What the U.S. needs to do is amend the law so that you don't have the stupidity of having fair use rights, but not being able to (legally) exercise them the moment someone applies some copy protection.
Fat chance of that when our only two political parties both support a heavy-handed stance on IP law. One party (Democrats) is beholden to Hollywood, and so they support tough IP laws. The other party (Republicans) and beholden to big business so THEY support tough IP laws too. Basically, consumers and normal citizens (those of us without lobbying money) get absolutely *NO* say in this "democracy."
Actually, that's a myth (repeated by sensationalistic journalists and opportunistic politicians, both redundant terms of course). Actually, sex offenders have one of the LOWEST recidivism rates of offenders, not that fact that keeps opportunists from cooking the numbers to support their self-serving point. Excellent article on it here.
So it's perfectly legal for customers to make their own backup copies of media, just as long as it's impossible for them to do. God, I love modern IP law!
Well, I guess everyone could go get a programming degree and write their own copying software. Or we could just break the law (since the law at this point has turned almost 100% of the citizens of the world into lawbreakers already, in one form or another).
And before any of you jump in to point out that the DMCA is just a U.S. thing, you had better keep in mind that the DMCA is just the U.S. implementation of the WIPO COpyright Treaty, so these types of court cases are probably in the pipeline for your country soon too!
Sounds like you're working at a real cutting-edge company. I used to work at one of those too. They would still be using Novell Netware 4 if I hadn't made them upgrade.
I'm supposed to believe that, in 2 years of hybrid development, you've developed a production vehicle that will get almost *5 TIMES* the gas mileage of Toyota's hybrid model (that they've been developing and improving on for over 12 years)?
I'm throwing the Shenanigans flag. No...scratch that...I'm throwing the COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT flag.
I suspect that, since this is a plug-in, they're "fudging" (more like "outright lying about") the figures by only counting actual gasoline used in day-to-day use. So if a guy drives every day back and forth to work, less than 40 miles, he's only using the plug-in electricity. But the GM exec's aren't counting that electricity he's using, only his actual gasoline used on occasional longer trips, towards the "Miles Per Gallon" rating. I guess GM thinks that people don't pay for their electricity, and that electricity doesn't come from power plants that burn fossil fuels too.
According to GM, I guess if I never go on longer trips, my Volt will be getting infinity miles per gallon.
Sony and MS working together. This cannot end well.
Throw in Steve Jobs to the mix and they'll be able to create an evil legion that will surely take over the world. Even Superman won't be able to save us.
One thing I noticed the last time that I read these magazines was that there were very few actual reviews in them. Most of the content was either ads, developer interviews, or "Previews" (that inevitably gushed over how great the game was going to be, according to its developers). The few actual reviews were all gushing too (except for a small number of very obscure titles that I wouldn't have considered anyway). Basically, it was 100% worthless to me. Why anyone would actual buy such a thing, much less subscribe to it, is beyond me. If I wanted to read reviews that were bought and paid for, I could get them at Gamespot for free.
"Fame," the ultimate addictive MMO. Try to leave it behind and go to college...try to find another career...try to go back home to your small town...but you'll always come back to the casting couch for Fame. It's the game that never lets go.
I'm a Xbox fanboy, but MS's decision to eliminate the standard hard drive from the 360 still baffles me. I know they wanted to save a buck, but it's still rare to see a console manufacturer actually take a step BACKWARDS from one console generation to the next. It basically meant that developers couldn't rely on the hard drive for caching (the way they could on the Xbox 1), and so now I can't walk through Oblivion without getting annoying texture pop-in's. Though they've largely improved on this by allowing hard drive installs and moving to phase out the harddrive-free SKU, it was still a bonehead move that left the 360 way more crippled than it ever needed to be.
Actually, if we continue apace at our rate of scientific advancement, we probably WILL one day move beyond our dependence on our conventional biological constraints (such as the need to extract energy and nutrients from conventional food sources). We've already learned to survive in ways our distant ancestors couldn't have dreamed of. I would argue that the biggest threat to the survival of the human race right now isn't global warming, disease, asteroids, etc. Our biggest threat is OURSELVES. I'm more worried that we may one day advance in our scientific knowledge to the point where a single mistake at a research facility could wipe all of us out in an instant.
Mass extinction is part of the natural process of this planet, and so are humans. Any extinction we cause is *not* unnatural (as this implies that humans are somehow supernatural). Any extinction caused by our activities is no less natural than any other of the many extinctions in this planet's long history caused by many other types of natural processes. The only real question we need to face is whether we will ultimately cause our OWN extinction, and if there is a way we can avoid that (or to avoid extinction by any other force).
It would be a lot easier to buy that argument if half the students had been required to defend the idea and half to oppose it, and it had taken place in a non-public setting. As it is, it doesn't sound like a pedagogical device to me--it sounds like simple indoctrination. And that's perfectly find for a private seminary, but not for an institution accredited as a purported serious institution of higher learning.
The reason you think that is because most atheists who are well-versed and experienced also know the pointlessness of arguing with a true believer. Only a young fool would waste his time arguing with someone who simply cannot be convinced to abandon his beliefs (be he Christian, Muslim, or otherwise).
Again that's fine, as long as they're not getting any public funding. But I don't think an institution should be accredited as an academic university, when their only purpose to is to teach and enforce intellectual dogma.
No accredited university should be requiring students to make public statements defending specific ideas under ANY situation, trolling or not. If this seminary is not receiving public funding, them I'm perfectly fine with them requiring any crazy shit they want to, but I don't think the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) should be accrediting them as an academic institution (this isn't the first time SACS's rather lax standards have been called into question--over a variety of issues). Students should retain their rights to their own opinions in any respectable academic setting, be they a liberal in a accredited seminary or a conservative at Berkley. If a professors wants to get up in class and rant about their beliefs, that's fine--but they WAY cross the line when they require (or even attempt to coerce) students to affirm those ideas themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
What the U.S. needs to do is amend the law so that you don't have the stupidity of having fair use rights, but not being able to (legally) exercise them the moment someone applies some copy protection.
Fat chance of that when our only two political parties both support a heavy-handed stance on IP law. One party (Democrats) is beholden to Hollywood, and so they support tough IP laws. The other party (Republicans) and beholden to big business so THEY support tough IP laws too. Basically, consumers and normal citizens (those of us without lobbying money) get absolutely *NO* say in this "democracy."
Actually, that's a myth (repeated by sensationalistic journalists and opportunistic politicians, both redundant terms of course). Actually, sex offenders have one of the LOWEST recidivism rates of offenders, not that fact that keeps opportunists from cooking the numbers to support their self-serving point. Excellent article on it here.
Probation doesn't last for the rest of your life.
So it's perfectly legal for customers to make their own backup copies of media, just as long as it's impossible for them to do. God, I love modern IP law!
Well, I guess everyone could go get a programming degree and write their own copying software. Or we could just break the law (since the law at this point has turned almost 100% of the citizens of the world into lawbreakers already, in one form or another).
And before any of you jump in to point out that the DMCA is just a U.S. thing, you had better keep in mind that the DMCA is just the U.S. implementation of the WIPO COpyright Treaty, so these types of court cases are probably in the pipeline for your country soon too!
And, god forbid, if they won this MS would just be the first of many companies they would go after--including Sun.
Sounds like you're working at a real cutting-edge company. I used to work at one of those too. They would still be using Novell Netware 4 if I hadn't made them upgrade.
You can have my 486 running Windows 3.1 when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers! It was good enough for 1994 and it's good enough now!
I'm supposed to believe that, in 2 years of hybrid development, you've developed a production vehicle that will get almost *5 TIMES* the gas mileage of Toyota's hybrid model (that they've been developing and improving on for over 12 years)?
I'm throwing the Shenanigans flag. No...scratch that...I'm throwing the COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT flag.
I suspect that, since this is a plug-in, they're "fudging" (more like "outright lying about") the figures by only counting actual gasoline used in day-to-day use. So if a guy drives every day back and forth to work, less than 40 miles, he's only using the plug-in electricity. But the GM exec's aren't counting that electricity he's using, only his actual gasoline used on occasional longer trips, towards the "Miles Per Gallon" rating. I guess GM thinks that people don't pay for their electricity, and that electricity doesn't come from power plants that burn fossil fuels too.
According to GM, I guess if I never go on longer trips, my Volt will be getting infinity miles per gallon.
Well, that explains why he failed.
Sony and MS working together. This cannot end well.
Throw in Steve Jobs to the mix and they'll be able to create an evil legion that will surely take over the world. Even Superman won't be able to save us.
One thing I noticed the last time that I read these magazines was that there were very few actual reviews in them. Most of the content was either ads, developer interviews, or "Previews" (that inevitably gushed over how great the game was going to be, according to its developers). The few actual reviews were all gushing too (except for a small number of very obscure titles that I wouldn't have considered anyway). Basically, it was 100% worthless to me. Why anyone would actual buy such a thing, much less subscribe to it, is beyond me. If I wanted to read reviews that were bought and paid for, I could get them at Gamespot for free.
"Fame," the ultimate addictive MMO. Try to leave it behind and go to college...try to find another career...try to go back home to your small town...but you'll always come back to the casting couch for Fame. It's the game that never lets go.
Duh, you forgot the hot chicks in skimpy clothing.
I'm a Xbox fanboy, but MS's decision to eliminate the standard hard drive from the 360 still baffles me. I know they wanted to save a buck, but it's still rare to see a console manufacturer actually take a step BACKWARDS from one console generation to the next. It basically meant that developers couldn't rely on the hard drive for caching (the way they could on the Xbox 1), and so now I can't walk through Oblivion without getting annoying texture pop-in's. Though they've largely improved on this by allowing hard drive installs and moving to phase out the harddrive-free SKU, it was still a bonehead move that left the 360 way more crippled than it ever needed to be.
Well, at least it gave that goddamn numeric keypad SOME usefulness.
I'm going to build my own planet, with blackjack and hookers!
Actually, if we continue apace at our rate of scientific advancement, we probably WILL one day move beyond our dependence on our conventional biological constraints (such as the need to extract energy and nutrients from conventional food sources). We've already learned to survive in ways our distant ancestors couldn't have dreamed of. I would argue that the biggest threat to the survival of the human race right now isn't global warming, disease, asteroids, etc. Our biggest threat is OURSELVES. I'm more worried that we may one day advance in our scientific knowledge to the point where a single mistake at a research facility could wipe all of us out in an instant.
Mass extinction is part of the natural process of this planet, and so are humans. Any extinction we cause is *not* unnatural (as this implies that humans are somehow supernatural). Any extinction caused by our activities is no less natural than any other of the many extinctions in this planet's long history caused by many other types of natural processes. The only real question we need to face is whether we will ultimately cause our OWN extinction, and if there is a way we can avoid that (or to avoid extinction by any other force).
And only billion more years left?!?!? But I'm not even packed!
It would be a lot easier to buy that argument if half the students had been required to defend the idea and half to oppose it, and it had taken place in a non-public setting. As it is, it doesn't sound like a pedagogical device to me--it sounds like simple indoctrination. And that's perfectly find for a private seminary, but not for an institution accredited as a purported serious institution of higher learning.
I get the distinct sense that this requirement wasn't just meant as an intellectual exercise in Socratic Method.
The reason you think that is because most atheists who are well-versed and experienced also know the pointlessness of arguing with a true believer. Only a young fool would waste his time arguing with someone who simply cannot be convinced to abandon his beliefs (be he Christian, Muslim, or otherwise).
Again that's fine, as long as they're not getting any public funding. But I don't think an institution should be accredited as an academic university, when their only purpose to is to teach and enforce intellectual dogma.
Dear Sony,
Thank you for the new customer.
Sincerely grateful,
Microsoft Corporation
No accredited university should be requiring students to make public statements defending specific ideas under ANY situation, trolling or not. If this seminary is not receiving public funding, them I'm perfectly fine with them requiring any crazy shit they want to, but I don't think the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) should be accrediting them as an academic institution (this isn't the first time SACS's rather lax standards have been called into question--over a variety of issues). Students should retain their rights to their own opinions in any respectable academic setting, be they a liberal in a accredited seminary or a conservative at Berkley. If a professors wants to get up in class and rant about their beliefs, that's fine--but they WAY cross the line when they require (or even attempt to coerce) students to affirm those ideas themselves.