No it doesn't. A CC license is founded on, and only relevant to copyright law. It does not, and _can not_ cover every possible impediment to every possible use - all it does is say that from a copyright point of view, you have permission.
I assume that rather than just using wild speculation and throwing around the term "slippery slope" that you are going to present some evidence that shows that it is likely that the current situation would slide towards fascism? Because I'm afraid your post in itself didn't. You just said "Slippery Slope" on its own, like it was some sort of magical argument winning talisman.
Those who refuse to learn from history... Again, another magical argument winning talisman presented without support. Which particular history does this parallel, and what makes the current situation similar enough to the situation in that history that we can reasonably use it as a model?
At the moment we have one data point - how can you extrapolate anything from that?
It is fallacious when it is used as an argument against something without evidence that there exist the conditions that would make a slippery slope likely.
In this case, the usage was highly fallacious - it was implied that the comparison with Nazism was justified because of the existence of the concept of a slippery slope - no actual evidence of a slippery slope was given.
If the argument had demonstrated other events that presented evidence of the slippery slope, then it would have been somewhat justified. But in general, the slippery slope argument is not an argument, and it cannot support a point on its own, which is why it is a fallacy.
Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies. Actually, most of the time you can - just not when there's a whole bunch of foreign heads of state around him.
Or if you can't you can specifically blame groups like The Chaser for harrasing him just because they thought it'd be funny.
Have a look at This article. With 4GB machines being more and more common (my laptop has 4GB - and it's not a workstation class one either, just a medium high end consumer one), the need for a 64 bit addressing is no longer something in the distant future. 32 bit addressing - and particularly the 2G userland / kernel split in Windows is already causing problems for games right now.
Sun and Adobe are both dragging the chain on 64 bit browser plugins. Although, at least Adobe say they're working on it, but Sun's reluctance makes little to no sense, they've had a 64 bit JVM and JDK for years, for both Windows and Linux. If they can manage to port the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of lines of code in the JVM to AMD64, why can't they manage the plugin? Surely that's only a handful of lines? A couple of thousand at most?
Yup, and you could test it a million times, with loads hundreds of times greater than you ever get in production, and _still_ miss the bug that brings you down in the end.
No, because the Australia - USA Free Trade Agreement brought in DMCA style anti-circumvention measures, as well as a bunch of other less than savoury copyright changes. Bizarrely enough, the same bill also made format shifting absolutely legal.
"It" doesn't work anywhere, because "it" is nothing but random speculation that an application that has registered a URI handler _might_ have a bug in it. Sure, that's a pretty reasonable assumption, but it's idiotic to blame it on the URI handler stuff, the web browser, or the operating system.
If there is such a bug in an application that has registered a custom URI, then any fault for any bug that may or may not exist lies squarely with the makers of that application.
The title of this submission has nothing whatsoever to do with TFA.
But don't artists need the album? In order to do the one or two hits, they have to throw a lot of things on the wall and see which ones stick and which ones don't No, that's what rehearsals are for.
A truly album focused artist will have a reason for every single track on the album, otherwise there's no need for the album at all - it's just a bunch of tracks.
And the 16K expansion actually worked for you? For some values of "worked";) I had the same problems with bumping it....
Mine was assembled when I received it, but I'm not actually sure how I came into possession of it - I was somewhere between 8 and 10 at the time. I think my grandfather may have given it to me (he used to be an electrical engineer, and playing with technology was his favourite hobby).
You haven't even looked have you? Dynamic server side performance is very rarely the main cause of speed problems - http latency from too many objects and poor placement of scripts and CSS are usually the problem.
Even if it takes two whole seconds for the server to generate the page, that's still a small fraction of the fifteen seconds it takes to completely download and render some more complicated sites.
But you did something very similar in your first reply - you turned a claim that disliking something because it is popular is worse than liking something because it's popular into a claim that it's ok to like something just because it's popular. That wasn't the claim. Your comment on whether or not popular taste is low taste was completely irrelevant.
There's only one reason for something being popular - it appeals to a large number of people. Why does it appeal to a large number of people? There could be a few reasons - 1. It's targeted specifically at a single group, who happen to be a large group. 2. It has broad appeal and provides something for everyone 3. It has achieved critical mass and has a lot of people interested in it to see what everyone else sees in it. 4. It is considered fashionable, and those who like to appear fashionable therefore want to been known as someone who enjoys it. 5. It actually really is very good.
Of them, only 4 is a bad reason. 3 gets new people into it, but can't sustain the popularity without 1, 2 or 5.
I believe the success of the Harry Potter series is mostly 2, 3 and 4 - but mostly 2 and 3. 3 couldn't have a sustained effect over 7 books if it weren't for 2. There's a little bit of 5 in there too - it's certainly not the best thing ever written, but there are far worse books out there that do pretty well, or are fairly well regarded.
The other thing that Harry Potter had going for it was the right mix of being aimed at children to young adults whilst remaining accessible to adults, parents will buy for their children what they might not bother buying for themselves even if they knew it was something they might like (afterall, one only has so much time for reading between jobs, housework and children), and once it is bought there's less barrier to them reading it. Then because of 2, they also become fans and feed into the whole thing some more.
In any case, the original statement still stands. Sure, liking something solely because its popular is a bad reason, but disliking it because it is popular isn't just a bad reason, it's nonsensical.
A few small parallels here and there is not deeper commentary. It's a passing nod. If that's your idea of deep social cometary, then you need to read more, or get out more, or just think more.
Then it's no less clear than the distinction between Symbian or Windows Mobile and the phone that uses it. I think you're looking for issues that don't really exist.
Slashdot Mirror
No it doesn't.
A CC license is founded on, and only relevant to copyright law. It does not, and _can not_ cover every possible impediment to every possible use - all it does is say that from a copyright point of view, you have permission.
Which particular history does this parallel, and what makes the current situation similar enough to the situation in that history that we can reasonably use it as a model?
At the moment we have one data point - how can you extrapolate anything from that?
It is fallacious when it is used as an argument against something without evidence that there exist the conditions that would make a slippery slope likely.
In this case, the usage was highly fallacious - it was implied that the comparison with Nazism was justified because of the existence of the concept of a slippery slope - no actual evidence of a slippery slope was given.
If the argument had demonstrated other events that presented evidence of the slippery slope, then it would have been somewhat justified.
But in general, the slippery slope argument is not an argument, and it cannot support a point on its own, which is why it is a fallacy.
I must say, I've never seen a slang nazi before.
Or if you can't you can specifically blame groups like The Chaser for harrasing him just because they thought it'd be funny.
Have a look at This article.
With 4GB machines being more and more common (my laptop has 4GB - and it's not a workstation class one either, just a medium high end consumer one), the need for a 64 bit addressing is no longer something in the distant future.
32 bit addressing - and particularly the 2G userland / kernel split in Windows is already causing problems for games right now.
Sun and Adobe are both dragging the chain on 64 bit browser plugins. Although, at least Adobe say they're working on it, but Sun's reluctance makes little to no sense, they've had a 64 bit JVM and JDK for years, for both Windows and Linux. If they can manage to port the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of lines of code in the JVM to AMD64, why can't they manage the plugin? Surely that's only a handful of lines? A couple of thousand at most?
Yup, and you could test it a million times, with loads hundreds of times greater than you ever get in production, and _still_ miss the bug that brings you down in the end.
No, because the Australia - USA Free Trade Agreement brought in DMCA style anti-circumvention measures, as well as a bunch of other less than savoury copyright changes.
Bizarrely enough, the same bill also made format shifting absolutely legal.
what's the proportion of false positives and false negatives within the 5% of incorrect results?
"It" doesn't work anywhere, because "it" is nothing but random speculation that an application that has registered a URI handler _might_ have a bug in it.
Sure, that's a pretty reasonable assumption, but it's idiotic to blame it on the URI handler stuff, the web browser, or the operating system.
If there is such a bug in an application that has registered a custom URI, then any fault for any bug that may or may not exist lies squarely with the makers of that application.
The title of this submission has nothing whatsoever to do with TFA.
A truly album focused artist will have a reason for every single track on the album, otherwise there's no need for the album at all - it's just a bunch of tracks.
Especially since using it defeats the purpose of irony in the first place ;)
I had the same problems with bumping it....
Mine was assembled when I received it, but I'm not actually sure how I came into possession of it - I was somewhere between 8 and 10 at the time.
I think my grandfather may have given it to me (he used to be an electrical engineer, and playing with technology was his favourite hobby).
That's right.
;)
Although I must admit that I had the 16k expansion cartridge for mine.
There's nothing like having to turn the screen off to make calculations run faster
It's so scientifically proven that you won't put your name to the claim or provide a link.
Your understanding of Australian law seems to have come only via Slashdot headlines - whether you're an Australian or not.
And it still has nothing to do with this article.
You haven't even looked have you?
Dynamic server side performance is very rarely the main cause of speed problems - http latency from too many objects and poor placement of scripts and CSS are usually the problem.
Even if it takes two whole seconds for the server to generate the page, that's still a small fraction of the fifteen seconds it takes to completely download and render some more complicated sites.
But you did something very similar in your first reply - you turned a claim that disliking something because it is popular is worse than liking something because it's popular into a claim that it's ok to like something just because it's popular.
That wasn't the claim.
Your comment on whether or not popular taste is low taste was completely irrelevant.
There's only one reason for something being popular - it appeals to a large number of people.
Why does it appeal to a large number of people? There could be a few reasons -
1. It's targeted specifically at a single group, who happen to be a large group.
2. It has broad appeal and provides something for everyone
3. It has achieved critical mass and has a lot of people interested in it to see what everyone else sees in it.
4. It is considered fashionable, and those who like to appear fashionable therefore want to been known as someone who enjoys it.
5. It actually really is very good.
Of them, only 4 is a bad reason. 3 gets new people into it, but can't sustain the popularity without 1, 2 or 5.
I believe the success of the Harry Potter series is mostly 2, 3 and 4 - but mostly 2 and 3. 3 couldn't have a sustained effect over 7 books if it weren't for 2.
There's a little bit of 5 in there too - it's certainly not the best thing ever written, but there are far worse books out there that do pretty well, or are fairly well regarded.
The other thing that Harry Potter had going for it was the right mix of being aimed at children to young adults whilst remaining accessible to adults, parents will buy for their children what they might not bother buying for themselves even if they knew it was something they might like (afterall, one only has so much time for reading between jobs, housework and children), and once it is bought there's less barrier to them reading it. Then because of 2, they also become fans and feed into the whole thing some more.
In any case, the original statement still stands. Sure, liking something solely because its popular is a bad reason, but disliking it because it is popular isn't just a bad reason, it's nonsensical.
A few small parallels here and there is not deeper commentary. It's a passing nod.
If that's your idea of deep social cometary, then you need to read more, or get out more, or just think more.
we are, however, apparently not very good at previewing.
Hang on - us Australians and New Zealanders like to spend at least 10% of every day smugly criticising Americans, and [i]we're[/i] not European ;)
What on earth does that have to do with threading?
"Didn't have" is certainly not the same thing as "Didn't need"
Then it's no less clear than the distinction between Symbian or Windows Mobile and the phone that uses it. I think you're looking for issues that don't really exist.