Excellent. It seems that this particular situation is so convoluted and widespread that whoever has the best lawyers will eventually win. Further:
The domain "Gmail.co.uk" is "is the private mail service reserved
exclusively for the customers of the Contensis Content Management System" and is linked to Contensis, a web content management application developer. Although I was unable to discover who actually owns the name, there was no suggestion they are involved with IIIR and IIIR states that they did not register the domain. In an article by Chris Richardson, several points are made about the statius of the url, including a suggestion that its purpose is to collect gmail ids and passwords. Richardson does state that "The company who has ownership of the domain has received offers to sell the rights, although none were from Google. They have, up until now, declined to sell the rights, stating, "[l]uckily, we're honourable people." I wonder if that means that they will "do no evil"?
Now as to IIIR. They have had several incarnations, but basically are an ASP provider of financial projections under the name Pronet Analytics.com Limited. IIIR's founder and CEO is Shane Smith. Although well regarded, they have experienced significant financial difficulties lately and are struggling. An independent firm has estimated the trademarks worth at around $45M to $60M dollars. Must be nice for a guy who ran down after he heard Google's announcement of gmail and registered the trademark for $700. Yeah, that sounds like he was protecting his "intellectual property rights". It also speaks to how "reluctantly" he is proceeding with the claim against Google. In a pretty thorough search using these resources, I was unable to find any reference to IIIR and g-mail prior to the Google story. It was not mentioned in any of the company documents I read. Wouldn't a working e-mail system have a bit stronger web presence?
My conclusion is that the law suit is a money grab. There IS evidence of possible prior claims to the "gmail" name. Actually, quite a few, with established histories and credible owners. IIIR's is one of the weakest, although presented by one of the bigger firms, and augmented by the IIIR's area of business - International Finance. In the end, Smith's whole claim is based on a service that was never developed and seemingly no one uses, and a valuation based on what the name is worth to GOOGLE, not to IIIR. I doubt Google is too worried. The real shame is the way this shit muddies the waters and will make it very difficult for legitimate claimants to get a fair shake. Smith is grasping at straws to save a business that has already screwed its creditors. I, for one, am glad he picked the wrong target. Mr. Smith - "you don't tug on Superman's cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off the ole Lone Ranger" and you sure as hell don't mess around with Google. Just ask Bill Gates. It ain't gonna be pretty.
billy - who would not call what's going to happen...well...evil
If the problem of attachment is solved, why stop at hand replacement? Some individuals may be capable of controlling several hands, possibly augmented in a fly-by-wire sort of way. Surgeons would seem obvious early adopters. Perhaps control and sensitivity could be switched from hand to hand, using a lockdown mode to "hold what ya got". Hands need not be life sized....but I guess this really is old ground....right Waldo?
Exactly - the whole 'free software' idea seems to ignore the fact that an awful lot of people are motivated by making money. The 'net tax' is an especially ludicrous idea. Instead of paying the producer of the content I actually USE, they want me to pay for the privilege of connecting at all, split my money up between who knows who, whether I've even seen the content or not? Yeah right. Doesn't that mean that there would really be NO free content? Otherwise someone has to decide who gets paid and who doesn't. How much is a post on/. worth? If mod points are involved it would give a whole new twist to karma. I guess they'd have to come up with some way to track my internet usage as well. Yeah this idea will really strike a blow for freedom. Brilliant...if you don't play by my rules...I'm taking my toys and going home.
Yes, but lets not forget the biggest reason the NO flood will affect the price of oil. It gives the oil companies an excuse to jack up the price. They have demonstrated their willingness to use practically ANY reason to justify increases. If their reasons seem logically invalid, they just explain that the oil market is very "complicated" and only they and their cohorts can really understand the details. I am constantly amazed when oil industry experts list all the causes of rising prices but somehow omit the fact that most oil companies announce record breaking profits quarter after quarter. I guess it must be more complicated than that. All that money gleaned in the price increases MUST be going somewhere. It couldn't be that they just keep it and call it 'profit', could it? No of course not. They would never lie to us like that...would they?
OK, I've read the typical array of bashing connected to any MS story. While I don't disagree that MS has made some sleazy business choices, this does not mean that their competition is any more angelic. Here are a few tidbits of food for thought:
Eric Kriss is a busy man. As well as his heroic efforts on behalf of the people of Massachusetts, he is also quite the entrepreneur. Along with his boss, Governor Mitt Romney, he founded Bain Capital a 17 billion dollar capital management firm that owns pieces of such widely diverged companies as Staples, Dominos, Burger King and Toys-R-US. Bain also tried to buyout the entire NHL and partnered with the Chinese in the attempted buyout of Maytag. He also worked for previous Massachusetts Governor William Weld. He took some time off to start a couple of companies of his own before continuing in public service. Workmode offers a web-based subscription model project management application called iProject. Follow the link and notice to what competitor he compares his product. Anyone want to take a guess before they click? Kriss started MediVision, Inc and was CEO of MediQual Systems, both health care companies. MediQual is especially interesting since it deals with medical information and documents - like web forms submitted to a state government. Yes sir, I bet they can make your practice compliant with that new format for billing documents pretty darn quick. When was the last time you believed a health care company was on the side of the people? Finally, take a look at
this, looks like MediVision wanted to cover their butts before paying some government office holders an honorarium at a political fundraiser. Hey, I'm not saying that there is anything WRONG with any of this. Just that factors other than"because it is an overriding imperative of the American democratic system" may be involved in the decision. What I'm saying is: a wolf in geeks clothing is still a wolf.
You can call OpenDocument an
'open' format, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have to be licensed. The XML format is actually provided by Sun and a license IS required. There are some interesting terms involved in the license, including cancellation if the licensee sues the licensor over ANY "infringement of claims essential to implement any W3C Recommendation" and the granting of reciprocal licenses. MS might have some legitimate hesitations about acquiring such a license. By the way, you need a license for PDF as well. And Reader STILL takes forever to load.
This whole discussion is about forms used by a state government for internal AND external use. Meaning the forms used to communicate with the citizens by the government. This can include informational presentations (possibly multimedia), online registration for services (motor vehicles, voter registration, unemployment, schools, etc.) and yes, maybe even embedded VOIP (click here to leave a voice mail for your city councilman). Why would a company spend time and money to develop gee whiz technology and willingly support a standard incapable of its implementation? How willing will companies and individuals be to toss out their tried and true Office routine and switch to apps that even most zealots describe as 'catching up' and 'almost as good as' Office? And that's not taking into account Office 12, due in '96, and, you guessed it, featuring improved XML. Do you call the government forcing you to quit using the overwhelmingly most popular business document tool if you want to communicate with them a good thing?
Taking the high road might well have earned him a few bucks as well. Or at least some tasty burgers. He could have quietly explained the whole thing to Mr. Fudd or Mr. Rucker or whoever. He might have ended up replacing the guy who pissed him off so badly. Instead, by specifically targeting Fuddruckers when he redirected the link, he might have created some legal problems for himself.
Personally, I was using Maxthon (MyIE) long before Firefox was released. My first browser was Netscape. I've used everything from Lynx to K-Meleon. Opera was my choice until they overloaded the interface. I've tried Firefox - I like Maxthon better. I can choose to surf as loose or tight as I want and switch on the fly. There are a large number of plugins that extend the massive array of built-in features. Best of all, it offers extreme customization options.
Yeah, FF is a good browser, but it's not all that innovative and it has its own set of problems, just like all software. In the end it comes down to individual taste. Looking at the behavior of the Mozilla bunch lately, I can't even see switching to FF because Mozilla represents 'the good guys'. Not any more. Kind of sad really...
Actually I was differentiating you from the "shit sayers". Even a cursory examination of the WinHoldEm forum reveals that the state of pokerbots is far beyond the level assumed in most of the posts attached to this story. I'm surprised there was nothing in the forum to interest you, especially since you admit a lack of experience at poker. I think that examining the approach of someone working the bot creation problem from the other direction (lots of poker experience - little AI experience) would be interesting. Hey what do I know...I'm not sure most of the people I know could pass the Turing Test in a meaningful way and I still like to play poker with wild cards!
I'm amazed (but probably shouldn't be) that so many posts say so much shit without any evidence of research...especially considering the amount of Google worship on/. As it turns out, pokerbots are much more complex and varied than any of these posts consider. You are right to consider the bots more as AIs than simple if/then engines. Take a look at the WinHoldEm website. You'll notice there are different models available. There is also information regarding casinos detection schemes and how to defeat them. The forum lists topics like Teams, hacks to the main bot code and play formulas. Bots are designed to be customized for the individual owners taste. It's much more evolved than most folks imagine.
The real value of teaming is not in the knowledge of the cards in play, it is in the freedom to chase a bad hand when a partner's hand can cover. It's easier to hang around trying to fill an inside straight when your partner has a pair of aces.
Look at the bright side - it might finally be possible to make some REAL money by defeating the Turing Test. You could code a bot who explained playing 20 hours a day by pretending to be a crankhead.
Thank god! No more of that pesky decision process..."hmmmm, this website says homosexual behavior causes your teeth to fall out, makes you get bad gas mileage and condemns you to an eternity in hell, I wonder if I can trust it?"
At last! A 'Fair and Balanced' portal!
billy - hackers of the world unite! can you say 'foxse' ? i knew you could...
Yep. No way that thing grows long hair and wears skin tight leather pants. No way that thing scores with chicks like Pam Lee and Carmen Miranda. Maybe Morgan Webb, but I doubt even that.
"Who owns the words?" asked a disembodied but very persistent voice throughout much of Burroughs' work. Who does own them now? Who owns the music and the rest of our culture? We do. All of us."
Yes, and the links on his site are to places you can BUY his books, not download them for free.
Yes, it's true that the usual reaction to MS stories tends to be kneejerk criticism often without much evidence of thought or rational balance. The baby gets the old heave ho along with the bath water more times than not. I usually urge a more reasonable approach based on the real contributions that MS has made to the IT industry and the fact that most major corporations behave the same way. I may not agree with MS's methods, but I try to keep an open mind, always aware of what MS has always represented. That said...NOT THIS TIME!
It's bad enough that the most pernicious and persistant tattle tale software on a MS box is probably the operating system. Take for example the index files in WIN98 that have never been explaned, the automatic updates in apps that can't be disabled, and services that reinstall themselves behind your back. I really do buy the 'least common denominator' explanation for a lot of these 'features', most users really don't understand their computers enough to maintain them, much less integrate new codecs, standards, and protocols. I do believe that making the default behaviors in many programs more update and security focused was a necessary step. MS often gets a bad rap for problems users could avoid by performing their recommended chores, especially installing patches. Bill Gates has recently touted a new focus on security, wanting to win back some customer trust. Whew, it was nice to see MS finally starting to turn in a new direction. Maybe I should have known better. The attitude expressed in this situation seems to be "Oh that's OK, it's just us, your friendly neighborhood MS. It was bad when those other guys did it, but you can trust us! By the way, could you enter your 16 digit authentication code and explain what that new unsupported by XP hardware is, since we really can't trust you?"
Microsoft could take the lead in creating really secure, customer oriented products. Maybe they would make a little less money if they gave up the drive to control every part of the industry. Would that kill them? IT is past the point where it needs one firm hand on the tiller to keep from sinking. Microsoft has the power and influence to change the face of software development. They could help make the world a better, freer place. Too bad the accountants have taken over from the dreamers.
So - you are reducing this to a battle of hired cyber-gunslingers working for and against the belief that a man who creates a thing should have a say in its destiny? Will you set the monetary value of creative content by the quality of its encryption? Right or wrong plays no part? I say what you are doing is against the law - the agreement between men that governs civilized behavior. There are laws for reasons. What prevents me from taking your food because I am stronger? What stops me from inserting crasher worms in trojan versions of my files on PTP nets? If you want to amend the agreement, I salute you. Wrongs are done every day in its name. You are deciding for all humanity that the fruit of my work may be taken from me at your whim. Copying my work without permission has the same effect as tearing down the fence at a concert. It cheapens my work by setting its value at zero. It also suggests what value you place on the fruits of your own labor.
This whole issue is starting to rise to the level of public attention. I think that you will be surprised at the number of people who value their own labor enough to appreciate the value of another's. They don't expect to get in movies for free, they expect to pay for concerts, and they expect to pay cable bills.
I am at a loss to understand your easy acceptance that you can take my work without my permission and do whatever you wish, yet you insist on crediting me with its creation. You are saying - "this is his work, and although he doesn't want me to, I'm going to copy it and give it away. Or maybe I'll just charge a little less, after all I have no real time or money invested. Sure, he's not likely to do another after the years, money, and sacrifice he put into this project, but that's not a big problem for me. There's lots of guys out there stupid enough to actually create the work instead of "sharing"."
So far the real battle has been fought between those who would use the work without respecting the author's wishes and the agents of the authors. If it gets any worse the authors themselves may get involved. They're the creative ones...remember? The ones who think out of the box - the ones with the ideas both magnificent and horrible. You could be in for a rocky ride.
It's nice to hear a reasonable, sane, viewpoint on copyrights. So much of the discussion we've heard on this subject takes place in the shrill whine of the zealot or the menacing growl of the mercenary. To me, it seems obvious that the author of a product deserves some compensation, even if only to cover his expenses and the cost of living while producing his work. Those who suggest that 'copying' takes nothing from the author assert they have a right to do what they will with the material. Doesn't the author also have this right, including charging for access and providing the material in a protected format if he wishes? Just as there would be no need for school zones if a few people were not stupid enough to go speeding through the streets surrounding schools, there would be no need for copyright laws if a few people were not dishonorable enough to copy other people's work without permission. The "pirates" forced the creation of DRM, not the other way around.
That said, as the article so aptly states, the copyright system has been broken both by new technologies and the rampant coporate greed that has perverted so many things in our society. One solution may lie in the process wherein the author assigns the copyrights to his work to a third party. Perhaps the time covered by the copyright could be reduced. For instance, the original author may be covered for 14 years, with the possibility for one extension, while any second party assignee would receive a copyright good for 7 years with no extensions. Maybe commercial use could modify the copyright - such as making a limited number of copies available by law to anyone who purchases the product. A rational evaluation and discussion would certainly create many good ideas along these lines.
"The real point is that these jokes were modded up."
It's still a matter of relative time - or actually timing. 200 posts down the thread you get nothing for the same joke - unless of course the 'observer' begins to read at that point and then...I think it's got something to do with the Great Wheel of Karma.
I wonder if the next step is suing Google if they let you run an ad that really sucks? Following a (somewhat) logical progression, what about suing if you link to a sucky site? Hell, why not just sue Google if they accept an ad from a company whose product or business plan sucks? Damn it Google, you guys should not have accepted my payments for my "All Pia - All The Time" Pia Zadora streaming site ads! You have a successful business - you should have known better. It's not like Click Fraud would have a reasonable expectation they would experience err..ehh...you know...CLICK FRAUD on Google! Who'd a thunk it? Get a clue, it's a virtual jungle on there. Bogus stuff on the net? Gimme a break, the scammers are always ahead.
I guess we do all owe the good folks at Click Fraud a small 'thank you' for bringing our attention to the situation. If I ever have to deal with the problem at least now I know there are companies out there to help me. I even know the name of one - one who goes for the legal throat to resolve their business (and brand awareness) problems. Thanks Click Fraud, you may have saved me from a huge headache. I might have done business with you. Now I know better. billy - evil?...no...just stupid
I would like to think not. I agree that constant public surveillance is very questionable, but the Constitution just does not address the possibility. If you extend the concept to an absurd, but not illogical degree, then an individual would be violating your rights by simply looking at you on a public street. Would you agree it is OK for an ATM to be monitored? If so, what about the people who happen to walk by in the background? If it is the record that you object to, how does the electronic record fundamentally differ from an individuals memory? My point is that a NEW viewpoint is required that takes in to account the technologies available now that the FF did not consider. By trying to stretch the Constitution to fit new situations you open the door to a much more flexible standard. That flexibility may not always extend in the direction you desire. Instead we need new definitions and guidelines, possibly in the form of a Privacy From Technology Amendment. At least we need to address the problem at a state by state level. We need to get a handle these powerful emerging technologies before they are usurped by Big Brother.
Please don't put words in my mouth or suggest you know thoughts in my head. Please don't characterize admiration and appreciation as tolerance. There are differences between individuals and cultures, thank god (any god you please is OK by me, even no god at all). Please do not suggest that pointing out individual characteristics of a culture is "condescending". If there are no differences between cultures why are there words that can not be successfully translated between languages? Why do YOU think suggesting that people are different suggests they are inferior? Why are girl babies smashed in the head in some cultures. Why is plastic surgery an accepted norm in some cultures? Why do some cultures ignore reality and pay lip service to "political correctness"? Why do you? Don't assume the worst - you're going to consistently find it.
I admit some generalizations, but would like to refute the "wild" characterization.
"Japan will not go to space to 'get raw materials'. It is much easier for t hem to buy those materials on the open market."
Where exactly on the open market will Japan find room for expansion? When petrochemical resources are globally depleted what good will the open market do them? Any country would much prefer to control the source of materials rather than depend on the market. Some manufactored goods can only be produced in space - should the Japanese buy them or sell them? Japan has the same reasons to seek resources in space as any other country - more so - considering the lack of resources they currently control.
"Japanese "management techniques" were originally invented and perfected by an American named Demming"
Deming certainly suggested innovative management techniques, primarily concerning quality assurance through Statistical Quality Control, but he was passing on the work of Walter Shewhart. The actual perfection of the management style owes more to Joseph M. Juran and Peter Drucker's book The Practice of Management. Together, the principles of Statistical Quality Control, Drucker's Management by Objectives, and Juran's emphasis on the planning process became the basis for the Hoshin Kanri management technique. American companies with divisions in Japan adopted this technique company wide - and considered the technique and its use to be confidential competitive information. It took the Japanese to refine the best of what were essentially American ideas, implement them, and establish their worth enough that they were eventually adopted by American companies. That Japanese management is today looking for answers from American business illustrates the willingness to find value whatever the source. American business is often not so flexible.
"'Loyalty to the greater good' is absolute bullshit. You have obviously never lived there. Japanese people are just like us-- but they tend to identify with the group more quickly"
So, they are just like us - only different? Perhaps you don't see identifying with the group rather than the self as the greater good - but that very characteristic IS good for the group. Especially when erratic or thoughtless behavior by individual group members can spell diaster in an artificial environment. Perhaps some of what you consider insecurity has components of humility and wisdom. Consider giri.
"You are dead wrong about 'learning from Japanese culture more valuable than the technology' bit. The technology will always outstrip the culture, because in this setting, it is pure engineering-- the 'culture' is the same no matter where you go."
Does this statement even make sense? Are you suggesting that the culture of a lunar mining colony, San Francisco, and a small village in Afghanistan are the same? That the cultures of all three places would have the same chance of surviving and thriving in a place where the strict adherence to rules and procedures dictated by technological necessities is essential? Are you saying that Japanese culture has no more influence on San Francisco than a small town in Afghanistan? Really?
As for nukes - got any proof - or is it an assumption - like my manga/anime habit - present only in your mind?
billy - who's seen a couple anime...Ninja Scroll rocks
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and don't forget about your pool cleaner!
They're telepathic, you know.
Well, at least the deluxe models.
billy - having second thoughts about about using Windows on his home shop CAD/CAM box
Excellent. It seems that this particular situation is so convoluted and widespread that whoever has the best lawyers will eventually win. Further:
The domain "Gmail.co.uk" is "is the private mail service reserved exclusively for the customers of the Contensis Content Management System" and is linked to Contensis, a web content management application developer. Although I was unable to discover who actually owns the name, there was no suggestion they are involved with IIIR and IIIR states that they did not register the domain. In an article by Chris Richardson, several points are made about the statius of the url, including a suggestion that its purpose is to collect gmail ids and passwords. Richardson does state that "The company who has ownership of the domain has received offers to sell the rights, although none were from Google. They have, up until now, declined to sell the rights, stating, "[l]uckily, we're honourable people." I wonder if that means that they will "do no evil"?
Now as to IIIR. They have had several incarnations, but basically are an ASP provider of financial projections under the name Pronet Analytics.com Limited. IIIR's founder and CEO is Shane Smith. Although well regarded, they have experienced significant financial difficulties lately and are struggling. An independent firm has estimated the trademarks worth at around $45M to $60M dollars. Must be nice for a guy who ran down after he heard Google's announcement of gmail and registered the trademark for $700. Yeah, that sounds like he was protecting his "intellectual property rights". It also speaks to how "reluctantly" he is proceeding with the claim against Google. In a pretty thorough search using these resources, I was unable to find any reference to IIIR and g-mail prior to the Google story. It was not mentioned in any of the company documents I read. Wouldn't a working e-mail system have a bit stronger web presence?
My conclusion is that the law suit is a money grab. There IS evidence of possible prior claims to the "gmail" name. Actually, quite a few, with established histories and credible owners. IIIR's is one of the weakest, although presented by one of the bigger firms, and augmented by the IIIR's area of business - International Finance. In the end, Smith's whole claim is based on a service that was never developed and seemingly no one uses, and a valuation based on what the name is worth to GOOGLE, not to IIIR. I doubt Google is too worried. The real shame is the way this shit muddies the waters and will make it very difficult for legitimate claimants to get a fair shake. Smith is grasping at straws to save a business that has already screwed its creditors. I, for one, am glad he picked the wrong target. Mr. Smith - "you don't tug on Superman's cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off the ole Lone Ranger" and you sure as hell don't mess around with Google. Just ask Bill Gates. It ain't gonna be pretty.
billy - who would not call what's going to happen...well...evil
If the problem of attachment is solved, why stop at hand replacement? Some individuals may be capable of controlling several hands, possibly augmented in a fly-by-wire sort of way. Surgeons would seem obvious early adopters. Perhaps control and sensitivity could be switched from hand to hand, using a lockdown mode to "hold what ya got". Hands need not be life sized....but I guess this really is old ground....right Waldo?
billy
Give me a line of guys with SlBs (Suspended-load Backpacks) connected to the pleasure centers of their brains and I'll give you an Earth sized yoyo.
After a long day of marching to power the Sultans air conditioning, the slaves dreaded when it was time for Must See TV.
Well, what we think happened is that somehow the wires got crossed...he musta been going about 60 miles an hour when his tennis shoe blew.
billy - from the land of unintended consequences
SOLUTION:
Scalability.....virtually unlimited
Ease of Use.....simple
Support.....free practically 24/7/365
Platform.....any
Cost.....zero
IMPLEMENTATION:
First, everybody open a Yahoo account...
billy - Groups....anyone?
Exactly - the whole 'free software' idea seems to ignore the fact that an awful lot of people are motivated by making money. The 'net tax' is an especially ludicrous idea. Instead of paying the producer of the content I actually USE, they want me to pay for the privilege of connecting at all, split my money up between who knows who, whether I've even seen the content or not? Yeah right. Doesn't that mean that there would really be NO free content? Otherwise someone has to decide who gets paid and who doesn't. How much is a post on
billy - who wonders what the goatse guy's take is
You have time to look at the crates?
billy - who can barely find time to reload
Yes, but lets not forget the biggest reason the NO flood will affect the price of oil. It gives the oil companies an excuse to jack up the price. They have demonstrated their willingness to use practically ANY reason to justify increases. If their reasons seem logically invalid, they just explain that the oil market is very "complicated" and only they and their cohorts can really understand the details. I am constantly amazed when oil industry experts list all the causes of rising prices but somehow omit the fact that most oil companies announce record breaking profits quarter after quarter. I guess it must be more complicated than that. All that money gleaned in the price increases MUST be going somewhere. It couldn't be that they just keep it and call it 'profit', could it? No of course not. They would never lie to us like that...would they?
billy - in Enron we trust?
OK, I've read the typical array of bashing connected to any MS story. While I don't disagree that MS has made some sleazy business choices, this does not mean that their competition is any more angelic. Here are a few tidbits of food for thought:
Eric Kriss is a busy man. As well as his heroic efforts on behalf of the people of Massachusetts, he is also quite the entrepreneur. Along with his boss, Governor Mitt Romney, he founded Bain Capital a 17 billion dollar capital management firm that owns pieces of such widely diverged companies as Staples, Dominos, Burger King and Toys-R-US. Bain also tried to buyout the entire NHL and partnered with the Chinese in the attempted buyout of Maytag. He also worked for previous Massachusetts Governor William Weld. He took some time off to start a couple of companies of his own before continuing in public service. Workmode offers a web-based subscription model project management application called iProject. Follow the link and notice to what competitor he compares his product. Anyone want to take a guess before they click? Kriss started MediVision, Inc and was CEO of MediQual Systems, both health care companies. MediQual is especially interesting since it deals with medical information and documents - like web forms submitted to a state government. Yes sir, I bet they can make your practice compliant with that new format for billing documents pretty darn quick. When was the last time you believed a health care company was on the side of the people? Finally, take a look at this, looks like MediVision wanted to cover their butts before paying some government office holders an honorarium at a political fundraiser. Hey, I'm not saying that there is anything WRONG with any of this. Just that factors other than "because it is an overriding imperative of the American democratic system" may be involved in the decision. What I'm saying is: a wolf in geeks clothing is still a wolf.
You can call OpenDocument an 'open' format, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have to be licensed. The XML format is actually provided by Sun and a license IS required. There are some interesting terms involved in the license, including cancellation if the licensee sues the licensor over ANY "infringement of claims essential to implement any W3C Recommendation" and the granting of reciprocal licenses. MS might have some legitimate hesitations about acquiring such a license. By the way, you need a license for PDF as well. And Reader STILL takes forever to load.
This whole discussion is about forms used by a state government for internal AND external use. Meaning the forms used to communicate with the citizens by the government. This can include informational presentations (possibly multimedia), online registration for services (motor vehicles, voter registration, unemployment, schools, etc.) and yes, maybe even embedded VOIP (click here to leave a voice mail for your city councilman). Why would a company spend time and money to develop gee whiz technology and willingly support a standard incapable of its implementation? How willing will companies and individuals be to toss out their tried and true Office routine and switch to apps that even most zealots describe as 'catching up' and 'almost as good as' Office? And that's not taking into account Office 12, due in '96, and, you guessed it, featuring improved XML. Do you call the government forcing you to quit using the overwhelmingly most popular business document tool if you want to communicate with them a good thing?
So what I'm saying is: there ain't no fre
Yes.
Taking the high road might well have earned him a few bucks as well. Or at least some tasty burgers. He could have quietly explained the whole thing to Mr. Fudd or Mr. Rucker or whoever. He might have ended up replacing the guy who pissed him off so badly. Instead, by specifically targeting Fuddruckers when he redirected the link, he might have created some legal problems for himself.
billy - last time I checked lawyers ain't cheap
So Firefox for windows "ain't no good"?
Personally, I was using Maxthon (MyIE) long before Firefox was released. My first browser was Netscape. I've used everything from Lynx to K-Meleon. Opera was my choice until they overloaded the interface. I've tried Firefox - I like Maxthon better. I can choose to surf as loose or tight as I want and switch on the fly. There are a large number of plugins that extend the massive array of built-in features. Best of all, it offers extreme customization options.
Yeah, FF is a good browser, but it's not all that innovative and it has its own set of problems, just like all software. In the end it comes down to individual taste. Looking at the behavior of the Mozilla bunch lately, I can't even see switching to FF because Mozilla represents 'the good guys'. Not any more. Kind of sad really...
billy - google? OK, I'm willing to listen...
Actually I was differentiating you from the "shit sayers". Even a cursory examination of the WinHoldEm forum reveals that the state of pokerbots is far beyond the level assumed in most of the posts attached to this story. I'm surprised there was nothing in the forum to interest you, especially since you admit a lack of experience at poker. I think that examining the approach of someone working the bot creation problem from the other direction (lots of poker experience - little AI experience) would be interesting. Hey what do I know...I'm not sure most of the people I know could pass the Turing Test in a meaningful way and I still like to play poker with wild cards!
billy - who is working on a cigar smoking bot
I'm amazed (but probably shouldn't be) that so many posts say so much shit without any evidence of research...especially considering the amount of Google worship on
The real value of teaming is not in the knowledge of the cards in play, it is in the freedom to chase a bad hand when a partner's hand can cover. It's easier to hang around trying to fill an inside straight when your partner has a pair of aces.
Look at the bright side - it might finally be possible to make some REAL money by defeating the Turing Test. You could code a bot who explained playing 20 hours a day by pretending to be a crankhead.
billy - how about a nice game of chess?
Thank god! No more of that pesky decision process..."hmmmm, this website says homosexual behavior causes your teeth to fall out, makes you get bad gas mileage and condemns you to an eternity in hell, I wonder if I can trust it?"
At last! A 'Fair and Balanced' portal!
billy - hackers of the world unite! can you say 'foxse' ? i knew you could...
I'd give Morgan Webb anything she wanted.
billy - sigh...
Yep. No way that thing grows long hair and wears skin tight leather pants. No way that thing scores with chicks like Pam Lee and Carmen Miranda. Maybe Morgan Webb, but I doubt even that.
billy - rust never sleeps
"Who owns the words?" asked a disembodied but very persistent voice throughout much of Burroughs' work. Who does own them now? Who owns the music and the rest of our culture? We do. All of us."
Yes, and the links on his site are to places you can BUY his books, not download them for free.
billy - do as I say...not as I do
Yes, it's true that the usual reaction to MS stories tends to be kneejerk criticism often without much evidence of thought or rational balance. The baby gets the old heave ho along with the bath water more times than not. I usually urge a more reasonable approach based on the real contributions that MS has made to the IT industry and the fact that most major corporations behave the same way. I may not agree with MS's methods, but I try to keep an open mind, always aware of what MS has always represented. That said...NOT THIS TIME!
It's bad enough that the most pernicious and persistant tattle tale software on a MS box is probably the operating system. Take for example the index files in WIN98 that have never been explaned, the automatic updates in apps that can't be disabled, and services that reinstall themselves behind your back. I really do buy the 'least common denominator' explanation for a lot of these 'features', most users really don't understand their computers enough to maintain them, much less integrate new codecs, standards, and protocols. I do believe that making the default behaviors in many programs more update and security focused was a necessary step. MS often gets a bad rap for problems users could avoid by performing their recommended chores, especially installing patches. Bill Gates has recently touted a new focus on security, wanting to win back some customer trust. Whew, it was nice to see MS finally starting to turn in a new direction. Maybe I should have known better. The attitude expressed in this situation seems to be "Oh that's OK, it's just us, your friendly neighborhood MS. It was bad when those other guys did it, but you can trust us! By the way, could you enter your 16 digit authentication code and explain what that new unsupported by XP hardware is, since we really can't trust you?"
Microsoft could take the lead in creating really secure, customer oriented products. Maybe they would make a little less money if they gave up the drive to control every part of the industry. Would that kill them? IT is past the point where it needs one firm hand on the tiller to keep from sinking. Microsoft has the power and influence to change the face of software development. They could help make the world a better, freer place. Too bad the accountants have taken over from the dreamers.
billy - say it ain't so Bill...
So - you are reducing this to a battle of hired cyber-gunslingers working for and against the belief that a man who creates a thing should have a say in its destiny? Will you set the monetary value of creative content by the quality of its encryption? Right or wrong plays no part? I say what you are doing is against the law - the agreement between men that governs civilized behavior. There are laws for reasons. What prevents me from taking your food because I am stronger? What stops me from inserting crasher worms in trojan versions of my files on PTP nets? If you want to amend the agreement, I salute you. Wrongs are done every day in its name. You are deciding for all humanity that the fruit of my work may be taken from me at your whim. Copying my work without permission has the same effect as tearing down the fence at a concert. It cheapens my work by setting its value at zero. It also suggests what value you place on the fruits of your own labor.
This whole issue is starting to rise to the level of public attention. I think that you will be surprised at the number of people who value their own labor enough to appreciate the value of another's. They don't expect to get in movies for free, they expect to pay for concerts, and they expect to pay cable bills.
I am at a loss to understand your easy acceptance that you can take my work without my permission and do whatever you wish, yet you insist on crediting me with its creation. You are saying - "this is his work, and although he doesn't want me to, I'm going to copy it and give it away. Or maybe I'll just charge a little less, after all I have no real time or money invested. Sure, he's not likely to do another after the years, money, and sacrifice he put into this project, but that's not a big problem for me. There's lots of guys out there stupid enough to actually create the work instead of "sharing"."
So far the real battle has been fought between those who would use the work without respecting the author's wishes and the agents of the authors. If it gets any worse the authors themselves may get involved. They're the creative ones...remember? The ones who think out of the box - the ones with the ideas both magnificent and horrible. You could be in for a rocky ride.
billy - you get what you pay for
It's nice to hear a reasonable, sane, viewpoint on copyrights. So much of the discussion we've heard on this subject takes place in the shrill whine of the zealot or the menacing growl of the mercenary. To me, it seems obvious that the author of a product deserves some compensation, even if only to cover his expenses and the cost of living while producing his work. Those who suggest that 'copying' takes nothing from the author assert they have a right to do what they will with the material. Doesn't the author also have this right, including charging for access and providing the material in a protected format if he wishes? Just as there would be no need for school zones if a few people were not stupid enough to go speeding through the streets surrounding schools, there would be no need for copyright laws if a few people were not dishonorable enough to copy other people's work without permission. The "pirates" forced the creation of DRM, not the other way around.
That said, as the article so aptly states, the copyright system has been broken both by new technologies and the rampant coporate greed that has perverted so many things in our society. One solution may lie in the process wherein the author assigns the copyrights to his work to a third party. Perhaps the time covered by the copyright could be reduced. For instance, the original author may be covered for 14 years, with the possibility for one extension, while any second party assignee would receive a copyright good for 7 years with no extensions. Maybe commercial use could modify the copyright - such as making a limited number of copies available by law to anyone who purchases the product. A rational evaluation and discussion would certainly create many good ideas along these lines.
billy - who says...you can copy this if ya wanna
"The real point is that these jokes were modded up."
It's still a matter of relative time - or actually timing. 200 posts down the thread you get nothing for the same joke - unless of course the 'observer' begins to read at that point and then...I think it's got something to do with the Great Wheel of Karma.
billy - if two trains...
I wonder if the next step is suing Google if they let you run an ad that really sucks? Following a (somewhat) logical progression, what about suing if you link to a sucky site? Hell, why not just sue Google if they accept an ad from a company whose product or business plan sucks? Damn it Google, you guys should not have accepted my payments for my "All Pia - All The Time" Pia Zadora streaming site ads! You have a successful business - you should have known better. It's not like Click Fraud would have a reasonable expectation they would experience err..ehh...you know...CLICK FRAUD on Google! Who'd a thunk it? Get a clue, it's a virtual jungle on there. Bogus stuff on the net? Gimme a break, the scammers are always ahead.
I guess we do all owe the good folks at Click Fraud a small 'thank you' for bringing our attention to the situation. If I ever have to deal with the problem at least now I know there are companies out there to help me. I even know the name of one - one who goes for the legal throat to resolve their business (and brand awareness) problems. Thanks Click Fraud, you may have saved me from a huge headache. I might have done business with you. Now I know better.
billy - evil?...no...just stupid
I would like to think not. I agree that constant public surveillance is very questionable, but the Constitution just does not address the possibility. If you extend the concept to an absurd, but not illogical degree, then an individual would be violating your rights by simply looking at you on a public street. Would you agree it is OK for an ATM to be monitored? If so, what about the people who happen to walk by in the background? If it is the record that you object to, how does the electronic record fundamentally differ from an individuals memory? My point is that a NEW viewpoint is required that takes in to account the technologies available now that the FF did not consider. By trying to stretch the Constitution to fit new situations you open the door to a much more flexible standard. That flexibility may not always extend in the direction you desire. Instead we need new definitions and guidelines, possibly in the form of a Privacy From Technology Amendment. At least we need to address the problem at a state by state level. We need to get a handle these powerful emerging technologies before they are usurped by Big Brother.
billy - you snooze...you lose
Please don't put words in my mouth or suggest you know thoughts in my head. Please don't characterize admiration and appreciation as tolerance. There are differences between individuals and cultures, thank god (any god you please is OK by me, even no god at all). Please do not suggest that pointing out individual characteristics of a culture is "condescending". If there are no differences between cultures why are there words that can not be successfully translated between languages? Why do YOU think suggesting that people are different suggests they are inferior? Why are girl babies smashed in the head in some cultures. Why is plastic surgery an accepted norm in some cultures? Why do some cultures ignore reality and pay lip service to "political correctness"? Why do you? Don't assume the worst - you're going to consistently find it.
billy - vive le difference
I admit some generalizations, but would like to refute the "wild" characterization.
"Japan will not go to space to 'get raw materials'. It is much easier for t hem to buy those materials on the open market."
Where exactly on the open market will Japan find room for expansion? When petrochemical resources are globally depleted what good will the open market do them? Any country would much prefer to control the source of materials rather than depend on the market. Some manufactored goods can only be produced in space - should the Japanese buy them or sell them? Japan has the same reasons to seek resources in space as any other country - more so - considering the lack of resources they currently control.
"Japanese "management techniques" were originally invented and perfected by an American named Demming"
Deming certainly suggested innovative management techniques, primarily concerning quality assurance through Statistical Quality Control, but he was passing on the work of Walter Shewhart. The actual perfection of the management style owes more to Joseph M. Juran and Peter Drucker's book The Practice of Management. Together, the principles of Statistical Quality Control, Drucker's Management by Objectives, and Juran's emphasis on the planning process became the basis for the Hoshin Kanri management technique. American companies with divisions in Japan adopted this technique company wide - and considered the technique and its use to be confidential competitive information. It took the Japanese to refine the best of what were essentially American ideas, implement them, and establish their worth enough that they were eventually adopted by American companies. That Japanese management is today looking for answers from American business illustrates the willingness to find value whatever the source. American business is often not so flexible.
"'Loyalty to the greater good' is absolute bullshit. You have obviously never lived there. Japanese people are just like us-- but they tend to identify with the group more quickly"
So, they are just like us - only different? Perhaps you don't see identifying with the group rather than the self as the greater good - but that very characteristic IS good for the group. Especially when erratic or thoughtless behavior by individual group members can spell diaster in an artificial environment. Perhaps some of what you consider insecurity has components of humility and wisdom. Consider giri.
"You are dead wrong about 'learning from Japanese culture more valuable than the technology' bit. The technology will always outstrip the culture, because in this setting, it is pure engineering-- the 'culture' is the same no matter where you go."
Does this statement even make sense? Are you suggesting that the culture of a lunar mining colony, San Francisco, and a small village in Afghanistan are the same? That the cultures of all three places would have the same chance of surviving and thriving in a place where the strict adherence to rules and procedures dictated by technological necessities is essential? Are you saying that Japanese culture has no more influence on San Francisco than a small town in Afghanistan? Really?
As for nukes - got any proof - or is it an assumption - like my manga/anime habit - present only in your mind?
billy - who's seen a couple anime...Ninja Scroll rocks