I don't know. Why do Americans often say "could careless" when they mean "couldn't careless"? I don't know. Why are Brits so careless with their spelling?
No, they didn't. Courts don't say someone is "probably guilty". Guess you didn't read the FTS let alone the FTA.
No, RTFA. The court gave the blogger the option of hiring a lawyer to defend him, while he remained anonymous. Which he possibly didn't read (we only have Google's word that he did which AFAIK isn't enough to give up someone's right to represent themselves at trial). Given that he didn't do this, THEN is the court suppose to decide the case without him? Are they suppose to keep him anonymous when he doesn't pay whatever amount the court finds him responsible for?
it was easier for the judge to demand the IP address from google. But they didn't demand, they asked for it. Or do warrants simply not exist in Israel and judges can demand whatever they desire with no oversight?
Guess what, the court did find the person probably did commit slander. But over there in the USoA (and I hope Israel) people also believe in the right to defend oneself in court. So unless you want the person to have a civil (or even worse criminal) case decided and judged without the person present, they need to be identified.
This isn't a case of someone saying "The sky is blue" and Skye Williams going to court claiming the person slandered them. This is a case where in all probability, the person did commit slander. The only way to say for sure, would be for the person to offer their defence.
The RIAA is bad because they're suing innocent people Wait, you only attack the RIAA when they sue innocent people? Because as far as I've seen slashdot rallies to the defense of any pirate!
He complains that commercial content distributors instead of paying for their own bandwidth, are leeching off consumers who are paying for the bandwidth. Sounds to me like he's complaining about that 1% actually.
The BSD imposes more limits then if I take source code from the public domain. Oh wait, I can't do that thanks to our ridiculously long copyright terms. Nevermind!
If that's the extent of the patent it should be invalid as a patent can't be on an idea but on an implementation. Sending data faster then real time is an idea. So having said that, I'd like to say they probably have a patent on a particular implementation which may/may not be obvious.
Books are broken. They are:
* Proven to be temporary. Much of history has been lost thanks to the use of books.
* Break. Definitely within a 20 year timeframe.
* Unreliable. The book becomes unusable if it gets wet.
* Lack of archival attributes: We definitely can't read a book in 100 years. We might be able to break the DRM in that time.
* Not portable. Can't carry more then a few at one time.
* Heavy. Can't carry more then a few without them becoming heavy.
* Inaccessible. Can't get to a book if you don't have that particular one immediately on hand.
* Difficult to store. As someone whose running out of room to store his books, this is a definite plus for ebooks.
But I'm sure this won't persuade you're luddite heart. I'm surprised you didn't mention the fact you can feel and smell the paper. Your sort of people laugh that. Myself, I'll just embrace the future instead.
you're saying this 2 year investment will save me how much again? I'll break even, that's right. If you only see value in buying books for cheaper then it probably isn't worth it for you. Many however see a benefit in its other aspects, including not needing to store the books anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
This is exactly what I was thinking. I'm less likely to question someone who appears as if they're doing some tv show then I am some random slob.
In that case the lotto numbers may be 12, 34, 63, 1, 79 and 66. Isn't it fun to talk about stuff you have no idea about?
Oh yes, wouldn't that make for fascinating tv! Watching people, watch other, for hours on end! Astounding! You sir should be a tv producer.
Just to be on the safe side I hope all of the penetrators are white.
You actually think corporations are held to the law. How cute, do you still believe in Santa Claus as well?
A cure to insomnia.
If by bad reasons you mean they're the only cable provider for a lot of areas, then yes, for bad reasons.
Why weren't these people backing up their work (let alone definitely needing it when using an operating system well known for its bugs)?
So wait, Microsoft is actually encouraging more choice in the marketplace? And of course its taken as a negative. I sure love slashdot.
$0.02 != $0.0002
The fact you equate encouraging others to not do evil with "having a warm fuzziness" says a lot about you.
Guess what, the court did find the person probably did commit slander. But over there in the USoA (and I hope Israel) people also believe in the right to defend oneself in court. So unless you want the person to have a civil (or even worse criminal) case decided and judged without the person present, they need to be identified. This isn't a case of someone saying "The sky is blue" and Skye Williams going to court claiming the person slandered them. This is a case where in all probability, the person did commit slander. The only way to say for sure, would be for the person to offer their defence.
Perhaps the ISP shouldn't oversell their bandwidth? It would result in higher prices, but it would be more honest.
The BSD imposes more limits then if I take source code from the public domain. Oh wait, I can't do that thanks to our ridiculously long copyright terms. Nevermind!
Thankyou for that clarification, it was a bit ambiguous.
If that's the extent of the patent it should be invalid as a patent can't be on an idea but on an implementation. Sending data faster then real time is an idea. So having said that, I'd like to say they probably have a patent on a particular implementation which may/may not be obvious.
Perhaps they should sue themselves then for signing away their rights for unfair compensation.
Books are broken. They are: * Proven to be temporary. Much of history has been lost thanks to the use of books. * Break. Definitely within a 20 year timeframe. * Unreliable. The book becomes unusable if it gets wet. * Lack of archival attributes: We definitely can't read a book in 100 years. We might be able to break the DRM in that time. * Not portable. Can't carry more then a few at one time. * Heavy. Can't carry more then a few without them becoming heavy. * Inaccessible. Can't get to a book if you don't have that particular one immediately on hand. * Difficult to store. As someone whose running out of room to store his books, this is a definite plus for ebooks. But I'm sure this won't persuade you're luddite heart. I'm surprised you didn't mention the fact you can feel and smell the paper. Your sort of people laugh that. Myself, I'll just embrace the future instead.