"Parody is fine as long as you don't actually use somebody else's logo. That crosses the line from fair use into trademark infringement."
I don't think that's entirely true. I believe you can use a trademark in a parody, but you should be sure your work actually falls under the legal description of a parody, i.e. it makes a critical commentary or statement about the original work. It isn't enough to just be funny.
There's also a bit to the story about Bioware talking so much about a simultaneous release, then a release a 'few weeks' after the windows version, then many months later, all when they never even bothered to _ask the vendor_ if the tools they chose to use might work with Linux. Boggles my mind that there'd be all this talk about a Linux version and they don't even bother to send an email to the support@vendor.com address.
Absolutely agree on the subscription with unrestricted usage. If emusic didn't work that way, I would not be a happy subscriber. It's even more important if the catalog becomes large. If you can get access to all sorts of unheard music, you definitely don't want to pay for something you don't really want. Previews don't cut it, IMHO, because much of the music I like takes me a few listens to "get."
Non-lossy format is a Con? I think not. http://etree.org/faq_general.html#6
Recording quality isn't studio, but there won't _ever_ be recordings of most of those shows unless the fans do it, so I guess in a general sense it's a con, but there's not much of an option there.
Fewer artists... you should've seen things a few years ago.. Many more artists now, and the list is growing.
My only cons with Furthurnet has been that some of the sources aren't always the best source for the show (only seen that once or twice), and that I'm out of hard-drive space because I've been lazy about burning.;)
The big problem with the ftp/http stuff is bandwidth and concurrent users. If you follow the etree.org crowd at all, you'll quickly realize that while there are many ftp sites, it's not often easy to get in, and there are a few http sites, but the bandwidth needs to be donated or the hosts get screwed on charges. There are some people using bittorrent, which helps too. Furthurnet basically makes it much easier for anyone and everyone to be a host, so the music _should_ spread more quickly. There have been some problems with crappy sources showing up, IIRC, but mostly it's been working well, from what I hear.
'In other words, "if everyone would just agree with us, then there would be no disagreement".'
Well, those are other words, but I don't think you can (successfully) make the case that the FAQ actually says that. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, they claim they are just asking for credit. Asking for credit in itself won't cause division. They then say that some people react to their request with abuse (*cough* mental illness? *cough*) and intimidation, and _that_ causes division. It's not the same thing as saying "We're not trying to cause division but _everyone_ who disagrees with us is."
I don't really care one way or the other, but it seems to me most of the hooplah comes from people misconstruing and misrepresenting the arguments. I, respectfully, think your post does just that. I could be wrong; I've never dealt with the FSF or Stallman.
Hopefully the waiver process isn't so difficult that people can still select the best tool for the job.
Hehe, that's the US Govt. yer talking about. Does the phrase "waiver process" in the context of US Govt. bring forth visions of simplicity dancing in your head? Hell, it'll probably take a committee of twelve 18 months just to come up with the waiver process form.
Many landfills may vent methane, but many don't vent enough to make it worthwhile to generate power from it. Some of them do though, and the states or corporations that run them are already using it for power generation.
One cool thing about Leo is that you can mess with source inside leo and it'll update your source files, and you can also mess with your source in your preferred editor and leo will just suck in the changes. So, you could start out a program using the outlining editor, jump into your preferred editor to fill out the actual code, then jump back into leo to update comments, add features, move blocks around, etc. Jumping around is a bit of a pain, but maybe the payoffs are great enough. I'm going to give it a shot, just in case.
"When there is a possibility of someone going down the path of crime, it is much cheaper to stop them when they haven't done anything than it is to incarcerate them later."
?? This has nothing to do with stopping crime. They're just "rounding up the usual suspects" ahead of time. There's nothing about the program that makes it sound like they try to help any of these people, or prevent crimes before they happen.
A couple of those items should really only matter to pretty big corporations. As long as the message/calendar store is in an open format, why does the alternative to Exchange need to be one project? I say there should be an agreed-upon standard for storing data, and then just let projects develop around that. The needs of the 'enterprise' system are going to be different than those of a 20-50 employee small business.
I always hear about point #4 under the client side. "It's gotta work just like the Microsoft tool or users won't like it." Funny thing is, it seems that there are/were piles of companies willing to make users learn a new system when they switched to Microsoft tools. What's so special about Microsoft that it's ok to make users learn something new when you switch to it, but not when you switch away from it? If something better comes along, why shouldn't the users be forced to learn it? After all, the goal is to drive the business forward, not keep people happy with their email client. People adapt. If it makes good business sense to make a switch, then make a switch. There'll be small hiccup in productivity as people learn new systems, but that's a short-term issue.
I see ignoring the issue as a 'civil disobedience' act. A guy can talk 'til he's blue in the face about how bad the patent situation is, but I'm not sure it's going to do anything but fall on deaf ears. The 'whack' comment was obviously a joke.
" DO ask for demos of working apps from previous jobs/schools. If they don't have anything working to show, they can't take a project, even a simple one, cradle to grave. You want self-starters who don't need constant supervision."
I think this is just wrong. There are many reasons a valuable candidate wouldn't be able to supply a demo -- NDA's, not an "applications" guy, etc. Assuming no demo means a person can't take a project from cradle to grave is a mistake. Better would be to ask for a completed, simple project. (Although a request like that would turn _me_ off -- don't lose sight of the fact that a potential employee is also interviewing the company).
I like the other points a lot, though, and would like to see more people make use of them.
Just a comment on the extra-curricular stuff on the resume. I've heard that often HR-types look for that stuff as weed-out criteria, indicating that the person doesn't have enough "real-world" experience and they needed to fill out the resume. Stupid, I know, but you often have to get past the stupid folks before you get a shot at a job. From my experience, upwards of 90% of jobs come through references anyway, and the interviews are just checks to make sure you're a functioning human being.
Projection of any kind is doomed anyway... if 'decades ahead' includes enough decades, we'll all just be jacking in nanobots to convert our sensory input when we want to 'watch' a movie.:)
Check out Environmental Defense. Pretty good record, and a nice variety of issues covered. The variety thing is important if you just want to donate to one organization. Otherwise, I suggest you pick a handful of issues you are most concerned with and find organizations that focus on each one.
Their Action Center is pretty cool. Makes it _very_ easy to shoot out a comment to government and corporate people.
I'd be more interested in hearing you explain what's non-obvious about this patent rather than hear arguments as to why the prior art examples "aren't quite there." I haven't the time to read the entire patent right now, but I didn't see anything that would have been non-obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art of instant messaging at the time the invention was made. What makes your invention so special?
I would never advocate taking illegal actions, but I'll gladly discuss a sub-plot for a science fiction novel. Consider a tech community that, after repeated failures by said community's government representatives, takes it upon itself to police the 'patent market.' Any companies that are granted and attempt to enfore ridiculous patents are given a technological death sentence. Phone and computer networks disrupted, management and board members individually targeted by identity theives, employees ridiculed, etc.
Does that comment have any authority to go with it? From what I saw of my brief tour of the website, it sounds like it actually requires RH 7.1 or 7.2 for some reason. I guess I could always give it a shot anyway, but I'd rather not go through the pain if there's something RH-specific about it that'll be tough to overcome. Looks cool though. Nice for the wife.
I'm not sure I agree. Or maybe I agree but don't realize it. I think we'll start to see a blurring of the lines. There will always be the 'pure' techy jobs, but I think we'll start to see a lot more jobs that blend non-tech and tech skills. Just as non-tech workers have learned to develop their own Microsoft Word templates for memos, or more advanced users have created Excel macros to aid with their work, people will start to develop their own custom software to help them do their jobs. An influx of tech workers into non tech jobs could drive this, provided the corporations don't get in the way. If anything, the non-techies should be getting worried. 'Course, I could be nuts. (It's a shame, there's a great argument in my head, but it just can't find it's way to the keyboard.) (Whoa! major deja vu... wasn't there a similar/. discussion a few years ago?)
I'll agree that a 'picture is worth a thousand words' when it comes to extracting information in most cases, but you don't see people holding up a picture of Hawaii and a calendar when they go visit the travel agent. Requesting information is handled much easier with language. That's why I agree with the top parent, and would say that the 'next-generation' interfaces will have complex and compelling ways to display information, but will also have a simple and flexible way to request that information. Language/text at a command-line seems like a very good way to do that.
Slashdot Mirror
"Parody is fine as long as you don't actually use somebody else's logo. That crosses the line from fair use into trademark infringement."
I don't think that's entirely true. I believe you can use a trademark in a parody, but you should be sure your work actually falls under the legal description of a parody, i.e. it makes a critical commentary or statement about the original work. It isn't enough to just be funny.
'course, ianal.
There's also a bit to the story about Bioware talking so much about a simultaneous release, then a release a 'few weeks' after the windows version, then many months later, all when they never even bothered to _ask the vendor_ if the tools they chose to use might work with Linux. Boggles my mind that there'd be all this talk about a Linux version and they don't even bother to send an email to the support@vendor.com address.
Absolutely agree on the subscription with unrestricted usage. If emusic didn't work that way, I would not be a happy subscriber. It's even more important if the catalog becomes large. If you can get access to all sorts of unheard music, you definitely don't want to pay for something you don't really want. Previews don't cut it, IMHO, because much of the music I like takes me a few listens to "get."
"Copying work without the owners permission is theft."
Not according to the law.
What Google needs is a click-thru EULA, indemnifying them from any sort of legal action whatsoever. :)
Non-lossy format is a Con? I think not. http://etree.org/faq_general.html#6
Recording quality isn't studio, but there won't _ever_ be recordings of most of those shows unless the fans do it, so I guess in a general sense it's a con, but there's not much of an option there.
Fewer artists... you should've seen things a few years ago.. Many more artists now, and the list is growing.
My only cons with Furthurnet has been that some of the sources aren't always the best source for the show (only seen that once or twice), and that I'm out of hard-drive space because I've been lazy about burning. ;)
The big problem with the ftp/http stuff is bandwidth and concurrent users. If you follow the etree.org crowd at all, you'll quickly realize that while there are many ftp sites, it's not often easy to get in, and there are a few http sites, but the bandwidth needs to be donated or the hosts get screwed on charges. There are some people using bittorrent, which helps too. Furthurnet basically makes it much easier for anyone and everyone to be a host, so the music _should_ spread more quickly. There have been some problems with crappy sources showing up, IIRC, but mostly it's been working well, from what I hear.
'In other words, "if everyone would just agree with us, then there would be no disagreement".'
Well, those are other words, but I don't think you can (successfully) make the case that the FAQ actually says that. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, they claim they are just asking for credit. Asking for credit in itself won't cause division. They then say that some people react to their request with abuse (*cough* mental illness? *cough*) and intimidation, and _that_ causes division. It's not the same thing as saying "We're not trying to cause division but _everyone_ who disagrees with us is."
I don't really care one way or the other, but it seems to me most of the hooplah comes from people misconstruing and misrepresenting the arguments. I, respectfully, think your post does just that. I could be wrong; I've never dealt with the FSF or Stallman.
Hopefully the waiver process isn't so difficult that people can still select the best tool for the job.
Hehe, that's the US Govt. yer talking about. Does the phrase "waiver process" in the context of US Govt. bring forth visions of simplicity dancing in your head? Hell, it'll probably take a committee of twelve 18 months just to come up with the waiver process form.
Sure, mice, fine. What about the software that's going to run those switches and routers? Think they'll buy that from Cisco?
Many landfills may vent methane, but many don't vent enough to make it worthwhile to generate power from it. Some of them do though, and the states or corporations that run them are already using it for power generation.
One cool thing about Leo is that you can mess with source inside leo and it'll update your source files, and you can also mess with your source in your preferred editor and leo will just suck in the changes. So, you could start out a program using the outlining editor, jump into your preferred editor to fill out the actual code, then jump back into leo to update comments, add features, move blocks around, etc. Jumping around is a bit of a pain, but maybe the payoffs are great enough. I'm going to give it a shot, just in case.
"When there is a possibility of someone going down the path of crime, it is much cheaper to stop them when they haven't done anything than it is to incarcerate them later."
?? This has nothing to do with stopping crime. They're just "rounding up the usual suspects" ahead of time. There's nothing about the program that makes it sound like they try to help any of these people, or prevent crimes before they happen.
A couple of those items should really only matter to pretty big corporations. As long as the message/calendar store is in an open format, why does the alternative to Exchange need to be one project? I say there should be an agreed-upon standard for storing data, and then just let projects develop around that. The needs of the 'enterprise' system are going to be different than those of a 20-50 employee small business.
I always hear about point #4 under the client side. "It's gotta work just like the Microsoft tool or users won't like it." Funny thing is, it seems that there are/were piles of companies willing to make users learn a new system when they switched to Microsoft tools. What's so special about Microsoft that it's ok to make users learn something new when you switch to it, but not when you switch away from it? If something better comes along, why shouldn't the users be forced to learn it? After all, the goal is to drive the business forward, not keep people happy with their email client. People adapt. If it makes good business sense to make a switch, then make a switch. There'll be small hiccup in productivity as people learn new systems, but that's a short-term issue.
I see ignoring the issue as a 'civil disobedience' act. A guy can talk 'til he's blue in the face about how bad the patent situation is, but I'm not sure it's going to do anything but fall on deaf ears. The 'whack' comment was obviously a joke.
Check out Plone, too. (runs under zope)
http://www.plone.org
Perfect for the task in the topic. Check out the Hawaii govt. movie linked at the plone site...
" DO ask for demos of working apps from previous jobs/schools. If they don't have anything working to show, they can't take a project, even a simple one, cradle to grave. You want self-starters who don't need constant supervision."
I think this is just wrong. There are many reasons a valuable candidate wouldn't be able to supply a demo -- NDA's, not an "applications" guy, etc. Assuming no demo means a person can't take a project from cradle to grave is a mistake. Better would be to ask for a completed, simple project. (Although a request like that would turn _me_ off -- don't lose sight of the fact that a potential employee is also interviewing the company).
I like the other points a lot, though, and would like to see more people make use of them.
Just a comment on the extra-curricular stuff on the resume. I've heard that often HR-types look for that stuff as weed-out criteria, indicating that the person doesn't have enough "real-world" experience and they needed to fill out the resume. Stupid, I know, but you often have to get past the stupid folks before you get a shot at a job.
From my experience, upwards of 90% of jobs come through references anyway, and the interviews are just checks to make sure you're a functioning human being.
Projection of any kind is doomed anyway... if 'decades ahead' includes enough decades, we'll all just be jacking in nanobots to convert our sensory input when we want to 'watch' a movie. :)
Their Action Center is pretty cool. Makes it _very_ easy to shoot out a comment to government and corporate people.
I'd be more interested in hearing you explain what's non-obvious about this patent rather than hear arguments as to why the prior art examples "aren't quite there." I haven't the time to read the entire patent right now, but I didn't see anything that would have been non-obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art of instant messaging at the time the invention was made. What makes your invention so special?
I would never advocate taking illegal actions, but I'll gladly discuss a sub-plot for a science fiction novel. Consider a tech community that, after repeated failures by said community's government representatives, takes it upon itself to police the 'patent market.' Any companies that are granted and attempt to enfore ridiculous patents are given a technological death sentence. Phone and computer networks disrupted, management and board members individually targeted by identity theives, employees ridiculed, etc.
Does that comment have any authority to go with it? From what I saw of my brief tour of the website, it sounds like it actually requires RH 7.1 or 7.2 for some reason. I guess I could always give it a shot anyway, but I'd rather not go through the pain if there's something RH-specific about it that'll be tough to overcome. Looks cool though. Nice for the wife.
I'm not sure I agree. Or maybe I agree but don't realize it. I think we'll start to see a blurring of the lines. There will always be the 'pure' techy jobs, but I think we'll start to see a lot more jobs that blend non-tech and tech skills. Just as non-tech workers have learned to develop their own Microsoft Word templates for memos, or more advanced users have created Excel macros to aid with their work, people will start to develop their own custom software to help them do their jobs. An influx of tech workers into non tech jobs could drive this, provided the corporations don't get in the way. If anything, the non-techies should be getting worried. 'Course, I could be nuts. /. discussion a few years ago?)
(It's a shame, there's a great argument in my head, but it just can't find it's way to the keyboard.)
(Whoa! major deja vu... wasn't there a similar
I'll agree that a 'picture is worth a thousand words' when it comes to extracting information in most cases, but you don't see people holding up a picture of Hawaii and a calendar when they go visit the travel agent. Requesting information is handled much easier with language. That's why I agree with the top parent, and would say that the 'next-generation' interfaces will have complex and compelling ways to display information, but will also have a simple and flexible way to request that information. Language/text at a command-line seems like a very good way to do that.