Whether my FC5, FC6, Xubuntu, openSuSE and Gentoo installations, my Apache webservers, or any of the approx. 80,000 packages on my 7 machines are "nonexistent" or "semiexistent"... whichever they are, they're chugging along pretty well.
"Nowadays, the patrons willing to pay for art are big 'soulless' corporations who will only back artists who can generate the most money for them -- NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!"
This is false. I know it to be false because I am willing to back artists and pay for art, and I'm not a soulless corporation. There are, I think, approximately a billion people like me. So you're describing maybe 1% of the patrons willing to pay for art.
I really enjoy your jazz station. The second song I heard was Brad Mehldau's rendition of "Monk's Dream" -- one of my all time favorite songs. I looked this up on the "played this hour" page because I am not yet adept at recognizing Mehldau's signature attack style.
At the bottom of that page was an ad for theyellowtags.com, a site that offers great deals on instruments with *no *shipping (even for a cello, which is what I'm in the market for). I'm emailing them right now.
If you could spend a few seconds removing your head from your ass, please contemplate whether it's a good idea to sue/threaten bloggers for *introducing *me to your *advertisers. Were it not for the blog you're attacking, I never would have heard your stream or bought this cello.
I know a big storm arose when Linus declared that the kernel would remain v2, but I don't see how this does anything but assuage his own personal sense of the rightness of things. Every distro out there is going to have acres of v3 software in it, or become utterly worthless.
A book suggested to me that the kernel was specifically optimized for compilation by GCC, IIRC. FSF holds the copyright on GCC and it will move to v3, as will bash, libc, make, sed, and countless others.
A sidenote: does this kinda indicate that maybe rms was right to ask that the complete systems be called GNU/Linux? Are companies going to be saying to their suppliers "No, GPLv3 makes me nervous 'cause of all the things MS and SCO said about it. I just want the same Linux I've always been getting, under v2 terms"
The fact that X -- the most powerful person on the planet -- was able to accomplish some snazzy things does not argue for X's creativity or intelligence. If someone with tremendous power "pulls one over" on the whole world, it's usually on account of great wickedness, not wicked greatness.
Arby's had this ad campaign many years ago about Arby's being for adults or whatever. My wife and I will never forget that they printed "Premium Beverage" on their cups as part of this.
No it does not make more sense. And -- for I think the 930,000th time -- the reason to have an OS be hackable is not that every corporate suit in America wants to learn C++ and hack hisher box.
It's that the suits can pay *any *hacker in the *world to hack their boxes.
"there is almost no difference between this "everyone has defensive patents" world, and the "no one has any patents at all" world. In both cases, companies that hold a bunch of patents are free to operate as they see fit"
See the important difference. It's the *thousands of companies who don't hold a bunch of patents. They are not free to operate as they see fit in the former case, and in fact live in a Damoclean situation where their continued survival is dependent on being below the radar of the patent oligarchy. In the latter case, they are free to operate as they see fit.
Or did you have some plan for providing these defensive patents to "everyone"?
You don't have to know MS's patent portfolio to know that -- yes -- F/OSS violates some of them. No program longer than about 1000 lines is likely to be "clean" in this sense.
The reason it's called FUD is not necessarily 'cause it's false: it's because Microsoft is *unlikely to actually do any of the things they are threatening.
Two centuries from now I think there's going to be a big dead zone in cultural history. I refer to the bulk of 20th century art, which it will be difficult to preserve and keep relevant as long as *all copying without permission is illegal.
Millions of great pieces of pre-Gutenberg literature were lost because of inadequate technology. Millions of pre-Internet pieces will be lost because of politics.
Some state, I think Washington, was suggesting a law requiring any mountain climber to carry a GPS. Sounded fine to me, but a *real mountain climber pointed out that sometimes security & safety are bad.
The reasoning is like in your example: the GPS makes amateurs feel like they can try things they shouldn't. And AV programs make people open more attachments, click more ads, etc.
"Wouldn't a patent law which does NOT promote science and arts be unconstitutional? "
This was essentially the argument presented in Eldred vs. Ashcroft, the SCOTUS case that challenged our latest Disney-copyright-extension law. Regrettably, this argument did not prevail. The holding of SCOTUS was (note, this was about copyright law, not patents -- but the constitutional basis is the same) was that a copyright law that did not radically change the contours of copyright was presumably constitutional and did not need to survive a constitutional challenge.
(I leave it as an exercise for the reader whether such things as the DMCA radically changed the contours of copyright.)
Presumably, Eldred vs. Ashcroft could be considered precedent for patent law, since constitutional challenge would be based on the same clause, even though patent and copyright law are very different.
lol I think it's my own fault: the domain is "twoclick.org" and no doubt smells just like doubleclick.net from a distance. And my post text didn't do much by way of description.
But it's just as well, since the traffic I got from the other link got me in hot water with my host. Please remember to come back again when the stress is off.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether my FC5, FC6, Xubuntu, openSuSE and Gentoo installations, my Apache webservers, or any of the approx. 80,000 packages on my 7 machines are "nonexistent" or "semiexistent"... whichever they are, they're chugging along pretty well.
"Nowadays, the patrons willing to pay for art are big 'soulless' corporations who will only back artists who can generate the most money for them -- NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!"
This is false. I know it to be false because I am willing to back artists and pay for art, and I'm not a soulless corporation. There are, I think, approximately a billion people like me. So you're describing maybe 1% of the patrons willing to pay for art.
I've been saying basically that, but boringly, for years now.
I really enjoy your jazz station. The second song I heard was Brad Mehldau's rendition of "Monk's Dream" -- one of my all time favorite songs. I looked this up on the "played this hour" page because I am not yet adept at recognizing Mehldau's signature attack style.
At the bottom of that page was an ad for theyellowtags.com, a site that offers great deals on instruments with *no *shipping (even for a cello, which is what I'm in the market for). I'm emailing them right now.
If you could spend a few seconds removing your head from your ass, please contemplate whether it's a good idea to sue/threaten bloggers for *introducing *me to your *advertisers. Were it not for the blog you're attacking, I never would have heard your stream or bought this cello.
I remember Hilf in here in his interview, talking about how Vista was totally going to reinvent what people do with computers.
Guess this is what he meant: riding bikes, gardening, not-computing...
Instead of saying "Restricted Content" maybe it should say "Rights Content"? Or if we're not using "DRM" anymore, "Digitally-Enabled Content"?
True, calling stuff you can't do "enabled" is a little too Orwellian even for the "content industry"...
The other point that this issue highlights is that if you don't control your property (computer, in this case) people will jump in and mess it up.
Think about it while you're getting those TCP modules hooked up.
I know a big storm arose when Linus declared that the kernel would remain v2, but I don't see how this does anything but assuage his own personal sense of the rightness of things. Every distro out there is going to have acres of v3 software in it, or become utterly worthless.
A book suggested to me that the kernel was specifically optimized for compilation by GCC, IIRC. FSF holds the copyright on GCC and it will move to v3, as will bash, libc, make, sed, and countless others.
A sidenote: does this kinda indicate that maybe rms was right to ask that the complete systems be called GNU/Linux? Are companies going to be saying to their suppliers "No, GPLv3 makes me nervous 'cause of all the things MS and SCO said about it. I just want the same Linux I've always been getting, under v2 terms"
The fact that X -- the most powerful person on the planet -- was able to accomplish some snazzy things does not argue for X's creativity or intelligence. If someone with tremendous power "pulls one over" on the whole world, it's usually on account of great wickedness, not wicked greatness.
...don't they know that menus are the new way to do everything? stupid stupid linux. doesn't even have the Genuine Aero Experience(TM)
I assure you that by the time Vista's successor is actually coded and released, 64-bit architectures will seem very quaint.
Arby's had this ad campaign many years ago about Arby's being for adults or whatever. My wife and I will never forget that they printed "Premium Beverage" on their cups as part of this.
Yeah. Premium beverages. e.g. 7up.
What's the legality of using signal-jamming equipment? I mean for non-presidents. Obviously, whatever the president does is always legal.
But, please read those EULAs, people
I believe 'premium content', as used by the ahem 'content industry', means "content that we need to recoup advertising dollars on"
No it does not make more sense. And -- for I think the 930,000th time -- the reason to have an OS be hackable is not that every corporate suit in America wants to learn C++ and hack hisher box.
It's that the suits can pay *any *hacker in the *world to hack their boxes.
"there is almost no difference between this "everyone has defensive patents" world, and the "no one has any patents at all" world. In both cases, companies that hold a bunch of patents are free to operate as they see fit"
See the important difference. It's the *thousands of companies who don't hold a bunch of patents. They are not free to operate as they see fit in the former case, and in fact live in a Damoclean situation where their continued survival is dependent on being below the radar of the patent oligarchy. In the latter case, they are free to operate as they see fit.
Or did you have some plan for providing these defensive patents to "everyone"?
You don't have to know MS's patent portfolio to know that -- yes -- F/OSS violates some of them. No program longer than about 1000 lines is likely to be "clean" in this sense.
The reason it's called FUD is not necessarily 'cause it's false: it's because Microsoft is *unlikely to actually do any of the things they are threatening.
"it never was, never was meant to be and never will be a mass market operating system used by the naive users."
I believe a few million children will soon be disagreeing with you
Two centuries from now I think there's going to be a big dead zone in cultural history. I refer to the bulk of 20th century art, which it will be difficult to preserve and keep relevant as long as *all copying without permission is illegal.
Millions of great pieces of pre-Gutenberg literature were lost because of inadequate technology. Millions of pre-Internet pieces will be lost because of politics.
Some state, I think Washington, was suggesting a law requiring any mountain climber to carry a GPS. Sounded fine to me, but a *real mountain climber pointed out that sometimes security & safety are bad.
The reasoning is like in your example: the GPS makes amateurs feel like they can try things they shouldn't. And AV programs make people open more attachments, click more ads, etc.
"Wouldn't a patent law which does NOT promote science and arts be unconstitutional? "
4 0226003735733
This was essentially the argument presented in Eldred vs. Ashcroft, the SCOTUS case that challenged our latest Disney-copyright-extension law. Regrettably, this argument did not prevail. The holding of SCOTUS was (note, this was about copyright law, not patents -- but the constitutional basis is the same) was that a copyright law that did not radically change the contours of copyright was presumably constitutional and did not need to survive a constitutional challenge.
(I leave it as an exercise for the reader whether such things as the DMCA radically changed the contours of copyright.)
Presumably, Eldred vs. Ashcroft could be considered precedent for patent law, since constitutional challenge would be based on the same clause, even though patent and copyright law are very different.
Source of analysis, btw, is Moglen's speech at Harvard's JOLT
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=200
Have you *tried making Ubuntu's windows turn sideways 45 degrees so that they kinda look cool and overlap a bit? It takes *hours!
lol I think it's my own fault: the domain is "twoclick.org" and no doubt smells just like doubleclick.net from a distance. And my post text didn't do much by way of description.
But it's just as well, since the traffic I got from the other link got me in hot water with my host. Please remember to come back again when the stress is off.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/result.html?p=1&
PS: come by my site (www.twoclick.org/unnamed). Sounds like you're pretty familiar with this stuff