At Columbia, a few of my teachers take novels and have them mass copied via Village Copier. It's pretty illegal, but it guarnatees that the books are available.
I totally agree. Rob Malda doesn't have any experience in US law or open source software that qualifies his opinions any more than this site's typical reader. He barely obtained a BS in computer science (his words) from a less than prestigious university (when was the last time Hope gave MIT's media lab a shiver?). He's no better than your typical high school student who is interested in computers and politics when it comes to this story. So why are his "cutting insights" in bold on the main page of the article? Because he's a vain, self-important pretender who has contributed one thing to society: a web site that he sold before the ink on the napkin Andover wrote their initital offer upon dried. (Can you tell I don't like him?)
I've read the posts and I've also read the original Apogee document. I don't see how you can say things like "the wording is bad" and "the meaning is obscure." Maybe you've never read true litigous works before, but there's a certain formality---sometimes jargon---that's required to ensure the meaning is never lost. It's a lot like UML or PDL (to put it in computer terms) or mathematical logic. While it might not make sense to the uninitiated, it makes sense to those who have studied law or related fields, the people who have to be certain of any legal document's meaning, like judges or policy-makers. The author can't always be there to make sure you understand their intents (plus, if it's ambiguous, people can change the meaning at a whim---look at how they've changed the Constitution). To put a legally binding, universally applicable document in slang would ruin its force. Ambiguity isn't acceptable when people's livlihoods are at stake (although, it could be argued that someone using Apogee's logo next to a pornographic photo wouldn't harm either party (until Apogee sues somebody)).
I don't understand how a seemingly intelligent guy like Taco could be so confused about this whole Apogee issue. It's like he's never read any of the primary information. Nowhere on Apogee's page does it say that they could or would sue anyone for deriding them, and here Taco is hyperboling about how he played chicken with them and won---about how he knew they wouldn't sue him because they had no case. He's making up his own little delusional world here. It's really weird. And all the loyal Slashdotters that do nothing but read the post and, like Labradors, blindly lap up and assimilate Taco's feelings on every issue are making it worse. Taco just runs a news site. He doesn't know bit zero about law and he's making the pretentious claim that he does. It's the same with Tim O'Reilly. Did any one ever read his interview with the head of US Patents? He made a fool of himself, saying things that were patently (pun) false and having the government official tell him so point after point.
Tama's not as worthless as it seems. The only other tries at making realistic robotic animals are AIBO and the insects at MIT. It's pretty hard to get funding for such ventures in the academic environment. Having private groups undertake animal AI and robotics opens a very lucrative (though not academically pure) opportunity for research. Who knows, if demand keeps up, in twenty years the next big advances in AI might end up being pushed by Sony, Lunka, or Nintendo and not Caltech or MIT.
According to Blue's News, the CEO if Id says that Quake 3 is definitely NOT Gold. Duh. I mean, why would a company release a test and then issue a go ahead less than a week after? Especially when said software is offering scores of new features not seen in the alphas? And more so when said features tend to crash MY Q3 server (and since I'm the only person that really matters, I'm sure Id would take this into account). I think the Stomped crew needs to review their policy of imbibing large quantities of liquid LSD before writing articles...
Slashdot Mirror
At Columbia, a few of my teachers take novels and have them mass copied via Village Copier. It's pretty illegal, but it guarnatees that the books are available.
No. The other guy's right. Nowhere in the letter does it say it took "programmers" 5 years.
I totally agree. Rob Malda doesn't have any experience in US law or open source software that qualifies his opinions any more than this site's typical reader. He barely obtained a BS in computer science (his words) from a less than prestigious university (when was the last time Hope gave MIT's media lab a shiver?). He's no better than your typical high school student who is interested in computers and politics when it comes to this story. So why are his "cutting insights" in bold on the main page of the article? Because he's a vain, self-important pretender who has contributed one thing to society: a web site that he sold before the ink on the napkin Andover wrote their initital offer upon dried. (Can you tell I don't like him?)
I've read the posts and I've also read the original Apogee document. I don't see how you can say things like "the wording is bad" and "the meaning is obscure." Maybe you've never read true litigous works before, but there's a certain formality---sometimes jargon---that's required to ensure the meaning is never lost. It's a lot like UML or PDL (to put it in computer terms) or mathematical logic. While it might not make sense to the uninitiated, it makes sense to those who have studied law or related fields, the people who have to be certain of any legal document's meaning, like judges or policy-makers. The author can't always be there to make sure you understand their intents (plus, if it's ambiguous, people can change the meaning at a whim---look at how they've changed the Constitution). To put a legally binding, universally applicable document in slang would ruin its force. Ambiguity isn't acceptable when people's livlihoods are at stake (although, it could be argued that someone using Apogee's logo next to a pornographic photo wouldn't harm either party (until Apogee sues somebody)).
The phrase is "pedantic."
I don't understand how a seemingly intelligent guy like Taco could be so confused about this whole Apogee issue. It's like he's never read any of the primary information. Nowhere on Apogee's page does it say that they could or would sue anyone for deriding them, and here Taco is hyperboling about how he played chicken with them and won---about how he knew they wouldn't sue him because they had no case. He's making up his own little delusional world here. It's really weird. And all the loyal Slashdotters that do nothing but read the post and, like Labradors, blindly lap up and assimilate Taco's feelings on every issue are making it worse. Taco just runs a news site. He doesn't know bit zero about law and he's making the pretentious claim that he does. It's the same with Tim O'Reilly. Did any one ever read his interview with the head of US Patents? He made a fool of himself, saying things that were patently (pun) false and having the government official tell him so point after point.
Tama's not as worthless as it seems. The only other tries at making realistic robotic animals are AIBO and the insects at MIT. It's pretty hard to get funding for such ventures in the academic environment. Having private groups undertake animal AI and robotics opens a very lucrative (though not academically pure) opportunity for research. Who knows, if demand keeps up, in twenty years the next big advances in AI might end up being pushed by Sony, Lunka, or Nintendo and not Caltech or MIT.
According to Blue's News, the CEO if Id says that Quake 3 is definitely NOT Gold. Duh. I mean, why would a company release a test and then issue a go ahead less than a week after? Especially when said software is offering scores of new features not seen in the alphas? And more so when said features tend to crash MY Q3 server (and since I'm the only person that really matters, I'm sure Id would take this into account). I think the Stomped crew needs to review their policy of imbibing large quantities of liquid LSD before writing articles...