I need a little clarification. please?
*I believe the average person calls it lazy...whatever.
** A guy in Time Magazine once said, paraphrasing, *I don't care what Rush Limbaugh says. I'm more concerned about his listeners.* Absolutely correct. They are the ones who put into action what ever he says. So the leaders of whatever possible conspiracy there is mean absolutely nothing to me either. They come and go like (dust in)the wind The followers are much more dangerous. They are the mob that creates the havoc. They are the ones with the irrational fears and hatred. It is upon them that I will direct my attention.
The tiniest understanding of animal psychology clears things up quite nicely. We have this real problem of accepting the fact that we are under the influence of very strong, more like overwhelming, instincts. Apparently they feel that admitting that would make them less than human. And they are acting less than human when they let instinct overrule rational thought. And it is quite possible we can't be any other way. Most everybody lives by conditioned response.
Actually patents are what protect method of implementation of an idea, and you were at one time supposed to bring a model or at least a drawing(since perveted by relaxed definition of what is patentable) of that method to the patent office. A single idea can have many methods, each one of them individually patentable*. For example, look at the fight between Glenn Curtiss and the Wright Brothers. Aircraft advancement** slowed to a crawl until the government took over the patent during world war I. And that's when things really took off, so to speak. Anyway, I am saying you have no right to exclusivity. You only have the real natural right to, for lack of a better word, "authorship", simply because it is impossible for one to be a creator of something that was created by someone else. IP*** is a fallacious claim of ownership. You have no right to dictate what I can do with what I possess. My copy is my copy. Yours is yours. What you are trying to do is to recollect the smoke that was let out of the bottle. Well, you can't. Only by the use of physical force can you make such false claims. Copyright was created out of the exact same reasoning 297 years ago as it is used to today, to protect an established industry. And I restate the only legitimate claim in ALL of this is that of authorship. Those who plagiarize are the only ones that should be looked after. Distribution and use is not for you or anyone else to control. There is no logical defense for operating this way. Attribution is your only rightful claim, and it is one that even I would defend.
*didn't help Curtiss though.
**In every instance I can find IP law has always slowed developement of virtually everything until it copyright/patent expired.
***which covers copyrights AND patents, so patents are not irrelevant. They are every bit as much a part of the picture as copyright.
There ya go! Send in the drones... to fight for what they think is theirs...even when it's not. Stamp out the rabble rouser and his demagoguery! "He is dangerous..."
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose, Nothing don't mean nothing honey if it ain't free.
Who says everything has to come from a company?? The whole corporate structure would change for the better. They wouldn't be able to claim whatever an employee made as theirs exclusively. Who cares how secretive they get? It's better than the hoarding and speculation we have today. Many people come up with the same ideas, so being secretive won't matter. Copyright simply screws everybody who didn't think of it first. It's nothing but a holdover from 19th century industrialists who wish to control everything. It creates an economic apartheid. It's why we still burn petroleum and use lame, kludgy x86 processors while better existing technology rots on the shelf waiting for a higher price. This is nothing more than a fear of change and sticking with the devil you know. And it has set us back probably over a hundred years, if not much more.
You will have access to anything that's "in the streets". Why does the idea that we'll sit and rot without copyright persist? It is so wrongheaded I don't have the words to describe it. Don't take my word for it then. There are plenty of others who feel the same way. Maybe you will find it easier to understand them. I hope that your interest in maintaining the status quo doesn't diminish your desire to seek out people with a different opinion. I know that the IP hoarding and speculation is wrong, and that why there is copyright. I just can't seem to get the idea out in a way that is easy to understand, but I do know that it's easy. Deal with plagiarism, and leave it at that. It's the only issue that should be on the table.
Yes, because we all know that efficiency is everything. Tell you what, let's ban democracy because it is less "efficient". In the name of efficiency, we need to revive the National Socialist Party. They're the most efficient there is. They will definitely keep the trains running on time so we can be more efficient in everything we do. What sickness!
And they would be correct in that assessment. There is no opposition of any real force. Basically it is be true throughout the world. There are no true freedom loving leaders in any country. All have their personal agendas, and we aren't included, except as support staff(slaves).
We got to face the facts. People prefer to be sheep because it's easy and convenient. It's too bad that they are dragging the rest of us to the slaughter with them. And as I said, it doesn't matter who leads us there, the problem is that we follow. Sorry about the bad mod.
We only need GPL because of copyright. When it's all gone, all will be well. Trust me on this one. The only thing to be concerned about is plagiarism. Everything else is fluff. No matter who "takes" the code, they can't stop you from using it also. And without copyright restrictions you are free to build on the works of others and everybody will be given the opportunity to do just that. There is so much superior tech(Alpha chip!) being locked down and kept off the streets because of copyright. This must end now. Jeeze, this is so redundant. I've said this so many times, and many others have also, with much more eloquence than I can muster with my seventh grade writing skills.
Thanks. I saved the page for later. I also had another reason not to watch the video. I seem to be suffering some malfunction with the flash player in Mozilla that I don't feel like dealing with. And I need the "Google Player" to see it if I download it? No thank you. Make it more generic so I don't have to load more third party junk onto my machine. I wish Slashdot wouldn't link to so much ad ridden and proprietary garbage, but I guess the money has to flow.
Didn't mean to harsh your high, but it's important to understand that both sides of what I guess I should call the Authoritarian Party (meaning republican/democrat) are trying to dupe you. The facade is very frail, and they are doing all they can to keep it from falling away into millions of pieces revealing their real intent. Rest assured that your welfare is quite secondary and is purely coincidental in their drive for more power.
I need to add that part of the problem is that we grant the same property rights to a corporation as we do for individuals. That, to me, is wrong. Especially if they can buy up huge plots of land and keep people off. We allow far too many rights to them, and to me, they should be forced to give up many more of these privileges to acquire a corporate charter with all its other benefits. That right there will go a long way towards mitigating the problems of monopolies. It is because these privileges the monopoly can survive. A corporation is not a natural entity, and should not be allowed any "natural" rights. They should only be allowed to exist under a strict set of rules designed specifically for businesses. This whole "corporation as a person" thing has thrown everything out of whack. Maybe that's what leads people to believe their is such a thing as a "natural" monopoly. To me, it just ain't so. It's the same problem I have with IP law.
Well I have seen laws where only one company gets the right of way, and everybody else has to get their permission to use it, frequently at exorbitant prices in order to keep them away. And you can't have everybody and their uncle digging up the street. That's why the regs are there. Otherwise the pavement would never last a week before somebody's digging it up again. And there would be a tangled mess of pipes and wire and fiber. The monopoly is granted through exclusivity, not by any natural market forces. It is a government protected racket. In the case of city services it is necessary, and I don't mind as long as it is based on merit, and not because somebody's weaselly brother-in-law needs a job, which normally is the case. A natural monopoly is one that depends strictly on market forces which simply cannot sustain it without some outside force, such as exclusive property rights that should not be granted in this fashion.
At one time, the phone company was a natural monopoly...
That's just not true. They were granted exclusive rights of way by the government. I was there. I remember those days quite well, where it was illegal to hook up unapproved equipment, which on the long run probably was good for reliability. And for us the phone service was very reliable (and is one reason my old equipment still works today), more than today's internet providers who also have exclusivity. That's why AT&T can get away with this because for many, there is no other choice...because of the exclusive franchise granted by the local government. If they allow the competition in the area, this would be a non-issue.
There's nothing to apologize for. I simply wanted to make it a bit more convenient. It took me a while to figure out what was different, and I usually add the trailing slash by default myself just out of habit.
Cool! I could use one of those. Mine has the old manual kind, and it is kinda dangerous to use while I'm driving while trying to keep the cell phone balanced on my shoulder and reading the paper and shaving.
The oil companies, the railroads were all protected in one fashion or another. Lot's of racketeering going on, all under the watchful eye of you-know-who. Sorry, so far nobody had found anything that doesn't have the force of law behind it, or some mob action with backing from the authorities. A monopoly needs force to sustain itself. The market won't do it. You gotta stamp out the competition, and only only way you can is with physical force.
Normally the gas company is a public utility*, or at least should be for the very reasons you describe. If it is private, usually only one company gets the contract. Again it's government protected.
*anything such as gas, water, electric, phone, etc. that involves using a public thoroughfare should be declared a public utility under the rules set by the public paying the taxes for the work, even if done by a private company.
Microsoft is protected by copyrights and patents. That's your government protection.
And if by some astounding change someone does manage to get somewhere, you use your war chest to just buy them out.
And if they don't sell, they will be sued out of existence with some lame IP violation they can't afford to prove invalid. The market isn't protecting Microsoft, the law is.
Slashdot Mirror
The big problem with term limits is that you may be rid of a particular individual, but the party remains in power. Mexico has "no re-election" and the corruption is as bad as ever. The only thing that can fix the problem is to use the old flight instructor's method of taking the fire extinguisher and whacking the student on the head when he does something stupid. That's what needs to be done with the voters.
...but I have to tell you that there's not a cat in hell's chance we'll join the next US military action we're invited to.
A bit of wag the dog here. This is in reality a British operation. Their interests in the Middle East run much deeper than the American's.
Bush/Blair=Pinky/Brain.
The classical example is "You write a song and someone performed it and makes millions off of your work." Copyrights are what make that illegal, and what make the GPL and other "copyleft" schemes possible.
That's a load of bull. And the argument doesn't nor ever did wash. That's like saying if I fix a guy's car and he sells it for a million bucks, I should get a piece of that action. That's a no-go. I've been through all this before, and now it's just boring repetition. Check way back in my history for any clarification to the statement that I make right here, *You are wrong*. I have stated why many times. If you don't want to accept it, fine, but I know that you're wrong. Copyright and patent still fall under the generic heading of IP just like Christianity and Buddhism fall under the heading of religion. Amazingly similar concepts by the way. And that is the way I will continue to treat it. The simple fact is that without copyright nobody can legally close the source and keep me from it. I am free to do with my copy as I please, and I will enforce that right any way I can. And If you think that I use my ten year MMX only for slashdotting, well, that's just another error on your part. It also happens to run my local network experimental web/ftp/MySQL server. I use it to simulate how fast things work on dial up. My "real" work is on a P-III frankenstein(fronkensteen) soon to bump up to P-IV I picked out of the garbage, so I guess I am getting my money's worth.
PATENTS let you screw over everyone who didn't think of it first.
Copyright does the same. Many famous song writers got burned by some obscure copyright holder to a similar tune. The second guy who comes up with the same melody, quite independently from the first is SOL. Screw that. Unacceptable. Please don't try to tell me the same thing doesn't happen in software, or anywhere else affected by these insane laws.
You managed to post to slashdot despite using an x86 machine, didn't you?
Yeah, and I also walk instead of driving a car. So, I don't understand the statement. I simply use what's available. If I could post with a pencil and paper, I probably would. I'm just saying that IP law is limiting our choices, and that's not right. Never has been. It's too bad you can't draw an accurate picture of life without the absurd concept of IP, but there it is waiting for us to take the plunge, but I guess "you're just chicken, McFly". Scared the water might feel a little chilly at first. Okay, you go your way. I'll go mine. I will continue my work of getting rid of this abomination. Negative moderation be damned.
Oh, and thanks for the link, now I have some good reading to do.
Nope, not saying that at all. They free to go as they please. If they wish to blindly and without question, as IS happening, follow their leaders into battle, that is their prerogative. I'm saying they have no right to force me to follow their path. I will continue to show them the errors of blind obedience. If I appear harsh in my criticism, so be it. Those who call me "unpatriotic", for instance, for my refusal to go along are in the trap. I have a fairly unique position being able to observe from outside the circle, with no personal ambition* to clamber over others to reach some mystical advantage over them. And what I see is what I say. I been watching this steady decline for a long time. I'm not entirely without experience. Though I may be inarticulate in my observations, I have full faith in them, until someone can come along and prove otherwise. I am more than happy to admit my errors when they are presented to me or if I see them for myself. My mind, while possibly quite flaccid, is very wide open. So are my eyes as deteriorated as they may be.
Now, my only difference with JC is that he places the blame on external causes, where I place the blame squarely on my own shoulders. I alone an responsible for my own misfortunes. And all good fortune I ascribe to pure luck. In truth it all seems kind of chaotic. But so far I've been pretty lucky. I don't care who's conspiring what. They can only do such things when they have followers**. In light of that, now I can't figure out what you're talking about. Now I need a little clarification. please?
*I believe the average person calls it lazy...whatever.
** A guy in Time Magazine once said, paraphrasing, *I don't care what Rush Limbaugh says. I'm more concerned about his listeners.* Absolutely correct. They are the ones who put into action what ever he says. So the leaders of whatever possible conspiracy there is mean absolutely nothing to me either. They come and go like (dust in)the wind The followers are much more dangerous. They are the mob that creates the havoc. They are the ones with the irrational fears and hatred. It is upon them that I will direct my attention.
The tiniest understanding of animal psychology clears things up quite nicely. We have this real problem of accepting the fact that we are under the influence of very strong, more like overwhelming, instincts. Apparently they feel that admitting that would make them less than human. And they are acting less than human when they let instinct overrule rational thought. And it is quite possible we can't be any other way. Most everybody lives by conditioned response.
Actually patents are what protect method of implementation of an idea, and you were at one time supposed to bring a model or at least a drawing(since perveted by relaxed definition of what is patentable) of that method to the patent office. A single idea can have many methods, each one of them individually patentable*. For example, look at the fight between Glenn Curtiss and the Wright Brothers. Aircraft advancement** slowed to a crawl until the government took over the patent during world war I. And that's when things really took off, so to speak. Anyway, I am saying you have no right to exclusivity. You only have the real natural right to, for lack of a better word, "authorship", simply because it is impossible for one to be a creator of something that was created by someone else. IP*** is a fallacious claim of ownership. You have no right to dictate what I can do with what I possess. My copy is my copy. Yours is yours. What you are trying to do is to recollect the smoke that was let out of the bottle. Well, you can't. Only by the use of physical force can you make such false claims. Copyright was created out of the exact same reasoning 297 years ago as it is used to today, to protect an established industry. And I restate the only legitimate claim in ALL of this is that of authorship. Those who plagiarize are the only ones that should be looked after. Distribution and use is not for you or anyone else to control. There is no logical defense for operating this way. Attribution is your only rightful claim, and it is one that even I would defend.
*didn't help Curtiss though.
**In every instance I can find IP law has always slowed developement of virtually everything until it copyright/patent expired.
***which covers copyrights AND patents, so patents are not irrelevant. They are every bit as much a part of the picture as copyright.
(Score:0, Flamebait)
There ya go! Send in the drones... to fight for what they think is theirs...even when it's not. Stamp out the rabble rouser and his demagoguery! "He is dangerous..."
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose,
Nothing don't mean nothing honey if it ain't free.
Who says everything has to come from a company?? The whole corporate structure would change for the better. They wouldn't be able to claim whatever an employee made as theirs exclusively. Who cares how secretive they get? It's better than the hoarding and speculation we have today. Many people come up with the same ideas, so being secretive won't matter. Copyright simply screws everybody who didn't think of it first. It's nothing but a holdover from 19th century industrialists who wish to control everything. It creates an economic apartheid. It's why we still burn petroleum and use lame, kludgy x86 processors while better existing technology rots on the shelf waiting for a higher price. This is nothing more than a fear of change and sticking with the devil you know. And it has set us back probably over a hundred years, if not much more.
You will have access to anything that's "in the streets". Why does the idea that we'll sit and rot without copyright persist? It is so wrongheaded I don't have the words to describe it. Don't take my word for it then. There are plenty of others who feel the same way. Maybe you will find it easier to understand them. I hope that your interest in maintaining the status quo doesn't diminish your desire to seek out people with a different opinion. I know that the IP hoarding and speculation is wrong, and that why there is copyright. I just can't seem to get the idea out in a way that is easy to understand, but I do know that it's easy. Deal with plagiarism, and leave it at that. It's the only issue that should be on the table.
Yes, because we all know that efficiency is everything. Tell you what, let's ban democracy because it is less "efficient". In the name of efficiency, we need to revive the National Socialist Party. They're the most efficient there is. They will definitely keep the trains running on time so we can be more efficient in everything we do. What sickness!
That's the magic number, no?
And they would be correct in that assessment. There is no opposition of any real force. Basically it is be true throughout the world. There are no true freedom loving leaders in any country. All have their personal agendas, and we aren't included, except as support staff(slaves).
We got to face the facts. People prefer to be sheep because it's easy and convenient. It's too bad that they are dragging the rest of us to the slaughter with them. And as I said, it doesn't matter who leads us there, the problem is that we follow. Sorry about the bad mod.
We only need GPL because of copyright. When it's all gone, all will be well. Trust me on this one. The only thing to be concerned about is plagiarism. Everything else is fluff. No matter who "takes" the code, they can't stop you from using it also. And without copyright restrictions you are free to build on the works of others and everybody will be given the opportunity to do just that. There is so much superior tech(Alpha chip!) being locked down and kept off the streets because of copyright. This must end now. Jeeze, this is so redundant. I've said this so many times, and many others have also, with much more eloquence than I can muster with my seventh grade writing skills.
Thanks. I saved the page for later. I also had another reason not to watch the video. I seem to be suffering some malfunction with the flash player in Mozilla that I don't feel like dealing with. And I need the "Google Player" to see it if I download it? No thank you. Make it more generic so I don't have to load more third party junk onto my machine. I wish Slashdot wouldn't link to so much ad ridden and proprietary garbage, but I guess the money has to flow.
Didn't mean to harsh your high, but it's important to understand that both sides of what I guess I should call the Authoritarian Party (meaning republican/democrat) are trying to dupe you. The facade is very frail, and they are doing all they can to keep it from falling away into millions of pieces revealing their real intent. Rest assured that your welfare is quite secondary and is purely coincidental in their drive for more power.
I always thought Utah was a bit religious...
There's a reason for everything.
I need to add that part of the problem is that we grant the same property rights to a corporation as we do for individuals. That, to me, is wrong. Especially if they can buy up huge plots of land and keep people off. We allow far too many rights to them, and to me, they should be forced to give up many more of these privileges to acquire a corporate charter with all its other benefits. That right there will go a long way towards mitigating the problems of monopolies. It is because these privileges the monopoly can survive. A corporation is not a natural entity, and should not be allowed any "natural" rights. They should only be allowed to exist under a strict set of rules designed specifically for businesses. This whole "corporation as a person" thing has thrown everything out of whack. Maybe that's what leads people to believe their is such a thing as a "natural" monopoly. To me, it just ain't so. It's the same problem I have with IP law.
Well I have seen laws where only one company gets the right of way, and everybody else has to get their permission to use it, frequently at exorbitant prices in order to keep them away. And you can't have everybody and their uncle digging up the street. That's why the regs are there. Otherwise the pavement would never last a week before somebody's digging it up again. And there would be a tangled mess of pipes and wire and fiber. The monopoly is granted through exclusivity, not by any natural market forces. It is a government protected racket. In the case of city services it is necessary, and I don't mind as long as it is based on merit, and not because somebody's weaselly brother-in-law needs a job, which normally is the case. A natural monopoly is one that depends strictly on market forces which simply cannot sustain it without some outside force, such as exclusive property rights that should not be granted in this fashion.
At one time, the phone company was a natural monopoly...
That's just not true. They were granted exclusive rights of way by the government. I was there. I remember those days quite well, where it was illegal to hook up unapproved equipment, which on the long run probably was good for reliability. And for us the phone service was very reliable (and is one reason my old equipment still works today), more than today's internet providers who also have exclusivity. That's why AT&T can get away with this because for many, there is no other choice...because of the exclusive franchise granted by the local government. If they allow the competition in the area, this would be a non-issue.
There's nothing to apologize for. I simply wanted to make it a bit more convenient. It took me a while to figure out what was different, and I usually add the trailing slash by default myself just out of habit.
a car with automatic toenail clippers.
Cool! I could use one of those. Mine has the old manual kind, and it is kinda dangerous to use while I'm driving while trying to keep the cell phone balanced on my shoulder and reading the paper and shaving.
Utah
Here, Let me help. The other one came up not found, not directly, anyway.
The oil companies, the railroads were all protected in one fashion or another. Lot's of racketeering going on, all under the watchful eye of you-know-who. Sorry, so far nobody had found anything that doesn't have the force of law behind it, or some mob action with backing from the authorities. A monopoly needs force to sustain itself. The market won't do it. You gotta stamp out the competition, and only only way you can is with physical force.
Normally the gas company is a public utility*, or at least should be for the very reasons you describe. If it is private, usually only one company gets the contract. Again it's government protected.
*anything such as gas, water, electric, phone, etc. that involves using a public thoroughfare should be declared a public utility under the rules set by the public paying the taxes for the work, even if done by a private company.
Microsoft is protected by copyrights and patents. That's your government protection.
And if by some astounding change someone does manage to get somewhere, you use your war chest to just buy them out.
And if they don't sell, they will be sued out of existence with some lame IP violation they can't afford to prove invalid. The market isn't protecting Microsoft, the law is.