Your comment is a bit confusing, I consider the "edge of the spindle hole" to be the actual physical hole --- but the ridge you're describing is at the edge of the non-writable/readable area around the hole, in the middle of a flat section of the disc. The hole itself is totally flat on the side which goes down, and on the other side has a small step recess (or possibly a better word would be "bevel").
Thanks for the interesting link, I had suspected that anyone who would be capable of attempting all of the things he's attempted would probably have to have a commensurate ego. Similar to Steve Jobs in some ways, if the general opinion out on the net is correct.
The linked site does reek of "disgruntled employee / friend / SO", as opposed to "we want to give you a balanced picture of what Michael Robertson is like"; so frankly, I doubt I'll ever know exactly what's going on. Actually, even if I would meet Mr. Robertson for a day or even two, I doubt I'd be able to get around his projected persona enough to make a good judgement. I know I'm just not very good at that.
Interesting. It has just hit me that when I look at that site and see the long list of negative reviews of Mr. Robertson, I have a bias to judge him by thinking "what would I be like if so many people thought that about me" --- which is unfair to him. Frankly, I doubt you'd be able to find enough people to generate that long a list of positive reviews for me (or at least "as enthusiasticly positive as those are enthusiastically negative"). I'm not a particularly dynamic or ambitious person. When I try to compensate for this bias, I can start to imagine (but not necessarily believe) that Mr. Robertson is so dynamic that one could also compile a list of positive reviewers which was ten times the length of that negative list.
My understanding is that they didn't claim that he would be liable for the corporation's losses --- instead, they accused him personally of copyright infringement based on music in his personal mp3tunes locker. On the other hand, I had the impression that the defence ripped apart the claims of EMI that anyone who downloaded any EMI music whatsoever from the net had to know it was unlicensed --- they exhibited a fairly long list of songs that EMI had put up on the net, itself, for free downloading.
Unfortunately, my impression is that copyright law is so messed up that even if it is impossible for someone to have known that he infringed, it is not a valid defence.
EMI probably knew that this was the probable outcome --- which explains why they repeatedly tried to add Michael Robertson as a personal defendent. Looks to me that Big Media has had it in for him ever since he proved, with the original mp3.com website, that good music could be generated and distributed without them.
I hope he and his family manage to come out financially unscathed. The original mp3.com site rocked.
I hate to say this, but having humanity's living conditions in a more heterogeneous state would seem to be advantageous for the long-term survival of humanity as a whole.
I thought of this because of another comment here where someone talks about his grandchildren freezing to death because fossil fuels are too expensive, and realizing that very few of the people raised in civilized Western conditions would have the skills necessary to survive if they suddenly found themselves in such a situation (even disregarding the intense competition for resources this implies), but plenty of people in third-world countries would still be OK.
TEPCO did not make sufficient preparations to cope with critical nuclear accidents.
After the batteries and power supply boards were inundated on 11 March, almost all electricity sources were lost
TEPCO did not envision such a power failure or any kind of prolonged power loss.
TEPCO thought that in a serious incident, venting pressure in the reactor containment vessels or carrying out other safety procedures would still be possible, because emergency power sources would still be available.
One can argue that the nuclear incident itself is not particularly significant compared to the tsunami; the largest estimate for deaths caused by the radiation leaks is approximately 1K, compared to 15K deaths and 3K missing (i.e., probably dead).
You have it wrong --- this is "we can save face if we blame the problems we had with our nuclear reactor on nuclear energy being inherently unsafe, not the fact that we totally f**ked up the safety management and planning in multiple ways".
BTW, at least one of these errors is being made practically everywhere in the world: stopping research into new, possibly safer reactor designs because of the public's knee-jerk fear of technology. (Maybe not so much in China, though.)
My guess is that this is simply a case of a prospective journal not getting as many submissions as expected. Why anyone thought this was particularly newsworthy is beyond me --- hence the rising cynicism / astroturf-sniffer.
The summary fails to note that the other journal is open access, also. If I were more cynical, I'd think that some scientific publishers want to give the impression that "open access" is failing before it starts.
Your comment is actually insightful, as anyone who has tried to install a pirated version of Windows 7 has discovered (i.e., if we define "free" as in beer, and "open" as in "wide open for piracy").
OTOH, MS might very well be monitoring the IP addresses of update requests and scanning them for fixed IPs assigned to businesses so that they can refer evidence of piracy by commercial entities to the proper BSA national branch office.
Frankly, MS has a stake that people pirate their OS and tools for home use, because they know that most businesses aren't going to take the risk involved in infringement, and will pay up. If all of the IP staff is using FOSS at home, they're much more likely to consider using FOSS in the office environment, especially if the business is small enough that there isn't a lot of politics/bureaucracy involved. And every widely publicized success story of FOSS adoption is another nail in MS's (eventual) coffin.
> Let me tell you what would happen after this or just before really.
No, I think, rather, considering the "enormous" fine that the FCC thinks this deserves, that any judge overreacting like that would end up being referred to a psychiatrist, who might very well prescribe for him --- guess what? --- the same stuff you appear to have forgotten to take this morning.
Yes, you have a point that the interaction between government, the court system, and big business is somewhat dysfunctional. You, however, veer off into peculiar realms of fantasy when trying to understand (1) the reality of this particular case, and (2) the reality of the US political scene.
Their legal council seem to have a terrific imagination, if the defense can be believed. From page 5 of the defense filing:
Contrary to to the Plaintiff's assertion at paragraph 11 of the Statement of Claim that "Her Majesty's copyright to the CPC Database was transferred to Canada Post" under section 63 of the Canada Post Corporation, no section 63 of the current Canada Post Corporation Act even exists. Neither does the Act that came into force in 1981 transfer such title.
On the last page of his filing, the defendent petitions the court to address the lawsuit as a Simplified Action (something similar to small-claims, I suppose) because he claims the damages could not possibly exceed $50k.
The plaintiff's filing is provided as a series of 1-page PDFs (!?) via links after the text "The full Scoop" at the bottom of the page at the URL you kindly provide in your post.
As for your two points:
The statement of defense claims: 'Contrary to to the Plaintiff's assertion at paragraph 11 of the Statement of Claim that "Her Majesty's copyright to the CPC Database was transferred to Canada Post" under section 63 of the Canada Post Corporation, no section 63 of the current Canada Post Corporation Act even exists.'
What did the people get from rootkit lawsuit? Most of them got diddly-squat. IIRC, it was possible to get up to $175 in refunds for expenses used to "fix" your computer.
Once I have enough neighbors who have been "banned", I can start to sell them mesh-to-VPN connections to Europe.
This will, of course, become illegal soon afterwards. (I'm not sure exactly how one would be caught if one does this properly, though --- perhaps there will be a big payoff to those who betray their providers?)
Slashdot Mirror
Your comment is a bit confusing, I consider the "edge of the spindle hole" to be the actual physical hole --- but the ridge you're describing is at the edge of the non-writable/readable area around the hole, in the middle of a flat section of the disc. The hole itself is totally flat on the side which goes down, and on the other side has a small step recess (or possibly a better word would be "bevel").
Kind of curious, would you be willing to post a link to some of your music?
Thanks for the interesting link, I had suspected that anyone who would be capable of attempting all of the things he's attempted would probably have to have a commensurate ego. Similar to Steve Jobs in some ways, if the general opinion out on the net is correct.
The linked site does reek of "disgruntled employee / friend / SO", as opposed to "we want to give you a balanced picture of what Michael Robertson is like"; so frankly, I doubt I'll ever know exactly what's going on. Actually, even if I would meet Mr. Robertson for a day or even two, I doubt I'd be able to get around his projected persona enough to make a good judgement. I know I'm just not very good at that.
Interesting. It has just hit me that when I look at that site and see the long list of negative reviews of Mr. Robertson, I have a bias to judge him by thinking "what would I be like if so many people thought that about me" --- which is unfair to him. Frankly, I doubt you'd be able to find enough people to generate that long a list of positive reviews for me (or at least "as enthusiasticly positive as those are enthusiastically negative"). I'm not a particularly dynamic or ambitious person. When I try to compensate for this bias, I can start to imagine (but not necessarily believe) that Mr. Robertson is so dynamic that one could also compile a list of positive reviewers which was ten times the length of that negative list.
Frankly, it doesn't mean that much any more, it seems. So no matter what he thought it meant, you're probably right.
My understanding is that they didn't claim that he would be liable for the corporation's losses --- instead, they accused him personally of copyright infringement based on music in his personal mp3tunes locker. On the other hand, I had the impression that the defence ripped apart the claims of EMI that anyone who downloaded any EMI music whatsoever from the net had to know it was unlicensed --- they exhibited a fairly long list of songs that EMI had put up on the net, itself, for free downloading.
Unfortunately, my impression is that copyright law is so messed up that even if it is impossible for someone to have known that he infringed, it is not a valid defence.
EMI probably knew that this was the probable outcome --- which explains why they repeatedly tried to add Michael Robertson as a personal defendent. Looks to me that Big Media has had it in for him ever since he proved, with the original mp3.com website, that good music could be generated and distributed without them.
I hope he and his family manage to come out financially unscathed. The original mp3.com site rocked.
> I would sacrifice rather the current business model of the music industry than the internet and free speech
FTFY
Even without copyright some artists will be able to make a living. Kickstarter, etc.
Look again, I replied to http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2831449&cid=39903031 whose content has nothing whatsoever to do with your post.
I hate to say this, but having humanity's living conditions in a more heterogeneous state would seem to be advantageous for the long-term survival of humanity as a whole.
I thought of this because of another comment here where someone talks about his grandchildren freezing to death because fossil fuels are too expensive, and realizing that very few of the people raised in civilized Western conditions would have the skills necessary to survive if they suddenly found themselves in such a situation (even disregarding the intense competition for resources this implies), but plenty of people in third-world countries would still be OK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Investigations :
From these documents could be concluded:
TEPCO did not make sufficient preparations to cope with critical nuclear accidents.
After the batteries and power supply boards were inundated on 11 March, almost all electricity sources were lost
TEPCO did not envision such a power failure or any kind of prolonged power loss.
TEPCO thought that in a serious incident, venting pressure in the reactor containment vessels or carrying out other safety procedures would still be possible, because emergency power sources would still be available.
One can argue that the nuclear incident itself is not particularly significant compared to the tsunami; the largest estimate for deaths caused by the radiation leaks is approximately 1K, compared to 15K deaths and 3K missing (i.e., probably dead).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Regulation --- which is something other nations, including the US, for sure have to be worried about.
You have it wrong --- this is "we can save face if we blame the problems we had with our nuclear reactor on nuclear energy being inherently unsafe, not the fact that we totally f**ked up the safety management and planning in multiple ways".
BTW, at least one of these errors is being made practically everywhere in the world: stopping research into new, possibly safer reactor designs because of the public's knee-jerk fear of technology. (Maybe not so much in China, though.)
My guess is that this is simply a case of a prospective journal not getting as many submissions as expected. Why anyone thought this was particularly newsworthy is beyond me --- hence the rising cynicism / astroturf-sniffer.
The summary fails to note that the other journal is open access, also. If I were more cynical, I'd think that some scientific publishers want to give the impression that "open access" is failing before it starts.
Your comment is actually insightful, as anyone who has tried to install a pirated version of Windows 7 has discovered (i.e., if we define "free" as in beer, and "open" as in "wide open for piracy").
OTOH, MS might very well be monitoring the IP addresses of update requests and scanning them for fixed IPs assigned to businesses so that they can refer evidence of piracy by commercial entities to the proper BSA national branch office.
Frankly, MS has a stake that people pirate their OS and tools for home use, because they know that most businesses aren't going to take the risk involved in infringement, and will pay up. If all of the IP staff is using FOSS at home, they're much more likely to consider using FOSS in the office environment, especially if the business is small enough that there isn't a lot of politics/bureaucracy involved. And every widely publicized success story of FOSS adoption is another nail in MS's (eventual) coffin.
Ooops, forgot to install that Greasemonkey script to prevent slip-up-mods....
> Let me tell you what would happen after this or just before really.
No, I think, rather, considering the "enormous" fine that the FCC thinks this deserves, that any judge overreacting like that would end up being referred to a psychiatrist, who might very well prescribe for him --- guess what? --- the same stuff you appear to have forgotten to take this morning.
Yes, you have a point that the interaction between government, the court system, and big business is somewhat dysfunctional. You, however, veer off into peculiar realms of fantasy when trying to understand (1) the reality of this particular case, and (2) the reality of the US political scene.
Their legal council seem to have a terrific imagination, if the defense can be believed. From page 5 of the defense filing:
On the last page of his filing, the defendent petitions the court to address the lawsuit as a Simplified Action (something similar to small-claims, I suppose) because he claims the damages could not possibly exceed $50k.
The plaintiff's filing is provided as a series of 1-page PDFs (!?) via links after the text "The full Scoop" at the bottom of the page at the URL you kindly provide in your post.
As for your two points:
paragraph 11 of the Statement of Claim that "Her Majesty's copyright to the CPC Database was
transferred to Canada Post" under section 63 of the Canada Post Corporation, no section 63 of the
current Canada Post Corporation Act even exists.'
> you can get a class action lawsuit going
What did the people get from rootkit lawsuit? Most of them got diddly-squat. IIRC, it was possible to get up to $175 in refunds for expenses used to "fix" your computer.
OTR
Once I have enough neighbors who have been "banned", I can start to sell them mesh-to-VPN connections to Europe.
This will, of course, become illegal soon afterwards. (I'm not sure exactly how one would be caught if one does this properly, though --- perhaps there will be a big payoff to those who betray their providers?)
Yeah, Rumblefish should go "jactitate" to someone else's video....
So, RIAA on one hand pays its artists as if it sells its digital files like CDs, but files legal papers claiming that these files are licensed, not sold (so that the doctrine of first sale will not enable reselling the music).
How typical.
If someone had told me, when I was 18, that one day I'd be reading court transcripts with great interest, I'd have thought he was insane.
And yet, here I am! Yet another way the world has changed, since way back then...