I was going to ask about this - in my own experience, Wikipedia editors don't seem to take kindly to people updating pages in areas that they're actually involved in...so i'd be surprised if they were to allow campaign members to 'clean up' entries.
Perhaps that explains the high edit count on Palin's page in '08: a furious back-and-forth between McCain staffers and Wikipedia editors?
What happens when an antivirus scanner "pre-scans" the page at link to the Ad, in case the user clicks on it, in order to speed up their browsing experience?
Technically, it's not a bot causing the page to be requested, it can just as well be a real person's user agent
True, but the company wouldn't want to pay for those pre-scans either, right?
Maybe everything we do is speech! Punch somebody in the nose? Free speech! Rob a house? Free speech! ("It was performance art!" the alleged burglar testified.)
Let me flip my argument around: if the FDA has the authority to regulate hearing aids, doesn't that give them the authority to regulate earphones and headsets and so forth? Is the "medical claim" the only difference? And if so, does "amplifies sound" constitute a medical claim? (I know hearing aids do more than simple amplification, but same idea.)
Wait a moment, does the FDA regulate eyeglasses too?
But is certification really necessary in this case? If a company just made a device to insert in your ear (like an earbud or headset) which amplified sound in a particular way, that wouldn't be much different from a Bluetooth headset or a set of earbuds...I don't see how they could be prohibited from selling them, though perhaps with a different name. Insurance might not pay for them, but if you insurance covers a hering aid then what's the problem?
Not to go Apple fanboi here, but MacOS has a feature like this: type a menu item into the search bar in the Help menu, and it gives you a list of matching menu items. I don't use it very often (though maybe I should).
I've been thinking lately that it would be great to be able to write while I walk: for me, walking makes it a lot easier to be creative. What I've been imagining is a heads-up display showing the text you're working on, and a chorded keyboard that you can operate with one or both hands at your side. No idea if that would ever be practical of course. Voice-to-text dictation would be an alternative to the keyboard, but I'd still want some sort of handheld controller that lets me choose alternate spellings and to scroll through the text. (I'm specifically thinking about writing in English; programming would be harder to dictate I imagine.)
I agree. She's a *science fiction author*; coming up with crazy ideas is her job.
Although if she were actually Empress of the Universe, why is she allowing people to fight wars?:P Or if it's her troops fighting a rebellion or something, what would stop the rebellion from altering the chips, hiding their babies so they aren't chipped so that they can be part of a long war, etc?
Some of us aren't stuck on anything; I have a pay-as-you-go T-Mobile plan, pay about $100 a year for the relatively few calls I make. Texts are $0.10 per I think, so I certainly don't use texts the way I might use some sort of instant messenger service.
I'm not claiming to be the norm by any means, but I do exist.:D
I was reacting to the phrase "We have much, much, much larger problems to worry about", which of course can be said about most things involving IP, the Internet, etc.
And hopefully you saw the part where I agreed with you.:)
I don't think the argument "we shouldn't deal with this problem because there are worse problems in the world" is very effective. There are 300 million people in America; we can multitask, worry about more than one problem at a time.
Personally, copying music isn't a huge problem for *me* because even if copyright for music vanished tomorrow, at the very worst the RIAA companies would collapse. People would still write and perform music, as amateurs do now, and people (including major companies) would still find ways to make money off of music. Plus we'd still have a half-century of recorded music to enjoy, much more than anyone could take in in a lifetime.
Now I'm not at all proposing that we abolish copyright, and I would certainly feel bad for the underlings who work at RIAA companies who might lose their jobs in the wake of such an event. But the music industry is tiny, economically speaking (didn't I read somewhere that Google could simply buy the music divisions of the 5 RIAA companies with the cash they have lying around?) In short, since this is the *worst-case scenario*, and since rampant piracy is far from being the worst-case scenario, then you're right: this really is not a big problem for society.
I get what they're doing and it makes sense, but you're going to end up with a lot of angry consumers who don't understand why their DVD drive doesn't work; or maybe they don't have one built into their computer but plug one in, and a dialog box says "Please deposit $5".
If anything, they should make the DVD version the standard, and let savvy folks downgrade and save the cost if they want.
Besides the offensiveness of the name, it just *sounds* uninspiring. Look at the words it sounds like: limp, wimp, pimp, whimper, simper. Blimp is an exception perhaps, but in general it's just a blah-sounding word, ok for us UNIX geeks maybe, but not if you want to market it.
You mean the dwarves who went to steal a horde of gold from a dragon without bringing any weapons? Who tease Bilbo with a song about busting up his crockery, and leave clarinets among the walking sticks, and whine about the lack of food on their journey almost as much as Bilbo does?
Tolkien's Dwarves definitely have their silly moments.
(I believe it's a stretch to say that the dwarves are equated with the Jews, though inspired might be somewhat nearer the mark.)
To be able to read a mathematics textbook successfully, you have to be able to pace yourself: to read one section at a time, slowly, work through the exercises, and not assume that you understand the material simply because it makes sense. It's a different skill from reading a novel, and many people don't have that skill. A lecture intentionally slows the book's material down to the appropriate pace for students who haven't learned how to read textbooks properly. It is inefficient by *design*.
We're talking about copyrights, not patents. A copyright doesn't prevent other companies from building on your work, it only prevents them from duplicating your words; they can still read the journal where your research is published.
A patent is what prevents other people from using your ideas in their own inventions.
Books do not have to be perfect to be good. Fans generally like Robert Jordan's world-building, plot, and characters (though everyone has a character or two they hate). If his pacing and prose are not always stellar, that does not to take away from the parts he does do well.
Having waited so long for the series' conclusion, I know I have been reluctant to recommend the series simply because I don't want them to deal with the frustration of waiting that I've put up with (and mind you, I started reading the book in 1994, after the 6th book was already published). Once the series is complete next year, I imagine you'll see more fans talking up the series as a whole.
But it'll never be everyone's cup of tea, and that's fine.
Practically every Robert Jordan fan I've ever encountered online thinks this; they just continued reading in spite of the pace of the later books, because they were hooked and wanted to know how the bloody thing ends.:)
I've been expecting Morse code to make a comeback for text messages, because you could send and receive texts entirely by touch (if the phone vibrates in Morse code for incoming texts). Not terribly efficient perhaps but great for texting on the sly (e.g. kids in classrooms).
If it were a competitive advantage (at least in the short-term), there would be no reason for the regulation. Though that could change once everyone has gotten over the hurdle of stablishing basic privacy procedures.
Re:Part of a money conflict within the King family
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 1
You have to pay the copyright owner to make a cover of their song; they just don't have the right to refuse you or set the price (as I understand it).
Now there's an idea; can someone make a "cover" of MLK's speech? Treat it as a rap, perhaps?:)
Re:Part of a money conflict within the King family
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 2
Does music lose its copyright just because it's performed in public? How would a speech be different?
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to ask about this - in my own experience, Wikipedia editors don't seem to take kindly to people updating pages in areas that they're actually involved in...so i'd be surprised if they were to allow campaign members to 'clean up' entries.
Perhaps that explains the high edit count on Palin's page in '08: a furious back-and-forth between McCain staffers and Wikipedia editors?
What happens when an antivirus scanner "pre-scans" the page at link to the Ad, in case the user clicks on it,
in order to speed up their browsing experience?
Technically, it's not a bot causing the page to be requested, it can just as well be a real person's user agent
True, but the company wouldn't want to pay for those pre-scans either, right?
Maybe everything we do is speech! Punch somebody in the nose? Free speech! Rob a house? Free speech! ("It was performance art!" the alleged burglar testified.)
Only if you're certain you're going to lose; presumably the other person is suing you for a lot more than double your legal costs.
A good point.
Let me flip my argument around: if the FDA has the authority to regulate hearing aids, doesn't that give them the authority to regulate earphones and headsets and so forth? Is the "medical claim" the only difference? And if so, does "amplifies sound" constitute a medical claim? (I know hearing aids do more than simple amplification, but same idea.)
Wait a moment, does the FDA regulate eyeglasses too?
But is certification really necessary in this case? If a company just made a device to insert in your ear (like an earbud or headset) which amplified sound in a particular way, that wouldn't be much different from a Bluetooth headset or a set of earbuds...I don't see how they could be prohibited from selling them, though perhaps with a different name. Insurance might not pay for them, but if you insurance covers a hering aid then what's the problem?
Not to go Apple fanboi here, but MacOS has a feature like this: type a menu item into the search bar in the Help menu, and it gives you a list of matching menu items. I don't use it very often (though maybe I should).
I've been thinking lately that it would be great to be able to write while I walk: for me, walking makes it a lot easier to be creative. What I've been imagining is a heads-up display showing the text you're working on, and a chorded keyboard that you can operate with one or both hands at your side. No idea if that would ever be practical of course. Voice-to-text dictation would be an alternative to the keyboard, but I'd still want some sort of handheld controller that lets me choose alternate spellings and to scroll through the text. (I'm specifically thinking about writing in English; programming would be harder to dictate I imagine.)
Given that the convoy depends on wireless communication, I wonder about its susceptibility to intentional jamming and hijacking.
I agree. She's a *science fiction author*; coming up with crazy ideas is her job.
Although if she were actually Empress of the Universe, why is she allowing people to fight wars? :P Or if it's her troops fighting a rebellion or something, what would stop the rebellion from altering the chips, hiding their babies so they aren't chipped so that they can be part of a long war, etc?
Some of us aren't stuck on anything; I have a pay-as-you-go T-Mobile plan, pay about $100 a year for the relatively few calls I make. Texts are $0.10 per I think, so I certainly don't use texts the way I might use some sort of instant messenger service.
I'm not claiming to be the norm by any means, but I do exist. :D
I was reacting to the phrase "We have much, much, much larger problems to worry about", which of course can be said about most things involving IP, the Internet, etc.
And hopefully you saw the part where I agreed with you. :)
I don't think the argument "we shouldn't deal with this problem because there are worse problems in the world" is very effective. There are 300 million people in America; we can multitask, worry about more than one problem at a time.
Personally, copying music isn't a huge problem for *me* because even if copyright for music vanished tomorrow, at the very worst the RIAA companies would collapse. People would still write and perform music, as amateurs do now, and people (including major companies) would still find ways to make money off of music. Plus we'd still have a half-century of recorded music to enjoy, much more than anyone could take in in a lifetime.
Now I'm not at all proposing that we abolish copyright, and I would certainly feel bad for the underlings who work at RIAA companies who might lose their jobs in the wake of such an event. But the music industry is tiny, economically speaking (didn't I read somewhere that Google could simply buy the music divisions of the 5 RIAA companies with the cash they have lying around?) In short, since this is the *worst-case scenario*, and since rampant piracy is far from being the worst-case scenario, then you're right: this really is not a big problem for society.
Thoughts?
I get what they're doing and it makes sense, but you're going to end up with a lot of angry consumers who don't understand why their DVD drive doesn't work; or maybe they don't have one built into their computer but plug one in, and a dialog box says "Please deposit $5".
If anything, they should make the DVD version the standard, and let savvy folks downgrade and save the cost if they want.
Besides the offensiveness of the name, it just *sounds* uninspiring. Look at the words it sounds like: limp, wimp, pimp, whimper, simper. Blimp is an exception perhaps, but in general it's just a blah-sounding word, ok for us UNIX geeks maybe, but not if you want to market it.
You mean the dwarves who went to steal a horde of gold from a dragon without bringing any weapons? Who tease Bilbo with a song about busting up his crockery, and leave clarinets among the walking sticks, and whine about the lack of food on their journey almost as much as Bilbo does?
Tolkien's Dwarves definitely have their silly moments.
(I believe it's a stretch to say that the dwarves are equated with the Jews, though inspired might be somewhat nearer the mark.)
as long as they teach the controversy of abortion, abstinence, and the drug wars. What? Yeah, didn't think so.
To be able to read a mathematics textbook successfully, you have to be able to pace yourself: to read one section at a time, slowly, work through the exercises, and not assume that you understand the material simply because it makes sense. It's a different skill from reading a novel, and many people don't have that skill. A lecture intentionally slows the book's material down to the appropriate pace for students who haven't learned how to read textbooks properly. It is inefficient by *design*.
We're talking about copyrights, not patents. A copyright doesn't prevent other companies from building on your work, it only prevents them from duplicating your words; they can still read the journal where your research is published.
A patent is what prevents other people from using your ideas in their own inventions.
Books do not have to be perfect to be good. Fans generally like Robert Jordan's world-building, plot, and characters (though everyone has a character or two they hate). If his pacing and prose are not always stellar, that does not to take away from the parts he does do well.
Having waited so long for the series' conclusion, I know I have been reluctant to recommend the series simply because I don't want them to deal with the frustration of waiting that I've put up with (and mind you, I started reading the book in 1994, after the 6th book was already published). Once the series is complete next year, I imagine you'll see more fans talking up the series as a whole.
But it'll never be everyone's cup of tea, and that's fine.
Practically every Robert Jordan fan I've ever encountered online thinks this; they just continued reading in spite of the pace of the later books, because they were hooked and wanted to know how the bloody thing ends. :)
I've been expecting Morse code to make a comeback for text messages, because you could send and receive texts entirely by touch (if the phone vibrates in Morse code for incoming texts). Not terribly efficient perhaps but great for texting on the sly (e.g. kids in classrooms).
If it were a competitive advantage (at least in the short-term), there would be no reason for the regulation. Though that could change once everyone has gotten over the hurdle of stablishing basic privacy procedures.
You have to pay the copyright owner to make a cover of their song; they just don't have the right to refuse you or set the price (as I understand it).
Now there's an idea; can someone make a "cover" of MLK's speech? Treat it as a rap, perhaps? :)
Does music lose its copyright just because it's performed in public? How would a speech be different?