Blocking access from said regions would be nice, but I don't understand why he should have to take down scores just because they're still under copyright in another country or the EU. What gives the EU the right to enforce its laws in Canada? What's the point of copyright laws that vary between countries, then? Do we have to respect the copyright law of each and every country? What if Sealand decides works in its jurisdiction are under copyright forever?
Entrepreneurs could sell handsets with capabilities that are unavailable -- or unavailable at affordable prices -- from current carriers.
How about, entrepreneurs could sell handsets with capabilities that are submarine patented by current carriers, and be sued out of existence, à la Vonage.
People are always so keen to argue the finer points and wording of the law if it lets them carry on taking other peoples stuff for free,
This is especially true of the/. crowd, from what I've seen. A lot of the people here don't seem to realize that if you actually take the time to read, say, SCOTUS opinions, they attempt to provide some solid reasoning, and to strike a just and equitable balance in general. Judges are not metaphysicians - they don't give a damn about the "true" nature of information and whether it wants to be free or not. They're more concerned with making sure people are compensated for work under the system that we have. That's not to say there aren't judges out there who are completely off the wall, though.
Your example isn't a bad one, and it's something I've wondered about myself, too - if I told anyone who asked where to buy their coke, is that illegal? Will I get in trouble? Should I? I have a feeling I'd get in trouble, but I'd probably be prosecuted with something very vague, like disturbing the peace. Then again, can we really compare purchasing coke with copyright infringement?
The problem with that argument is that it ignores the changing nature of the programs that users run. In the past, "running a server" meant mail, web, telnet, and other common things. Now, "running a server" means BitTorrent, hosting a deathmatch game, or using any sort of remote access (RDP, VNC, ssh, MythWeb). These things are no longer just for geeks. Hell, even AIM can be considered a server, if you ever use direct IM.
What are they trying to accomplish by disallowing servers? Private (and misconfigured) mail servers are no fun, and running a largish website on a residential connection's not very nice, fine. But RDP for non-critical, occasional remote access to your Windows box? What's wrong with that? Is that sort of thing really bringing their network to its knees?
Also, besides common cry of "Linux ISOs!" (which, you have to admit, is a pretty lame argument for most people out there), BitTorrent is used for legally distributing such things as:
- "America's Army" (the U.S. Army's free video game). I've uploaded over 80 GB of that alone in the past few weeks.
- Aronofsky's director's commentary for the movie "The Fountain," which was not included on the DVD release
- The Pirate Bay's "Steal This Film - Part 1", which talks about the raid on their servers
I.e., there a plenty of legitimate uses for BitTorrent, and there will only be more as content gets bigger and people realize the value of not having to pay for all the bandwidth their downloaders are using.
That's impressive. I think I must have knocked out a NIC or sound card of the same era machine. It completely locked up - the image on the screen stayed, but go no response from anything. After a reboot, it was fine. I was scared shitless for a few seconds, there, though.
You are prompted to enter your administrator key. This key is on the sticker on the inside of your PC case. You shutdown the PC, get a screwdriver, open the case, write down the 18 digit administrator code, put the case back together and reboot.
Please. No self-respecting geek shuts down the computer before taking it apart...
I once knocked a PCI card out of a running machine. That was amusing.
Being agnostic or atheist has no necessary connection to being amoral. Perhaps you're connecting morality with religion? I don't think it's necessary to do so. And as another poster pointed out, being a geek, or at least a "hacker", does usually imply some ethical constraints; otherwise the oft-promoted hacker/cracker distinction becomes superfluous.
Secondly, utter disregard for human life is typically considered sociopathic.
It's too bad the kid didn't use the hack for something more worthwhile, e.g., if there had been cases of police brutality, he could have sent the SWAT team to an elected official's house, called the media, and caused a big stir. Not that that would justify what he did, but it certainly would've been better than sending them to a random house.
I think the problem is that patents are being (c) sold to people who have no intention of (a) manufacturing the product themselves, nor (b) of licensing the patent to someone else. In which case, the patent doesn't promote innovation in any way. Sure, the original inventor is monetarily compensated, but if the invention isn't being used at all, what's the point? If the sale of the patent is to someone who is actually going to do something with it, instead of just sitting on it for a decade and then suing people, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
Well, I'm not sure what TFA is actually trying to say. In one instance, it says this:
FlashMate does more by giving notebook users the ability to access to hard disk data and various applications via the notebook's USB interface, without actually having to engage the CPU.
But in another place, it says this:
"Our FlashMate technology expands beyond hybrid-drive functionality by enabling notebook users to conveniently perform tasks without having to turn on the computer..."
How is the drive going to be powered? Through the USB port? I don't even think that's possible, at least in a desktop. It seems like the CEO is using "turn on the computer" as a synonym for "boot into the OS." In which case, all this really is, is a USB Disk Mode, so no, you wouldn't be able to transfer files from your desktop during a power outage.
It's good to see that the original inventors and holders of this patent will finally be compensated for their innovation.
Oh wait... the company that holds the patent now (IP Innovation) has nothing to do with the original inventors? Well, I hope any damages they are awarded will encourage them to innovate.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this basically measuring stellar parallax, but instead of using visible light and optical telescopes against a background of stars, they are using radio waves and radio telescopes against a background of quasars?
Appearances are deceiving. I mainly wanted to clarify how much English has changed since its inception, because a lot of people tend to think "Old English" means Shakespeare. The point is, it hinges on how you define "Middle Ages." He later says he was thinking about the 14th century onwards, in which case the changes that took place in the 14th and 15th centuries are important, e.g., the standardizing effect of Chaucer's work.
Slashdot Mirror
What's going to stop those sites from prohibiting sexually explicit photos in their TOS, as most of them already do?
I don't recall tecnobrega being mentioned in "Steal This Film, Part 1". You may have meant "Good Copy, Bad Copy."
If Hollywood thinks that 15 grand makes you rich and powerful, I think they need to examine more than their business model.
The baggage claim is not a dump truck! You can't just keep dumping stuff on it...
Blocking access from said regions would be nice, but I don't understand why he should have to take down scores just because they're still under copyright in another country or the EU. What gives the EU the right to enforce its laws in Canada? What's the point of copyright laws that vary between countries, then? Do we have to respect the copyright law of each and every country? What if Sealand decides works in its jurisdiction are under copyright forever?
Reminds me of a Facebook group: "If this group reaches 4,294,967,296 it might cause an integer overflow."
How about, entrepreneurs could sell handsets with capabilities that are submarine patented by current carriers, and be sued out of existence, à la Vonage.
This is especially true of the /. crowd, from what I've seen. A lot of the people here don't seem to realize that if you actually take the time to read, say, SCOTUS opinions, they attempt to provide some solid reasoning, and to strike a just and equitable balance in general. Judges are not metaphysicians - they don't give a damn about the "true" nature of information and whether it wants to be free or not. They're more concerned with making sure people are compensated for work under the system that we have. That's not to say there aren't judges out there who are completely off the wall, though.
Your example isn't a bad one, and it's something I've wondered about myself, too - if I told anyone who asked where to buy their coke, is that illegal? Will I get in trouble? Should I? I have a feeling I'd get in trouble, but I'd probably be prosecuted with something very vague, like disturbing the peace. Then again, can we really compare purchasing coke with copyright infringement?
The problem with that argument is that it ignores the changing nature of the programs that users run. In the past, "running a server" meant mail, web, telnet, and other common things. Now, "running a server" means BitTorrent, hosting a deathmatch game, or using any sort of remote access (RDP, VNC, ssh, MythWeb). These things are no longer just for geeks. Hell, even AIM can be considered a server, if you ever use direct IM.
What are they trying to accomplish by disallowing servers? Private (and misconfigured) mail servers are no fun, and running a largish website on a residential connection's not very nice, fine. But RDP for non-critical, occasional remote access to your Windows box? What's wrong with that? Is that sort of thing really bringing their network to its knees?
Also, besides common cry of "Linux ISOs!" (which, you have to admit, is a pretty lame argument for most people out there), BitTorrent is used for legally distributing such things as:
- "America's Army" (the U.S. Army's free video game). I've uploaded over 80 GB of that alone in the past few weeks.
- Aronofsky's director's commentary for the movie "The Fountain," which was not included on the DVD release
- The Pirate Bay's "Steal This Film - Part 1", which talks about the raid on their servers
I.e., there a plenty of legitimate uses for BitTorrent, and there will only be more as content gets bigger and people realize the value of not having to pay for all the bandwidth their downloaders are using.
That's impressive. I think I must have knocked out a NIC or sound card of the same era machine. It completely locked up - the image on the screen stayed, but go no response from anything. After a reboot, it was fine. I was scared shitless for a few seconds, there, though.
Please. No self-respecting geek shuts down the computer before taking it apart...
I once knocked a PCI card out of a running machine. That was amusing.
Being agnostic or atheist has no necessary connection to being amoral. Perhaps you're connecting morality with religion? I don't think it's necessary to do so. And as another poster pointed out, being a geek, or at least a "hacker", does usually imply some ethical constraints; otherwise the oft-promoted hacker/cracker distinction becomes superfluous.
Secondly, utter disregard for human life is typically considered sociopathic.
It's too bad the kid didn't use the hack for something more worthwhile, e.g., if there had been cases of police brutality, he could have sent the SWAT team to an elected official's house, called the media, and caused a big stir. Not that that would justify what he did, but it certainly would've been better than sending them to a random house.
That's right. Some of us are sociopaths and proud of it!
Don't push your standards on me, man! I'm a non-conformist!!1
Give me a break. Everyone knows that registration is optional. Just hope they don't make you activate your brain!
Yeah, I'm not a prescriptivist, but I still balked at that.
This would give a whole new meaning to things like the "U2 iPod".
I think the problem is that patents are being (c) sold to people who have no intention of (a) manufacturing the product themselves, nor (b) of licensing the patent to someone else. In which case, the patent doesn't promote innovation in any way. Sure, the original inventor is monetarily compensated, but if the invention isn't being used at all, what's the point? If the sale of the patent is to someone who is actually going to do something with it, instead of just sitting on it for a decade and then suing people, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
Well, I'm not sure what TFA is actually trying to say. In one instance, it says this:
But in another place, it says this:
How is the drive going to be powered? Through the USB port? I don't even think that's possible, at least in a desktop. It seems like the CEO is using "turn on the computer" as a synonym for "boot into the OS." In which case, all this really is, is a USB Disk Mode, so no, you wouldn't be able to transfer files from your desktop during a power outage.
It's good to see that the original inventors and holders of this patent will finally be compensated for their innovation.
Oh wait... the company that holds the patent now (IP Innovation) has nothing to do with the original inventors? Well, I hope any damages they are awarded will encourage them to innovate.
Our patent system is broken.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this basically measuring stellar parallax, but instead of using visible light and optical telescopes against a background of stars, they are using radio waves and radio telescopes against a background of quasars?
So the "value" that the woman's 13 year-old daughter saw were Vista's gadgets:
I'm glad the end-user is seeing so much value in Vista.
What would be even funnier is if it were one of those cards that uses "shared" system memory for video memory.
Appearances are deceiving. I mainly wanted to clarify how much English has changed since its inception, because a lot of people tend to think "Old English" means Shakespeare. The point is, it hinges on how you define "Middle Ages." He later says he was thinking about the 14th century onwards, in which case the changes that took place in the 14th and 15th centuries are important, e.g., the standardizing effect of Chaucer's work.