Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate?
Your theory does not jibe with Google's involvement with the FCC spectrum bidding a year or two ago. Remember how they lobbied to get extra conditions imposed as a contingency for licensing? They only got a watered down version of what they wanted, but it was still enough that the spectrum licensee had to accept 3rd party devices on their network. Devices just like an unlocked phone from some company other than the telco.
Why would facts about EtherPad be irrelevant to a discussion about EtherPad?
Because I responded to a point that YOU made that was irrelevant to etherpad. If you did not want to talk about licensing issues you should not have made a comment that applied generically to licensing issues.
Are you being deliberately obtuse? I didn't quote you, did you see quote tags, did you see quote marks?
I understood precisely what you meant, that's why I wrote something that should have sounded FAMILIAR to make the point that you had changed your argument.
Are you arguing that EtherPad is feature-incomplete? What additional features are necessary for it to function adequately for the vast majority of users?
Irrelevant. I am pointing out that your claim about BSD licensing under the conditions of being feature complete and stable apply equally to the GPL.
Money isn't the determining factor in my book (gratis), but the freedom to use the software (libre).
In the above sentence your uses of gratis and libre are identical.
A more common meaning of libre wrt to Free software is the freedom to "tinker." If someone gives you software to use any way you want but they don't provide the source your freedom to tinker is severely curtailed.
I think month would be valid...for instance, I have a January birthday so my culture experience is going to be different than somebody with a birthday later in the year simply because I would be a year ahead of them in school...
Not consistently. Every state has different rules for what year you enter school, some states even let the local school districts decide. I have three cousins, all older than me by up to about 6 months but due to the fact that we lived in different states 2 of them were one grade behind me and one was one grade ahead of me.
deliberately make the place unpleasant and uncomfortable so that patrons didn't stick around too long
Well, if that's the case, they must have abandoned it a long time ago because I remember in the mid 70s - when my town got their first mcdonalds - that it came with the coolest playground ever. Forget the food, the best part of going to mcdonalds was getting to climb up in mayor mccheese's head.
Ooooh, tv shows exaggerate stereotypes for comedic effect. And that equals misandry? More bullshit.
And your analysis of the shows is pathetic. Yeah, freaking pathetic. You aren't judging the shows, you are judging some un-cited random joe's opinion of a show in a summarrized in just a few sentences. I don't think you could have made a more ridiculous failure of a rebuttal if you had tried.
But you know what? Doing that with a straight face totally fits the stereotype of the modern misogynist. Don't even try to hide behind, "but, but, but I said wiki != watching" - that just means you were perfectly aware of how ridiculous it was but as stupid as it was, you had nothing better to support your claims.
You mean like people who can't just make a point without insulting commentary? Of course, this cuts both ways, I could say you're the biased one because you've been indoctrinated by the feminist conspiracy. zomg! I ar smartey man now! right? RIGHT?!
So, because I am able to see when a woman is the butt of a joke that means I've been brain-washed by women? Apparently the truth does have an insulting bias.
tell you what, have you watched tv recently? misandry is everywhere. it's become part of the cultur-norm. That's feminism for you.
Bullshit. For every case where a guy acts like a dumbass and some woman saves the day you'll find a woman acting like a dumbass and the guy saving the day. It isn't misandry or misogyny, its comedy. Look at "The New Adventures of Old Christine" - Julia Louis-Dreyfus character is a massively self-absorbed ditz, her brother being far more level-headed than she is. Or "Gary Unmarried" where his ex-wife routinely underestimates him - the most recent episode had him saving her from marrying a philandering billionaire because she was too stupid to figure it out on her own.
People like you are waaaay too susceptible to confirmation bias to be taken seriously.
SPF has been around for at least a couple of years, but at least one very large hosting provider - hostgator.com - hasn't made it any easier to implement. They still require that you email them and request that they set it up for you.
What is disheartening about the article is that it looks like the BBC are just in denial mode, and not really taking the complaints seriously.
When the BBC first started HD broadcasts they quickly garnered a rep for amazing picture quality - to the point that BBC HDTV "caps" were generally considered the gold standard - even if they typically were only 1440x1080 rather than 1920x1080. Their decision to follow most of the other networks - especially the American cablecos and satellite networks - in reducing bitrate is a major bummer for HD aficionados. It is really disappointing all around how the promise of incredible picture quality has been tossed aside by the mindset that has given us "57 channels and nothin' on."
Um, also don't hammer me for using a wiki source. As I recall, you used a wiki source as well.
Oblivious?
*I* used a wiki source because you did. I was parodying your argument by mirroring it. As for your linking to the WSJ EDITORIAL - come on, you clearly just went googling for something and are now throwing it up and hoping it will stick.
Now, I never said Libby didn't lie. I never said that Libby wasn't innocent.
And I asked why he went to the effort of lying as much as he did to deserve conviction on four charges. What was his motivation? You dismissed it as trivial. The jury clearly didn't - nor did Bush who only partially pardoned the man - leaving him $250K in the hole.
That's right! He was not an evil neo-con. He simply wasn't conservative enough
Lol. Now that's some serious conspiracy theory shit to be slinging around for one so quick to play the hate card. It doesn't take much to come up with plenty of other theories that fit the facts you have provided.
So far all you've done is prove your own partisanship here.
OK, we'll use your math. Four is not "a lot more" than two.
No. That's YOUR MATH. My math is that four is a lot more than ONE. 400% more to be precise.
Well, my source just listed perjury and obstruction of justice.
Wait, wait, wait. Your source? You came into this conversation like an expert with a well researched opinion. Now the best you've got is wikipedia articles? I'm the one who was wondering why Libby was convicted of a lot more than just one charge. You were the sanctimonious one accusing people of hatred because you knew better. You clearly are no truth seeker if you think making excuses like that is compatible with lecturing others.
I don't understand how he could mislead the Grand Jury as to when and how he disclosed Plames' employment with the CIA since he wasn't the one to do it. The only way that statement could be true is if Libby lied and said that he was the one to leak the name.
Now you arguing with a wikipedia article? That is really illuminating, NOT. That's little better than proofreading. If you can't understand it, then it fucking-a behooves you to dig deeper and really figure it out. But going around accusing people of being full of hate because they question something obviously questionable when you can't do any better is a waste of hot air.
Obviously the JURY understood it. Maybe you ought to too before telling everybody else the jury was just part of a conspiracy.
It was as if they found out that it was not a high level Bush appointee/staff member and gave up on the actual investigation and went after whoever they could get that worked for the political opposition.
Deputy Secretary of the department of state - the #2 guy appointed at the department - is not high enough level?
It is not there to protect people who want to issue death threats.
The world is just black and white isn't it? Someone arbitrarily declares what another person says to be a death threat and that's good enough for you, isn't it?
Libby was convicted on March 6, 2007, on four counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements.
In other words, it is intellectually dishonest to say that four is "two." But, if suspending your common sense and believing that Libby was not just prosecuted but also convicted because "The prosecution needed a conviction to show for the money" justifies your hatred, then go for it.
Slashdot Mirror
If slashdot was still giving out mod points to people who don't use javascript, I would have modded you up.
It would have been worth less money to Verizon, but far more in terms of customer loyalty.
That's what ETFs are for!
Ok, now that we've had over a decade with the DMCA, haven't lawmakers seen that it doesn't work and ends up being a pain to the purchaser more than the pirate?
Yeah, and then they will disband the TSA too!
Your theory does not jibe with Google's involvement with the FCC spectrum bidding a year or two ago.
Remember how they lobbied to get extra conditions imposed as a contingency for licensing?
They only got a watered down version of what they wanted, but it was still enough that the spectrum licensee had to accept 3rd party devices on their network. Devices just like an unlocked phone from some company other than the telco.
Why would facts about EtherPad be irrelevant to a discussion about EtherPad?
Because I responded to a point that YOU made that was irrelevant to etherpad.
If you did not want to talk about licensing issues you should not have made a comment that applied generically to licensing issues.
Are you being deliberately obtuse? I didn't quote you, did you see quote tags, did you see quote marks?
I understood precisely what you meant, that's why I wrote something that should have sounded FAMILIAR to make the point that you had changed your argument.
Are you arguing that EtherPad is feature-incomplete? What additional features are necessary for it to function adequately for the vast majority of users?
Irrelevant. I am pointing out that your claim about BSD licensing under the conditions of being feature complete and stable apply equally to the GPL.
I'm also fairly certain that they can throw out anybody they want, as long as they do not single out protected groups.
Yep. Check out this 5 minute clip. Hope it works outside of the us copyright zone...
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/254666/november-03-2009/nailed--em---mormon-church-trespassing
The arguments against the BSD license don't really hold water when the package in question is stable and feature-complete.
ROTFLMAO!
Lets assume feature-complete actually happens for more than 0.01% of all software programs.
If you actually get to that point then, by definition, the arguments against the GPL license don't really hold any water either.
Money isn't the determining factor in my book (gratis), but the freedom to use the software (libre).
In the above sentence your uses of gratis and libre are identical.
A more common meaning of libre wrt to Free software is the freedom to "tinker." If someone gives you software to use any way you want but they don't provide the source your freedom to tinker is severely curtailed.
most people in prison for crimes like assault, murder, or theft believe that what they did is wrong in the general case
Which is different from druggies how? They still believe themselves innocent or at least unfairly imprisoned.
How is that different? THIS is how it is different:
I bet if we polled the murderers, they'd would not believe a change in the law was needed too.
Sound familiar?
I think month would be valid...for instance, I have a January birthday so my culture experience is going to be different than somebody with a birthday later in the year simply because I would be a year ahead of them in school...
Not consistently. Every state has different rules for what year you enter school, some states even let the local school districts decide. I have three cousins, all older than me by up to about 6 months but due to the fact that we lived in different states 2 of them were one grade behind me and one was one grade ahead of me.
deliberately make the place unpleasant and uncomfortable so that patrons didn't stick around too long
Well, if that's the case, they must have abandoned it a long time ago because I remember in the mid 70s - when my town got their first mcdonalds - that it came with the coolest playground ever. Forget the food, the best part of going to mcdonalds was getting to climb up in mayor mccheese's head.
Don't worry, the french government is too occupied looking good to make war.
Sure about that? They are nearly tied with the UK for 2nd largest arms manufacturer in the world.
Check out the US DVD (not the bluray) of the russian film "Nochnoi Dozor" aka "Nightwatch." The animated subtitles really add to the experience.
Not saying every film needs to do that. Just that artistry can be expressed in subs too.
Ooooh, tv shows exaggerate stereotypes for comedic effect. And that equals misandry? More bullshit.
And your analysis of the shows is pathetic. Yeah, freaking pathetic. You aren't judging the shows, you are judging some un-cited random joe's opinion of a show in a summarrized in just a few sentences. I don't think you could have made a more ridiculous failure of a rebuttal if you had tried.
But you know what? Doing that with a straight face totally fits the stereotype of the modern misogynist. Don't even try to hide behind, "but, but, but I said wiki != watching" - that just means you were perfectly aware of how ridiculous it was but as stupid as it was, you had nothing better to support your claims.
You mean like people who can't just make a point without insulting commentary? Of course, this cuts both ways, I could say you're the biased one because you've been indoctrinated by the feminist conspiracy. zomg! I ar smartey man now! right? RIGHT?!
So, because I am able to see when a woman is the butt of a joke that means I've been brain-washed by women? Apparently the truth does have an insulting bias.
tell you what, have you watched tv recently? misandry is everywhere. it's become part of the cultur-norm. That's feminism for you.
Bullshit. For every case where a guy acts like a dumbass and some woman saves the day you'll find a woman acting like a dumbass and the guy saving the day. It isn't misandry or misogyny, its comedy. Look at "The New Adventures of Old Christine" - Julia Louis-Dreyfus character is a massively self-absorbed ditz, her brother being far more level-headed than she is. Or "Gary Unmarried" where his ex-wife routinely underestimates him - the most recent episode had him saving her from marrying a philandering billionaire because she was too stupid to figure it out on her own.
People like you are waaaay too susceptible to confirmation bias to be taken seriously.
SPF has been around for at least a couple of years, but at least one very large hosting provider - hostgator.com - hasn't made it any easier to implement. They still require that you email them and request that they set it up for you.
http://forums.hostgator.com/custom-mx-and-spf-records-t58820.html
What is disheartening about the article is that it looks like the BBC are just in denial mode, and not really taking the complaints seriously.
When the BBC first started HD broadcasts they quickly garnered a rep for amazing picture quality - to the point that BBC HDTV "caps" were generally considered the gold standard - even if they typically were only 1440x1080 rather than 1920x1080. Their decision to follow most of the other networks - especially the American cablecos and satellite networks - in reducing bitrate is a major bummer for HD aficionados. It is really disappointing all around how the promise of incredible picture quality has been tossed aside by the mindset that has given us "57 channels and nothin' on."
Um, also don't hammer me for using a wiki source. As I recall, you used a wiki source as well.
Oblivious?
*I* used a wiki source because you did. I was parodying your argument by mirroring it.
As for your linking to the WSJ EDITORIAL - come on, you clearly just went googling for something and are now throwing it up and hoping it will stick.
Now, I never said Libby didn't lie. I never said that Libby wasn't innocent.
And I asked why he went to the effort of lying as much as he did to deserve conviction on four charges. What was his motivation? You dismissed it as trivial. The jury clearly didn't - nor did Bush who only partially pardoned the man - leaving him $250K in the hole.
That's right! He was not an evil neo-con. He simply wasn't conservative enough
Lol. Now that's some serious conspiracy theory shit to be slinging around for one so quick to play the hate card. It doesn't take much to come up with plenty of other theories that fit the facts you have provided.
So far all you've done is prove your own partisanship here.
There is now technology to sequence entire genomes very quickly using massive parallel sequencing.
How's that on the cheap/fast/good criteria? Is it feasible to sequence individual, non-millionaire, patients yet?
OK, we'll use your math. Four is not "a lot more" than two.
No. That's YOUR MATH. My math is that four is a lot more than ONE. 400% more to be precise.
Well, my source just listed perjury and obstruction of justice.
Wait, wait, wait. Your source? You came into this conversation like an expert with a well researched opinion. Now the best you've got is wikipedia articles? I'm the one who was wondering why Libby was convicted of a lot more than just one charge. You were the sanctimonious one accusing people of hatred because you knew better. You clearly are no truth seeker if you think making excuses like that is compatible with lecturing others.
I don't understand how he could mislead the Grand Jury as to when and how he disclosed Plames' employment with the CIA since he wasn't the one to do it. The only way that statement could be true is if Libby lied and said that he was the one to leak the name.
Now you arguing with a wikipedia article? That is really illuminating, NOT. That's little better than proofreading. If you can't understand it, then it fucking-a behooves you to dig deeper and really figure it out. But going around accusing people of being full of hate because they question something obviously questionable when you can't do any better is a waste of hot air.
Obviously the JURY understood it. Maybe you ought to too before telling everybody else the jury was just part of a conspiracy.
It was as if they found out that it was not a high level Bush appointee/staff member and gave up on the actual investigation and went after whoever they could get that worked for the political opposition.
Deputy Secretary of the department of state - the #2 guy appointed at the department - is not high enough level?
Not all the people posting, but all of the people supporting. Apply common-sense so as to avoid misinterpretation.
It is not there to protect people who want to issue death threats.
The world is just black and white isn't it? Someone arbitrarily declares what another person says to be a death threat and that's good enough for you, isn't it?
You are apparently not a truth seeker. I am sorry I misjudged you.
From Wikipedia's United States v. Libby entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Libby
Libby was convicted on March 6, 2007, on four counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements.
In other words, it is intellectually dishonest to say that four is "two." But, if suspending your common sense and believing that Libby was not just prosecuted but also convicted because "The prosecution needed a conviction to show for the money" justifies your hatred, then go for it.