No, it doesn't mean you're a criminal. There's no reason to be hostile towards this; try to see it from the Guild's point of view:
Almost all writers get paid little for their work, and what they do get paid they have to claw away from managers, publishers, event organizers, etc. As such, the Guild prohibits the performance of copyrighted work, because performance transforms the written piece into a different kind of entertainment; a different medium, and therefore a separate price.
You can of course read anything out loud that you want. You just can't read it out loud into a recording device and then sell the recording without getting Guild permission first. In fact, the very meat and potatoes of Audible's bread and butter is this marked difference between the written word and the spoken word.
All of that said, the Guild's lawyers are confused here. An automated, computerized voice with flat emotives is not a performance of any kind. The protection that the Guild offers for such things should not be being used here. It's a simple matter of ignorance on the Guild's side, which will probably be corrected sooner rather than later.
I can't help but notice the poetic absence of Microsoft in that list.
It's not that corporations can't do basic research for fear of being sued, it's specifically that Microsoft's investors are annoyed at Microsoft spending an enormous amount of research on R&D with little return.
There's BSD code in every version of windows going back to NT 4.0. BSD developers know this, and that's part of the point. If I may:
"I don't use *BSD because I hate Microsoft, I use it because I love unix"
That's the whole of the point. It doesn't matter who uses the code; there's no sense of "being ripped off" in the BSD world. You develop it because you love it, and because you want to make things (all things) work better. Not because you want to kick Microsoft (or anyone else) in the teeth.
NetBSD is small, stable, and fast as hell. It is not really meant for use on the desktop, though many people do (including me). I mainly use it to build small, single purpose servers that I never want to have to look at again, and it's perfect for it.
It's also where a lot of neat code sees its first light of day in the *BSD systems; over the years NetBSD has lent parts of its code to the other two BSDs, and therefore (de-facto) to Windows, Linux, and OS X.
But no, it's probably not going to make you very happy as a desktop operating system.
You know, just about every company that did business in europe during WWII (IBM, Leica, Volkswagen, etc) has the same history. So really you're talking about any international company that existed before 1945 and still exists now. I fail to see how it's relevant.
No, the fact is that Michael Dell (as anyone who's met the man can attest) is a jackass. He assumes superiority in every situation, despite the mediocrity of the hardware on which his name is embossed. I'm not at all surprised he got spanked by Putin.
I think what you're describing is the beginning of the next set of battles in the war for Free Shit.
Of course the opposition (in my case, the RIAA) will try to find ways to outsmart thieves, but by the thieves' very existence it seems to me that they're smarter. So the next move might be that trackers get smarter and don't advertise IP addresses, instead converting them through some sort of encryption technology that would of course have to have modules for every TCP stack there is (rot 13 would probably work here as far as the RIAA is concerned)which would then be decrypted in-thread on the client side, forever invisible to all but the most 31337 sorts of people who know exactly how to make nmap work.
Which would then spawn another volley, etc.
This fight probably won't end in any of our lifetimes, but at least we've always been winning.
It seems to me that whether or not anyone agrees with whether or not virtual piracy is right and just, the RIAA and MPAA continue to be about nine years behind current technologies.
Because there are now newsreaders and bittorrent clients for every platform that support encrypted connections over clever ports, the RIAA and MPAA will not be able to include exactly which files were shared, if any, in any court documents they submit for any case where the defendant dutifully encrypted all of their connections.
In fact, to my knowledge, not one case has ever come up where the defendant's connection to a swarm (or anything else) was encrypted.
So there it is. Really the thing to be concerned about is how much extra we're each going to be paying per month for the privilege of using the internet in order for these jackass companies to support their useless puckering for the beached, bloated whale that is the RIAA.
The heat sink for a piezoelectric spot cooler. So really no, there's not a huge amount of point until someone figures out how to do heat exchange with something other than heat conductive metals who's efficiency depends directly on surface area.
And now the name, address, and other details of that judge are everywhere forever.
The Kent police are policing in an archaic way that does not work anymore.
The problem here is that "freedom of the press" (which both the the UK have) is different from "freedom of speech" (which the US has and the UK does not). You'll find a lot of Americans around here I think, screaming bloody murder in favor of Indymedia's right to host whatever the hell they want, and a bunch of Brits pointing out that really Indymedia is not a victim here, but a perpetrator. Neither one of you are "right" so to speak, and the fact of the matter is that if it's important to a person to reveal that sort of information about an individual publicly, they'll do it in such a way that the Kent police will have absolutely nothing to say about it.
Which, as has been mentioned, has already happened in this case
Researchers actually aren't saying much. This is simply another attempt by news media (like Slashdot) to make sense of statistics (which may as well be magic to most people), and twisting them into exciting headlines.
I've had a bit of experience with the marriage of research and media, and it's pretty terrible. Research needs media in order to excite the public so that they in turn get more funding, but they have to excite the public by acquiescing to weak understanding of causality in the minds of the people reporting the results of these sorts of studies.
It's not a nefarious move. It's how iTunes (and therefore Apple) recognize purchased music. This is necessary for a number of benevolent reasons, including a strong layer of insurance against selling you the same track twice.
If you really don't like it, write the two-liner (one line if you know sed and awk) that blows your personal info out of every purchased track automatically.
I never claimed it was. It's caused instead by experience, and experience and age are not mutually exclusive.
And why the bloody hell would I want to waste time and money teaching someone their job? I do not run a school, buddy. You have to pay to go to those, and there's a reason for that. It's expensive to pack knowledge into the heads of future programmers and engineers.
Though now that I'm thinking about it, I suppose if someone were to offer to pay me to give them a position for which they are in no way qualified, so that they can learn to be qualified, I'd probably say something along the lines of "yeah, ok."
I've given them now and then before a hire, but I've done it through an organization who reveals each answer -- not all of them do.
Of course it has a bearing on whether I hire the person, if it is given. I would never hire someone whom the test reveals is "trustworthy", because that's a misnomer. What they mean is "devious and poor perspective of what's important".
Instead, if given to separate two final applicants, the one who scores over a certain threshold that I've named "honesty", ironically by scoring low enough, they're chosen for the job. I would never hire someone who didn't know how to have a good time, man.
Bingo. You can really tell the modders in this thread are under 30...which makes sense when you think about it, since really they're the only ones who would be offended by my statement.
Yet another reason to not hire them. They're still too damn sensitive. There's no crying in computer programming!
Slashdot Mirror
No, it doesn't mean you're a criminal. There's no reason to be hostile towards this; try to see it from the Guild's point of view:
Almost all writers get paid little for their work, and what they do get paid they have to claw away from managers, publishers, event organizers, etc. As such, the Guild prohibits the performance of copyrighted work, because performance transforms the written piece into a different kind of entertainment; a different medium, and therefore a separate price.
You can of course read anything out loud that you want. You just can't read it out loud into a recording device and then sell the recording without getting Guild permission first. In fact, the very meat and potatoes of Audible's bread and butter is this marked difference between the written word and the spoken word.
All of that said, the Guild's lawyers are confused here. An automated, computerized voice with flat emotives is not a performance of any kind. The protection that the Guild offers for such things should not be being used here. It's a simple matter of ignorance on the Guild's side, which will probably be corrected sooner rather than later.
I can't help but notice the poetic absence of Microsoft in that list.
It's not that corporations can't do basic research for fear of being sued, it's specifically that Microsoft's investors are annoyed at Microsoft spending an enormous amount of research on R&D with little return.
There's BSD code in every version of windows going back to NT 4.0. BSD developers know this, and that's part of the point. If I may:
"I don't use *BSD because I hate Microsoft, I use it because I love unix"
That's the whole of the point. It doesn't matter who uses the code; there's no sense of "being ripped off" in the BSD world. You develop it because you love it, and because you want to make things (all things) work better. Not because you want to kick Microsoft (or anyone else) in the teeth.
I wish the truth reflected the reality.
NetBSD is small, stable, and fast as hell. It is not really meant for use on the desktop, though many people do (including me). I mainly use it to build small, single purpose servers that I never want to have to look at again, and it's perfect for it.
It's also where a lot of neat code sees its first light of day in the *BSD systems; over the years NetBSD has lent parts of its code to the other two BSDs, and therefore (de-facto) to Windows, Linux, and OS X.
But no, it's probably not going to make you very happy as a desktop operating system.
FTP: too many connections!
Haha just kidding.
You know, just about every company that did business in europe during WWII (IBM, Leica, Volkswagen, etc) has the same history. So really you're talking about any international company that existed before 1945 and still exists now. I fail to see how it's relevant.
No, the fact is that Michael Dell (as anyone who's met the man can attest) is a jackass. He assumes superiority in every situation, despite the mediocrity of the hardware on which his name is embossed. I'm not at all surprised he got spanked by Putin.
I think what you're describing is the beginning of the next set of battles in the war for Free Shit.
Of course the opposition (in my case, the RIAA) will try to find ways to outsmart thieves, but by the thieves' very existence it seems to me that they're smarter. So the next move might be that trackers get smarter and don't advertise IP addresses, instead converting them through some sort of encryption technology that would of course have to have modules for every TCP stack there is (rot 13 would probably work here as far as the RIAA is concerned)which would then be decrypted in-thread on the client side, forever invisible to all but the most 31337 sorts of people who know exactly how to make nmap work.
Which would then spawn another volley, etc.
This fight probably won't end in any of our lifetimes, but at least we've always been winning.
Watch how fast https becomes ubiquitous. When everyone is encrypting everything, the RIAA will be utterly powerless.
As they already are when it comes to any encrypted connection to any number of swarms or usenet servers.
It seems to me that whether or not anyone agrees with whether or not virtual piracy is right and just, the RIAA and MPAA continue to be about nine years behind current technologies.
Because there are now newsreaders and bittorrent clients for every platform that support encrypted connections over clever ports, the RIAA and MPAA will not be able to include exactly which files were shared, if any, in any court documents they submit for any case where the defendant dutifully encrypted all of their connections.
In fact, to my knowledge, not one case has ever come up where the defendant's connection to a swarm (or anything else) was encrypted.
So there it is. Really the thing to be concerned about is how much extra we're each going to be paying per month for the privilege of using the internet in order for these jackass companies to support their useless puckering for the beached, bloated whale that is the RIAA.
What does it mean for mechanical film cameras, specifically Leica M series? Will they have to be made louder to comply with this law?
You do it with one of these:
http://www.instructables.com/id/SH8YISTFPPG0L4D/
The heat sink for a piezoelectric spot cooler. So really no, there's not a huge amount of point until someone figures out how to do heat exchange with something other than heat conductive metals who's efficiency depends directly on surface area.
That's the sound of 30,000 other security professionals simultaneously saying "no shit!"
And now the name, address, and other details of that judge are everywhere forever.
The Kent police are policing in an archaic way that does not work anymore.
The problem here is that "freedom of the press" (which both the the UK have) is different from "freedom of speech" (which the US has and the UK does not). You'll find a lot of Americans around here I think, screaming bloody murder in favor of Indymedia's right to host whatever the hell they want, and a bunch of Brits pointing out that really Indymedia is not a victim here, but a perpetrator. Neither one of you are "right" so to speak, and the fact of the matter is that if it's important to a person to reveal that sort of information about an individual publicly, they'll do it in such a way that the Kent police will have absolutely nothing to say about it.
Which, as has been mentioned, has already happened in this case
Researchers actually aren't saying much. This is simply another attempt by news media (like Slashdot) to make sense of statistics (which may as well be magic to most people), and twisting them into exciting headlines.
I've had a bit of experience with the marriage of research and media, and it's pretty terrible. Research needs media in order to excite the public so that they in turn get more funding, but they have to excite the public by acquiescing to weak understanding of causality in the minds of the people reporting the results of these sorts of studies.
BeOS 5.0 booted in 9 seconds on my Pentium III 500 with 128 megs of RAM.
"If you think I should overlook a brilliant youngster and hire a plodding old fart just because he's old"
I don't, and you need to take a logic class.
Oh, fuck you.
Flamebait indeed.
It's not a nefarious move. It's how iTunes (and therefore Apple) recognize purchased music. This is necessary for a number of benevolent reasons, including a strong layer of insurance against selling you the same track twice.
If you really don't like it, write the two-liner (one line if you know sed and awk) that blows your personal info out of every purchased track automatically.
I fail to see the issue.
What a damn stupid idea.
"Not necessarily. I'm well over 30, and I agree with him."
Then you'd be a terrible hiring manager.
"I'd even more rather have a 40 year old with great talent and instinct, but you take what you can get."
These people are everywhere, and a lot of them are out of work right now. If you're not finding them, you're not looking hard enough.
"Competence is not caused by age"
I never claimed it was. It's caused instead by experience, and experience and age are not mutually exclusive.
And why the bloody hell would I want to waste time and money teaching someone their job? I do not run a school, buddy. You have to pay to go to those, and there's a reason for that. It's expensive to pack knowledge into the heads of future programmers and engineers.
Though now that I'm thinking about it, I suppose if someone were to offer to pay me to give them a position for which they are in no way qualified, so that they can learn to be qualified, I'd probably say something along the lines of "yeah, ok."
I've given them now and then before a hire, but I've done it through an organization who reveals each answer -- not all of them do.
Of course it has a bearing on whether I hire the person, if it is given. I would never hire someone whom the test reveals is "trustworthy", because that's a misnomer. What they mean is "devious and poor perspective of what's important".
Instead, if given to separate two final applicants, the one who scores over a certain threshold that I've named "honesty", ironically by scoring low enough, they're chosen for the job. I would never hire someone who didn't know how to have a good time, man.
Bingo. You can really tell the modders in this thread are under 30...which makes sense when you think about it, since really they're the only ones who would be offended by my statement.
Yet another reason to not hire them. They're still too damn sensitive. There's no crying in computer programming!