Since the USPTO is playing the honest, I'll be frank too.
I don't observe anyone's intellectual property (the shortening of my constitutional rights (I'm Non-USA before someone cites the USA's constitution for me)), period. I would like to encourage others to protect their own rights too.
The best thing that could have been done to the patent system is to scrap the whole thing. Those who created it didn't go past modern economy 101, because, well, it was created 200-300 years ago (in a much more applicable form than it is in today, if i may add).
It's one thing that the intellectual property system reduces my right for freedom of speech (why can't i "say" data sequences on the net?), but it is also bad for the economy. It is a forced, artificial restriction much like prohibition was. Society can be interpreted as a continuation of evolution on some level. This means, that societies which made murder a "crime", survived better, for example. As a general rule of thumb, while respecting a few basic things, the less restrictive a society is, the better. Creating artificial restrictions is making a society function less optimal. Applying restrictions on computers, which eventually boil down to mathematics are:
a.) Not precise. (I demand to know the sequence of those base two numbers which you hold the copyright/patent on. If you can't reproduce those numbers, your copyright doesn't stand.)
b.) Because of a.), defining a copyrighted work is ambigous. Since what we define those copyrights on are very precise, creating a relation between the two sets are almost impossible. (Could you point me to the database where i can look up a copyrighted set of base two numbers, please, so that i can verify that i can make sure i don't infringe upon someone's copyright?)
Apart from these natural necessities, even if i were to accept the unfair artificial restriction placed upon me by society, i flatly refuse to accept to believe in the pack of _lies_ copyright and patent holders spread in order to protect their own selfish interests against society as a whole.
The dreaded day when someone copyrighted a mathematical expression happened decades ago, when someone decided that people should pay someone for copying specific binary bits apart from the ISP. There is a huge difference between paying for someone to create the knowledge about a sequence of specific bits (writing source code, translating that into binary executable) and for paying someone for the reversal of the artificial restriction of being denied the right to copy already known binary bits from one storage to another.
The paying for copying part is gravely vague too. What constitutes as copying? Installing an operating system is surely copying? Am i not allowed to copy then or not?
Modern communications require freedom of information. On communications i mean digital communication which is starting to gain strength lately, and will hopefully cleanse the world of this medieval copyright nonsense.
Exactly. Copyright is not a concern, copyright is the problem.
We see that technology invalidated copyright. The good reaction: we abolish copyright because it's just not feasible any more. The stupid reaction: putting our heads in the sand and pretending the problem does not exist for the sake of interests based on outdated business scheme.
Let's theorize: what would happen if we would invent a machine that is capable of replicating matter quite effectively? Would we still hold on to our precious paper money and just inflate it whenever someone prints 500 billion dollars worth and try to stop that by legislation? No, we would be stupid to do so. We would just deal away with physical money and turn to electronic more.
The situation is like that with copyright. We cannot just hold technology back because of legislation, especially such important one as communications.
So, you get mugged every week(get infected) and you keep reporting the event to the police(spyware scanner) who may or may not do something about it and you still repeat the same action over and over again?
A sensible person secures its neighbourhood (hw firewall/router), goes doing some bodybuilding and gets some self-defense stuff (linux), or the paranoid ones will go out in a tank, in a full body armour and a huge personal armoury inside the tank, while going to kung fu school to Pai Mei (openbsd).
It's a dupe of the 25 year old 3M factory article which got pulled by one of the editors in the end. Only in that case someone in a factory "discovered a forcefield".
I follow the diver
Down to Central Park
Swimming in the stream of change
A January summer night
Divers swimming by
Listening to the stream of change
The world closing in
Did you ever think
That we could be so close, like brothers
The future's in the air
I can feel it everywhere
Flowing with the stream of change
Chorus:
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the stream of change
Swimming down the street
Distant memories
Are buried in the water forever
I follow the diver
Down to Central Park
Listening to the stream of change
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow share their dreams
With you and me
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the stream of change
The stream of change flows straight
Into the face of the Statue of Liberty
Like a stormwind that will ring
The freedom bell for peace of mind
Let your sonar ping
What my guitar wants to say
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow share their dreams
With you and me
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the stream of change
You fucking SLASHBOTS CANT MAKE A FUCKING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A REAL TROLL AND A PERFECTLY SOUND OPINION, you gaping assholes!
The sample above was included so that it is possible to make difference between the above two. Please _moderate_ this post as troll, as this is what it deserves, but my original post would not.
Use pyth^H^H^H^Hrub^H^H^H...oh wait. NO. Cue the fucking jokes about using something else.
We are here reading this review because we want to use perl, so f*ck off, RoR, PHP, Python fanboys. Everything you can do in those languages i can do in perl, with style, so i NO don't want to hear about the hype of the year.
I couldn't live without perl one liners and i found the review helpful. Like many said before, perl doesn't force you to write readable code, but it doesn't mean noone can.
Best practice would be "use strict;use warnings;" and using indents properly.
I'd argue with this. There are no inherent rights. When humans started to build a society/country, a few rules were formed and a few rights were defined, then the rulebook went through constant change up until today. All of that is virtual anyway.
What you are arguing is semantics. It doesn't matter whether they wrote:
a.) "Congress grants you the freedom to speak"
or
b.) "Birth grants you the freedom to speak",
since the rights were defined by those who wrote the constitution/legal document in both cases.
Basically, rights can be seen as a trade. The agreement includes certain elements:
You were told that there are some rights you and others have, which the government will protect.
If you or others were to violate those rights, they are defined as crimes and the system acts against them.
You cannot resign/transfer/sell your rights.
You were assumed to have "signed" this agreement when you were born in a certain country.
"Rights" are more like a statement though, that the system will act in some ways. Mostly this happened because the system should ensure the survival of the people it's made up of, so for example murder was outlawed. A system , or more accurately, the systems are driven/shaped by evolution aswell, it tends to gravitate towards the best way to survive, or it just collapses/gets replaced by another one. The best way to survive is peace, so the system tries to ensure peace. However, if the system is vulnerable to malfunctioning (by wrong elected officials, for example), then it will sooner or later collapse/be replaced.
It's not god or birth, or constitution that gives us "rights", but the system, for it's own survival, for it's own reasons.
When the title says "Microsoft skips patch tuesday", it means that Microsoft will skip a patch's deployment on tuesday, not that they are going to cancel the "patch tuesday".
Oh come on, how many times we had a patch that needed another patch from MS?
Also, most F/OSS end-users profit from the simple fact, that the whole world is beta-testing the patch for them. How could MS hire that kind of testing force, ever?
Slashdot Mirror
Since the USPTO is playing the honest, I'll be frank too.
I don't observe anyone's intellectual property (the shortening of my constitutional rights (I'm Non-USA before someone cites the USA's constitution for me)), period. I would like to encourage others to protect their own rights too.
The best thing that could have been done to the patent system is to scrap the whole thing. Those who created it didn't go past modern economy 101, because, well, it was created 200-300 years ago (in a much more applicable form than it is in today, if i may add).
It's one thing that the intellectual property system reduces my right for freedom of speech (why can't i "say" data sequences on the net?), but it is also bad for the economy. It is a forced, artificial restriction much like prohibition was. Society can be interpreted as a continuation of evolution on some level. This means, that societies which made murder a "crime", survived better, for example. As a general rule of thumb, while respecting a few basic things, the less restrictive a society is, the better. Creating artificial restrictions is making a society function less optimal. Applying restrictions on computers, which eventually boil down to mathematics are:
a.) Not precise. (I demand to know the sequence of those base two numbers which you hold the copyright/patent on. If you can't reproduce those numbers, your copyright doesn't stand.)
b.) Because of a.), defining a copyrighted work is ambigous. Since what we define those copyrights on are very precise, creating a relation between the two sets are almost impossible. (Could you point me to the database where i can look up a copyrighted set of base two numbers, please, so that i can verify that i can make sure i don't infringe upon someone's copyright?)
Apart from these natural necessities, even if i were to accept the unfair artificial restriction placed upon me by society, i flatly refuse to accept to believe in the pack of _lies_ copyright and patent holders spread in order to protect their own selfish interests against society as a whole.
The dreaded day when someone copyrighted a mathematical expression happened decades ago, when someone decided that people should pay someone for copying specific binary bits apart from the ISP. There is a huge difference between paying for someone to create the knowledge about a sequence of specific bits (writing source code, translating that into binary executable) and for paying someone for the reversal of the artificial restriction of being denied the right to copy already known binary bits from one storage to another.
The paying for copying part is gravely vague too. What constitutes as copying? Installing an operating system is surely copying? Am i not allowed to copy then or not?
Modern communications require freedom of information. On communications i mean digital communication which is starting to gain strength lately, and will hopefully cleanse the world of this medieval copyright nonsense.
Exactly. Copyright is not a concern, copyright is the problem.
We see that technology invalidated copyright. The good reaction: we abolish copyright because it's just not feasible any more. The stupid reaction: putting our heads in the sand and pretending the problem does not exist for the sake of interests based on outdated business scheme.
Let's theorize: what would happen if we would invent a machine that is capable of replicating matter quite effectively? Would we still hold on to our precious paper money and just inflate it whenever someone prints 500 billion dollars worth and try to stop that by legislation? No, we would be stupid to do so. We would just deal away with physical money and turn to electronic more.
The situation is like that with copyright. We cannot just hold technology back because of legislation, especially such important one as communications.
So, you get mugged every week(get infected) and you keep reporting the event to the police(spyware scanner) who may or may not do something about it and you still repeat the same action over and over again?
A sensible person secures its neighbourhood (hw firewall/router), goes doing some bodybuilding and gets some self-defense stuff (linux), or the paranoid ones will go out in a tank, in a full body armour and a huge personal armoury inside the tank, while going to kung fu school to Pai Mei (openbsd).
It's a dupe of the 25 year old 3M factory article which got pulled by one of the editors in the end. Only in that case someone in a factory "discovered a forcefield".
I follow the diver
Down to Central Park
Swimming in the stream of change
A January summer night
Divers swimming by
Listening to the stream of change
The world closing in
Did you ever think
That we could be so close, like brothers
The future's in the air
I can feel it everywhere
Flowing with the stream of change
Chorus:
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the stream of change
Swimming down the street
Distant memories
Are buried in the water forever
I follow the diver
Down to Central Park
Listening to the stream of change
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow share their dreams
With you and me
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the stream of change
The stream of change flows straight
Into the face of the Statue of Liberty
Like a stormwind that will ring
The freedom bell for peace of mind
Let your sonar ping
What my guitar wants to say
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow share their dreams
With you and me
Take me to the magic of the moment
On a gory night
Where the children of tomorrow dream away
In the stream of change
The radiation wouldn't be a problem for republicans. Cockroaches have radiation-resistance.
We certainly can't. A Vogon constructor fleet is an entirely different matter though...
Bwahahah. One of the stupidest post i've ever seen to get modded up to 5.
You must be new here.
Yea, right, "troll".
You fucking SLASHBOTS CANT MAKE A FUCKING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A REAL TROLL AND A PERFECTLY SOUND OPINION, you gaping assholes!
The sample above was included so that it is possible to make difference between the above two. Please _moderate_ this post as troll, as this is what it deserves, but my original post would not.
Yes.
Perl didn't decrease in popularity, the others increased as people found out they can do "professional" websites in php, etc.
RoR would be nice but it lacks the granularity of perl.
That doesn't make what you have said more funny.
Use pyth^H^H^H^Hrub^H^H^H...oh wait. NO. Cue the fucking jokes about using something else.
We are here reading this review because we want to use perl, so f*ck off, RoR, PHP, Python fanboys. Everything you can do in those languages i can do in perl, with style, so i NO don't want to hear about the hype of the year.
I couldn't live without perl one liners and i found the review helpful. Like many said before, perl doesn't force you to write readable code, but it doesn't mean noone can.
Best practice would be "use strict;use warnings;" and using indents properly.
Yea, this is mentioned in the Securing Debian manual aswell, but this particular method does not work anymore...
I'm sure slashdot can spare a few trolls.
Evil grin.
Troll? Get a sense of humour people...
I'd argue with this. There are no inherent rights. When humans started to build a society/country, a few rules were formed and a few rights were defined, then the rulebook went through constant change up until today. All of that is virtual anyway.
What you are arguing is semantics. It doesn't matter whether they wrote:
a.) "Congress grants you the freedom to speak"
or
b.) "Birth grants you the freedom to speak",
since the rights were defined by those who wrote the constitution/legal document in both cases.
Basically, rights can be seen as a trade. The agreement includes certain elements:
"Rights" are more like a statement though, that the system will act in some ways. Mostly this happened because the system should ensure the survival of the people it's made up of, so for example murder was outlawed. A system , or more accurately, the systems are driven/shaped by evolution aswell, it tends to gravitate towards the best way to survive, or it just collapses/gets replaced by another one. The best way to survive is peace, so the system tries to ensure peace. However, if the system is vulnerable to malfunctioning (by wrong elected officials, for example), then it will sooner or later collapse/be replaced.
It's not god or birth, or constitution that gives us "rights", but the system, for it's own survival, for it's own reasons.
I didn't use MS products lately...
When the title says "Microsoft skips patch tuesday", it means that Microsoft will skip a patch's deployment on tuesday, not that they are going to cancel the "patch tuesday".
Sigh.
Oh come on, how many times we had a patch that needed another patch from MS?
Also, most F/OSS end-users profit from the simple fact, that the whole world is beta-testing the patch for them. How could MS hire that kind of testing force, ever?
Wow talk about late reply ;)
This one seems to be a time paradox.
The post is it's own parent, created by some time flux and a mixture of usenet bitterness. The parent posted itself as a reply to its own "cid".
There, this explains it quite well. I'm sure i'll get lots of scientific cred for it since most people are still in trance from the 1TB laptop.
Taco should read the description of this page. It's supposed to be news for nerds, not for idiots.
This place is going downhill, so i think i'll just join the others migrating to some other nerd site.
Who knows, maybe i'll donate this account to GNAA. They at least have some editorial quality, journalistic integrity and some entertaining value.
Yeah, there is a reason why he is one of the very few people on my foes list.
He demonstrated his ignorance many times before.