...but the REASON the problem didn't exist is because copying/producing copies was expensive as hell PERIOD.
Now that copying IS so cheap proves that the copies are worthless. Only the original perforance of work is worth anything, through commissioning or work for hire, etc.
...last I checked, the constitution and the basis for the entire american system of govt began in the 1770's and 80's. If you have any evidence that the constitution was originally intended to deny the possibility of IP...
I'm not sure how you came up with that conclusion out of the statement that simply said that the Americans didn't respect the IP from other countries, particularly Britain.
...the law of 1710 you cite was the first parliamentary act, however common law had been dealing with these issues for at least 200 years.
Uh, 200 years ago? Or 200 years before 1710?
...having worked in the publishing industry.
Well, there you go. Trying to protect an obsolete industry. To bring up the tired old analogy, You're making buggy whips. We no longer need buggy whips. Well, maybe the sex shops can sell 'em, but that's another thread.
...don't get me started on the pro-piracy bullshit...violating copyright holder rights is "justified," while violating the copyright of the GPL is "evil"...
Evidently, you didn't get the memo. Copyrights (and all IP) is a gov't service provided to you to protect your monopoly. In NO WAY is it a natural right. You shouldn't be able to monopolize ideas any more than you should be allowed to monopolize the sale of controlled substances. I see plenty of anti MS stuff here, but I also see plenty of MS advertising. Which do you think has more meaning to Slashdot? Apparently MS doesn't care about the negative posts and takes it all in stride. Perhaps you could follow their example? I don't care for their business practices much myself, so I simply contribute to them as little as possible.
Oh, and about your sig, Copyright holders are the freeloaders who are getting bitter that their free ride is about to end...hopefully.
Hell we can't seem to go five years without declaring war on somebody or another.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the last time the U.S. declared war on anybody was in 1941 or 42. After that it was called "police action". Doesn't really matter, dead is dead.
(Catching this duscussion in the middle and not checking the rest) What we are probably seeing is 10 PERCENT of the abuse! Anybody out there who thinks we are any better than they are have definitely got some crossed circuits in the old cranium. Some might call it gray matter inside their heads, but I think it's brown colored. Update: I just read the rest of his posts. He is indeed a troll. At least on this subject. Or he could just be messin' with us.(maybe that's what makes him a troll)
Maybe because authors didn't have their own press like they do now. The whole issue never came up before Gutenburg. And after that, it became an issue of who had the right to print to protect gov't and the publishing industry (more like the writer's guild at the time) The U.S. didn't care much about enforcing IP until it had acquired a significant amount of its own. The pirates and "criminals" of yesterday's societies are what gave us today's freedoms. And today's pirates will do the same for future societies. It appears that if you want freedom, you need the "criminals" to make the law unenforcable. When I create something, I get paid then and there, as it should be. Then I forget about it and move on. By the way, the first copyright law came about in 1710. It's not all that diiferent from today's law (except for the time scales involved). Right now, copyright is being used to protect the publishing middle man more than anyone else. This is necessary to insure that creators will be dependant on them (requiring that they sign over their rights, etc,) forever if possible.
BTW, there shouldn't be any municipal water supplies. Drinking water companies need not be run by the city, when a for-profit company could do the job.
At what cost? We've seen what happens when electric utilities got privatized. Our good friend Dennis Kucinich can inform you what happened (in ohio at least). There's nothing wrong with people using their collective power (through gov't if necessay) to operate and control these things. If they stay on the ball, they can assure that everything will run smoothly. If they privatize, they lose that control. Cable TV is a good example. The corruptability of a gov't office soley depends on how far the voters let it go. So far, they have been asleep at the wheel on this one.
The more this happens, the less 65 year old politicians will understand about daily life.
Don't vote them then. Good luck convincing your neighbors though. Until the average voter understands these issues, nobody's going to look for tech savvy piliticos to nominate and elect into office. There's a lot of work ahead.
You are aware that when IP was implemented that the publishing industry went nuts at the thought of the authors retaining any rights at all to their work. I can't find any explaination as to what REALLY happened when there were no IP laws. All I saw was wild generalizations about "chaos" and "mayhem". For who? Was there rioting in the streets? Did all the farmers go on strike and cause widespread starvation? All you damn IP people want to keep the gravy train running, and I say, Get paid for your performance. I told another guy that if you want IP, then I want royalties for every mile you drive your car after I fix it. Then I can sit back and "collect the rent" just like you. If you wany IP treated like real property, then you should pay property tax like you do on real property.
Yeah but, the box is ok...a little hot sauce...hmmmm, tastes like rice cakes...Actually, if you let the grease soak into the cardboard, it tastes a little like chimichangas.
2. Unnecessary, possibly dangerous, definitely mis-managed, with the present business climate - definitely unethical. However, if it never leaves the lab, no problem.
3. Lock the bastards up! No...the best thing is to take away their corporate charter, and the people in control should lose their property, or at least their bank account. Then lock 'em up!...No...not really. I don't believe in jail for property crimes.
Of course, nobody would think the federal reserve would paint a nice warm fuzzy picture just to keep people from panicking and dumping their credit cards. Like I said "gov't press release".
...good to remove Sadam and establish a non-totalitarian regime but way bad to money-grub and try to hang on to power after doing that...
Uh, please remember that we put him there and propped him up throughout the 80's so we could harrass Iran. There is nothing honorable in what we are doing to the Middle East. If you think we are going to install a non-totalitarian regime in Iraq, I think you will unpleasantly surprised. We are there to protect our "interests". That doesn't necessarily mean non-totalitarian. Unless they choose to play ball. And I thought my analogy was appropriate and on topic since you mentioned ethics. Maybe this would be better, Any computer user with ethics would refuse to run Windows.
Did you get this from actual households, or did you just hear it on FOX news? It certainly sounds like a gov't press release.
...any SCO employee with ethics would have got out far sooner.
Even though that may be true, we would have carry that across the board to include the statement, "Any American with ethics would quit paying taxes until we pulled out of Iraq." We can't pick and choose where we want to apply ethics. It has to apply to everybody, or we can't apply it to anybody.
Striking a glorious blow for freedom is probably illegal by its very nature. If it were legal, it wouldn't be glorious. Very few of our present freedoms were gained legally at the beginning. Voter rights, women's rights, end of alcohol prohibition, etc. were all won by illegal acts, making the law unenforcable.
The FCC is in the content business now. They are dictating what you can put in your signal. Most of their present work is purely political, and tech issues have fallen by the wayside. I noticed that when they let the market decide on which AM stereo format to use, instead of thoroughly checking the specs on each and simply putting the best one on the air. When they were a real technical organization, they were pretty damn good, and many of the standards used still hold up today. Now, of course, it's all about the money.
Ol' boy wanted his "Pearl Harbor" and got it. Anyone who thinks the gov't is telling the truth about this...well, I wish I had what they are on. A cool cartoon I saw on Slate showed Bush and Saddam standing together each with a shovel in their hand by new grave with "The Truth" on the tombstone.
I didn't notice any "poof" in the videos until the towers started coming down, so I thought it was just a result of the air being pushed out by the falling tower. My personal conspiracy theory is that some right wing whackos wanted to blow up the Secret Service building near by (also contained CIA and IRS(there ya go) offices...WTC #7?) and hired the hijackers as a diversion. These weirdos might hate the Muslims, but they probably hate the Isrealis even more. (the old "enemy of my enemy" thing) Pretty damn good diversion. Wouldn't surprise me to see if Bush said, "Go for it."
their video capture cards use DRM. It doesn't matter how good they are. We shouldn't support it in any way until that stuff comes out and we get a fully capable card. Say it with me. Don't tolerate DRM.
Aw, man, don't be like that. Read the post, and judge it on its merits, not on who wrote it. I just got done telling a guy last night that the importance is in the messege, not the meesenger. Even the worst people on the planet have been known to make insightful statements. That doesn't make it any less valid. Besides, sometimes a person may not be able to log for some reason or another...or he could be a real dick. I'm not the one to judge.
I can't tell one from the other. My point was that constant maintenance of a database is going to bugger it up eventually. It would be better to insure that the original lasts as long as absolutely possible.
We'll probably never know who's right or if there even is a "right" in cosmic terms anyway. While the last hundred years were pretty horrible, I think if we go back a thousand years or so we might conclude that the Europeans (most notably the Vikings and the Christians) were really a savage bunch. Then there's Ghengis Kahn, etc. But in relation to the whole planet, there most likely hasn't been any real change. The savagery just moved off shore (from Europe and the U.S. anyway)
Does that not disquilify them being good?
You're extremely right on with that. It could also lead me to conclude that you are right about humans not getting better over time. All the good people would sacrifice themselves, leaving only the bastards. Gandhi and his followers should be and probably are considered truly good people. There was also a large group of natives on a Carribean island that, when facing the conquistadors, chose mass suicide over slavery. In truth, that's the way it should be done. Killing another person truly bad, no matter what. In reality, we are survival whores that will do anything to stay alive. I'm not how I would act when facing a situation like this, but I know I should just let it go and not try to cling to life.
I can explain why I know we aren't going to change, but I don't think you will like or accept my explanation.
Don't hold out on me, man! My liking or accepting it is irrelevent.
I'm really holding out for some evidence that physical existance is not entirely evil and that death is not so absolute as to make life entirely meaningless.
Could I be any more off-topic on this thread? We're supposed to be talking IRC and the NYT. I don't care. I'm having fun. Thanks.
Probably the most wrong I've ever been is when I thought that each generation was more intelligent and open minded than the previous one. Maybe TV really does rot your brain. Or all that soda pop and twinkies.
Our history on this planet is extremely short. Let's not underestimate ourselves.(or overestimate) I tend to believe that there is a higher percentage of moral people now than there was, say, just 100 years ago. They're just not running the show. Maybe the problem comes up when good people have to do bad things to prevail or even to survive. I know that we CAN change ourselves. It's desire part that's hard to produce. The time scales involved are so beyond our imaginations that trying to prove these assumptions will be very difficult.
This whole thing would be more interesting if you could focus on the message and not the messenger. There was a cool poll that showed people pieces of the constitution (the bill of rights, I believe), and they were asked what they thought of it. Most thought it was some hippie or commie propaganda. Needless to say, they were quite surprised to find out where it came from. I could probably do the same thing to the jesus freaks. The messege didn't change obviously, but everybody was focused on the messenger. You're making the same mistake here. Kind of a bummer, actually. I really would like to see if anybody can logically defend the status quo, and I'm not finding it. Who I am and what I do are so completely irrelevent here. Just read the messege and try to work with that. Don't be a drone.
Slashdot Mirror
...but the REASON the problem didn't exist is because copying/producing copies was expensive as hell PERIOD.
...last I checked, the constitution and the basis for the entire american system of govt began in the 1770's and 80's. If you have any evidence that the constitution was originally intended to deny the possibility of IP...
...the law of 1710 you cite was the first parliamentary act, however common law had been dealing with these issues for at least 200 years.
...having worked in the publishing industry.
Now that copying IS so cheap proves that the copies are worthless. Only the original perforance of work is worth anything, through commissioning or work for hire, etc.
I'm not sure how you came up with that conclusion out of the statement that simply said that the Americans didn't respect the IP from other countries, particularly Britain.
Uh, 200 years ago? Or 200 years before 1710?
Well, there you go. Trying to protect an obsolete industry. To bring up the tired old analogy, You're making buggy whips. We no longer need buggy whips. Well, maybe the sex shops can sell 'em, but that's another thread.
...don't get me started on the pro-piracy bullshit...violating copyright holder rights is "justified," while violating the copyright of the GPL is "evil"...
Evidently, you didn't get the memo. Copyrights (and all IP) is a gov't service provided to you to protect your monopoly. In NO WAY is it a natural right. You shouldn't be able to monopolize ideas any more than you should be allowed to monopolize the sale of controlled substances. I see plenty of anti MS stuff here, but I also see plenty of MS advertising. Which do you think has more meaning to Slashdot? Apparently MS doesn't care about the negative posts and takes it all in stride. Perhaps you could follow their example? I don't care for their business practices much myself, so I simply contribute to them as little as possible.
Oh, and about your sig, Copyright holders are the freeloaders who are getting bitter that their free ride is about to end...hopefully.
Or you could just take away the power cord.
Hell we can't seem to go five years without declaring war on somebody or another.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the last time the U.S. declared war on anybody was in 1941 or 42. After that it was called "police action". Doesn't really matter, dead is dead.
(Catching this duscussion in the middle and not checking the rest) What we are probably seeing is 10 PERCENT of the abuse! Anybody out there who thinks we are any better than they are have definitely got some crossed circuits in the old cranium. Some might call it gray matter inside their heads, but I think it's brown colored. Update: I just read the rest of his posts. He is indeed a troll. At least on this subject. Or he could just be messin' with us.(maybe that's what makes him a troll)
Even I could see this coming.
See my posts
See my posts
Made from real gorilla....uuuhhh...errr...that doexn't work...Nevermind
Maybe because authors didn't have their own press like they do now. The whole issue never came up before Gutenburg. And after that, it became an issue of who had the right to print to protect gov't and the publishing industry (more like the writer's guild at the time) The U.S. didn't care much about enforcing IP until it had acquired a significant amount of its own. The pirates and "criminals" of yesterday's societies are what gave us today's freedoms. And today's pirates will do the same for future societies. It appears that if you want freedom, you need the "criminals" to make the law unenforcable. When I create something, I get paid then and there, as it should be. Then I forget about it and move on. By the way, the first copyright law came about in 1710. It's not all that diiferent from today's law (except for the time scales involved). Right now, copyright is being used to protect the publishing middle man more than anyone else. This is necessary to insure that creators will be dependant on them (requiring that they sign over their rights, etc,) forever if possible.
BTW, there shouldn't be any municipal water supplies. Drinking water companies need not be run by the city, when a for-profit company could do the job.
At what cost? We've seen what happens when electric utilities got privatized. Our good friend Dennis Kucinich can inform you what happened (in ohio at least). There's nothing wrong with people using their collective power (through gov't if necessay) to operate and control these things. If they stay on the ball, they can assure that everything will run smoothly. If they privatize, they lose that control. Cable TV is a good example. The corruptability of a gov't office soley depends on how far the voters let it go. So far, they have been asleep at the wheel on this one.
The more this happens, the less 65 year old politicians will understand about daily life.
Don't vote them then. Good luck convincing your neighbors though. Until the average voter understands these issues, nobody's going to look for tech savvy piliticos to nominate and elect into office. There's a lot of work ahead.
You are aware that when IP was implemented that the publishing industry went nuts at the thought of the authors retaining any rights at all to their work. I can't find any explaination as to what REALLY happened when there were no IP laws. All I saw was wild generalizations about "chaos" and "mayhem". For who? Was there rioting in the streets? Did all the farmers go on strike and cause widespread starvation? All you damn IP people want to keep the gravy train running, and I say, Get paid for your performance. I told another guy that if you want IP, then I want royalties for every mile you drive your car after I fix it. Then I can sit back and "collect the rent" just like you. If you wany IP treated like real property, then you should pay property tax like you do on real property.
Do you really want look like these guys?
Yeah but, the box is ok...a little hot sauce...hmmmm, tastes like rice cakes...Actually, if you let the grease soak into the cardboard, it tastes a little like chimichangas.
1. Depends how it's done.
2. Unnecessary, possibly dangerous, definitely mis-managed, with the present business climate - definitely unethical. However, if it never leaves the lab, no problem.
3. Lock the bastards up! No...the best thing is to take away their corporate charter, and the people in control should lose their property, or at least their bank account. Then lock 'em up!...No...not really. I don't believe in jail for property crimes.
Of course, nobody would think the federal reserve would paint a nice warm fuzzy picture just to keep people from panicking and dumping their credit cards. Like I said "gov't press release".
...good to remove Sadam and establish a non-totalitarian regime but way bad to money-grub and try to hang on to power after doing that...
Uh, please remember that we put him there and propped him up throughout the 80's so we could harrass Iran. There is nothing honorable in what we are doing to the Middle East. If you think we are going to install a non-totalitarian regime in Iraq, I think you will unpleasantly surprised. We are there to protect our "interests". That doesn't necessarily mean non-totalitarian. Unless they choose to play ball. And I thought my analogy was appropriate and on topic since you mentioned ethics. Maybe this would be better, Any computer user with ethics would refuse to run Windows.
The household balance sheet is robust,...
...any SCO employee with ethics would have got out far sooner.
Did you get this from actual households, or did you just hear it on FOX news? It certainly sounds like a gov't press release.
Even though that may be true, we would have carry that across the board to include the statement, "Any American with ethics would quit paying taxes until we pulled out of Iraq." We can't pick and choose where we want to apply ethics. It has to apply to everybody, or we can't apply it to anybody.
Striking a glorious blow for freedom is probably illegal by its very nature. If it were legal, it wouldn't be glorious. Very few of our present freedoms were gained legally at the beginning. Voter rights, women's rights, end of alcohol prohibition, etc. were all won by illegal acts, making the law unenforcable.
The FCC is in the content business now. They are dictating what you can put in your signal. Most of their present work is purely political, and tech issues have fallen by the wayside. I noticed that when they let the market decide on which AM stereo format to use, instead of thoroughly checking the specs on each and simply putting the best one on the air. When they were a real technical organization, they were pretty damn good, and many of the standards used still hold up today. Now, of course, it's all about the money.
Ol' boy wanted his "Pearl Harbor" and got it. Anyone who thinks the gov't is telling the truth about this...well, I wish I had what they are on. A cool cartoon I saw on Slate showed Bush and Saddam standing together each with a shovel in their hand by new grave with "The Truth" on the tombstone.
I didn't notice any "poof" in the videos until the towers started coming down, so I thought it was just a result of the air being pushed out by the falling tower. My personal conspiracy theory is that some right wing whackos wanted to blow up the Secret Service building near by (also contained CIA and IRS(there ya go) offices...WTC #7?) and hired the hijackers as a diversion. These weirdos might hate the Muslims, but they probably hate the Isrealis even more. (the old "enemy of my enemy" thing) Pretty damn good diversion. Wouldn't surprise me to see if Bush said, "Go for it."
their video capture cards use DRM. It doesn't matter how good they are. We shouldn't support it in any way until that stuff comes out and we get a fully capable card. Say it with me. Don't tolerate DRM.
Aw, man, don't be like that. Read the post, and judge it on its merits, not on who wrote it. I just got done telling a guy last night that the importance is in the messege, not the meesenger. Even the worst people on the planet have been known to make insightful statements. That doesn't make it any less valid. Besides, sometimes a person may not be able to log for some reason or another...or he could be a real dick. I'm not the one to judge.
I can't tell one from the other. My point was that constant maintenance of a database is going to bugger it up eventually. It would be better to insure that the original lasts as long as absolutely possible.
We'll probably never know who's right or if there even is a "right" in cosmic terms anyway. While the last hundred years were pretty horrible, I think if we go back a thousand years or so we might conclude that the Europeans (most notably the Vikings and the Christians) were really a savage bunch. Then there's Ghengis Kahn, etc. But in relation to the whole planet, there most likely hasn't been any real change. The savagery just moved off shore (from Europe and the U.S. anyway)
Does that not disquilify them being good?
You're extremely right on with that. It could also lead me to conclude that you are right about humans not getting better over time. All the good people would sacrifice themselves, leaving only the bastards. Gandhi and his followers should be and probably are considered truly good people. There was also a large group of natives on a Carribean island that, when facing the conquistadors, chose mass suicide over slavery. In truth, that's the way it should be done. Killing another person truly bad, no matter what. In reality, we are survival whores that will do anything to stay alive. I'm not how I would act when facing a situation like this, but I know I should just let it go and not try to cling to life.
I can explain why I know we aren't going to change, but I don't think you will like or accept my explanation.
Don't hold out on me, man! My liking or accepting it is irrelevent.
I'm really holding out for some evidence that physical existance is not entirely evil and that death is not so absolute as to make life entirely meaningless.
Could I be any more off-topic on this thread? We're supposed to be talking IRC and the NYT. I don't care. I'm having fun. Thanks.
Probably the most wrong I've ever been is when I thought that each generation was more intelligent and open minded than the previous one. Maybe TV really does rot your brain. Or all that soda pop and twinkies.
Our history on this planet is extremely short. Let's not underestimate ourselves.(or overestimate) I tend to believe that there is a higher percentage of moral people now than there was, say, just 100 years ago. They're just not running the show. Maybe the problem comes up when good people have to do bad things to prevail or even to survive. I know that we CAN change ourselves. It's desire part that's hard to produce. The time scales involved are so beyond our imaginations that trying to prove these assumptions will be very difficult.
This whole thing would be more interesting if you could focus on the message and not the messenger. There was a cool poll that showed people pieces of the constitution (the bill of rights, I believe), and they were asked what they thought of it. Most thought it was some hippie or commie propaganda. Needless to say, they were quite surprised to find out where it came from. I could probably do the same thing to the jesus freaks. The messege didn't change obviously, but everybody was focused on the messenger. You're making the same mistake here. Kind of a bummer, actually. I really would like to see if anybody can logically defend the status quo, and I'm not finding it. Who I am and what I do are so completely irrelevent here. Just read the messege and try to work with that. Don't be a drone.