It depends on how much of the original work is quoted and used in the secondary work.
A journalist may put in a few quotes, but the entire article is their own work and can stand alone without reading the original. A review is very different from the original work.
A professor may use more of the original work, but the article is their own work and can stand alone without reading the original. An analysis of the themes and motives (or just writing style) is very different from the plot itself.
A lexicon like the one under discussion uses many quotes and cannot stand alone without the original work. It depends entirely on the original books and the secondary author adds nothing new.
I don't believe there is a double standard here, as the third case is completely different from the first two.
I had a quick look at the site, and it really is a comprehensive guide to the Harry Potter universe. If I were more interested in the universe, I'd be fascinated by it. Having said that, it is completely drawn from the books with no interpretation or analysis to aid a fair use defence. The only similar guides I've ever seen published have been with the express approval of the author or copyright holders (I'm thinking Tolkien books and map collections, Discworld quizzes and maps, WH40K anything, Star Wars anything, etc) so it looks like there's a pretty well established rule here.
But not just any dirt will do. It has to be dirt in a geologically stable zone, well out of reach of the water table and with no chance of being eroded away in the next 10-100 thousand years.
Otherwise we'd just bury it under your house (we took a vote, sorry).
Another question: We place our trust in Google every time we use its services, but why do we place more trust in a profit-maximizing enterprise than in our own government? Ostensibly we can hold our government accountable through elections, but we have less influence on corporations. Sure, we have the power of the wallet, but when's the last time you saw an effective consumer boycott in the information economy?
That's a good question.
When a corporation is publicly seen to do wrong, they suffer because customers turn away from it, if possible*. The wrong may even cause the government to step in, either at state or federal level, and prosecute a case against the corporation. Even if there's no illegality, customers can turn away because of the bad publicity. Yahoo was hit recently by the repetition of the story about them giving information to aid the Chinese government in cracking down on pro-democracy dissidents. I don't have hard data here, but I would assume that Yahoo was hit in the numbers by people turning to other search engines in protest.
If Google upsets people, they can almost trivially switch to another competing search engine.
We can't switch governments with the same ease though. They only hold elections every three or four years (depending where in the world you live) and realising this, quite often try the really objectionable stuff early in their term, so that people come around or at least forget the impact by the time the next election rolls around. In a very real sense, governments are less accountable than corporations in that we can't just turn to a competitor or buy a few shares and vote against the board. We have to wait and 'maintain the rage' until we can next cast our votes.
.
(* Corporations with monopoly power are special cases, which is why they get special regulation to try to ensure fairness.)
I mean it, what exactly, specifically, is stopping you?
Well, aside from the US military forces, probably the way that the first (small) group to do this will be branded a terrorist organisation then attacked with the full force of the law. The government will make them all look like Timothy McVeigh, and the public will be glad to see them put away for life.
You can bear arms all you like, but there's no way you can fight the government if the military back them and not you. All the handguns and even machine guns in the world won't stop a tank or a fighter plane.
You need a better solution than violence and, conveniently, there's one coming up soon. If you really disagree with the government, organise a grass-roots change through voting. Get people interested and focused on change. Make the politicians answer to you.
303Million Concerned Citizens cannot possibly be wrong.
The people voted the government in. Still think large numbers of people are always right?
I'm someone who plays in the WoW environment, and I'm okay there, but as soon as I go against a similarly spec'd player I nearly always lose. I think I've got some sort of co-ordination problem - while the other player is leaping around like a rabbit on speed and hitting me with well synchronised de-buffs, spells and all sorts of unholy damage, I'm trying to attack them and hit my little buff button while not looking away from the screen (or I'll probably die).
Whoops, hit the wrong button. I guess dispel undead won't help against that blood elf, but that bubble-shieldy thing would've been nice and given me the time to heal up a bit. Whoa - how'd he do that? And that! What *is* that twirly thing he did with the sword? And I'm dead. Again. Curses!
I'm like this in most games. As soon as it gets really fast-paced I start making mistakes. I think I tagged plasma grenades on myself in Halo, while looking wildly in all directions and being shot up by hysterically-laughing Covenant grunts.
I get better, but rely on the game mechanics a bit more than I should. I could ask for changes to the Paladin class in WoW to make things easier for me (guns! more bubbles! more stuns!) but my skill level would drop down to the lowest common denominator and I'd suck even more.
I'd be ashamed of my utter lack of gamer-adequacy if I were having less fun.
Your definition of success is irrelevant to others. For some, work is just something they do but being a success is all about their relationships/hobbies/amateur theatre/etc. For some success is about financial reward, and for others it's about being in a role where they feel valued. For you it's about being able to retire and live in whatever way you like.
That's all well and good. Different people define 'success' differently, and while your definition may work for you, I know few people who would agree.
I'm a casual WoW player. I just play for a bit of fun, giving up time I might be watching TV or reading a book instead. The social aspect of the game is fun, but I can't commit to arranging raids or multi-person instances because something might come up that I actually care about (my wife might say "let's go out to dinner tonight!" and I'll dump WoW without a second thought).
For me, the changes make it easier to get to L60 (my only character is a L55 Paladin, so there's not much more to go), add new content and quests, and hopefully will make dungeons a bit more playable for me. That's all good as far as I'm concerned!
I've seen a lot of posts about how WoW is dumbing down RPGs, how the game balance is poor or why PvP is not as good as before. Not having been involved in this game until recently, these posts seem to be a mix of "it were better when we were young" attitudes (think Liverpudlian accent), resistance to any changes and some actual concern for the game's quality. It's a fun game today, easy to pick up, easy to put down and simple to play.
I don't play for massive challenges, I play for fun.
The frame around the tablet in the article looks whiter, which I put down to light reflecting at a different angle to the MODbook photo. The key feature here is the oddly-shaped piece around the camera. It's identical in both images. I think it very unlikely Apple would lift that design from a third party.
The illustrations are bland enough to be worthless.
The photo is of a device already existing, that people desperate for an Apple tablet can buy today. I think it has normal warranty support, but the non-Apple-ness of the mod may turn people off.
I don't believe tablet PCs are a worthwhile area for Apple. They may be nice and have some real niches, but I don't see that they're successful enough to warrant an Apple model. I may well be wrong, but I'll only believe in them when I see them released on the Apple website or through some official communication.
Rumours about Apple products are almost always wrong, and there are a few stock market 'analysts' (read: "profiteers") out there who feed rumours, short the stock and make money out of the inevitable stock dip when it turns out the rumour was false after all. I completely distrust any rumours about companies these days, there are too many people with too many conflicting motives.
I've always been a bit disturbed about the Finder's 'instant delete' actions, where files replaced in this manner don't end up in the trash bin but are just removed in an unrecoverable manner.
I see your filing cabinet metaphor, but having never done filing I wasn't familiar with this concept. I think the behaviour in the Finder is logical, but destructive. It should be recoverable, but it not. I don't think anything says "you should have known" but I see where you're coming from.
As for the warnings etc, how many users actually read those warning pop-ups? And if they do read them do you reckon they'd understand exactly what was meant?
"An older item named "Foo" already exists in this location. Do you want to replace it with the newer one you are moving?" Stop | Replace
So you think people have a hard time with that? You need to mix with more intelligent people!
And yes, I do think it's logical. Why shouldn't a folder replace another of the same name? It's all UI decisions, and so long as they're consistent, they're logical.
No, when I drop my test folder into the folder containing my second test folder, I get a warning about replacing a folder and I know that's been there since at least System 6 (my first Mac) and probably from the 1984 Mac. I tried dropping my test folder onto the second test folder directly, and it just became a sub-folder as expected, with all files intact in both levels.
You may not have given specific enough instructions though - can you give a step-by-step process to this bug? Or is it just not true?
That's true, but consider a road accident - you won't know to check before it happens, and you'll be a lot happier if you get the message immediately. I think that the likelihood is so low that it shouldn't be a good argument, but it's still a possibility.
I like the idea of having some cinemas that passively block signals (low current through a wire mesh in the walls) and letting people make their choices. Just so long as they don't have to sign waivers when they buy tickets! Of course, since this story is about the US (I'm in Aus.) there'd be someone who'd sue because they didn't get some 'important' message.
Fair enough. Like if Windows lost data, it'd be like saying "My gaming console lost data." Or if Linux lost data, it'd be like saying "My server lost data."
Only complete bastards would be happy that someone, somewhere lost important data. I'd like to see more transparency on the tagging mechanism, such as who voted for which tags.
Okay, this is a terrible bug, but to me the real news is that the Finder has a move operation. I've only ever used the simple drag (ie copy) when transferring files to other disks. That might also be why I've never had this disconnection-delete problem.
The workaround is trivial - copy files until you're certain. In fact, I'd recommend doing that in all OSs anyway. Moves or cut-pastes are fraught with potential badness. I've lost files in Windows doing that, and always wondered what's wrong with just moving and deleting manually later on.
The dialogue box that appears says "An older item named "Documents" already exists in this location. Do you want to replace it with the newer one you are moving?" The options are "Stop" and "Replace."
There is no "OK" button, but leaving that aside, the message makes it pretty clear that this is a folder replacement happening, not a merge. That's not stupid design, but a different design choice. I find the merging concept you describe more confusing, but that's my personal preference.
The Mac has exhibited this same behaviour since 1984, so even if you dislike this design choice, it's been consistent and predictable across all OS versions and releases.
Here in Australia I've heard people discussing the most personal things in trams and trains, loudly for all to hear. I've even heard people arranging to pick up marijuana!
There's a comedy show on the public channel called "The Chaser's War on Everything" which has the character Clive (the slightly too-loud commuter). It's a hidden camera segment filmed live on public transport where the guy pretends to call his doctor, wife or someone else, to talk about his venereal diseases or something similarly outrageous.
Would your presence have prevented his death? If not, your nonpresence is just another of life's unfortunate circumstance
Wow, you're cold.
Your point is logical but utterly devoid of emotion. I can't imagine the mindset you must have if you truly believe your statement. It's certainly not a humane one.
Or maybe they evolved, developed intellect, created cities (that wouldn't have survived 160M years anyway), spaceships and left just before the calamity.
Yes, I knew it was Dave Callan (I saw him at the Comedy Festival in Melbourne a few years back), but I didn't think his name would mean anything to people on this mostly US-based website. For some reason I always think of him as Scottish. I don't know why, and I know it's a terrible thing to get someone's nationality wrong like that, but I just can't get that right. At least I didn't say he was British!
Slashdot Mirror
It depends on how much of the original work is quoted and used in the secondary work.
A journalist may put in a few quotes, but the entire article is their own work and can stand alone without reading the original. A review is very different from the original work.
A professor may use more of the original work, but the article is their own work and can stand alone without reading the original. An analysis of the themes and motives (or just writing style) is very different from the plot itself.
A lexicon like the one under discussion uses many quotes and cannot stand alone without the original work. It depends entirely on the original books and the secondary author adds nothing new.
I don't believe there is a double standard here, as the third case is completely different from the first two.
I had a quick look at the site, and it really is a comprehensive guide to the Harry Potter universe. If I were more interested in the universe, I'd be fascinated by it. Having said that, it is completely drawn from the books with no interpretation or analysis to aid a fair use defence. The only similar guides I've ever seen published have been with the express approval of the author or copyright holders (I'm thinking Tolkien books and map collections, Discworld quizzes and maps, WH40K anything, Star Wars anything, etc) so it looks like there's a pretty well established rule here.
But not just any dirt will do. It has to be dirt in a geologically stable zone, well out of reach of the water table and with no chance of being eroded away in the next 10-100 thousand years.
Otherwise we'd just bury it under your house (we took a vote, sorry).
Another question: We place our trust in Google every time we use its services, but why do we place more trust in a profit-maximizing enterprise than in our own government? Ostensibly we can hold our government accountable through elections, but we have less influence on corporations. Sure, we have the power of the wallet, but when's the last time you saw an effective consumer boycott in the information economy?
That's a good question.
When a corporation is publicly seen to do wrong, they suffer because customers turn away from it, if possible*. The wrong may even cause the government to step in, either at state or federal level, and prosecute a case against the corporation. Even if there's no illegality, customers can turn away because of the bad publicity. Yahoo was hit recently by the repetition of the story about them giving information to aid the Chinese government in cracking down on pro-democracy dissidents. I don't have hard data here, but I would assume that Yahoo was hit in the numbers by people turning to other search engines in protest.
If Google upsets people, they can almost trivially switch to another competing search engine.
We can't switch governments with the same ease though. They only hold elections every three or four years (depending where in the world you live) and realising this, quite often try the really objectionable stuff early in their term, so that people come around or at least forget the impact by the time the next election rolls around. In a very real sense, governments are less accountable than corporations in that we can't just turn to a competitor or buy a few shares and vote against the board. We have to wait and 'maintain the rage' until we can next cast our votes.
.
(* Corporations with monopoly power are special cases, which is why they get special regulation to try to ensure fairness.)
I'm not a US citizen, but...
I mean it, what exactly, specifically, is stopping you?
Well, aside from the US military forces, probably the way that the first (small) group to do this will be branded a terrorist organisation then attacked with the full force of the law. The government will make them all look like Timothy McVeigh, and the public will be glad to see them put away for life.
You can bear arms all you like, but there's no way you can fight the government if the military back them and not you. All the handguns and even machine guns in the world won't stop a tank or a fighter plane.
You need a better solution than violence and, conveniently, there's one coming up soon. If you really disagree with the government, organise a grass-roots change through voting. Get people interested and focused on change. Make the politicians answer to you.
303Million Concerned Citizens cannot possibly be wrong.
The people voted the government in. Still think large numbers of people are always right?
I'm someone who plays in the WoW environment, and I'm okay there, but as soon as I go against a similarly spec'd player I nearly always lose. I think I've got some sort of co-ordination problem - while the other player is leaping around like a rabbit on speed and hitting me with well synchronised de-buffs, spells and all sorts of unholy damage, I'm trying to attack them and hit my little buff button while not looking away from the screen (or I'll probably die).
Whoops, hit the wrong button. I guess dispel undead won't help against that blood elf, but that bubble-shieldy thing would've been nice and given me the time to heal up a bit. Whoa - how'd he do that? And that! What *is* that twirly thing he did with the sword? And I'm dead. Again. Curses!
I'm like this in most games. As soon as it gets really fast-paced I start making mistakes. I think I tagged plasma grenades on myself in Halo, while looking wildly in all directions and being shot up by hysterically-laughing Covenant grunts.
I get better, but rely on the game mechanics a bit more than I should. I could ask for changes to the Paladin class in WoW to make things easier for me (guns! more bubbles! more stuns!) but my skill level would drop down to the lowest common denominator and I'd suck even more.
I'd be ashamed of my utter lack of gamer-adequacy if I were having less fun.
Your definition of success is irrelevant to others. For some, work is just something they do but being a success is all about their relationships/hobbies/amateur theatre/etc. For some success is about financial reward, and for others it's about being in a role where they feel valued. For you it's about being able to retire and live in whatever way you like.
That's all well and good. Different people define 'success' differently, and while your definition may work for you, I know few people who would agree.
12-item mail = good for me!
Lately I've collected lots of herbs by killing tree elementals in Felwood, and mailing them to my wife's herbalist takes *ages*.
This is a sensible change, probably overdue but I've not played the game for long enough to really know how much pain it's caused.
I'm slower at levelling than you, but I thought that as well. Still, it was fun and maybe it's time to try out a new class.
I'm a casual WoW player. I just play for a bit of fun, giving up time I might be watching TV or reading a book instead. The social aspect of the game is fun, but I can't commit to arranging raids or multi-person instances because something might come up that I actually care about (my wife might say "let's go out to dinner tonight!" and I'll dump WoW without a second thought).
For me, the changes make it easier to get to L60 (my only character is a L55 Paladin, so there's not much more to go), add new content and quests, and hopefully will make dungeons a bit more playable for me. That's all good as far as I'm concerned!
I've seen a lot of posts about how WoW is dumbing down RPGs, how the game balance is poor or why PvP is not as good as before. Not having been involved in this game until recently, these posts seem to be a mix of "it were better when we were young" attitudes (think Liverpudlian accent), resistance to any changes and some actual concern for the game's quality. It's a fun game today, easy to pick up, easy to put down and simple to play.
I don't play for massive challenges, I play for fun.
The changes work for me.
SuperDuper and an external Linux-based NAS running AFP.
Look at the article's photo:
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/laptops/0,39029450,49293967,00.htm
Now look at the MODbook
http://eshop.macsales.com/Customized_Pages/modbook/modbook_info_p1.html
The frame around the tablet in the article looks whiter, which I put down to light reflecting at a different angle to the MODbook photo. The key feature here is the oddly-shaped piece around the camera. It's identical in both images. I think it very unlikely Apple would lift that design from a third party.
The illustrations are bland enough to be worthless.
The photo is of a device already existing, that people desperate for an Apple tablet can buy today. I think it has normal warranty support, but the non-Apple-ness of the mod may turn people off.
I don't believe tablet PCs are a worthwhile area for Apple. They may be nice and have some real niches, but I don't see that they're successful enough to warrant an Apple model. I may well be wrong, but I'll only believe in them when I see them released on the Apple website or through some official communication.
Rumours about Apple products are almost always wrong, and there are a few stock market 'analysts' (read: "profiteers") out there who feed rumours, short the stock and make money out of the inevitable stock dip when it turns out the rumour was false after all. I completely distrust any rumours about companies these days, there are too many people with too many conflicting motives.
I've always been a bit disturbed about the Finder's 'instant delete' actions, where files replaced in this manner don't end up in the trash bin but are just removed in an unrecoverable manner.
I see your filing cabinet metaphor, but having never done filing I wasn't familiar with this concept. I think the behaviour in the Finder is logical, but destructive. It should be recoverable, but it not. I don't think anything says "you should have known" but I see where you're coming from.
As for the warnings etc, how many users actually read those warning pop-ups? And if they do read them do you reckon they'd understand exactly what was meant?
"An older item named "Foo" already exists in this location. Do you want to replace it with the newer one you are moving?"
Stop | Replace
So you think people have a hard time with that? You need to mix with more intelligent people!
And yes, I do think it's logical. Why shouldn't a folder replace another of the same name? It's all UI decisions, and so long as they're consistent, they're logical.
No, when I drop my test folder into the folder containing my second test folder, I get a warning about replacing a folder and I know that's been there since at least System 6 (my first Mac) and probably from the 1984 Mac. I tried dropping my test folder onto the second test folder directly, and it just became a sub-folder as expected, with all files intact in both levels.
You may not have given specific enough instructions though - can you give a step-by-step process to this bug? Or is it just not true?
That's true, but consider a road accident - you won't know to check before it happens, and you'll be a lot happier if you get the message immediately. I think that the likelihood is so low that it shouldn't be a good argument, but it's still a possibility.
I like the idea of having some cinemas that passively block signals (low current through a wire mesh in the walls) and letting people make their choices. Just so long as they don't have to sign waivers when they buy tickets! Of course, since this story is about the US (I'm in Aus.) there'd be someone who'd sue because they didn't get some 'important' message.
Fair enough. Like if Windows lost data, it'd be like saying "My gaming console lost data." Or if Linux lost data, it'd be like saying "My server lost data."
Actually that last one could bite.
+5 logical!
Don't forget "lol" and "yay."
Only complete bastards would be happy that someone, somewhere lost important data. I'd like to see more transparency on the tagging mechanism, such as who voted for which tags.
Okay, this is a terrible bug, but to me the real news is that the Finder has a move operation. I've only ever used the simple drag (ie copy) when transferring files to other disks. That might also be why I've never had this disconnection-delete problem.
The workaround is trivial - copy files until you're certain. In fact, I'd recommend doing that in all OSs anyway. Moves or cut-pastes are fraught with potential badness. I've lost files in Windows doing that, and always wondered what's wrong with just moving and deleting manually later on.
The dialogue box that appears says "An older item named "Documents" already exists in this location. Do you want to replace it with the newer one you are moving?" The options are "Stop" and "Replace."
There is no "OK" button, but leaving that aside, the message makes it pretty clear that this is a folder replacement happening, not a merge. That's not stupid design, but a different design choice. I find the merging concept you describe more confusing, but that's my personal preference.
The Mac has exhibited this same behaviour since 1984, so even if you dislike this design choice, it's been consistent and predictable across all OS versions and releases.
Here in Australia I've heard people discussing the most personal things in trams and trains, loudly for all to hear. I've even heard people arranging to pick up marijuana!
There's a comedy show on the public channel called "The Chaser's War on Everything" which has the character Clive (the slightly too-loud commuter). It's a hidden camera segment filmed live on public transport where the guy pretends to call his doctor, wife or someone else, to talk about his venereal diseases or something similarly outrageous.
(found him on YouTube)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzcEeimHIe0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MrlvzTuhS8
This stuff happens though! Not as obvious, but it really happens! These people are freaks!
Who said anything about preventing unfortunate things happening? In times of crises people need each other for support, not just prevention.
Nice response though. I hope you never have the need to respond to a personal calamity.
Would your presence have prevented his death? If not, your nonpresence is just another of life's unfortunate circumstance
Wow, you're cold.
Your point is logical but utterly devoid of emotion. I can't imagine the mindset you must have if you truly believe your statement. It's certainly not a humane one.
Or maybe they evolved, developed intellect, created cities (that wouldn't have survived 160M years anyway), spaceships and left just before the calamity.
They're out there somewhere...
Yes, I knew it was Dave Callan (I saw him at the Comedy Festival in Melbourne a few years back), but I didn't think his name would mean anything to people on this mostly US-based website. For some reason I always think of him as Scottish. I don't know why, and I know it's a terrible thing to get someone's nationality wrong like that, but I just can't get that right. At least I didn't say he was British!