I would have to disagree. People can't just go around willy nilly denying rights to their paying customers, which students still are. There has to be, you know, a reason. And a "single strike" cannot be a valid reason unless there is very strong evidence of guilt, which implies the need for some sort of due process.
I know Mr. Rutan deserves whatever he gets, but still it's a bummer to me. I had kindof liked the idea of young whippersnapper companies being the ones to crack open mass market space travel.
Still, it was probably inevitable, and I certainly still wish them all the best luck possible.
Yeah but you're forgetting one thing--MS is definitely on the defensive in the browser wars right now. I'm seeing Firefox super everywhere these days--WAY different from 5 years ago.
I believe they will be forced to comply, believe it or not.
True, but to butcher Clarke:
"Any sufficiently advanced automation is indistinguishable from intelligence".
How's that:-)
I mean, how do I know you're really thinking?
While I agree that the level of vitriol here is pointless and distracting, the fundamental issue is worth a lot of anger. If we lose control of our information infrastructure to bad elements, we won't have a free exchange of information any more.
And that means we cannot solve any other problems. And we have other problems that need to be solved.
Don't you think it's insane to obey an insane law?
Call if Civil Disobedience, if you like.
P.S. I do agree with you in principle, though, that not enough people understand the concept of the value of obeying the rule of law.
I've never quite understood the motivations of developers to put these warnings in. If they're in a country where it's "legal", then what are they worried about? What is going to come back onto them if someone in a fascist state like the USA uses it, and it's illegal there?
And on the other hand, if they UnitedStatesians, and they know they're writing "illegal code" and distributing it and therefore breaking the law, why on earth do you put the warning then?
I think what it is is they've managed to get us all paranoid about this stuff, and by putting up notices like that we're playing their game. It's nonsense and it's madness--ignoring it is the correct thing to do.
It's kinda like when you rode the bus to school, and everyone would misbehave at once because hey, they can't put us ALL in detention.
Can they?
In other words, you do not have to do anything to be affected by this law.
This is not a law. It looks, sounds, and smells like one, but it is not. It's an Executive Order. It's supposed to be driven by the President's understanding of the actual law. Unfortunately, this one has no such understanding, and so such orders are created.
Only Congress can make laws. The President merely helps or hinders them.
You know, the real problem here is eBay's submission to this sort of thing at the expense of their sellers (their actual customers!). Can eBay not afford a legal defense fund?
You are absolutely correct. Just like Mr. Gatling ( inventor of the Gatling Gun, the first fully automatic firearm). He invented it because he thought that it was so powerful that it would make war unthinkable.
You're eating the line being fed to you by the military industrial complex. Don't be naive. Hell, don't be a fool.
Yeah but one thing. That imbalance in technology is not permanent. Over time our enemies will develop similar levels of technology. That's what happened to the Romans--the barbarians caught up in warmaking tech. Look at the American Civil War.
Your argument makes tactical sense in the short term, but in the long term it is a totally insane strategy for all of us humans as a whole.
Kinda stupid, in fact.
The problem is that one would have to sort through your files to determine what was "legit" or "not legit" to take, according to your definition. It's the nosey poking around that is the problem, before the copying even begins.
Dumbass!
Slashdot Mirror
If you read the part you quoted more carefully, you'll see that.
I would have to disagree. People can't just go around willy nilly denying rights to their paying customers, which students still are. There has to be, you know, a reason. And a "single strike" cannot be a valid reason unless there is very strong evidence of guilt, which implies the need for some sort of due process.
Perhaps if you watched more porn, you'd have a better sex life? I'm pretty sure you would.
That is a really, really, really good point.
Ethics are like morals, only with Reason as their underpinning. I think you'll like it. It's not what you seem to think it is.
Still, it was probably inevitable, and I certainly still wish them all the best luck possible.
I believe they will be forced to comply, believe it or not.
I mean, not really.
True, but to butcher Clarke: "Any sufficiently advanced automation is indistinguishable from intelligence". How's that :-)
I mean, how do I know you're really thinking?
I don't think the work "think" means what you think it means!
While I agree that the level of vitriol here is pointless and distracting, the fundamental issue is worth a lot of anger. If we lose control of our information infrastructure to bad elements, we won't have a free exchange of information any more.
And that means we cannot solve any other problems. And we have other problems that need to be solved.
Point being, it's nobody elses business what files me and my friends share back and forth.
In my opinion, even if I define my friends to be anyone on a p2p network.
It's a privacy issue, ultimately, imho.
Don't you think it's insane to obey an insane law? Call if Civil Disobedience, if you like. P.S. I do agree with you in principle, though, that not enough people understand the concept of the value of obeying the rule of law.
Is it actually illegal to use patented technology without a license? Or just make a product that has it and sell it?
I've never quite understood the motivations of developers to put these warnings in. If they're in a country where it's "legal", then what are they worried about? What is going to come back onto them if someone in a fascist state like the USA uses it, and it's illegal there? And on the other hand, if they UnitedStatesians, and they know they're writing "illegal code" and distributing it and therefore breaking the law, why on earth do you put the warning then? I think what it is is they've managed to get us all paranoid about this stuff, and by putting up notices like that we're playing their game. It's nonsense and it's madness--ignoring it is the correct thing to do. It's kinda like when you rode the bus to school, and everyone would misbehave at once because hey, they can't put us ALL in detention. Can they?
This is not a law. It looks, sounds, and smells like one, but it is not. It's an Executive Order. It's supposed to be driven by the President's understanding of the actual law. Unfortunately, this one has no such understanding, and so such orders are created.
Only Congress can make laws. The President merely helps or hinders them.
Bzzt, wrong. You didn't read your own bold text:
or to pose a significant risk of committing
That means they think you will do something in advance. You know, the future. Who decides? They do.
They are actually saying they can seize your assets if they think you will do something bad.
Can I have that hair-splitter when you're done with it? Semantics can excuse almost any behavior.
It's only a matter of time before a machine can out-think a man. "Unbeatably". Something to think about.
Yes. Next.
You know, the real problem here is eBay's submission to this sort of thing at the expense of their sellers (their actual customers!). Can eBay not afford a legal defense fund?
You are absolutely correct. Just like Mr. Gatling ( inventor of the Gatling Gun, the first fully automatic firearm). He invented it because he thought that it was so powerful that it would make war unthinkable. You're eating the line being fed to you by the military industrial complex. Don't be naive. Hell, don't be a fool.
Yeah, we didn't foment the violence in Iraq at all. Don't believe everything you read!
Yeah but one thing. That imbalance in technology is not permanent. Over time our enemies will develop similar levels of technology. That's what happened to the Romans--the barbarians caught up in warmaking tech. Look at the American Civil War. Your argument makes tactical sense in the short term, but in the long term it is a totally insane strategy for all of us humans as a whole. Kinda stupid, in fact.
The problem is that one would have to sort through your files to determine what was "legit" or "not legit" to take, according to your definition. It's the nosey poking around that is the problem, before the copying even begins. Dumbass!