"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
I believe this is a subtle reference to the Atari Combat game which came out with the Atari 2600. Presumably the other two games referred to are as well; can anybody name them?
For effective stem cell therapy, you need to use your own stem cells. Those would only be available if you saved some at birth (there are companies that offer to freeze and store umbilical cord blood on the off chance that someday it might be useful.) But for most people alive now, adult cells would need to be used.
No argument from me there. To put our brave volunteers into harm's way without doing everything possible to protect them is just evil. Rumsfeld, are you listening?
What good will it do to release the console in 3 months when it will take at least 6 months to write games for it? Unless, of course, it is emulating some other platform.
How well armored are the Apache's rotors? How much more catastrophic is it for the rotor to come into contact with shrapnel than it is for a Humvee's tires?
The point was, the fewer people involved in my astroturfing scheme, the less chance there is of the truth leaking out. These guys got in trouble because they were too lazy to do their own dirty work. Hundreds of other smarter businesses are still getting away with it.
In the United States, the federal government is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, section 9 of the U.S. Constitution. Some would argue that prematurely terminating existing copyrights and patents violates that provision. However, but the same token, extending currently copyrights should also be seen as a violation of that provision. To be logical, the laws that were in place at the time the intellectual property protection was initially filed for should apply for the entire lifetime of that protection. All we can really do is to prevent douchebags from doing this in the future, and then wait 20 years for existing obvious patents to age out.
The lawsuits mentioned on slashdot sound more frivolous because you're only hearing half of the story. This of course doesn't explain the SCO Group case, for which the only rational response must be "WTF?!?", even if (especially if) both sides arguments are carefully examined.
He's not trying to get damages out of them; he's trying to get them to settle by buying "licenses" to make the problem go away. Plus, he's suing companies that HAVE money, while they still do have some assets. If I was trying to get money out of AOL, I'd be in a big hurry too!
Because amphibious vehicles have worked out so well that now everyone owns one! I suspect it is even harder to build something that both makes a good aircraft and a good car than it is to build something that both makes a good boat and a good car. As a child, my father sold Allsport Tracker amphibious ATVs. Guess what -- they sucked. Big time.
Right you are. The secret to surviving IEDs is to build an inverted-cone shaped vehicle where the passengers sit high up away from the road and the shape deflects blasts outwards. Which is exactly what they already do in existing MRAPs
In 40 years of development, it has never flown with a passenger. Moller has been convicted of securities fraud. I suspect it would be faster and easier to start from scratch with a workable design than to pump more money into the failed Moller Skycar. That being said, the Skycar was way ahead of it's time in the same way the Apple Newton was, in that we have only recently come up with engines with the necessary power/weight ratio and control systems necessary to make something like this work. Sounds like the reason they gave up on the specification for use of ducted rotors for this project was that nobody could actually get it to work. I have a friend that is also trying to develop a flying vehicle similar to the sky car -- let's just say that he is much better at coming up with ideas then he is at actually bringing something to market.
From the article, yes it sounds like it uses powered rotation for takeoff, then autorotation once it's moving. But the whole idea seems silly to me. By definition, a flying vehicle must have less armor than a ground-based one. Either build a flying vehicle or build a truck. Try to build something that does both, and it will inevitably suck at both.
To make real money out of bootlegging music you need CD duplicating equipment, workers, distribution channels, etc. That hypothetical "One kid with a computer" isn't making any money at all, so he's a lot closer to my "One kid bootlegging fashions for herself". Although you are correct that duplication of digital information is easy and cheap, that doesn't change the argument. People pay lots of money for name-brand fashions because they like the label, and it's not worth their time to make their own rip-offs. Likewise, people continue to pay money for CDs and DVDs rather than download them from the 'net because their time is valuable, they get better quality buying licensed products, and they usually get physical artifacts with their CD or DVD (e.g. the 3D glasses that came with the 3D movie I bought my daughter). Buying physical CDs or DVD is analogous to buying fashions. Bittorrent competes with iTunes, not with physical disks. Also note that even with the ridiculous copyright enforcement regimes we have in place, bootlegs of physical CDs and DVDs are widely available and cheap, despite the best efforts of the RIAA and MPAA to extort money from children and old ladies that don't own computers.
What kind of live shows can Adobe do to recoup the millions it pays developers if the software itself becomes free? Right, because if GNU/Linux has proven anything, it is that nobody will write software unless you pay them millions of dollars! Viable business models change; the solution is not to rewrite the laws to prop up the old industries that refuse to change their business model. Copyright has only been around for about the last 200 years... are you insisting that nobody wrote any good books or music before copyright was put into place? Granted, before copyright most artists were supported by monarchies and churches in a patronage system, but there is no reason why patronage wouldn't still work.
Not something that any kid with a computer can do. Right... it's something that any kid with scissors, a sewing machine, and a charge account at JoAnne's Fabrics can do!
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty far back:
"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
-- Attributed to SOCRATES by Plato
I believe this is a subtle reference to the Atari Combat game which came out with the Atari 2600. Presumably the other two games referred to are as well; can anybody name them?
Wikipedia is not a valid reference in an adversarial system because anyone can edit an article so say whatever they want before citing that article.
For effective stem cell therapy, you need to use your own stem cells. Those would only be available if you saved some at birth (there are companies that offer to freeze and store umbilical cord blood on the off chance that someday it might be useful.) But for most people alive now, adult cells would need to be used.
No argument from me there. To put our brave volunteers into harm's way without doing everything possible to protect them is just evil. Rumsfeld, are you listening?
To answer my own question: "Easy". Their just asking to be sued by Staples!
What does the "E" in Eee PC stand for?
What good will it do to release the console in 3 months when it will take at least 6 months to write games for it? Unless, of course, it is emulating some other platform.
How well armored are the Apache's rotors? How much more catastrophic is it for the rotor to come into contact with shrapnel than it is for a Humvee's tires?
Half an hour after playing on it, you feel like playing games again.
The point was, the fewer people involved in my astroturfing scheme, the less chance there is of the truth leaking out. These guys got in trouble because they were too lazy to do their own dirty work. Hundreds of other smarter businesses are still getting away with it.
In the United States, the federal government is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, section 9 of the U.S. Constitution. Some would argue that prematurely terminating existing copyrights and patents violates that provision. However, but the same token, extending currently copyrights should also be seen as a violation of that provision. To be logical, the laws that were in place at the time the intellectual property protection was initially filed for should apply for the entire lifetime of that protection. All we can really do is to prevent douchebags from doing this in the future, and then wait 20 years for existing obvious patents to age out.
He is the proverbial "lesser of two weasels".
The lawsuits mentioned on slashdot sound more frivolous because you're only hearing half of the story. This of course doesn't explain the SCO Group case, for which the only rational response must be "WTF?!?", even if (especially if) both sides arguments are carefully examined.
He's not trying to get damages out of them; he's trying to get them to settle by buying "licenses" to make the problem go away. Plus, he's suing companies that HAVE money, while they still do have some assets. If I was trying to get money out of AOL, I'd be in a big hurry too!
Because amphibious vehicles have worked out so well that now everyone owns one! I suspect it is even harder to build something that both makes a good aircraft and a good car than it is to build something that both makes a good boat and a good car. As a child, my father sold Allsport Tracker amphibious ATVs. Guess what -- they sucked. Big time.
Right you are. The secret to surviving IEDs is to build an inverted-cone shaped vehicle where the passengers sit high up away from the road and the shape deflects blasts outwards. Which is exactly what they already do in existing MRAPs
In 40 years of development, it has never flown with a passenger. Moller has been convicted of securities fraud. I suspect it would be faster and easier to start from scratch with a workable design than to pump more money into the failed Moller Skycar. That being said, the Skycar was way ahead of it's time in the same way the Apple Newton was, in that we have only recently come up with engines with the necessary power/weight ratio and control systems necessary to make something like this work. Sounds like the reason they gave up on the specification for use of ducted rotors for this project was that nobody could actually get it to work. I have a friend that is also trying to develop a flying vehicle similar to the sky car -- let's just say that he is much better at coming up with ideas then he is at actually bringing something to market.
From the article, yes it sounds like it uses powered rotation for takeoff, then autorotation once it's moving. But the whole idea seems silly to me. By definition, a flying vehicle must have less armor than a ground-based one. Either build a flying vehicle or build a truck. Try to build something that does both, and it will inevitably suck at both.
So the pixels are either 8 times more dense or 64 times more dense, depending on whether you're talking linear measurement or area.
I wanted to get cremated, but I wound up just making an ash of myself...
I have written a derivative piece called 4'34" that is even better... am I subject to a copyright infringement lawsuit?
To make real money out of bootlegging music you need CD duplicating equipment, workers, distribution channels, etc. That hypothetical "One kid with a computer" isn't making any money at all, so he's a lot closer to my "One kid bootlegging fashions for herself". Although you are correct that duplication of digital information is easy and cheap, that doesn't change the argument. People pay lots of money for name-brand fashions because they like the label, and it's not worth their time to make their own rip-offs. Likewise, people continue to pay money for CDs and DVDs rather than download them from the 'net because their time is valuable, they get better quality buying licensed products, and they usually get physical artifacts with their CD or DVD (e.g. the 3D glasses that came with the 3D movie I bought my daughter). Buying physical CDs or DVD is analogous to buying fashions. Bittorrent competes with iTunes, not with physical disks. Also note that even with the ridiculous copyright enforcement regimes we have in place, bootlegs of physical CDs and DVDs are widely available and cheap, despite the best efforts of the RIAA and MPAA to extort money from children and old ladies that don't own computers.
What kind of live shows can Adobe do to recoup the millions it pays developers if the software itself becomes free? Right, because if GNU/Linux has proven anything, it is that nobody will write software unless you pay them millions of dollars! Viable business models change; the solution is not to rewrite the laws to prop up the old industries that refuse to change their business model. Copyright has only been around for about the last 200 years... are you insisting that nobody wrote any good books or music before copyright was put into place? Granted, before copyright most artists were supported by monarchies and churches in a patronage system, but there is no reason why patronage wouldn't still work.
Not something that any kid with a computer can do. Right... it's something that any kid with scissors, a sewing machine, and a charge account at JoAnne's Fabrics can do!