recently got a call from the WWF asking for donations. The telemarketer spun a sob story about polar bears drowning because of the melting ice caps. Almost had my wife in tears, and "sure she would sign up for a regular donation so they could work on the problem". total heart-tugging B.S. I was mildly impressed with the tactic, however.
But then how would he post about it on Slashdot? take note of the broadband component he mentioned above. i assume he doesn't have an equivalent alternative.
I would have to argue that it's not a copyright violation. If the rights holder provides a legally produced copy to an individual, and prescribes certain copy allowances to that individual (i.e., installation rights, which involves copying some/all of the copyrighted material, and execution rights, which involves additional copying of some/all of that copyrighted material to RAM, Swapdisk, etc., the details of which may slightly vary from system to system) then I don't see what additional copying happened in this case beyond what was already permitted. READING the data, especially of state objects, rather than the lines of copyrighted code, wouldn't involve copyright. Unless they intend to argue that every state produced in RAM by their copyrighted code is in itself copyrighted material, and copying that data even in part (which would have to be done in a program, at some low level, to work with/on that data) constitutes an unauthorized copy of their copyrighted work. In that case, they'd have to get the judge to agree that an active state of data constitutes a copyrightable piece of media, and that any copying of partial information from that piece of media falls outside of the already implicitly grated rights of copy (i.e., it's more than just 'reading').
I have a hard time seeing a judge thinking about things this deeply, meaning (a) he'll say, "you're full of crap. no dice.", or (b) he'll say, "wow, you're right. no program may read another program's data, whether on the harddrive, or in memory, because that implicitly involves some level of copying of information, and we must protect copyright."
Possibly true. That said, every message I've sent to a Congress person via their website's email form has gotten a response. (likely canned but directly responds to the issue). Likely because to submit, you have to enter a valid zip code to id your representative (trivial capcha, but enough to keep out the botspam)
If nothing else, it does give them a count of constituent opinion on a matter (10000 emails for, 12 against...). Likely their all handled by staff members too (as would be their paper mail).
So, that said, go HERE: http://www.house.gov/writerep
write your rep a brief message about "what the crap's going on in the Committee on Education and Labor?" and "please oppose this effort whenever an appropriate opportunity to do so arises."
nah... I always thought having a bard in my party was a little to hokey. I mean, c'mon, he sings his magic? And only one song per level before you have to take him back to the tavern... really. Skara Brae don't need that sh**.
Definitely true. Sintered metal machines (SLS, see here: http://www.3dsystems.com/products/sls/index.asp ) I believe currently run about $500k to $1M. 'Functional' plastic systems (FDM, see here: http://www.stratasys.com/fdm_products.aspx?id=127 ) are $200k or more. I see few people currently, or in the near term, willing to put an 'as expensive as their house' tool in their house.
That said, there are likely a lot of things you could do with room temperature epoxies and investment casting, and cheaper modelers for those casts. Cheaper, though, still means typically $10k or more. And even then, the raw materials aren't cheap.
So, how to bring things down? How about the Fab@home project? Nothing like open source 3D fab. I think the current cost estimate to build the tool is about $2500. I'm surprised every engineering school hasn't set their undergrads to work to make something like that (as a useful project, a teaching tool, and a development platform). The material set is a bit limited at present, but really guys, they've demonstrated Chocolate!! what more could you want?:)
an OS for the masses would make it completely transparent to the user what is being done with memory. The user 'from the masses' doesn't care what's being used for what. As long as things run responsively and quickly, it's a win. There is Zero need for a up front and obvious to the average PC user exactly where each byte of ram is going. All they need is a "hey, you're trying to do a bit too much all at once" message when they get close to running out of overhead. Maybe show a pie chart with app.name (NOT the process name/number) and percent of mem used, and give them the chance to close down something BEFORE the system grinds to an unresponsive halt.
ahhh... now we hit on the crux of the matter. The main problem is that the Powerpoint slideshow starts to replace any other actual documentation of the work. PPT is not ment to be a medium for thorough documentation, but it's turning into one. That reference document you mention starts to become the only thing you make, because it's the only thing people want to see. "Can't make the presentation, just send me your slides, and I'll get back to you with my decision." The slideshow has become your executive summary, so you better include all the info in there. Can't speak to it when they're reading it. And most upper management wouldn't think to check the 'notes' section.
he wouldn't mess up the system. He would be very easy to track using the system.
Step1: id new target
Step2: characterize target
Step3: analyze future targets
Step4: compare with previously cataloged characteristics.
Step5: identify targets with matching characteristics as being the same target.
silly walk man just made step 5 very easy by making steps 2 and 4 very distinct from all other targets.
Now, if everyone walked silly, that would be different. There should be a grassroots 'walk silly for privacy' effort.
OR, if everyone got a Segway, then they'd shoot the whole system to heck. That must be the path to Step6:Profit!
exactly. that's basically a funded-up-front licensing agreement.
they don't need to donate the patents, they need to open up visibility. maybe even 'shop' for developers using a bargain-ish licensing fee as described above.
"that doesn't mean that there isn't plenty of good science left to do"
Not too mention returning to the study of the equations of motion, basic trajectory analysis, and developing new models explaining the interaction of moderately sized rubber spheres with larger diameter metal hoops. Damn ACC tourney...
Go Wahoos!
or would the weight/price/maintenance of expensive high-efficiency solar cells offset any gain you might have hoped to have made? that seems more likely in my book.
maybe a better statement would have been: kids have no constitutionally protected freedom from government suppression of their speech. That, at least, can be intelligently debated on its constitutional merits and whether or not people under the age of majority can claim constitutional protections...
the state dept doesn't have to worry about doing anything. All we need to do is find one plase where SHA-1 is used in DRM or any other 'digital media protection' or copyright scheme, and we can put out a warrant for her arrest under the DMCA. Now, if only the Chinese extradition treaty would kick in... 2-way of course:)
is only readable from "Up to four feet away".
a high gain directional antenna with receivers (tranceivers? these are passive, or only semi-active, right?) tuned to the same frequency would get better spatial resolution and standoff range than what is likely present in the standard receiver.
Think of WiFi (std 802.11). normally very local, but with high gain directional antennas, people have used it for long range networking.
Alarmist summary, yes. Misplaced fears, maybe. Incorrect technically, not necessarily.
general law of the land does not typically need to be spelled out in each and every agreement. Current law of the land stipulates rather stringent limitations on the right to produce copies of some one else's copyrighted works, except where exceptions to that limit have been granted. Sharing involves producing copies (even partial ones), thus potentially violating the copyright if the copyright owner hasn't granted you licence to copy in that fashion, or unless law of the land stipulates that the form of copying you are doing is acceptable violation of copyright.
No limit is placed by copyright on your ability to listen to the music. Copyright limits your legally permitted ability to make copies of the work.
Now, express and implied consent to copy can be granted. If inherent in a playing medium is digital file transfer from one location to another, and the copyright holder produces a format for that medium, and grants purchasers the right to use that format on that medium, than he has implicitly granted permission to copy for use in that medium. That does not mean that he's granted permission to copy that file willy-nilly and distribute whereever.
Right or wrong, copyright is very limiting, especially when applied to a digital domain where even intended use often involves creating a copy of the data somewhere. Nonetheless, even in a digital format, and whether or not digital copying is possible/easy/trivial, the same limits apply as in the brick and mortar world.
The law of the land does not need to be explicitly spelled out in a contract. You are in no way limited to listening to the copy of the work that you paid for. You may be limited in producing other copies of that work, as limited by the law of the land. Fair use was specifically allowed way back when for specific cases. As it hasn't been specifically applied to newer cases in any court of law, any assumption of fair use rigths in other circumstances is just that: an assumption. Assumptions very well may get smacked down in a court of law. If there's a 'you should have known better' tied to that smack-down, expect penalties. IIRC part of that fair use allowance involved the fact that it didn't detract (much) value from the original product. That was typically tied to the fact that copies couldn't be perfect. Now, that is no longer the case, so applicability of fair use may very well be legally very different in newer cases.
No one says copyright is perfect, but it is what it is, and the law (and penalties) is based on that. If you think it's unreasonable, fine. I think a ticket for going 74 in a 65mph zone is unreasonable. I still pay the ticket, as I was willingly operating in the wrong. Given the opportunity I might argue for a change. But until the change comes to pass, I still recognize that going 74 in a 65 is outside the law.
Slashdot Mirror
recently got a call from the WWF asking for donations. The telemarketer spun a sob story about polar bears drowning because of the melting ice caps. Almost had my wife in tears, and "sure she would sign up for a regular donation so they could work on the problem". total heart-tugging B.S. I was mildly impressed with the tactic, however.
But then how would he post about it on Slashdot? take note of the broadband component he mentioned above. i assume he doesn't have an equivalent alternative.
Clearly you are new here...
I have a hard time seeing a judge thinking about things this deeply, meaning (a) he'll say, "you're full of crap. no dice.", or (b) he'll say, "wow, you're right. no program may read another program's data, whether on the harddrive, or in memory, because that implicitly involves some level of copying of information, and we must protect copyright."
Based on past events, I dread the result.
If nothing else, it does give them a count of constituent opinion on a matter (10000 emails for, 12 against...). Likely their all handled by staff members too (as would be their paper mail). So, that said, go HERE: http://www.house.gov/writerep write your rep a brief message about "what the crap's going on in the Committee on Education and Labor?" and "please oppose this effort whenever an appropriate opportunity to do so arises."
nah... I always thought having a bard in my party was a little to hokey. I mean, c'mon, he sings his magic? And only one song per level before you have to take him back to the tavern... really. Skara Brae don't need that sh**.
That said, there are likely a lot of things you could do with room temperature epoxies and investment casting, and cheaper modelers for those casts. Cheaper, though, still means typically $10k or more. And even then, the raw materials aren't cheap.
So, how to bring things down? How about the Fab@home project? Nothing like open source 3D fab. I think the current cost estimate to build the tool is about $2500. I'm surprised every engineering school hasn't set their undergrads to work to make something like that (as a useful project, a teaching tool, and a development platform). The material set is a bit limited at present, but really guys, they've demonstrated Chocolate!! what more could you want? :)
an OS for the masses would make it completely transparent to the user what is being done with memory. The user 'from the masses' doesn't care what's being used for what. As long as things run responsively and quickly, it's a win. There is Zero need for a up front and obvious to the average PC user exactly where each byte of ram is going. All they need is a "hey, you're trying to do a bit too much all at once" message when they get close to running out of overhead. Maybe show a pie chart with app.name (NOT the process name/number) and percent of mem used, and give them the chance to close down something BEFORE the system grinds to an unresponsive halt.
ahhh... now we hit on the crux of the matter. The main problem is that the Powerpoint slideshow starts to replace any other actual documentation of the work. PPT is not ment to be a medium for thorough documentation, but it's turning into one. That reference document you mention starts to become the only thing you make, because it's the only thing people want to see. "Can't make the presentation, just send me your slides, and I'll get back to you with my decision." The slideshow has become your executive summary, so you better include all the info in there. Can't speak to it when they're reading it. And most upper management wouldn't think to check the 'notes' section.
it's also MUCH more cost effective for the RIAA, which is why they do it.
Step1: id new target
Step2: characterize target
Step3: analyze future targets
Step4: compare with previously cataloged characteristics.
Step5: identify targets with matching characteristics as being the same target.
silly walk man just made step 5 very easy by making steps 2 and 4 very distinct from all other targets.
Now, if everyone walked silly, that would be different. There should be a grassroots 'walk silly for privacy' effort.
OR, if everyone got a Segway, then they'd shoot the whole system to heck. That must be the path to Step6:Profit!
Linux doesn't help the average user...
they don't need to donate the patents, they need to open up visibility. maybe even 'shop' for developers using a bargain-ish licensing fee as described above.
any recent or upcoming movies in both formats for an apples-to-apples comparison?
been able to? i think it's more about not beating up the poor kid for his lunch money. go for the yuppie with the latte first.
"that doesn't mean that there isn't plenty of good science left to do" Not too mention returning to the study of the equations of motion, basic trajectory analysis, and developing new models explaining the interaction of moderately sized rubber spheres with larger diameter metal hoops. Damn ACC tourney... Go Wahoos!
but dupes do? :)
or would the weight/price/maintenance of expensive high-efficiency solar cells offset any gain you might have hoped to have made? that seems more likely in my book.
They can. They don't need to. Next question.
maybe a better statement would have been: kids have no constitutionally protected freedom from government suppression of their speech. That, at least, can be intelligently debated on its constitutional merits and whether or not people under the age of majority can claim constitutional protections...
the state dept doesn't have to worry about doing anything. All we need to do is find one plase where SHA-1 is used in DRM or any other 'digital media protection' or copyright scheme, and we can put out a warrant for her arrest under the DMCA. Now, if only the Chinese extradition treaty would kick in... 2-way of course :)
is only readable from "Up to four feet away".
a high gain directional antenna with receivers (tranceivers? these are passive, or only semi-active, right?) tuned to the same frequency would get better spatial resolution and standoff range than what is likely present in the standard receiver.
Think of WiFi (std 802.11). normally very local, but with high gain directional antennas, people have used it for long range networking.
Alarmist summary, yes. Misplaced fears, maybe. Incorrect technically, not necessarily.
Was anyone else reminded of the scene when the one robot finds the other one after the guy hit it with an axe? Poor little robot...
The U. S. has been "metric" since 1866. Reference
No limit is placed by copyright on your ability to listen to the music. Copyright limits your legally permitted ability to make copies of the work.
Now, express and implied consent to copy can be granted. If inherent in a playing medium is digital file transfer from one location to another, and the copyright holder produces a format for that medium, and grants purchasers the right to use that format on that medium, than he has implicitly granted permission to copy for use in that medium. That does not mean that he's granted permission to copy that file willy-nilly and distribute whereever.
Right or wrong, copyright is very limiting, especially when applied to a digital domain where even intended use often involves creating a copy of the data somewhere. Nonetheless, even in a digital format, and whether or not digital copying is possible/easy/trivial, the same limits apply as in the brick and mortar world.
The law of the land does not need to be explicitly spelled out in a contract. You are in no way limited to listening to the copy of the work that you paid for. You may be limited in producing other copies of that work, as limited by the law of the land. Fair use was specifically allowed way back when for specific cases. As it hasn't been specifically applied to newer cases in any court of law, any assumption of fair use rigths in other circumstances is just that: an assumption. Assumptions very well may get smacked down in a court of law. If there's a 'you should have known better' tied to that smack-down, expect penalties. IIRC part of that fair use allowance involved the fact that it didn't detract (much) value from the original product. That was typically tied to the fact that copies couldn't be perfect. Now, that is no longer the case, so applicability of fair use may very well be legally very different in newer cases.
No one says copyright is perfect, but it is what it is, and the law (and penalties) is based on that. If you think it's unreasonable, fine. I think a ticket for going 74 in a 65mph zone is unreasonable. I still pay the ticket, as I was willingly operating in the wrong. Given the opportunity I might argue for a change. But until the change comes to pass, I still recognize that going 74 in a 65 is outside the law.