My fleet of Toshiba laptops is far older than 6 years and they work flawlessly as well. And my PowerBook 165c runs like a champ and has for longer than Apple has been selling PowerPC machines.
I don't think Apple has anything close to the build quality they did a decade ago. Apple is a company with a very uneven quality history.
No matter how much you rattle the keys on your keyboard, you're clearly a conspiracy-theory enthusiast. Vietnam was a 'conspiracy'??
It was a clear instance of communist aggression. Look at the years immediately after the communists rolled into the south. Were all those boat people wrong to flee? Did Pol Pot liberate Cambodia?
Yes, I know, I know. There are all sorts of complicated theories and explanations spun up. It isn't that you're needlessly paranoid. The world is out to get you, and all of us.
Well, when the US Government shuts down Slashdot and all you are prevented from ranting and raving, maybe a little bit of what you're ranting about will make sense.
However, the US Government isn't shutting down Slashdot, and you rant on and on.
I can't wait for the egg to dry on a lot of people's face. Problem is, you'll all be off ranting about something new then.
It's good to see that you Lyndon Larouche types are still around. You're sorta like canaries in the coal mine. As long as nutcases like you can ramble on about 'conspiracies' it serves as proof that there is no consiracy.
But that paradox likely sails right over your head, eh?
If you don't grasp the fact that internationalism was more than a vestige of Stalinism, you have no right to call yourself a Marxist. The idea of worker internationalism is at the root of Marxism. You're just some guy who picked out what you thought was a 'scary hard-core name' for your slashdot account.
You view economic systems the same as you view operating systems? As badges of honor for zealotry, it seems. You need to come back when you're grown up.
Psst: don't wave that red flag too widely. When you mature you'll regret it if you've done so too visibly in your reckless youth.
That's your ideology speaking, not a legal precedent. And people release their creative works to the public based on legal precedents. It's a dangerous 'one-way-trap' situation to try to impose your ideology on the system of laws after-the-fact.
Honestly, there aren't really very many Constitutional Scholars who participate in these forums. But as the saying goes, everybody has an opinion.
How would the currency block prevent me from printing a photo of a relative? I'm not claiming to have Ben Franklin, Andrew Jackson, etc. as an ancestor...
The way I see it, this move would end up being about media companies who own the means of dissemination scarfing up anything that falls out of the original copyright period. Sure, you and I could make copies, but really what will happen is all the songs, images, etc. will end up on cheap commercials.
I have noticed over the last several years that a lot of the great rock tunes of my youth are being licensed for TV commercials by big corporations. Often they turn the whole original context of the song on it's head and it becomes another craven sound-bromide. The Cure's 'Pictures of You' comes to mind. Geez, Robert Smith! Did you need to sell out that badly?
Advertising kills culture, and all I see Lessig's move leading to is the recycling and destruction of culture.
If your book went out of print fifty years ago, and you've done absolutely nothing since to make your continued interest in the work known, hell yes.
Why?
A lot of people wrote/said/published idiotic things in their youth that they really don't want re-published.
John Kerry, for instance, wrote an imflammatory book 'The New Soldier', in the early 70's before he settled in as a brahmin senator. He's wisely making sure the book remains out of print, and copies of it stay rare and collectable at 3-4 figure prices.
Should neo-conservatives be allowed to reprint it widely? There certainly would be enough interest in it and probably someone who would fund a reissue of a few hundred thousand copies for free distribution.
The staff in a resturant would be engaging in a commercial performance of the song. There is not an 'enforcer' in each resturant who prohibits the patrons from singing whatever song they want at their table.
Anybody with a reasonable high quality flatbed scanner could have duplicated the images, which then could have been brought into a Walgreens on a CD-ROM and printed.
It seems like people in this discussion are trying to bring up 'horror story' scenarios that really amount to people without a wit of common sense. The notion of paying a photography place to make the duplicates is really, really 20th century.
It's a trivial matter for you to have the photographer duplicate the set of prints you received. Did you ask him to do that? He doesn't need the negatives to produce a fairly nice (but obviously slightly degraded) second set for you.
Well, pitting yourself against the photographers is a losing strategy.
I have a professional photographer friend. I go to a lot of auctions and recently bought a large quantity of color slides at an estate auction. There are many, many historically significant slides in the collection, i.e. the man who shot them travelled quite a bit (i.e. Sarejevo in the 1960's). My photographer friend told me that since I own the only copies of the slides, I own the copyright on them. He's not a crackpot, btw, he's someone who makes money selling images.
I am in the process of deciding what to do with the slides. I have a slide scanner now and may soon put them on the market.
If there were no commercial value for the slides, they would just die in the dust somewhere. Commercial value has an important part in preserving things some times.
It isn't always all Public Domain, nor do we need to become that socialist to preserve our history. But I'm not espousing a fashionable idea. ..
Slashdot Mirror
There is no such thing as an 'Intel fanboy.'
There are 'AMD fanboys' and there are 'the rest of us.'
Get that straight. You might be embarassed someday otherwise.
a lot of us are tired of legacy ports that are literally 10 years old littering the back of our computer
Don't be retarded. Serial and Parallel ports are much, much older than ten years.
Apple didn't drop PS/2 in 1998. They never had PS/2, though some of the Apple clones that they ran out of business did.
they were in Iraq to get a cut of the oil contracts.
Funny thing, that. France was in Iraq for that, too.
Up until a year or so ago, that is.
Have you renounced your citizenship?
(go ahead, if you like)
My fleet of Toshiba laptops is far older than 6 years and they work flawlessly as well. And my PowerBook 165c runs like a champ and has for longer than Apple has been selling PowerPC machines.
I don't think Apple has anything close to the build quality they did a decade ago. Apple is a company with a very uneven quality history.
You could test C++, Perl, bash scripts, etc. on a cheap Pentium I laptop you could buy on eBay for a hundred bucks or less.
Get one, stick Linux on it. "You won't regret it" (seems to be the meme getting tacked onto all the 'get a Mac' comments this evening)
Probably hiring an attorney is the next step to take.
No matter how much you rattle the keys on your keyboard, you're clearly a conspiracy-theory enthusiast. Vietnam was a 'conspiracy'??
It was a clear instance of communist aggression. Look at the years immediately after the communists rolled into the south. Were all those boat people wrong to flee? Did Pol Pot liberate Cambodia?
Yes, I know, I know. There are all sorts of complicated theories and explanations spun up. It isn't that you're needlessly paranoid. The world is out to get you, and all of us.
Nice hobby you've got going there.
Well, when the US Government shuts down Slashdot and all you are prevented from ranting and raving, maybe a little bit of what you're ranting about will make sense.
However, the US Government isn't shutting down Slashdot, and you rant on and on.
I can't wait for the egg to dry on a lot of people's face. Problem is, you'll all be off ranting about something new then.
It's good to see that you Lyndon Larouche types are still around. You're sorta like canaries in the coal mine. As long as nutcases like you can ramble on about 'conspiracies' it serves as proof that there is no consiracy.
But that paradox likely sails right over your head, eh?
Please go to the OS/2 control panel and turn on the telnet and ftp servers. And please post us your IP.
Thank you.
YRO is Timothy's personal rant topic heading. Your mistake was thinking it had to do with Online Rights.
If you don't grasp the fact that internationalism was more than a vestige of Stalinism, you have no right to call yourself a Marxist. The idea of worker internationalism is at the root of Marxism. You're just some guy who picked out what you thought was a 'scary hard-core name' for your slashdot account.
You view economic systems the same as you view operating systems? As badges of honor for zealotry, it seems. You need to come back when you're grown up.
Psst: don't wave that red flag too widely. When you mature you'll regret it if you've done so too visibly in your reckless youth.
No, I do not have a problem with that. But if the copyright owners have a problem with it, then it's your problem, not mine.
It also raises the question: "which customers do they stick with the other drives?"
I'd be digging for 30 pin SIMS and an ISA network card (I know I had one in the basement somewhere, damn it!).
I have a few 486 motherboards with PCI slots and 72-pin memory slots I can sell you. Some even sport 5x86 cpu chips.
That's your ideology speaking, not a legal precedent. And people release their creative works to the public based on legal precedents. It's a dangerous 'one-way-trap' situation to try to impose your ideology on the system of laws after-the-fact.
Honestly, there aren't really very many Constitutional Scholars who participate in these forums. But as the saying goes, everybody has an opinion.
How would the currency block prevent me from printing a photo of a relative? I'm not claiming to have Ben Franklin, Andrew Jackson, etc. as an ancestor...
The way I see it, this move would end up being about media companies who own the means of dissemination scarfing up anything that falls out of the original copyright period. Sure, you and I could make copies, but really what will happen is all the songs, images, etc. will end up on cheap commercials.
I have noticed over the last several years that a lot of the great rock tunes of my youth are being licensed for TV commercials by big corporations. Often they turn the whole original context of the song on it's head and it becomes another craven sound-bromide. The Cure's 'Pictures of You' comes to mind. Geez, Robert Smith! Did you need to sell out that badly?
Advertising kills culture, and all I see Lessig's move leading to is the recycling and destruction of culture.
If your book went out of print fifty years ago, and you've done absolutely nothing since to make your continued interest in the work known, hell yes.
Why?
A lot of people wrote/said/published idiotic things in their youth that they really don't want re-published.
John Kerry, for instance, wrote an imflammatory book 'The New Soldier', in the early 70's before he settled in as a brahmin senator. He's wisely making sure the book remains out of print, and copies of it stay rare and collectable at 3-4 figure prices.
Should neo-conservatives be allowed to reprint it widely? There certainly would be enough interest in it and probably someone who would fund a reissue of a few hundred thousand copies for free distribution.
The staff in a resturant would be engaging in a commercial performance of the song. There is not an 'enforcer' in each resturant who prohibits the patrons from singing whatever song they want at their table.
This is the stuff Urban Legends are made out of.
Anybody with a reasonable high quality flatbed scanner could have duplicated the images, which then could have been brought into a Walgreens on a CD-ROM and printed.
It seems like people in this discussion are trying to bring up 'horror story' scenarios that really amount to people without a wit of common sense. The notion of paying a photography place to make the duplicates is really, really 20th century.
It's a trivial matter for you to have the photographer duplicate the set of prints you received. Did you ask him to do that? He doesn't need the negatives to produce a fairly nice (but obviously slightly degraded) second set for you.
Well, pitting yourself against the photographers is a losing strategy.
.
I have a professional photographer friend. I go to a lot of auctions and recently bought a large quantity of color slides at an estate auction. There are many, many historically significant slides in the collection, i.e. the man who shot them travelled quite a bit (i.e. Sarejevo in the 1960's). My photographer friend told me that since I own the only copies of the slides, I own the copyright on them. He's not a crackpot, btw, he's someone who makes money selling images.
I am in the process of deciding what to do with the slides. I have a slide scanner now and may soon put them on the market.
If there were no commercial value for the slides, they would just die in the dust somewhere. Commercial value has an important part in preserving things some times.
It isn't always all Public Domain, nor do we need to become that socialist to preserve our history. But I'm not espousing a fashionable idea. .
A 68HC05, 68HC11, the Zilog Z8's, the PICs. Nope, they're not IBM 650's.
Umm, Knuth makes heavy use of a 'virtual machine' in his texts, by the way.