Here's what we got from APNIC this morning:
Dear APNIC community
We are writing to inform you that as of Friday, 15 April 2011, the APNIC
pool reached the Final/8 IPv4 address block, bringing us to Stage Three
of IPv4 exhaustion in the Asia Pacific. For more information about Stage
Three, please refer to: http://www.apnic.net/ipv4-exhaustion/stages
Last/8 address policy:
APNIC's objective during Stage Three is to provide IPv4 address space
for new entrants to the market and for those deploying IPv6...but given how fast APNIC reached the final/8, you'd think it won't be long before they run out entirely.
What happens if the TSA decide to instigate "random" seizures of laptops? If I had to visit the US on a business trip, it would be a nightmare for my business laptop to be *taken* by US authorities without cause or reason. This is simply unacceptable behaviour by a first world nation.
Why do rational people allow these laws to stand? There are a whole host of reasons why this is outrageously invasive and unnecessary, not too mention what happened to the presumption of innocence? What if a device has commercially sensitive material on it? Or documents protected by privilege? What happens if material from a seized device is leaked onto the Internet? Can we sue the US Government for damages?
If this is how the US is going to behave towards visitors, then you can count me out.
I understand what you are getting at, but I still think it is a little naive to think that someone who has spent considerable time representing the political will of a large and influential body such as the IFPI has more than a little conflict of interest.
I'm not sure that it's fair to compare a minimum wage worker at McDonalds/KFC to the paid professionals who lobby for changes in copyright law and I don't it's reasonable to give her the benefit of the doubt in this instance.
She was with the IFPI as recently as 2004 in the role of "Deputy General Counsel, Director of Legal Policy and Regulatory Affairs." and although it doesn't say when she left (so we're talking maybe five years ago?), it's far too recent for my liking. Would you put it past the music industry to plant someone sympathetic and formerly in their employ in the government? I wouldn't. This has conflict of interest written all over it.
I'm certainly no legal expert, but shouldn't a judge with such an obvious conflict of interest recuse themselves from such cases? I was under the impression that's what a judge is supposed to do if the judge can't adjudicate impartially?
It's ridiculous to claim that the use of pirated software is "the" market defining factor behind supply pricing competition, and you'd likely be very wrong in assuming that software piracy in business is limited to overseas suppliers, too. It might also have something to do with lower cost of living/lower wages/import and export tariffs.. in fact a whole slew of things.
I'm sorry, but it's simply wrong to punish the party which didn't even infringe in the first place. It's like threatening one person with a gun and shooting the innocent bystander.
Oh really? That's a nicely jaded view.. the counter point is - if piracy didn't exist, would any of those things (improvements) have occurred naturally? No, of course not - the industries would still price fix and have you buying from stores under their pre-Internet business model days.
The industries were never going to reform their business practices for the benefit of the consumer, we can only thank the Internet and advances in compression technology for putting the power back in the hands of the consumer; free of the limitations of physical media and with a much larger distribution model.
Anyhow, I'm sure you have far more important trolling to get on with, don't let me stop you.
How about when hitting "reply all" the mail client pops up a message box confirming that the user wants to "reply all"? Question is.. Is the annoyance of a confirmation box worth it to avoid a career ending mistake or, at the least, a healthy dosage of WTF?
Part of me prefers that the career equivalent of "social darwinism" kicks in to reward reply-all stupidity. Then again - haven't we all written heated emails when we've been tired at some point in our careers?
Personally, to avoid such mistakes I have a rule - I don't write heated or rude emails in the mail client directly. I write them in notepad and when I've calmed down, I usually rethink the text and it never gets sent.
Geeze Guys,
I think you're missing the main point here - the legal action isn't over publishing rights to Tolkien's works, it's to use his likeness in a novel. It's akin to the estate of George Washington taking legal action against any author who has ever written a novel featuring their ancestor.
Making money off the published works of a relative is one thing.. holding the world at ransom over using his name or likeness? That's bullshit. If that were the case, no new work of fiction (or non fiction) would ever be able to reference real people(or *their likeness*) without paying royalties. That's screwed.
How about.. _never_ retaining personal data unless it's been approved by a court order, much like it _used to be_ for wire taps and surveillance? This is just wrong.
Compaq really killed DEC after the takeover. Such a pity because I used to refurb ex-government PCs, and I can tell you the old Digitals were WAY better than Compaqs, HPs or any other competition. Farewell to Mr Olsen, it is a shame his legacy doesn't live on in his memory.
Frankly, this isn't news. The whole country blocks facebook, twitter and god only knows what else.
The netizens in China have figured out terms they can use to work around the filtering (they're not dumb) which goes to show how stupid the government sanctioned "great firewall" is (please take note Australia and other countries which are democracies who are entertaining mandatory filters!).
Blocking a single word on a single site is hardly the biggest outrage I can think of. Think about it.
Plus, frankly, the people here are far more concerned with Chinese New Year/Spring Festival which is only a few days away. I suspect that few inside China are paying much attention to anything else. If you've ever BEEN to China, then you'd know exactly what I'm talking about. Chinese New Year is like Christmas and New Years Eve all thrown into a two or three week long massive holiday. If a protest breaks out in the next two weeks, I'll happily eat my hat, but the odds are it won't.
I'm actually in China at the moment. The "great firewall" is only really noticeable when it comes to the obvious sites - facebook, twitter and some google services etc. Slashdot isn't blocked (obviously) but even if it was, a VPN connection and everything's fine (although, a little slower). So I suspect it'll be the same with this French legislation - you'll likely be able to bypass it with tunneling.
My thoughts exactly, but coupled with the thought that this is just another privacy controversy waiting to happen..
New Facebook byline: "Want to share your E-mail messages with your friends?".. [opt out here]..
If only works would actually enter the public domain.
With the never ending extensions to the current copyright laws (world wide it would seem) the public domain is not expanding, in fact it is actually shrinking.
But you are correct, copyright was a means for authors and artists to derive income from their works (which is supposed to eventually join the public domain). I doubt the original framers of copyright legislation had the interests of the author's great-grand grandchildren at heart though.
Sure, proclaim BluRay dead and try not to remind people that Microsoft (and the Xbox 360) backed the failed HD-DVD bid.. Not to mention, not everyone can download 20+ gb instantly, I think physical media will be with us for some time to come..
>If someone thinks C is too complex or too hard to learn then he shouldn't be working with programming computers, he's likely to cause great damage sooner or later.
Amen! I don't understand the downside of people learning to write C/C++. Abstracting away some hardware or platform specific coding is a great time saver, but being completely ignorant to what is underneath (or being unable to grasp key programming tenets) makes for poor programmers IMHO.
This is very (hauntingly) similar to the duty imposed on the sale of writable media in Canada several years back.
This didn't stop the music industry bandwagon from attempting to cash in on a Canadian DCMA and various other tactics.
"Apple's premise is that the majority of people are stupid enough to confuse the logos"
C'mon.. seriously, even Cletus the slack jawed yokel is going to be able to tell the different between the "wapple" and Apple's logo.. plus, Apple *don't own supermarkets*.
This is just a drain on our (Australia's) already monolithic legal system, the real victims here are Australian citizens who will have to wait longer for their day in court.
Defending the trademark is exactly the same motivation behind McDonald's failed law suit in Malaysia (against McCurry), which was another massive waste of time.
All this does is feed the pockets of corporate lawyers (on both sides).
Personally, I hope the global-mega-corps get hit with a massive fine for wasting the court's time, which might hopefully send a clear message to said corporations.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's what we got from APNIC this morning: Dear APNIC community We are writing to inform you that as of Friday, 15 April 2011, the APNIC pool reached the Final /8 IPv4 address block, bringing us to Stage Three
of IPv4 exhaustion in the Asia Pacific. For more information about Stage
Three, please refer to: http://www.apnic.net/ipv4-exhaustion/stages
Last /8 address policy:
APNIC's objective during Stage Three is to provide IPv4 address space
for new entrants to the market and for those deploying IPv6. ..but given how fast APNIC reached the final /8, you'd think it won't be long before they run out entirely.
What happens if the TSA decide to instigate "random" seizures of laptops? If I had to visit the US on a business trip, it would be a nightmare for my business laptop to be *taken* by US authorities without cause or reason. This is simply unacceptable behaviour by a first world nation. Why do rational people allow these laws to stand? There are a whole host of reasons why this is outrageously invasive and unnecessary, not too mention what happened to the presumption of innocence? What if a device has commercially sensitive material on it? Or documents protected by privilege? What happens if material from a seized device is leaked onto the Internet? Can we sue the US Government for damages? If this is how the US is going to behave towards visitors, then you can count me out.
I understand what you are getting at, but I still think it is a little naive to think that someone who has spent considerable time representing the political will of a large and influential body such as the IFPI has more than a little conflict of interest. I'm not sure that it's fair to compare a minimum wage worker at McDonalds/KFC to the paid professionals who lobby for changes in copyright law and I don't it's reasonable to give her the benefit of the doubt in this instance. She was with the IFPI as recently as 2004 in the role of "Deputy General Counsel, Director of Legal Policy and Regulatory Affairs." and although it doesn't say when she left (so we're talking maybe five years ago?), it's far too recent for my liking. Would you put it past the music industry to plant someone sympathetic and formerly in their employ in the government? I wouldn't. This has conflict of interest written all over it.
I'm certainly no legal expert, but shouldn't a judge with such an obvious conflict of interest recuse themselves from such cases? I was under the impression that's what a judge is supposed to do if the judge can't adjudicate impartially?
It's ridiculous to claim that the use of pirated software is "the" market defining factor behind supply pricing competition, and you'd likely be very wrong in assuming that software piracy in business is limited to overseas suppliers, too. It might also have something to do with lower cost of living/lower wages/import and export tariffs.. in fact a whole slew of things. I'm sorry, but it's simply wrong to punish the party which didn't even infringe in the first place. It's like threatening one person with a gun and shooting the innocent bystander.
Oh really? That's a nicely jaded view.. the counter point is - if piracy didn't exist, would any of those things (improvements) have occurred naturally? No, of course not - the industries would still price fix and have you buying from stores under their pre-Internet business model days. The industries were never going to reform their business practices for the benefit of the consumer, we can only thank the Internet and advances in compression technology for putting the power back in the hands of the consumer; free of the limitations of physical media and with a much larger distribution model. Anyhow, I'm sure you have far more important trolling to get on with, don't let me stop you.
How about when hitting "reply all" the mail client pops up a message box confirming that the user wants to "reply all"? Question is.. Is the annoyance of a confirmation box worth it to avoid a career ending mistake or, at the least, a healthy dosage of WTF? Part of me prefers that the career equivalent of "social darwinism" kicks in to reward reply-all stupidity. Then again - haven't we all written heated emails when we've been tired at some point in our careers? Personally, to avoid such mistakes I have a rule - I don't write heated or rude emails in the mail client directly. I write them in notepad and when I've calmed down, I usually rethink the text and it never gets sent.
Geeze Guys, I think you're missing the main point here - the legal action isn't over publishing rights to Tolkien's works, it's to use his likeness in a novel. It's akin to the estate of George Washington taking legal action against any author who has ever written a novel featuring their ancestor. Making money off the published works of a relative is one thing.. holding the world at ransom over using his name or likeness? That's bullshit. If that were the case, no new work of fiction (or non fiction) would ever be able to reference real people(or *their likeness*) without paying royalties. That's screwed.
How about.. _never_ retaining personal data unless it's been approved by a court order, much like it _used to be_ for wire taps and surveillance? This is just wrong.
Compaq really killed DEC after the takeover. Such a pity because I used to refurb ex-government PCs, and I can tell you the old Digitals were WAY better than Compaqs, HPs or any other competition. Farewell to Mr Olsen, it is a shame his legacy doesn't live on in his memory.
Frankly, this isn't news. The whole country blocks facebook, twitter and god only knows what else. The netizens in China have figured out terms they can use to work around the filtering (they're not dumb) which goes to show how stupid the government sanctioned "great firewall" is (please take note Australia and other countries which are democracies who are entertaining mandatory filters!). Blocking a single word on a single site is hardly the biggest outrage I can think of. Think about it.
Plus, frankly, the people here are far more concerned with Chinese New Year/Spring Festival which is only a few days away. I suspect that few inside China are paying much attention to anything else. If you've ever BEEN to China, then you'd know exactly what I'm talking about. Chinese New Year is like Christmas and New Years Eve all thrown into a two or three week long massive holiday. If a protest breaks out in the next two weeks, I'll happily eat my hat, but the odds are it won't.
It's ridiculous enough right now. Stop giving them ideas!
I'm actually in China at the moment. The "great firewall" is only really noticeable when it comes to the obvious sites - facebook, twitter and some google services etc. Slashdot isn't blocked (obviously) but even if it was, a VPN connection and everything's fine (although, a little slower). So I suspect it'll be the same with this French legislation - you'll likely be able to bypass it with tunneling.
My thoughts exactly, but coupled with the thought that this is just another privacy controversy waiting to happen.. New Facebook byline: "Want to share your E-mail messages with your friends?".. [opt out here]..
If only works would actually enter the public domain. With the never ending extensions to the current copyright laws (world wide it would seem) the public domain is not expanding, in fact it is actually shrinking. But you are correct, copyright was a means for authors and artists to derive income from their works (which is supposed to eventually join the public domain). I doubt the original framers of copyright legislation had the interests of the author's great-grand grandchildren at heart though.
This feels like an exercise in trolling. Don't give in and feed the trolls! Especially if they aren't HTML 5.0 compliant!
The shame of it is that it wasn't a slow news day in Australia, either..
Sure, proclaim BluRay dead and try not to remind people that Microsoft (and the Xbox 360) backed the failed HD-DVD bid.. Not to mention, not everyone can download 20+ gb instantly, I think physical media will be with us for some time to come..
>If someone thinks C is too complex or too hard to learn then he shouldn't be working with programming computers, he's likely to cause great damage sooner or later. Amen! I don't understand the downside of people learning to write C/C++. Abstracting away some hardware or platform specific coding is a great time saver, but being completely ignorant to what is underneath (or being unable to grasp key programming tenets) makes for poor programmers IMHO.
This is very (hauntingly) similar to the duty imposed on the sale of writable media in Canada several years back. This didn't stop the music industry bandwagon from attempting to cash in on a Canadian DCMA and various other tactics.
..but won't he hijack Ottawa and eventually get demoted?
This would be the "war on terror", right? Seems a lot more like a war on Iraqis..
"Apple's premise is that the majority of people are stupid enough to confuse the logos" C'mon.. seriously, even Cletus the slack jawed yokel is going to be able to tell the different between the "wapple" and Apple's logo.. plus, Apple *don't own supermarkets*. This is just a drain on our (Australia's) already monolithic legal system, the real victims here are Australian citizens who will have to wait longer for their day in court. Defending the trademark is exactly the same motivation behind McDonald's failed law suit in Malaysia (against McCurry), which was another massive waste of time. All this does is feed the pockets of corporate lawyers (on both sides). Personally, I hope the global-mega-corps get hit with a massive fine for wasting the court's time, which might hopefully send a clear message to said corporations.