Your perception of the passage of time is calibrated, among other things, by your peripheral vision. Peripheral vision is designed to detect movement. Natural selection most likely gave it to us to detect predators that are moving at us fast. What happens is your emotions will change your focus of your eyes which then change how quickly you detect movements. Then your calibration for time is off because how sensitive you are to detecting movements is off. Hence the saying "Time flies when you're having fun". Most likely something to do with the nervous system. When you're frightened your focus sharpens, and so does your peripheral vision, and therefore time will slow down.
Good point, but one flaw: You're quoting the media. I've read some articles today from a different source that conflicts with your position, that says they are indeed asking for the elimination of court orders.
So who's right? Don't trust the media. Go right to the source. So who where do we find the text of the bill?
that this whole SCO thing is a lot like the.com fiasco. The craze may still be pumping those stocks, but we all know it's eventually going to burst. This is no different.
That's not a bad idea, but it would have to be a fairly different p2p protocol, like a cross between freenet and bittorrent. There is one big constraint involved, imo, which is convenience. This means that is must be a browser based p2p application. It couldn't be a separate app by itself, because people would only keep it on as long as they need wikipedia (which usually takes no time at all). It couldn't be a java app because of the same problem. I think it would have to be a browser plugin of some sort for people to keep it on for long periods of time and also for it to be convenient to use. Can most browsers listen to ports?
"I imagine a less cooperative school administration would be more punitive"
I think in this case, since it had to do with a class, the school would have to think twice about going ape-shit on you. This was a school project that was okayed by a prof no doubt, so how could they punish you without totally compromising academic freedom? They couldn't exactly label you as a cracker without totally being obvious and spreading half-truths instead of the whole story.
The movie industry relies on first come first serve seating. I think assigned seating would spawn a whole new fad of calculating the end of the 15 minute advertisement and preview spiel so you can well, avoid wasting 15 minutes of your life as a zombie/whore. The MPAA would NOT stand for this either.
Nope, it's legal to bring recordable media into Canada to avoid the levy as long as you don't resell it. It is illegal to not declare the items you bring through the border, though.
Shit like that should be illegal. You cannot truthfully agree to something you don't know about yet. And the fact that if you want to earn a living nowadays it forces you to buy into this shit makes contracts like this not in public interest. When I become Emperor of the Universe I will ban this practice.
Actually, he is stealing because when you don't attribute quotes to the people that made them, it disadvantages the author and his reputation for the idea. It was actually stealing because, inductively, the person that "stole" it made a gain in reputation that should have gone to the author. What was stolen in this case was the reputation, and that was most likely what the author was trying to maximize (if it wasn't the case, then it still doesn't matter).
However, the same idea that you presented would be true for the more common IP problems like copying copyrighted music. With copyrighted music, nothing is "stolen" because nothing was deprived from the author directly. The author of the music is trying to maximize their money, but no money is being subtracted from their total amount.
In the former case, it detracts from his original post that the author made. So, copying copyrighted music is still morally wrong; it isn't stealing, but, plagiarizing is. The word "steal" is losely used when it comes to matters of IP; in some cases it is justified and in others it is not. In this case it is.
Just in case you are interested and havn't found it yet, SFU's machine is a beowulf cluster and is called bugaboo.
Offtopic, the Peak (the school "newspaper" of SFU for those who don't know) wouldn't publish anything unless it portrayed the injustice of students / homeless / leftwingers etc being beaten down repeatedly by "the man", so I don't know why they would publish this.
No, he didn't mean ethernet MAC, he meant whatever unique ID the cable modem stores that differentiates that cable modem from others for billing purposes. Say if you were to buy a cable modem and do all the necessary hacking to remove the filters on your cable box outside your house, you would still not be able to use it because of the cable modem's ID. Also, if regulation were done by ethernet MAC, would you become a completely new node in the eyes of your isp once you changed your MAC? I bloody well hope not unless you are made to independently register your MAC with a user/pass system. .
About shouting "fire" in a crowded room, the term free speech is a little misleading. Sometimes "speech" is the act of talking, or making a point, or whatever. However, the speech they talk about in "free speech" is about making a point... it is not how you say it (in a different language, or with an accent for example), but what you say that should be free. Shouting "fire" isn't a form of speech, despite the vocal sounds, because it doesn't communicate anything worthwhile. The fact that you are using it to cause mayhem supersedes any protection of it because there is nothing to protect.
About hate speech... I am not sure that is so common sense to limit it at all. Of course, it is speech unlike shouting "fire" in a crowd. However, when does hate speech begin and political criticism of race/sexual orientation/religion end? Say, for instance, if I were to write a harsh editorial in my local paper criticizing Israelis / Palestinians for their actions, even if I didn't use slurs in it it would no doubt be labeled as hate motivated by the group I was criticizing and therefore hate speech. I would surely disagree. But the point is, hate speech laws can get a little flaky when one side of an issue considers it a good point and the other side considers it to be hate speech.
I really don't like the idea of hate speech laws, and here in Canada we do have them. I think they can be abused to limit legitimate speech. This type of speech should be considered unacceptable by our culture, but not limited by our laws.
The one thing that bugs me about this is that why does a government organization that does not take part in any trade, own the trademark on something?
Maybe if they developed profiling software or an efficient billyclub or something (even then, that is more of a patent area), but I really think the police should be the last people getting a trademark. If I lived in the UK, yes, I would be uber-pissed at such idiocy. I hate the attitude of cops in general. Damn cops!
Whenever some story about, say KDE, pops up everyone is like "this is the best thing for Linux since sliced bread". Reality check: not all people run KDE run it on Linux. I think the BSD people should be entitled to the same "This is what we do for everyone!" type of recognition as everyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Your perception of the passage of time is calibrated, among other things, by your peripheral vision. Peripheral vision is designed to detect movement. Natural selection most likely gave it to us to detect predators that are moving at us fast. What happens is your emotions will change your focus of your eyes which then change how quickly you detect movements. Then your calibration for time is off because how sensitive you are to detecting movements is off. Hence the saying "Time flies when you're having fun". Most likely something to do with the nervous system. When you're frightened your focus sharpens, and so does your peripheral vision, and therefore time will slow down.
Good point, but one flaw: You're quoting the media. I've read some articles today from a different source that conflicts with your position, that says they are indeed asking for the elimination of court orders.
So who's right? Don't trust the media. Go right to the source. So who where do we find the text of the bill?
NASA: We've found conclusive evidence of the existence of liquid water once existed on mars!
Public: really?
NASA: No, PSYCH~!~!~!~
How do you know it's a girl? Maybe it's parent's could have listened to a lot of Cash?
You all drink coffee eh?
IT is what CS students should be studying in their spare time, and not some "lite" version.
They'll have to switch over to the gold standard.
that this whole SCO thing is a lot like the .com fiasco. The craze may still be pumping those stocks, but we all know it's eventually going to burst. This is no different.
You're right. Reagonomics was developed to combat stagflation (and it worked). Keynesian economics doesn't even address the concept of stagflation.
That's not a bad idea, but it would have to be a fairly different p2p protocol, like a cross between freenet and bittorrent. There is one big constraint involved, imo, which is convenience. This means that is must be a browser based p2p application. It couldn't be a separate app by itself, because people would only keep it on as long as they need wikipedia (which usually takes no time at all). It couldn't be a java app because of the same problem. I think it would have to be a browser plugin of some sort for people to keep it on for long periods of time and also for it to be convenient to use. Can most browsers listen to ports?
"swiping code (legality be damned) sure is innovative"
Probably more innovative than writing it all again, and again, and again, and again....
That shouldn't be a problem unless he brings you a faraday cage for christmas.
"I imagine a less cooperative school administration would be more punitive"
I think in this case, since it had to do with a class, the school would have to think twice about going ape-shit on you. This was a school project that was okayed by a prof no doubt, so how could they punish you without totally compromising academic freedom? They couldn't exactly label you as a cracker without totally being obvious and spreading half-truths instead of the whole story.
The movie industry relies on first come first serve seating. I think assigned seating would spawn a whole new fad of calculating the end of the 15 minute advertisement and preview spiel so you can well, avoid wasting 15 minutes of your life as a zombie/whore. The MPAA would NOT stand for this either.
Don't worry. He was taken out.
Yes, but not in an Engineering program like this class.
Nope, it's legal to bring recordable media into Canada to avoid the levy as long as you don't resell it. It is illegal to not declare the items you bring through the border, though.
Shit like that should be illegal. You cannot truthfully agree to something you don't know about yet. And the fact that if you want to earn a living nowadays it forces you to buy into this shit makes contracts like this not in public interest. When I become Emperor of the Universe I will ban this practice.
Well, the native patchset for 1.4 for developers is available. There are no legal troubles afaik, but it just takes time to port.
Actually, he is stealing because when you don't attribute quotes to the people that made them, it disadvantages the author and his reputation for the idea. It was actually stealing because, inductively, the person that "stole" it made a gain in reputation that should have gone to the author. What was stolen in this case was the reputation, and that was most likely what the author was trying to maximize (if it wasn't the case, then it still doesn't matter).
However, the same idea that you presented would be true for the more common IP problems like copying copyrighted music. With copyrighted music, nothing is "stolen" because nothing was deprived from the author directly. The author of the music is trying to maximize their money, but no money is being subtracted from their total amount.
In the former case, it detracts from his original post that the author made. So, copying copyrighted music is still morally wrong; it isn't stealing, but, plagiarizing is. The word "steal" is losely used when it comes to matters of IP; in some cases it is justified and in others it is not. In this case it is.
Just in case you are interested and havn't found it yet, SFU's machine is a beowulf cluster and is called bugaboo.
Offtopic, the Peak (the school "newspaper" of SFU for those who don't know) wouldn't publish anything unless it portrayed the injustice of students / homeless / leftwingers etc being beaten down repeatedly by "the man", so I don't know why they would publish this.
No, he didn't mean ethernet MAC, he meant whatever unique ID the cable modem stores that differentiates that cable modem from others for billing purposes. Say if you were to buy a cable modem and do all the necessary hacking to remove the filters on your cable box outside your house, you would still not be able to use it because of the cable modem's ID. Also, if regulation were done by ethernet MAC, would you become a completely new node in the eyes of your isp once you changed your MAC? I bloody well hope not unless you are made to independently register your MAC with a user/pass system. .
About shouting "fire" in a crowded room, the term free speech is a little misleading. Sometimes "speech" is the act of talking, or making a point, or whatever. However, the speech they talk about in "free speech" is about making a point... it is not how you say it (in a different language, or with an accent for example), but what you say that should be free. Shouting "fire" isn't a form of speech, despite the vocal sounds, because it doesn't communicate anything worthwhile. The fact that you are using it to cause mayhem supersedes any protection of it because there is nothing to protect.
About hate speech... I am not sure that is so common sense to limit it at all. Of course, it is speech unlike shouting "fire" in a crowd. However, when does hate speech begin and political criticism of race/sexual orientation/religion end? Say, for instance, if I were to write a harsh editorial in my local paper criticizing Israelis / Palestinians for their actions, even if I didn't use slurs in it it would no doubt be labeled as hate motivated by the group I was criticizing and therefore hate speech. I would surely disagree. But the point is, hate speech laws can get a little flaky when one side of an issue considers it a good point and the other side considers it to be hate speech.
I really don't like the idea of hate speech laws, and here in Canada we do have them. I think they can be abused to limit legitimate speech. This type of speech should be considered unacceptable by our culture, but not limited by our laws.
The one thing that bugs me about this is that why does a government organization that does not take part in any trade, own the trademark on something?
Maybe if they developed profiling software or an efficient billyclub or something (even then, that is more of a patent area), but I really think the police should be the last people getting a trademark. If I lived in the UK, yes, I would be uber-pissed at such idiocy. I hate the attitude of cops in general. Damn cops!
The same people that make OpenBSD make OpenSSH?
Whenever some story about, say KDE, pops up everyone is like "this is the best thing for Linux since sliced bread". Reality check: not all people run KDE run it on Linux. I think the BSD people should be entitled to the same "This is what we do for everyone!" type of recognition as everyone else.