I would think it would be as much GNU/Linux as it was before. Linux is not part of the GNU project -- HURD is the GNU kernel. GNU/Linux is just combining the Linux kernel with a GNU userland.
(warning: my sarcasm meter is currently broken)
A nice side effect is that if a site works well in Firefox then it will also work well for Safari, Opera, or whatever standards compliant browser you like.
That's why it works so well for web pages. W3C essentially creates a "standard interface" between HTML coders and people's browsers. We don't really have an equivalent for application programmers. Every OS has its own set of APIs. Some may be shared, but the interfaces that are completely cross-platform tend to be pretty barebones (think libc).
Regardless of whether you are depriving the record companies of money (not entirely disagreeable) you are actually depriving the talented people who wrote and performed the music too. That's utter crap
I can only imagine the venom you must be saving for the record labels.
and I see you're too damn frightened to post that behind an actual identity (mostly because you're opinion is bullshit).
So his post can't be reliably connected to other posts. Big deal.
I suppose we could argue as to whether or not the 7th Amendment implies the right to a trial with those same restrictions.
For example, my alma mater high school district was sued on behalf of a current student by the ALCU after the district did not stop a parent from reciting the Lord's Prayer at graduation. Neither the district nor student body knew who the plaintiff was.
Perhaps not directly, but I imagine Google would love to see some serious advances in energy production (as alluded to in TFS). Consider how much they draw with all their data centers. They may be seeing this as a "rising tide lifts all boats" situation.
I'm afraid I don't see much of anything non-obvious on their list, and there's likely plenty of prior art as well. The "online auction" patent was filed in 1999; eBay was founded in 1995. How bad is it when a patent troll gets away with patenting things that aren't even new?
FUD and disinformation are their primary weapons. Their two weapons are FUD and disinformation, and ruthless efficiency. ...
Their three weapons are FUD, disinformation, and ruthless efficiency... and pushes for insane extensions to copyright/patent protections.
There four weapons are....
Amongst their weapons are...
How about the fact that he couldn't read it (i.e. terms were never presented to him) and probably couldn't click "yes" (i.e. never agreed to them)? Relevant?
The legal technicality that is used by software is that copying the program from the install media to your disk and then to RAM requires extra rights (not valid in all jurisdictions).
I don't think the legality/enforceability of EULAs in general is being disputed here. Gateway is saying Sheehan can't sue because it's forbidden in the EULA, and Sheehan is saying he never saw or agreed to the EULA. I think all we could use this as precedent for is enforcing a EULA that the customer simply may have seen and agreed to, and I doubt that will fly here.
His talk would be, "Citizens, citizens, citizens." His action would be, "Lobbyists, lobbyists, lobbyists," or perhaps "Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft."
So what if you can make a perfect pseudonym identification system? What does that achieve for you? What do you accomplish beyond that?
I won't have someone create a troll account called epee1221 on some other forum.
Surely you've seen slashdotters (or impersonators) someplace other than slashdot? It matters whether or not it can be attached/detached from other pseudonyms because regardless of any "reputation infrastructure," people who see the same name in different places generally expect it to be the same person.
If, for some reason, you really want to prove to people that your two accounts (on same or different sites) are both used by the same person, you might try digital signatures -- this reduces a subset of the original problem to a plain old public-key infrastructure.
Slashdot Mirror
What doesn't only work within boundaries?
I would think it would be as much GNU/Linux as it was before. Linux is not part of the GNU project -- HURD is the GNU kernel. GNU/Linux is just combining the Linux kernel with a GNU userland.
(warning: my sarcasm meter is currently broken)
So his post can't be reliably connected to other posts. Big deal.
Wouldn't it have been the ACLU?
Perhaps not directly, but I imagine Google would love to see some serious advances in energy production (as alluded to in TFS). Consider how much they draw with all their data centers. They may be seeing this as a "rising tide lifts all boats" situation.
An abbreviated list:
I'm afraid I don't see much of anything non-obvious on their list, and there's likely plenty of prior art as well. The "online auction" patent was filed in 1999; eBay was founded in 1995. How bad is it when a patent troll gets away with patenting things that aren't even new?
Yep, it seems to work. (Can't say I like the /.
sidebar stuff in Cygwin lynx).
Aren't appeals for deciding questions of law, not questions of fact?
Ah, I see. I took it to mean "inherent value."
Yes, GP appears to be confusing cost with value.
FUD and disinformation are their primary weapons. Their two weapons are FUD and disinformation, and ruthless efficiency.
... ... and pushes for insane extensions to copyright/patent protections.
Their three weapons are FUD, disinformation, and ruthless efficiency
There four weapons are....
Amongst their weapons are...
Ok, lemme try this again....
How about the fact that he couldn't read it (i.e. terms were never presented to him) and probably couldn't click "yes" (i.e. never agreed to them)? Relevant?
I don't think the legality/enforceability of EULAs in general is being disputed here. Gateway is saying Sheehan can't sue because it's forbidden in the EULA, and Sheehan is saying he never saw or agreed to the EULA. I think all we could use this as precedent for is enforcing a EULA that the customer simply may have seen and agreed to, and I doubt that will fly here.
(IANAL)
This time, the RIAA can't drop the suit without prejudice as soon as it starts to look like they'll lose.
Interesting. All the statements I've heard from him were complaining that the bills would require inflation forecasts to be factored into budgeting.
His talk would be, "Citizens, citizens, citizens." His action would be, "Lobbyists, lobbyists, lobbyists," or perhaps "Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft."
So what if you can make a perfect pseudonym identification system? What does that achieve for you? What do you accomplish beyond that? I won't have someone create a troll account called epee1221 on some other forum.
Surely you've seen slashdotters (or impersonators) someplace other than slashdot? It matters whether or not it can be attached/detached from other pseudonyms because regardless of any "reputation infrastructure," people who see the same name in different places generally expect it to be the same person.
If, for some reason, you really want to prove to people that your two accounts (on same or different sites) are both used by the same person, you might try digital signatures -- this reduces a subset of the original problem to a plain old public-key infrastructure.
It's not about what format they use internally. It's about what format they use when they release them.
I interpreted it saying that the legislature writes the requirements, and the executive does the implementation. Courts are for testing.