Someone posted that the files are watermarked. This sounds like a good compromise to me. It makes it slightly more difficult to distribute the file in mass, but I can still copy it to all my devices and archive it, etc. What's wrong with that? I guess the biggest problem is that I should be able to buy music anonymously, and the watermark is worthless unless I am associated with the watermark.
The DOJ can't just drop the investigation. Why can't they go forward with someone on the staff who already has the appropriate clearance? Is the DOJ colluding with the President in this cover-up?
Am I the only one who finds it funny that the Department of Justice is not part of the Judiciary branch? Historically it makes sense since it is a cabinet department of the executive. But considering it is often responsible for investigating misconduct of the legislative and executive branches, it is very odd. It sounds like the Judiciary branch needs an investigative arm.
EXACTLY! Soooo many sports are this way too! Think about Golf: is there are reason the ball wants to go to the hole? Or maybe it doesn't want to and that's the whole twist. Maybe I was the bad guy all along! Maan, that sucks! It makes it hard to concentrate. Like when I'm sacking the quarterback I sometimes stop and think -- is there a reason that he wants that lump of pig skin to make it to the end zone? Is that like ball heaven or something? As though my end zone wasn't just as good? That is why sports suck.
I just assumed ODF was popular because it was already fully capable of representing everything the popular word processors do. I guess that was a bad assumption.:-(
This will give Microsoft a chance to embrace and extend ODF, so maybe in a few years everyone will be using Microsoft's ODF format. If the format isn't capable of doing everything that existing formats already do, then it isn't ready to be a standard yet.
So I'm going to use OpenOffice, you will use KOffice, and my boss will use Microsoft Office, and none of us will be able to read each others files. Welcome to 1989 when people got sick and tired of converting between WordStar, WordPerfect, MS Word, and AbiWord - so slowly everyone moved to the dominant player because interoperability was just too frustrating.
If ODF doesn't have a solution to this problem then it is completely pointless.
Why don't manufacturers bundle Firefox with new computers? It seems to my that it would be in their best interest to ship a more secure product to keep their tech support calls down. And since they can modify the source code, they could make a Dell branded version or fix bugs that their users are experiencing.
The parent is correct: Cars are not copyrighted. The aesthetics are covered by Design patents and the mechanics are controlled by regular patents. Copyright disallows selling derived works, but patent laws do not.
I know this isn't the point of the topic, but that interests me. I watch a movie a month! Maybe 2 because of rentals. Which one of us is out from the norm? Now I'm going to have to ask my coworkers this question. Are you including TV shows as movies?
So I assume a new movie comes out every few months. Now there is a significant set of existing movies so it is possible to watch more movies per month than the number of new movies that are made per month. But one a day seems impossible. Are there really that many movies out there that you won't exhaust them all in a few years?
I assume you spent at least 2 hours every day to movies. Is that right? How much time goes to TV?
I am amazed at how these cameras manage to survive and produce a steady image from the atmosphere, into space, and back. This leads me to believe that instead of using foam insulation, we should cover the entire shuttle in cameras.
Does this affect the ClearPlay DVD player, or just companies that manufacture DVDs? It seems to me that the player should be in the clear since the alterations happen at the persons home on their own copy and since they must select for them to happen. So there is no distribution of the derivitive work.
What you just described would be well within network neutrality, as far as I understand it. I work for a company that builds remote monitoring systems for hospital ICU wards, and I believe they pay a premium for bandwidth and low-latency connections. There's nothing wrong with that. The problem is when they promise someone a better connection but don't lay the new fiber, so they just bump someone else's traffic.
Even more to the point, I think what you described is what needs to happen, and that network neutrality is the way to do it.
Lots of people seem to say that network neutrality prevents a tiered internet. That doesn't make sense: We have network neutrality today, and we have a tiered network today. You pay for higher bandwidth. You pay for faster routers and lower-latency networks. That's a necessary thing.
Net neutrality is widely portrayed as an assault on the core principles of the Internet.
I've never heard Net neutrality portrayed that way. Especially since net neutrality is one of the core principles of the Internet that has been around since day 1. This seems like a tactic by Infoworld where they wanted to say "We are going to portray net neutrality as an assault on the core principles of the internet" while somehow managing to blame someone else.
I'm going to moderate a debate on global warming by starting out with "Now, global warming is generally portrayed as a phony made-up theory by a bunch of environmental wackos trying to assault democracy. Tell me Mr. Al Gore, do you believe ther is a chance that some of these hippies might not be high?"
The entire planet has had network neutrality for years and it hasn't cost anyone a penny. The US has had common carrier laws since 1830 (they originally referred to shipping companies) and they are still in effect today. Why would continuing a law that has existed for 176 years suddenly incurr some new big cost?
Is the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation really a group representing Black Americans? If so, why would stand aganist network neutrality? Their web site doesn't list Network Neutrality as an issue anywhere that I can find.
How about the National Association of Manufacturers?Net neutrality isn't on their list of key issues either, but a search reveals a misguided report showing how they don't want network neutrality because it would stifle companies from laying new fiber. I can see manufacturers not liking that, but since network neutrality has nothing to do with laying of fiber, I only assume that someone there is misinformed.
The whole list of supporters seems this way. Is anyone here a member of one of these organizations who can shed some light on the views of these organizations?
I've never clicked on an ad in my life. Except maybe by accident when the site's navigation is right near the ad. I just did a random survety of my coworkers. They all said the same thing without my prompting: That they only have done it by accident, and can't think of any specific ad they ever clicked on.
Is ad revenue no longer based on pay-per-click? Because if it is, I don't know who is clicking on them.
The judge made some very interesting statements in this judgement:
if the bank does not accept the EULA [licence] terms [by operating the software and agreeing the terms], it receives no licence.
That is interesting. The judge is saying that if the buyer does not agree to the EULA (even if they don't disagree with it -- if they just never install or use the software) that the license vanishes into nowhere. The company does not get a refund, nor do they get the license. That is pretty bizarre.
Thus, provided that the licensing system is enforceable in law, the circumstances exemplified cannot give rise to a legitimate trade in COAs
Whooahhh hold on...!!! So the judge made the ruling under the assumption that the licensing system is enforcable. But he doesn't state that it is enforcable. It sounds like he just told the defendants to claim that the licensing system isn't valid. That is also odd, since the defendent thought they were working within the system, and they weren't interested in challenging it. And the judge wasn ruling about how a system works, but hinting that the system isn't valid. Sounds like he should have let it go to trial.
Most of the time I see people using virtualization, it is to get around software conflicts, or to be able to install things side-by-side that aren't designed to be run in that environment. In such cases, virtualization is overkill. They didn't mean to virtualize the entire processor and memory - they only needed to virtualize the system configuration and limited parts of the file system hierarchy.
For these purposes, chroot is a better fit.
I've often wanted an equivalent for Windows, where I could run an application with a virtual registry, so that it didn't muck things up. Or so that it thought it had full access to the C:\WINDOWS folder. Instead, I have to use Virtualization s which requires 2 gigs of space, causes a 2:1 speed reduction, and cuts my available memory in half.
Even better yet, would be decent installers and applications that follow the rules.
The only thing that tha arcade has going for it is immersion. Custom hardware devices like DDR, drum sets, 360-degree pan-and-tilt systems, holograms, etc. Arcades are a place to go and see new technology, and for companies to try and make a profit on experimental game play systems. But if I want to play video games on a 52" screen, I'll go visit a friend who splurged on such a system. Everybody knows somebody with a setup like that. And frankly, I don't really enjoy it that much more. It's impressive for about 5 minutes, then it just doesn't matter anymore.
Despite lots of fanfare, a close look at the products reveals that Google still hasn't produced a huge winner...Google has yet to establish a single market leader outside its core search business.
Is it possible that Google's goal with all of these products is merely to hold it's lead in the search business? Instead of paying a million dollars for a TV ad campaign, they spend a million dollars developing a nifty useful tool. It hits their target market better, and provides positive benefit to their users.
Isn't this illegal hacking in some states? I bet if I drove by and did this I would get arrested. Obviously, the police are not subject traffic violations during pursuits and such, but making them above hacking and snooping laws is dangerous and unfair.
I'm not really advocating charging police officers for this, it is really to point out how absurd such laws are.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone posted that the files are watermarked. This sounds like a good compromise to me. It makes it slightly more difficult to distribute the file in mass, but I can still copy it to all my devices and archive it, etc. What's wrong with that? I guess the biggest problem is that I should be able to buy music anonymously, and the watermark is worthless unless I am associated with the watermark.
The DOJ can't just drop the investigation. Why can't they go forward with someone on the staff who already has the appropriate clearance? Is the DOJ colluding with the President in this cover-up?
Am I the only one who finds it funny that the Department of Justice is not part of the Judiciary branch? Historically it makes sense since it is a cabinet department of the executive. But considering it is often responsible for investigating misconduct of the legislative and executive branches, it is very odd. It sounds like the Judiciary branch needs an investigative arm.
EXACTLY! Soooo many sports are this way too! Think about Golf: is there are reason the ball wants to go to the hole? Or maybe it doesn't want to and that's the whole twist. Maybe I was the bad guy all along! Maan, that sucks! It makes it hard to concentrate. Like when I'm sacking the quarterback I sometimes stop and think -- is there a reason that he wants that lump of pig skin to make it to the end zone? Is that like ball heaven or something? As though my end zone wasn't just as good? That is why sports suck.
I don't think you will find a security book/article that says that account lockouts mean that there is no need for strong passwords.
This is almost as good as if they had just thrown out their proprietary protocols for a W3C standard one!
I just assumed ODF was popular because it was already fully capable of representing everything the popular word processors do. I guess that was a bad assumption. :-(
This will give Microsoft a chance to embrace and extend ODF, so maybe in a few years everyone will be using Microsoft's ODF format. If the format isn't capable of doing everything that existing formats already do, then it isn't ready to be a standard yet.
So I'm going to use OpenOffice, you will use KOffice, and my boss will use Microsoft Office, and none of us will be able to read each others files. Welcome to 1989 when people got sick and tired of converting between WordStar, WordPerfect, MS Word, and AbiWord - so slowly everyone moved to the dominant player because interoperability was just too frustrating.
If ODF doesn't have a solution to this problem then it is completely pointless.
Why don't manufacturers bundle Firefox with new computers? It seems to my that it would be in their best interest to ship a more secure product to keep their tech support calls down. And since they can modify the source code, they could make a Dell branded version or fix bugs that their users are experiencing.
The parent is correct: Cars are not copyrighted. The aesthetics are covered by Design patents and the mechanics are controlled by regular patents. Copyright disallows selling derived works, but patent laws do not.
Am I the only person who has never heard of the word "stack" in this context?
Wikipedia: stacks - Nope
Google definition of stack - Nope.
Urban Dictionary: stack - Nope.
Dictionary.com - stack - Nope
Google search "IT stack" - Only hit is the eweek article.
I think they made up this term.
s/stack/platform/g
or
s/stack/framework/g
I know this isn't the point of the topic, but that interests me. I watch a movie a month! Maybe 2 because of rentals. Which one of us is out from the norm? Now I'm going to have to ask my coworkers this question. Are you including TV shows as movies?
So I assume a new movie comes out every few months. Now there is a significant set of existing movies so it is possible to watch more movies per month than the number of new movies that are made per month. But one a day seems impossible. Are there really that many movies out there that you won't exhaust them all in a few years?
I assume you spent at least 2 hours every day to movies. Is that right? How much time goes to TV?
I am amazed at how these cameras manage to survive and produce a steady image from the atmosphere, into space, and back. This leads me to believe that instead of using foam insulation, we should cover the entire shuttle in cameras.
Does this affect the ClearPlay DVD player, or just companies that manufacture DVDs? It seems to me that the player should be in the clear since the alterations happen at the persons home on their own copy and since they must select for them to happen. So there is no distribution of the derivitive work.
What you just described would be well within network neutrality, as far as I understand it. I work for a company that builds remote monitoring systems for hospital ICU wards, and I believe they pay a premium for bandwidth and low-latency connections. There's nothing wrong with that. The problem is when they promise someone a better connection but don't lay the new fiber, so they just bump someone else's traffic.
Even more to the point, I think what you described is what needs to happen, and that network neutrality is the way to do it.
Lots of people seem to say that network neutrality prevents a tiered internet. That doesn't make sense: We have network neutrality today, and we have a tiered network today. You pay for higher bandwidth. You pay for faster routers and lower-latency networks. That's a necessary thing.
I've never heard Net neutrality portrayed that way. Especially since net neutrality is one of the core principles of the Internet that has been around since day 1. This seems like a tactic by Infoworld where they wanted to say "We are going to portray net neutrality as an assault on the core principles of the internet" while somehow managing to blame someone else.
I'm going to moderate a debate on global warming by starting out with "Now, global warming is generally portrayed as a phony made-up theory by a bunch of environmental wackos trying to assault democracy. Tell me Mr. Al Gore, do you believe ther is a chance that some of these hippies might not be high?"
The entire planet has had network neutrality for years and it hasn't cost anyone a penny. The US has had common carrier laws since 1830 (they originally referred to shipping companies) and they are still in effect today. Why would continuing a law that has existed for 176 years suddenly incurr some new big cost?
I am curious about the organizations that oppose network neutrality. The article has a list which seems to match the list on a fake grassroots site run by telecoms.
Is the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation really a group representing Black Americans? If so, why would stand aganist network neutrality? Their web site doesn't list Network Neutrality as an issue anywhere that I can find.
How about the National Association of Manufacturers?Net neutrality isn't on their list of key issues either, but a search reveals a misguided report showing how they don't want network neutrality because it would stifle companies from laying new fiber. I can see manufacturers not liking that, but since network neutrality has nothing to do with laying of fiber, I only assume that someone there is misinformed.
The whole list of supporters seems this way. Is anyone here a member of one of these organizations who can shed some light on the views of these organizations?
I've never clicked on an ad in my life. Except maybe by accident when the site's navigation is right near the ad. I just did a random survety of my coworkers. They all said the same thing without my prompting: That they only have done it by accident, and can't think of any specific ad they ever clicked on.
Is ad revenue no longer based on pay-per-click? Because if it is, I don't know who is clicking on them.
True, but it means you can put that intelligence to better use.
That is interesting. The judge is saying that if the buyer does not agree to the EULA (even if they don't disagree with it -- if they just never install or use the software) that the license vanishes into nowhere. The company does not get a refund, nor do they get the license. That is pretty bizarre.
Whooahhh hold on...!!! So the judge made the ruling under the assumption that the licensing system is enforcable. But he doesn't state that it is enforcable. It sounds like he just told the defendants to claim that the licensing system isn't valid. That is also odd, since the defendent thought they were working within the system, and they weren't interested in challenging it. And the judge wasn ruling about how a system works, but hinting that the system isn't valid. Sounds like he should have let it go to trial.Most of the time I see people using virtualization, it is to get around software conflicts, or to be able to install things side-by-side that aren't designed to be run in that environment. In such cases, virtualization is overkill. They didn't mean to virtualize the entire processor and memory - they only needed to virtualize the system configuration and limited parts of the file system hierarchy.
For these purposes, chroot is a better fit.
I've often wanted an equivalent for Windows, where I could run an application with a virtual registry, so that it didn't muck things up. Or so that it thought it had full access to the C:\WINDOWS folder. Instead, I have to use Virtualization s which requires 2 gigs of space, causes a 2:1 speed reduction, and cuts my available memory in half.
Even better yet, would be decent installers and applications that follow the rules.
The only thing that tha arcade has going for it is immersion. Custom hardware devices like DDR, drum sets, 360-degree pan-and-tilt systems, holograms, etc. Arcades are a place to go and see new technology, and for companies to try and make a profit on experimental game play systems. But if I want to play video games on a 52" screen, I'll go visit a friend who splurged on such a system. Everybody knows somebody with a setup like that. And frankly, I don't really enjoy it that much more. It's impressive for about 5 minutes, then it just doesn't matter anymore.
Wow, that's a stretch. Does anyone have a link to Osama Bin Laden's myspace profile? Or is he disguised as a 16 year old goth girl?
Isn't this illegal hacking in some states? I bet if I drove by and did this I would get arrested. Obviously, the police are not subject traffic violations during pursuits and such, but making them above hacking and snooping laws is dangerous and unfair.
I'm not really advocating charging police officers for this, it is really to point out how absurd such laws are.