Wonder why someone hasn't come up with a totally anonymouse IRC application/protocol?
Good question. But I'm not sure if it's possible as long as we are tied to a wire for access. I'm waiting for the day when we can "island hop" neuron style over wireless to make tracking impossible, or at least not worth the effort.
He's very dependant on the status quo, and will twist any argument to fit his line of thought, tending to look for and pick out irrelevent parts of a statement because, like you say, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Hey, be the first on your block to offer a warranty for your for-sale code! Just word it carefully, that's all. Announce it on slasherdotted. SOMEONE has to do it, first guy gets some very cool cred methinks
The first guy to do it will probably try to patent it.:-)
I'm not absolutely sure if FULL disclosure would be appropriate(but I lean in that direction), but ANONYMOUS disclosure is essential if you want to avoid that lawyer thingy. When exposing flaws, don't give your name. Honesty has no place there.
Hopefully we can get the Patent Office/system overhauled or at least looked at before Longhorn comes out.
Seeing as that you have an election between now and then, that will depend on how willing you are to vote out the incumbent, and voting in somebody significantly different. Outside of slashdot, the IP problem is trivial and is not an issue with gen pop. On that note, it looks like "four more years" of the same ol'...
Remember, all that piracy that you piss and moam about is what made Microsoft so big.(also worked for Hollywood in the early days) Or do you believe it was their high quality software? I know all the copyright drones like to believe that anybody who doesn't like the system is nothing but a bunch of thieves, but unfortunately it's simply not the case. But that's the way it has to be painted to keep the public hoodwinked. The BSA can go to hell, and the people will do just fine.
Enforce and people migrate, dont and people dont pay.
Hmmm...I guess Microsoft's 50 billion just fell from the sky.
Sigh...Slashdot sucks these days. The endless Microsoft articles are boring and uninformed. Remember when it was cool tech news?
Like Microsoft, Slashdot now has to answer to its shareholders.(or whatever their corporate overlord is) Any independence that may have existed in the past took a fast exit when it was bought. That's why the comments are always so much better than the posted article. Too bad life's too short to read them all.
More important to me...Why is ANY mission critical system tied to the internet? Our entire "life support" system is becoming way too involved with these fragile contraptions, and it is putting us all at risk, where a single failure can knock down the whole thing. And the whole idea behind the net was to prevent this very thing. It seems kind of like when one guy walks into an airport and says he has a gun and then all air traffic in the whole country stops.(Well, the airports close anyway). Not a good way to run a circus.
And none of this has anything to do with my point: that copyright holders who make money ALREADY pay a tax.
And you also pay a tax on "real" property. If you want the gov't to protect your phoney baloney intellectual property (Imaginary property is more appropriate due to the fact that the whole concept is as phoney as a three dollar bill) like real property, then you should pay a similar tax on it, especially because of the strictly commercial nature of IP. Your 30 bucks doesn't cover it. Copyright is nothing more than more corporate welfare at the public's expense.(Save your bull about it "promoting innovation". It does nothing of the sort. That line is there to get the public to accept it, which they obviously wouldn't if they knew the truth.) Any law that protects a select few and not the public in general is no good. If lack of IP protection slows down innovation, so be it. I can live without "New and improved" laundry detergent and their "Brighter brights".
While there can be no doubt that the actual implementation of the patent system is severely flawed, the overall purpose and approach -- using the granting of monopolies to encourage people to publish their research instead of keeping it as "trade secrets" -- is certainly reasonable.
That is NOT the purpose of any IP. The real purpose is to CONTROL information. It's to insure only authorized people can posess and distribute. The stated purpose that everybody likes to throw around is pure FUD. What we have under the current system is "new and improved!" and "whiter whites". Most truly useful inventions are locked up tight with IP law. We must rid ourselves of the concept of IP. Then, maybe, I can get a VCR or computer that lasts longer than five years.(Talking about the new stuff here.), most of which barely works when it's new.
Copyright is a gov't service, not a right. You pay income tax, yes. You also pay a gas tax to use the roads, and you might have to pay a toll also. If you want to use this service, you should pay a fee. You can write it off as a business expense if you need to. Talk about freeloaders...you want a gov't service to protect your monopoly and you don't want to pay for it. On top of that, you want it to last damn near forever.
...Note that of "sharers who won't pay" they themselves suggest that "copyright holders (and perhaps the collecting society itself) would continue to be entitled to enforce their rights against 'free-loaders' "
Copyright holders are the REAL freeloaders. They just want do something once, and then sit back and "collect the rent"
Re:Cone of Advertising, cone of secret Teleprompti
on
Directed Sound
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Wonder why someone hasn't come up with a totally anonymouse IRC application/protocol?
:-)
Good question. But I'm not sure if it's possible as long as we are tied to a wire for access. I'm waiting for the day when we can "island hop" neuron style over wireless to make tracking impossible, or at least not worth the effort.
anonymouse
Is that Mickey's evil twin?
He's very dependant on the status quo, and will twist any argument to fit his line of thought, tending to look for and pick out irrelevent parts of a statement because, like you say, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
...the Who song yuo quote was refering to a supposedly different boss that they fought to bring in was the same as the old one.
That would be Kerry, right? Suffering a little dyslexia(sp) with the O's and U's are you?
Hey, be the first on your block to offer a warranty for your for-sale code! Just word it carefully, that's all. Announce it on slasherdotted. SOMEONE has to do it, first guy gets some very cool cred methinks
:-)
The first guy to do it will probably try to patent it.
I'm not absolutely sure if FULL disclosure would be appropriate(but I lean in that direction), but ANONYMOUS disclosure is essential if you want to avoid that lawyer thingy. When exposing flaws, don't give your name. Honesty has no place there.
The last time a major company fell apart, we had to hire Sally Struthers to start up "CEO charity foundations".
She's still alive??
Noone agrees with SCO (at least I have not heard of anyone).
Microsoft?
Hopefully we can get the Patent Office/system overhauled or at least looked at before Longhorn comes out.
Seeing as that you have an election between now and then, that will depend on how willing you are to vote out the incumbent, and voting in somebody significantly different. Outside of slashdot, the IP problem is trivial and is not an issue with gen pop. On that note, it looks like "four more years" of the same ol'...
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss...
Damn new math...Try fifteen or sixteen years ago.
However since it started running in November last year, the detector has not seen a single WIMP.
:-)
If they ran it five or six years ago, they would have found one in the White House.
Oh, man...I really hope you didn't take that seriously! However, we could consider that "security through obscurity". Paint the files black?
Remember, all that piracy that you piss and moam about is what made Microsoft so big.(also worked for Hollywood in the early days) Or do you believe it was their high quality software? I know all the copyright drones like to believe that anybody who doesn't like the system is nothing but a bunch of thieves, but unfortunately it's simply not the case. But that's the way it has to be painted to keep the public hoodwinked. The BSA can go to hell, and the people will do just fine.
Enforce and people migrate, dont and people dont pay.
Hmmm...I guess Microsoft's 50 billion just fell from the sky.
Sigh...Slashdot sucks these days. The endless Microsoft articles are boring and uninformed. Remember when it was cool tech news?
Like Microsoft, Slashdot now has to answer to its shareholders.(or whatever their corporate overlord is) Any independence that may have existed in the past took a fast exit when it was bought. That's why the comments are always so much better than the posted article. Too bad life's too short to read them all.
If Microsoft wrote their own encryption scheme (and maybe they have)...
Yes, they have. It's called "hidden". You can find it under attributes.
If Juan is essentually pronounced with the ju becoming a 'w', is his name 'warez'?
No, it's Juan...(hwonn)
More important to me...Why is ANY mission critical system tied to the internet? Our entire "life support" system is becoming way too involved with these fragile contraptions, and it is putting us all at risk, where a single failure can knock down the whole thing. And the whole idea behind the net was to prevent this very thing. It seems kind of like when one guy walks into an airport and says he has a gun and then all air traffic in the whole country stops.(Well, the airports close anyway). Not a good way to run a circus.
And none of this has anything to do with my point: that copyright holders who make money ALREADY pay a tax.
And you also pay a tax on "real" property. If you want the gov't to protect your phoney baloney intellectual property (Imaginary property is more appropriate due to the fact that the whole concept is as phoney as a three dollar bill) like real property, then you should pay a similar tax on it, especially because of the strictly commercial nature of IP. Your 30 bucks doesn't cover it. Copyright is nothing more than more corporate welfare at the public's expense.(Save your bull about it "promoting innovation". It does nothing of the sort. That line is there to get the public to accept it, which they obviously wouldn't if they knew the truth.) Any law that protects a select few and not the public in general is no good. If lack of IP protection slows down innovation, so be it. I can live without "New and improved" laundry detergent and their "Brighter brights".
Maybe this is what they want
Where are you getting those prices from Russia or China?
Probably got it from one of those freeloadin' pirates he's bitching about.
Who expects interference and dropped connections on 802.11?
Maybe the same people who expected the Spanish Inquisition?
How 'bout "pussy"...?
While there can be no doubt that the actual implementation of the patent system is severely flawed, the overall purpose and approach -- using the granting of monopolies to encourage people to publish their research instead of keeping it as "trade secrets" -- is certainly reasonable.
That is NOT the purpose of any IP. The real purpose is to CONTROL information. It's to insure only authorized people can posess and distribute. The stated purpose that everybody likes to throw around is pure FUD. What we have under the current system is "new and improved!" and "whiter whites". Most truly useful inventions are locked up tight with IP law. We must rid ourselves of the concept of IP. Then, maybe, I can get a VCR or computer that lasts longer than five years.(Talking about the new stuff here.), most of which barely works when it's new.
Copyright is a gov't service, not a right. You pay income tax, yes. You also pay a gas tax to use the roads, and you might have to pay a toll also. If you want to use this service, you should pay a fee. You can write it off as a business expense if you need to. Talk about freeloaders...you want a gov't service to protect your monopoly and you don't want to pay for it. On top of that, you want it to last damn near forever.
...Note that of "sharers who won't pay" they themselves suggest that "copyright holders (and perhaps the collecting society itself) would continue to be entitled to enforce their rights against 'free-loaders' "
Copyright holders are the REAL freeloaders. They just want do something once, and then sit back and "collect the rent"
Casino cheats could have a field day with this.