Most of the laws we have are created with input from those they would most directly affect.
Think about some law that directly affects you. Then ask yourself how much input you had into writing that law. Repeat this thought experiment several times. You might start to see a pattern forming.
Comparing it with the former Soviet Union is a joke... you don't get stopped on every road at every state border with people asing for "papers, please".
"At least it's not as bad as in [USSR | China | Iran | N. Korea | Nazi Germany]" Ah, yes. The eternal cry of the optimist.
If you're driving on a public road within the US, the cops can pull you over and check your papers whenever they feel like it, you don't even have to cross any state borders. As far as I know, you can still travel anonymously by train or bus, but how long do you think that'll last?
If the efbeeaye wanted to take my prints off a receipt or a counter or a doorknob or whatever, they'd have to send a couple of guys around to do it in person. Oh, and if the prints were located on private property, they'd need either a warrant or permission of the property owner. This ensures that they only do it when they really need to. However, with a system like this, they'd just have to write a few lines of additional code to record the prints of EVERYONE who passes through it.
Call me old-fashioned, but I think the default settings for a government should make it as hard as possible for them to spy on people, and to only allow it in exceptional circumstances and in a clearly limited fashion. This, I think, is the spirit behind the 4th Amendment.
Maybe I should try it. I've got a bunch of half-finished programs sitting on my hard drive that I haven't even looked at in years; I can probably convince the IRS that several half-finished programs add up to one fully functional $85 million "enterprise-grade software solution". Hell, why be greedy - we'll say $8.5 million.
Seriously though, does anyone know how IBM arrived at that figure? My gut feeling is that some middle manager just pulled it out of his ass, but I'd like to hear how exactly it was justified.
Paying people without getting poorer would be a real trick.
I think you're on to something there. What we need is GPL'd money. You'd be able to make as many copies as you want, and fix the design to your satisfaction (I never liked the new asymmetrical style; also, they mis-spelled Adam Weishaupt's name on the $1 bill - I've been waiting forever for them to fix that) as long as you include the licensing terms on each piece. This requirement might be kind of tough for coins, but I think today's microengraving technology is up to the task.
well, arent those businesses making money from playing of said music.
Indirectly, yes. But the business has already paid for the music (let us postulate that they're not using pirated recordings.) Why should they have to pay for it again just because it's performed in a "public" place?
Imagine this: if you buy wallpaper to be used in your home, you pay a one-time flat rate. If you try to use the same wallpaper to cover the walls in a restaurant that you own, you have to pay licensing fees for every day that the restaurant is open for business. If you fail to pay up, you get sued by the Wallpaper Industry Association of America. Most people wouldn't stand still for shit like that - yet this is exactly what the record companies are doing.
He claims that it's hard and that nobody does it "in the real world."
No, he doesn't. Direct quote from the article: "But how many people actually do this? Hardly anybody in real life." There's a BIG difference between "nobody" and "hardly anybody".
To clarify: when I said "century old", I was talking about the whole record business, not the RIAA specifically. I'm a little vague on the dates, but I think it was around the early 20th century that selling mass-produced audio recordings became a viable business.
The reason you need a phono pre-amp is because the turntable does no amplification on its own, unlike other components. The output is just a straight-wire connection to the little piezoelectric element in the needle, which as you may imagine puts out a really low voltage. Open up a turntable and you'll see it's actually a very simple design - a motor with a switch, and a couple of shielded wires.
The equalization may have something to do with it, but I don't think it's the primary reason.
If we continue to ignore the RIAA, they will just go away. They are useless to begin with.
Very true. A free market will try to eliminate middle-men. Most people take the recording industry for granted because it's been around since anyone can remember; fact is, it's only about a century old. People managed to make music before the record companies came along; they'll continue to do so after they're gone.
When you say "past centuries", you're probably only thinking 300-400 years back or so. The idea of using paper as the primary medium to distribute poetry is relatively new; it was only made possible by the development of the press, and an increase in literacy among Europeans. Before that, most poems were composed in order to be sung or declaimed aloud.
A better approach is to let them go through their whole pitch, then say something like: "Hold on, let me get my credit card." Then put them on hold, and ignore them. If they think they've made a sale, they WILL NOT hang up, and will stay on the line for as long as it takes (a friend of mine claims he once strung one of them along for five hours.) And while they're waiting for you, they won't be able to harass other people. Of course, you have to be willing to give up a phone line for the duration of your little game.
If they were testing the entire web-browsing population, then you'd be right, but they're not. In fact, this is probably LESS accurate than a survey, since the sample isn't selected randomly.
Also, browser-detecting code is NEVER 100% accurate.
I'm guessing their margin of error is a lot higher than 1%.
This is definitely a big problem in politics - I think it just represents intellectual laziness on the part of the public. People either get caught up in the "right vs left" game, or else they shrug and say "all these guys are liars, they're all the same". Both approaches avoid a thorough and open-minded assesment of the real issues at hand; after all, an such an assesment would actually require effort.
The only problem is when I, as a drive, start drinking from it
Why is that neccessarily a problem? For most adults, a SMALL amount of booze won't affect their ability to drive safely, (and drunk driving laws do reflect this fact.) If it's legal to drink one beer, then start driving, why is it illegal to drink that beer WHILE you're driving?
Since it takes roughly an hour to metabolize one drink, you should be able to finish off a six-pack in an 8 hour drive, as long as you space the beers properly, and maybe stop for lunch along the way..
Microsoft has stopped developing IE on non-Windows platforms
You're implying that they were developing for more than one "non-Windows platform". As far as I know, IE was only ever made for Windows and Mac OS. Did I somehow miss the IE releases for OpenBSD or Minix?
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the laws we have are created with input from those they would most directly affect.
Think about some law that directly affects you. Then ask yourself how much input you had into writing that law. Repeat this thought experiment several times. You might start to see a pattern forming.
having programmed in VB for the last 8 years doing kernel level programming
If that doesn't tip people off, then nothing will.
I don't know about you, but I prefer traditional business contracts with the price clearly stated upfront
The price is clearly stated up front: it's $699. A bargain.
Comparing it with the former Soviet Union is a joke... you don't get stopped on every road at every state border with people asing for "papers, please".
"At least it's not as bad as in [USSR | China | Iran | N. Korea | Nazi Germany]" Ah, yes. The eternal cry of the optimist.
If you're driving on a public road within the US, the cops can pull you over and check your papers whenever they feel like it, you don't even have to cross any state borders. As far as I know, you can still travel anonymously by train or bus, but how long do you think that'll last?
you dont lose anything tangible if you share an internet connection properly.
Ditto for sharing your wife properly. Who knows, she may even learn a few things.
That wasn't Arlo, that was his dad Woody.
If the efbeeaye wanted to take my prints off a receipt or a counter or a doorknob or whatever, they'd have to send a couple of guys around to do it in person. Oh, and if the prints were located on private property, they'd need either a warrant or permission of the property owner. This ensures that they only do it when they really need to. However, with a system like this, they'd just have to write a few lines of additional code to record the prints of EVERYONE who passes through it.
Call me old-fashioned, but I think the default settings for a government should make it as hard as possible for them to spy on people, and to only allow it in exceptional circumstances and in a clearly limited fashion. This, I think, is the spirit behind the 4th Amendment.
I'm still waiting for a sequel to Shatner's early masterpiece "Incubus."
"Mysteria... profunde... amor!"
If I recall correctly, republicans controlled the senate and congress then
I think your recollection is faulty. When Clinton entered office, there was a Democratic majority in both houses.
I think that happens quite a lot actually ... You'll see images that are visually the same, about the same size, but have different MD5 sums.
You actually spend time analyzing the checksums of porno images?
Maybe I should try it. I've got a bunch of half-finished programs sitting on my hard drive that I haven't even looked at in years; I can probably convince the IRS that several half-finished programs add up to one fully functional $85 million "enterprise-grade software solution". Hell, why be greedy - we'll say $8.5 million.
Seriously though, does anyone know how IBM arrived at that figure? My gut feeling is that some middle manager just pulled it out of his ass, but I'd like to hear how exactly it was justified.
Paying people without getting poorer would be a real trick.
I think you're on to something there. What we need is GPL'd money. You'd be able to make as many copies as you want, and fix the design to your satisfaction (I never liked the new asymmetrical style; also, they mis-spelled Adam Weishaupt's name on the $1 bill - I've been waiting forever for them to fix that) as long as you include the licensing terms on each piece. This requirement might be kind of tough for coins, but I think today's microengraving technology is up to the task.
well, arent those businesses making money from playing of said music.
Indirectly, yes. But the business has already paid for the music (let us postulate that they're not using pirated recordings.) Why should they have to pay for it again just because it's performed in a "public" place?
Imagine this: if you buy wallpaper to be used in your home, you pay a one-time flat rate. If you try to use the same wallpaper to cover the walls in a restaurant that you own, you have to pay licensing fees for every day that the restaurant is open for business. If you fail to pay up, you get sued by the Wallpaper Industry Association of America. Most people wouldn't stand still for shit like that - yet this is exactly what the record companies are doing.
He claims that it's hard and that nobody does it "in the real world."
No, he doesn't. Direct quote from the article: "But how many people actually do this? Hardly anybody in real life." There's a BIG difference between "nobody" and "hardly anybody".
No, but here's a translation.
To clarify: when I said "century old", I was talking about the whole record business, not the RIAA specifically. I'm a little vague on the dates, but I think it was around the early 20th century that selling mass-produced audio recordings became a viable business.
The reason you need a phono pre-amp is because the turntable does no amplification on its own, unlike other components. The output is just a straight-wire connection to the little piezoelectric element in the needle, which as you may imagine puts out a really low voltage. Open up a turntable and you'll see it's actually a very simple design - a motor with a switch, and a couple of shielded wires.
The equalization may have something to do with it, but I don't think it's the primary reason.
If we continue to ignore the RIAA, they will just go away. They are useless to begin with.
Very true. A free market will try to eliminate middle-men. Most people take the recording industry for granted because it's been around since anyone can remember; fact is, it's only about a century old. People managed to make music before the record companies came along; they'll continue to do so after they're gone.
How's dynamic typing different from weak typing? I thought they were the same thing.
"Fuck the wabbit... Fuck the waaaa-bbit!"
When you say "past centuries", you're probably only thinking 300-400 years back or so. The idea of using paper as the primary medium to distribute poetry is relatively new; it was only made possible by the development of the press, and an increase in literacy among Europeans. Before that, most poems were composed in order to be sung or declaimed aloud.
So I guess the circle is turning again.
A better approach is to let them go through their whole pitch, then say something like: "Hold on, let me get my credit card." Then put them on hold, and ignore them. If they think they've made a sale, they WILL NOT hang up, and will stay on the line for as long as it takes (a friend of mine claims he once strung one of them along for five hours.) And while they're waiting for you, they won't be able to harass other people. Of course, you have to be willing to give up a phone line for the duration of your little game.
If they were testing the entire web-browsing population, then you'd be right, but they're not. In fact, this is probably LESS accurate than a survey, since the sample isn't selected randomly.
Also, browser-detecting code is NEVER 100% accurate.
I'm guessing their margin of error is a lot higher than 1%.
This is definitely a big problem in politics - I think it just represents intellectual laziness on the part of the public. People either get caught up in the "right vs left" game, or else they shrug and say "all these guys are liars, they're all the same". Both approaches avoid a thorough and open-minded assesment of the real issues at hand; after all, an such an assesment would actually require effort.
The only problem is when I, as a drive, start drinking from it
Why is that neccessarily a problem? For most adults, a SMALL amount of booze won't affect their ability to drive safely, (and drunk driving laws do reflect this fact.) If it's legal to drink one beer, then start driving, why is it illegal to drink that beer WHILE you're driving?
Since it takes roughly an hour to metabolize one drink, you should be able to finish off a six-pack in an 8 hour drive, as long as you space the beers properly, and maybe stop for lunch along the way..
Microsoft has stopped developing IE on non-Windows platforms
You're implying that they were developing for more than one "non-Windows platform". As far as I know, IE was only ever made for Windows and Mac OS. Did I somehow miss the IE releases for OpenBSD or Minix?