It's similar to the GPL. Locking down software under draconian EULAs is the problem. Using the copyright system "against itself" is the solution.
But the GPL is not a statement against copyright, so that doesn't make a lot of sense. It's using copyright exactly as copyright law is intended. Only the most extreme fringe of the Free Software movement wants copyright completely abolished.
I have not heard many other companies with that motto.
Perhaps because it shouldn't need to be said? Not doing evil is the most basic of human ethics, not something to be proud of. The fact that they use it as a motto actually says a lot - that there is a high possibility of Google naturally being evil, so they have to make efforts keep it in check.
(why would you replace a $70 drum on a $99 printer?)
because $70 is less than $99, so it makes economic sense? Because it's environmentally reckless to replace a whole printer when only the drum needs replacing?
Using patent law in addition to copyright would, if anything, make that more common, and give a "strike back" option against those who attempt to use patent law against FOSS-whoever does so probably will have by then violated an open source patent in their closed source software.
Just like the post you were replying to says, this makes FOSS just like "them." Isn't the dominant position in the FOSS community that software patents are wrong? So, how could FOSS developers use software patents without being hypocrites?
The neat thing about film is that you can look at the original to see what is actually present, and compare it with what you are resolving in your scans. So, really, there is no mystery. And then, of course, there are the 40x60" enlargements, and smaller prints.
None of which prove anything unless you subject them to technical/scientific tests. Just because you think they look good doesn't prove anything about the actual resolution.
"This looks really cool, I'll bet my son, nephew, grandson, will like it!"
Man, that's pretty fucked up when the same person is your son, nephew and grandson. Were you raised by time travelers by any chance? Oh wait, now I see your handle.
But psychological evaluation tests are almost completely worthless, so what would that achieve? Even if the tests did work, humans are not machines. People who are completely stable and sane today can easily become completely insane next week. The human mind is a very fragile thing.
The simplest method of cleaning house in DC would be for millions of enraged citizens to simply surround the capital with pitchforks, firearms and signs reading "GTFO Now!" and give every politician 24 hours to evacuate.
OK, let's assume for a second that this has the intended effect, and all the politicians leave. Then what?
My 6x7 cm film images are already 11,023 x 9,448 when scanned at 4000 dpi.
Just because your scanner is capable of resolving 4000 dpi doesn't mean that your film is resolving detail at that resolution. Most likely you are wasting pixels, and think you have a higher resolution image than you actually do.
The real application for ultra-high resolution is surveillance cams.
Because, as we all know, there can only ever be one real application for a particular technology. The multitude of other valid applications are just faking it.
and if there is some other meaning to "greater dynamic range" than "more shades of gray" I certainly don't know what it is.
Well, then you don't know the standard definition of "dynamic range" as it applies to photography. It means the difference between the highest and lowest light intensity a medium can capture. It does not mean "more shades of gray"
For example, a medium which can capture 1,000 shades of gray between EV-4 and EV-6 has low dynamic range compared to one which can capture only 100 shades of gray between EV-1 and EV-9.
Maybe we're getting to a point where big business will no longer make oodles of money distorting our culture.
"Distorting our culture"? What the hell does that mean? Firstly, what is "our culture" in the first place? Distorting it would imply that there is some kind of pure, undistorted version of "our culture." Since culture is arbitrary and malleable, what is this undistorted version you are referring to?
This would be the coolest thing ever, if instead of "vroom vroom" noises, it played the lyrics to Madness' Driving in My Car read out by a bad Japanese speech synthesizer.
I've been driving in my car, it's not quite a Jaguar I bought it in Primrose Hill from a bloke from Brazil It was made in '59 in a factory by the Tyne...
The first thing they did was audit our source code to identify all the modules derived from open source. Before the sale could go through we had to rewrite those modules from scratch.
Ummm, that just proves exactly what the post you were replying to was claiming. Microsoft rewrote those modules, because it doesn't want to reciprocate or release modified code to the community. They want to incorporate others' work without having to abide by open source licenses.
Slashdot Mirror
Do we get to operate our theremins as if they were computers?
It's similar to the GPL. Locking down software under draconian EULAs is the problem. Using the copyright system "against itself" is the solution.
But the GPL is not a statement against copyright, so that doesn't make a lot of sense. It's using copyright exactly as copyright law is intended. Only the most extreme fringe of the Free Software movement wants copyright completely abolished.
I have not heard many other companies with that motto.
Perhaps because it shouldn't need to be said? Not doing evil is the most basic of human ethics, not something to be proud of. The fact that they use it as a motto actually says a lot - that there is a high possibility of Google naturally being evil, so they have to make efforts keep it in check.
It's Google. They're probably selling your phone calls to the Chinese government.
and I thought I was the only one
No, I think all of us have had mothers at some stage in our lives.
(why would you replace a $70 drum on a $99 printer?)
because $70 is less than $99, so it makes economic sense? Because it's environmentally reckless to replace a whole printer when only the drum needs replacing?
Using patent law in addition to copyright would, if anything, make that more common, and give a "strike back" option against those who attempt to use patent law against FOSS-whoever does so probably will have by then violated an open source patent in their closed source software.
Just like the post you were replying to says, this makes FOSS just like "them." Isn't the dominant position in the FOSS community that software patents are wrong? So, how could FOSS developers use software patents without being hypocrites?
I heard that Sarah Palin can pick this up quite easily from her home in Wasilla!
Oh my god, she's a Communist double-agent kill-bot! This explains everything. I always suspected that "Nikolai" was actually just "Trig" in Russian.
The neat thing about film is that you can look at the original to see what is actually present, and compare it with what you are resolving in your scans. So, really, there is no mystery. And then, of course, there are the 40x60" enlargements, and smaller prints.
None of which prove anything unless you subject them to technical/scientific tests. Just because you think they look good doesn't prove anything about the actual resolution.
"This looks really cool, I'll bet my son, nephew, grandson, will like it!"
Man, that's pretty fucked up when the same person is your son, nephew and grandson. Were you raised by time travelers by any chance? Oh wait, now I see your handle.
But psychological evaluation tests are almost completely worthless, so what would that achieve? Even if the tests did work, humans are not machines. People who are completely stable and sane today can easily become completely insane next week. The human mind is a very fragile thing.
The simplest method of cleaning house in DC would be for millions of enraged citizens to simply surround the capital with pitchforks, firearms and signs reading "GTFO Now!" and give every politician 24 hours to evacuate.
OK, let's assume for a second that this has the intended effect, and all the politicians leave. Then what?
My 6x7 cm film images are already 11,023 x 9,448 when scanned at 4000 dpi.
Just because your scanner is capable of resolving 4000 dpi doesn't mean that your film is resolving detail at that resolution. Most likely you are wasting pixels, and think you have a higher resolution image than you actually do.
The real application for ultra-high resolution is surveillance cams.
Because, as we all know, there can only ever be one real application for a particular technology. The multitude of other valid applications are just faking it.
We need new laws of nature, since we're near the edges of the ones we have now.
That's OK. Once we figure out the meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything; a new universe will be created to replace the one we had.
and if there is some other meaning to "greater dynamic range" than "more shades of gray" I certainly don't know what it is.
Well, then you don't know the standard definition of "dynamic range" as it applies to photography. It means the difference between the highest and lowest light intensity a medium can capture. It does not mean "more shades of gray"
For example, a medium which can capture 1,000 shades of gray between EV-4 and EV-6 has low dynamic range compared to one which can capture only 100 shades of gray between EV-1 and EV-9.
It was made in '59 in a factory by the Tyne
And then they built the supercollider
Yes, I know, it doesn't quite Rhyme.
That's because it's a Madness song
(note, you'll have to excuse me for not digging up the name of the NAMBLA president from work.)
You work for NAMBLA? Wow, tough gig.
Maybe we're getting to a point where big business will no longer make oodles of money distorting our culture.
"Distorting our culture"? What the hell does that mean? Firstly, what is "our culture" in the first place? Distorting it would imply that there is some kind of pure, undistorted version of "our culture." Since culture is arbitrary and malleable, what is this undistorted version you are referring to?
How does this affect the porn industry?
You see, when a man and a woman love each other very much, they get together and form a copyright... and then there's porn.
I'll stick with my Detroit Muscle,
In my day, we called that a "trouser snake."
This would be the coolest thing ever, if instead of "vroom vroom" noises, it played the lyrics to Madness' Driving in My Car read out by a bad Japanese speech synthesizer.
I've been driving in my car, it's not quite a Jaguar
I bought it in Primrose Hill from a bloke from Brazil
It was made in '59 in a factory by the Tyne...
The first thing they did was audit our source code to identify all the modules derived from open source. Before the sale could go through we had to rewrite those modules from scratch.
Ummm, that just proves exactly what the post you were replying to was claiming. Microsoft rewrote those modules, because it doesn't want to reciprocate or release modified code to the community. They want to incorporate others' work without having to abide by open source licenses.
1a) while quietly fighting in the dark
So, is that what the kids are calling sex these days?
Just one problem... what should I call it?
The internet?