But amend that to add 'once the content has been made available to the public'. There are a multitude of works that are subject to copyright that are never released to the 'public'. Every time you write a letter or email to someone, you own the copyright to that letter but you would not want the public to be able to obtain the content. I agree with you in the case of things like books, musical works, movies etc., copyright should be sacrificed once they go 'out of print'.
And their normal (at least in the UK) notification to you that "calls may be recorded..." is giving you permission to record. If they did not want you to record then they should announce "WE may record calls..."
If you look at the history of the PC vs Apple vs Commodore/Amiga, you will remember the remarkable success that cheap, ubiquitous success the PC (and clones -- this is important) had over the others.
And even with the PC, look at how shortlived IBM's closed MCA based PS/2 was. Following the success of the 'open' PC architecture, and the clones, they tried to regain control with the closed MicroChannel architecture - and it was a flop.
A pity that the article does not give any indication of how he it could be better done. A gut feeling that 'we are doing this all wrong' is not much (practical) use without some idea of how we should be doing it.
The solution to that is to not announce the price you are willing to pay. You want beans, so you ask the two bean sellers how much they are selling for (as is normal in a shop). ie you ask each of them for a quote and you choose which seller to buy from (or decide that they all asking too much and not purchase at this time). This is the way that almost everything else works from buying goods in a store to having a tradesman perform work for you. Even in a auction, it is the seller who starts things off by announcing "I have something to sell, who will offer me XXX" and the bidding starts there. Even with eBay where the buyer puts in a maximum bid, the seller sets the starting price and is not told how much the potential buyer is prepared to pay.
How does one opt out of cookies without using a cookie to remember it?
By not storing a cookie. If you visit the site and do not opt out, it will send you cookies including one which indicates that you did not opt out of receiving cookies. Then on subsequent visits, if this cookie is presented then the site knows that you did not opt out and can continue to send/update cookies. It, however, mean that you will also have to opt out again on every subsequent visit to the site.
And it would have served the underwriters right if the investors had decided the price was too high and failed to bid for the stock at the opening price leaving the underwriter to make up the shortfall.
If a hoax or threatening or terrorist telephone call is made from a payphone, either one run directly by the telephone company or one in privately owned premises such as a hotel or motorway services (gas station for those in the USA), the authorities would not confiscate the phone or arrest the owner of the premises. So should an open WiFi connection available to the public not be treated the same way as a payphone?
The solution to that problem is quote simple. Once someone, of any age, has passed the security checkpoint they should not be allowed back through it "the wrong way" to the non-secure area. The technology for this is not new, I first encountered it about 25 years ago. To pass the checkpoint you enter into a 'single person sized' cubicle and the door closes behind you, the exit door will not open until both the entrance door has closed behind you and the security officer presses the button to allow you to proceed.
If they want to be even greener, why not save more water and reduce the volume of waste discharged into the sewers? Not stopping at using the recycled grey water for flushing urinals and toilets, but providing waterless urinals in the mens rooms and urine separating toilets in the womens rooms. Maybe going even further and collecting the urine from the (waterless) urinals and urine separating toilets and processing it separately (eg as fertiliser) rather than discharging it into the sewerage system.
The cable owners should claim against the ship, whose owners in turn claim off their third party liability insurance. Should it not be the same as a road accident where if a car or truck damages your property (either your vehicle or it hits your wall/house etc) then you claim from the driver/vehicle owner and the claim is paid by their insurance.
Just yesterday I actually had someone tell me to enter my "personal PIN number ID" for a university copying machine. That's enough to make one's head explode.
Which is not the actual PIN, but the PIN's ID - which in this case would probably be the student or staff number. (ie whatever it is that identifies which PIN is being requested).
It is not the term 'reasonable' which is being violated, but the term 'discriminatory'. Requiring per-item royalty payments not only discriminates against FLOSS but also against products which are sold (often at a high price) in source form for a one-off payment.
Also it would be nice if Google did not index the content of the ads. On numerous occasions I have found that the only occurence of my search is in an ad on the page.
There are some cases where secure bootloaders are valid. Ie, so that only owners can modify their devices instead of just anyone who has physical access (electricity meters), rented or leased equipment (broadband routers), and so forth. Sometimes the device requires a level of trust as part of its design and the owners insist on knowing that the firmware has not been tampered with, such as encrypted routers.
Yes, but that is putting control in the hands of the owner of the device. Trusted computing and secure boot is doing the opposite and removing control from the owner of the device and placing it in the hnads of the supplier of one of the components.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is how the charging on the original (X.25) packet switched networks was done. You were charged by the amount of data transferred.
But amend that to add 'once the content has been made available to the public'. There are a multitude of works that are subject to copyright that are never released to the 'public'. Every time you write a letter or email to someone, you own the copyright to that letter but you would not want the public to be able to obtain the content. I agree with you in the case of things like books, musical works, movies etc., copyright should be sacrificed once they go 'out of print'.
The same argument applies to eBooks. On Amazon (at least in the UK), the price of the Kindle edition is often more than that of the paperback edition.
And their normal (at least in the UK) notification to you that "calls may be recorded..." is giving you permission to record. If they did not want you to record then they should announce "WE may record calls..."
And in the 2001 census had various options, including 'Other Asian' under the Asian category but had Chinese as a separate (not under Asian) option.
If you look at the history of the PC vs Apple vs Commodore/Amiga, you will remember the remarkable success that cheap, ubiquitous success the PC (and clones -- this is important) had over the others.
And even with the PC, look at how shortlived IBM's closed MCA based PS/2 was. Following the success of the 'open' PC architecture, and the clones, they tried to regain control with the closed MicroChannel architecture - and it was a flop.
A pity that the article does not give any indication of how he it could be better done. A gut feeling that 'we are doing this all wrong' is not much (practical) use without some idea of how we should be doing it.
The solution to that is to not announce the price you are willing to pay. You want beans, so you ask the two bean sellers how much they are selling for (as is normal in a shop). ie you ask each of them for a quote and you choose which seller to buy from (or decide that they all asking too much and not purchase at this time). This is the way that almost everything else works from buying goods in a store to having a tradesman perform work for you. Even in a auction, it is the seller who starts things off by announcing "I have something to sell, who will offer me XXX" and the bidding starts there. Even with eBay where the buyer puts in a maximum bid, the seller sets the starting price and is not told how much the potential buyer is prepared to pay.
All the address based blocklists have to do is block the whole /64 which is the smallest allocation ipv6 allocation unit.
But surely the court would be more clogged by N thousand individual cases than by a single class action with (the same) N thousand plaintiffs.
How does one opt out of cookies without using a cookie to remember it?
By not storing a cookie. If you visit the site and do not opt out, it will send you cookies including one which indicates that you did not opt out of receiving cookies. Then on subsequent visits, if this cookie is presented then the site knows that you did not opt out and can continue to send/update cookies. It, however, mean that you will also have to opt out again on every subsequent visit to the site.
Buying a whole block would probably not work, as then it would be simple to block the whole block.
And it would have served the underwriters right if the investors had decided the price was too high and failed to bid for the stock at the opening price leaving the underwriter to make up the shortfall.
If a hoax or threatening or terrorist telephone call is made from a payphone, either one run directly by the telephone company or one in privately owned premises such as a hotel or motorway services (gas station for those in the USA), the authorities would not confiscate the phone or arrest the owner of the premises. So should an open WiFi connection available to the public not be treated the same way as a payphone?
How does it tell the difference between a "rival" browser and any random application which uses a TCP/IP transport?
The solution to that problem is quote simple. Once someone, of any age, has passed the security checkpoint they should not be allowed back through it "the wrong way" to the non-secure area. The technology for this is not new, I first encountered it about 25 years ago. To pass the checkpoint you enter into a 'single person sized' cubicle and the door closes behind you, the exit door will not open until both the entrance door has closed behind you and the security officer presses the button to allow you to proceed.
If they want to be even greener, why not save more water and reduce the volume of waste discharged into the sewers? Not stopping at using the recycled grey water for flushing urinals and toilets, but providing waterless urinals in the mens rooms and urine separating toilets in the womens rooms. Maybe going even further and collecting the urine from the (waterless) urinals and urine separating toilets and processing it separately (eg as fertiliser) rather than discharging it into the sewerage system.
Yeah, like they did in Indochine!
I must admit that I have not listened to anything by (the French band) Indochine for quite some time.
The cable owners should claim against the ship, whose owners in turn claim off their third party liability insurance. Should it not be the same as a road accident where if a car or truck damages your property (either your vehicle or it hits your wall/house etc) then you claim from the driver/vehicle owner and the claim is paid by their insurance.
So the correct thing to say would the "RSVP promptly".
Just yesterday I actually had someone tell me to enter my "personal PIN number ID" for a university copying machine. That's enough to make one's head explode.
Which is not the actual PIN, but the PIN's ID - which in this case would probably be the student or staff number. (ie whatever it is that identifies which PIN is being requested).
In which case it is not FRAND, because it discriminates against the individual and small startup.
It is not the term 'reasonable' which is being violated, but the term 'discriminatory'. Requiring per-item royalty payments not only discriminates against FLOSS but also against products which are sold (often at a high price) in source form for a one-off payment.
Also it would be nice if Google did not index the content of the ads. On numerous occasions I have found that the only occurence of my search is in an ad on the page.
There are some cases where secure bootloaders are valid. Ie, so that only owners can modify their devices instead of just anyone who has physical access (electricity meters), rented or leased equipment (broadband routers), and so forth. Sometimes the device requires a level of trust as part of its design and the owners insist on knowing that the firmware has not been tampered with, such as encrypted routers.
Yes, but that is putting control in the hands of the owner of the device. Trusted computing and secure boot is doing the opposite and removing control from the owner of the device and placing it in the hnads of the supplier of one of the components.