The "manufacturers/IP creators" are the scientists and they don't see a single penny from people buying their papers.
Still, when the scientists use journals to communicate with the rest of the world, the contract they agree to is that any reader of their paper may have to pay a hefty fee to access the journal containing their paper. I don't know why they agree to it, but since they do, anyone copying the articles without the journal's permission, is committing theft/piracy, since the rights of the journal have been violated.
So, no, piracy and theft are not virtually the same thing given that they're completely different.
So you're arguing that pirating and distributing scientific papers has no impact on the bottom line (profit) of the journals? I bet you think stealing goods from a retail store has no financial impact on the retail store either.
That's why I put all my papers up on my website, completely for free.
That's the right solution that other scientists should follow -- copy from a free, legal source of the paper and not the copyrighted material from a journal like this Russian is doing. Hopefully, the journals don't have exclusive rights to the papers that scientists publish. Therefore, the scientists are free to publish another copy on the web for free, or a small fee.
Someone pirating a paper of mine is at worst doing me no harm...
Only because you weren't charging money for it in the first place. If you were, you'd be screaming bloody murder.
And a web-based, cheap/free website providing peer-reviewing feature for papers is impossible? AFAIK, these journals have contributed little to deserve the high prices they demand -- the funding for the research comes from the public and research is performed by PhDs. The journals are just the middlemen between the authors and readers/other researchers.
BS argument. Both manufacturer/IP creator and retailer suffer great financial losses whether physical goods are stolen or IP goods are pirated... it's virtually the same thing. But pirates need BS to justify their harmful actions.
The manufacturing, labor and distribution costs are only a small portion of the final retail price of physical goods. A good chunk of the retail price is based on value of IP of the goods being sold.
the research referenced is often done on the public dime
So why doesn't the public already own these papers? Why is copying and distributing these papers considered illegal?
The internet has been around for decades and publishing a pdf is damn easy. So why do these authors publish their papers through expensive journals instead of just uploading to slideshare.net or scribd?
Except they want to do as many stupid things as possible:
Isn't it stupid to subtly change the design of something that people have been familiar for decades? The new gearshifter seems confusing and inferior to the previous mechanical gearshifter. It seems everything designed in the last 5-7 years have these annoying design flaws (e.g. systemd, the new OS X, Win 8/10 and now this).
Don't be so literal. Here, viewing ads is of course, optional. No one is forcing your head forwards with your eyelids taped to keep your eyes open so you view ads on your monitor.
However, stripping ads from the content before they reach you is definitely theft, since there is zero benefit to people paying for your content.
Every ad-supported website on the planet has ads plastered all over their home pages, including, say, this very site. So, no, I can't typically just look at the home page of any website without paying with ad impressions
Fine. A more apt analogy would be, you have to buy a ticket (view ad) before you can watch the movie (view website).
I also change the channel, or leave the room when a commercial comes on. Same with radio.
Advertisers know you do all those things. However, there's a chance that you won't leave the room or change the channel fast enough... thereby you're exposed to some ads. However, when you use adblock, it's as if the TV and radio stations don't broadcast any ads at all. So you're exposed to 0 ads and that's a problem for the advertisers... they are getting 0 ROI on their massive ad expense. Don't you think you're stealing by using adblock?
I can go into a store and not buy anything (a.k.a. not giving them any revenue) if I want to.
You can do that on websites too. Just visit the homepage, but don't click on any links (that's just like not buying anything at the store).
Why should I be obligated to give websites money (in the form of ad impressions) every time I visit?
Because you are using/enjoying/consuming the website's commercial content and the ads are your payment. Your childish comment is equivalent to saying "why should I pay for merchandise at the store?"
Again, the two things are not equivalent, and the fact that phones suck at privacy is NOT reason to go make desktops suck at privacy too.
That's complete nonsense about not being equivalent. Desktop OSes are old tech, as such they did not have spying before. Smartphone OSes were created during the Internet era and have a ton of spying built into them. What's happening is that modern desktop OSes are catching up to smartphone OSes and adding spying. So yes, Android spyware OS is equivalent to Win 10 spyware OS.
Wait, they're demanding that their content receive special legal protections solely on basis of its resolution?
Why not? As resolutions tend towards movie-ilke quality, the more valuable they are perceived by the TV studios.
Music companies don't care if you copy low-quality music (like concerts or cassettes), but will sue if you copy high quality (256-bit mp3 and higher) music files.
Isn't it time ISPs started offering symmetric speed DSL? Then we could upload/download those photos through our own home servers without needing the privacy-invading cloud servers. With the current pathetic upload speeds in most home DSL plans, it's difficult to download anything big from a home server.
They could log keystrokes without buying SwiftKey.
How? They need to control a dominant mobile keyboard for that. SwiftKey has decent market share in Android, but Microsoft, prior to this purchase, has no dominating keyboard.
Can we get confirmation this bug is getting fixed? The duplicate posts are okay, however, the bug also hides 70% of the posts while repeating the remaining 30% posts over and over.
How can such a severe bug (hiding comments) not be fixed for 10 years? Are there no developers available at/. to fix issues? AFAIK, this bug has existed ever since/. decided to split comments into multiple pages.
In nested mode, some comments are duplicated on multiple pages whereas other comments are not shown at all! This bug has been around for a decade... please fix.
It's completely normal for a *nix based system to expose something like UEFI variables through the filesystem. It's a concept called Everything is a File [wikipedia.org] and is the same reason why root can read and poke places in/proc and/dev to get information about the system or make changes to it.
That is a very shortsighted statement. Nowhere did I mention not to expose the EFI variables as files. My only condition was that EFI should make it very difficult for the OS or any other software to f*ck up these variables that are needed to boot up the system. But it would surprise me that as the systemd of the BIOS world, EFI, would be based on sane design decisions.
This looks like an EFI design bug. Why should EFI allow the OS or any other software brick the system by deleting its variables? Like OO, EFI should allow access to these variables through methods and not directly.
It just means that you don't believe in your views enough to put your UUID them and be held accountable for them at even that level. That would be why they're called "cowards.
The way slashdot calls these anonymous people "cowards" seems like a bit of double standards to me. Why doesn't/. show the UUID of the people who mod a post up or down and their rationale for voting the way they did? Hiding mod identity is pure hypocrisy.
So why waste time in court? Why does this court case even exist disputing over something that's free? Obviously, Oracle has some rights over Java's use.
Slashdot Mirror
Still, when the scientists use journals to communicate with the rest of the world, the contract they agree to is that any reader of their paper may have to pay a hefty fee to access the journal containing their paper. I don't know why they agree to it, but since they do, anyone copying the articles without the journal's permission, is committing theft/piracy, since the rights of the journal have been violated.
So you're arguing that pirating and distributing scientific papers has no impact on the bottom line (profit) of the journals? I bet you think stealing goods from a retail store has no financial impact on the retail store either.
That's the right solution that other scientists should follow -- copy from a free, legal source of the paper and not the copyrighted material from a journal like this Russian is doing. Hopefully, the journals don't have exclusive rights to the papers that scientists publish. Therefore, the scientists are free to publish another copy on the web for free, or a small fee.
Only because you weren't charging money for it in the first place. If you were, you'd be screaming bloody murder.
And a web-based, cheap/free website providing peer-reviewing feature for papers is impossible? AFAIK, these journals have contributed little to deserve the high prices they demand -- the funding for the research comes from the public and research is performed by PhDs. The journals are just the middlemen between the authors and readers/other researchers.
BS argument. Both manufacturer/IP creator and retailer suffer great financial losses whether physical goods are stolen or IP goods are pirated... it's virtually the same thing. But pirates need BS to justify their harmful actions.
The manufacturing, labor and distribution costs are only a small portion of the final retail price of physical goods. A good chunk of the retail price is based on value of IP of the goods being sold.
So why doesn't the public already own these papers? Why is copying and distributing these papers considered illegal?
The internet has been around for decades and publishing a pdf is damn easy. So why do these authors publish their papers through expensive journals instead of just uploading to slideshare.net or scribd?
Not if Google adds thousands to the car's price tag, effectively making you pay for the insurance.
Isn't it stupid to subtly change the design of something that people have been familiar for decades? The new gearshifter seems confusing and inferior to the previous mechanical gearshifter. It seems everything designed in the last 5-7 years have these annoying design flaws (e.g. systemd, the new OS X, Win 8/10 and now this).
Molds are quite expensive to make... would be my guess.
Don't be so literal. Here, viewing ads is of course, optional. No one is forcing your head forwards with your eyelids taped to keep your eyes open so you view ads on your monitor.
However, stripping ads from the content before they reach you is definitely theft, since there is zero benefit to people paying for your content.
Fine. A more apt analogy would be, you have to buy a ticket (view ad) before you can watch the movie (view website).
Advertisers know you do all those things. However, there's a chance that you won't leave the room or change the channel fast enough... thereby you're exposed to some ads. However, when you use adblock, it's as if the TV and radio stations don't broadcast any ads at all. So you're exposed to 0 ads and that's a problem for the advertisers... they are getting 0 ROI on their massive ad expense. Don't you think you're stealing by using adblock?
You can do that on websites too. Just visit the homepage, but don't click on any links (that's just like not buying anything at the store).
Because you are using/enjoying/consuming the website's commercial content and the ads are your payment. Your childish comment is equivalent to saying "why should I pay for merchandise at the store?"
That's complete nonsense about not being equivalent. Desktop OSes are old tech, as such they did not have spying before. Smartphone OSes were created during the Internet era and have a ton of spying built into them. What's happening is that modern desktop OSes are catching up to smartphone OSes and adding spying. So yes, Android spyware OS is equivalent to Win 10 spyware OS.
Why not? As resolutions tend towards movie-ilke quality, the more valuable they are perceived by the TV studios.
Music companies don't care if you copy low-quality music (like concerts or cassettes), but will sue if you copy high quality (256-bit mp3 and higher) music files.
Isn't it time ISPs started offering symmetric speed DSL? Then we could upload/download those photos through our own home servers without needing the privacy-invading cloud servers. With the current pathetic upload speeds in most home DSL plans, it's difficult to download anything big from a home server.
How? They need to control a dominant mobile keyboard for that. SwiftKey has decent market share in Android, but Microsoft, prior to this purchase, has no dominating keyboard.
Can we get confirmation this bug is getting fixed? The duplicate posts are okay, however, the bug also hides 70% of the posts while repeating the remaining 30% posts over and over.
How can such a severe bug (hiding comments) not be fixed for 10 years? Are there no developers available at /. to fix issues? AFAIK, this bug has existed ever since /. decided to split comments into multiple pages.
In nested mode, some comments are duplicated on multiple pages whereas other comments are not shown at all! This bug has been around for a decade... please fix.
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
"React" is kinda rare. But if trademarking common words is okay, I'm going to trademark the word "the".
That is a very shortsighted statement. Nowhere did I mention not to expose the EFI variables as files. My only condition was that EFI should make it very difficult for the OS or any other software to f*ck up these variables that are needed to boot up the system. But it would surprise me that as the systemd of the BIOS world, EFI, would be based on sane design decisions.
This looks like an EFI design bug. Why should EFI allow the OS or any other software brick the system by deleting its variables? Like OO, EFI should allow access to these variables through methods and not directly.
If Musk's company earns billions a year from hyperloop travel, how much does the company plan to pay the MIT team in royalties? Better not be 0%.
The way slashdot calls these anonymous people "cowards" seems like a bit of double standards to me. Why doesn't /. show the UUID of the people who mod a post up or down and their rationale for voting the way they did? Hiding mod identity is pure hypocrisy.
^^^^^This!!!! How can a critical bug not be fixed for over 10 years?!
This /. submission has over 500 comments, but in nested mode, I can read only 100 to 200 comments.
Or within a few nanoseconds in a massively multi-core system.
So why waste time in court? Why does this court case even exist disputing over something that's free? Obviously, Oracle has some rights over Java's use.
Well, Java is C++ with garbage collection added and a few difficult constructs (like multiple inheritance, explicit pointers etc.) removed.