I found out about it when someone canned "Vertical Limit", one of Sony's movies which was pushed that way, here on Slashdot. Can't find my post anymore....
Seriously, if they thought that abolishing the Constitution would bring more money into their and their customers' (the record labels') pockets, you don't think they'd do it? Given how they behave now?
I think they are worried that a grass-roots campaign against using unreasonable statutory damages against the (non-commercial) "everyman" will be more effective than all the money they've invested / are investing in Congressional lobbying.
Of course, they are lucky that the defendent isn't a famous retired football player!
Have you thought about using a separate Firefox profile which is only for banking? This would enable you to maintain temporal continuity in the other profile.
Re:How would *you* know?
on
Qt Becomes LGPL
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
> "Troll" is not a synonym for "disagrees with me and therefore is bad".
I totally agree with that. "Troll" like everything else is a judgment call. You came across like a troll. See Vexorian's post for more explanation.
Personally, I didn't judge you a troll for the "I don't use Linux" post; in fact, I have no problem with people for whom Linux doesn't cut it and I am very aware of some of the reasons which might cause that.
The "Kopete is terrible" post by itself also didn't bring you over my threshold, but the combination of the two passed the threshold.
One of the big differences between the FOSS world and Windows / MacOS is the rate at which applications can evolve feature-wise and interface-wise. For some, this is great, for others, a catastrophe. This makes me doubt that anyone who uses Windows (and I assumed Windows without FOSS, given the complaint of your post: "integration") as their primary computing platform would be able to properly pass judgment on any particular FOSS application.
Next time, qualify with "Last time I tried Linux, in Monthname Yearnumber, Kopete was terrible. " and you will be much less likely to be judged a troll.
Your second attack scenario is interesting but you missed something in your dismissal of the first.
> That scenario still comes under "making available,"
As mentioned above, if RIAA download these files from Person C's computer (C having downloaded it via P2P) and find out during discovery that Person C is not Person A, they might well think they have a case against Person A for distributing to Person C.
OK, then posters with zero-size sigs have penises of infinite size, and posters without sigs have penises of imaginary size.
Understand that I'm undermining my mathematical reputation, here, just to satisfy your pedantry, so don't expect me to reply to any more posts. Thread closed!:)
5) And if you manage to find the manned threat in space, it takes much less effort to neutralize/kill it (compared to the case where it is in a breathable atmosphere and where having heavy armor is possible).
I don't even trust the Windows boxes in my own house.
I have two solutions:
Change the password under Linux to a temporary one; login under Windows; change password back after finishing
Use special alternative user IDs for freebee things like webmail
So if you know ahead of time that you will be going to that friend's house, you can just change your password to a temporary one before leaving your house.
I would guess that in Wikipedia the balance of power would be more even than in most other places. If the guy's staffer starts a sanitizing edit war, there's the whole arbitration process, etc., which is set up for this kind of situation.
I'm not claiming that the change will necessarily be accepted in the end, but if no one tries, for sure nothing will happen.
I didn't figure out what you meant at first and was intrigued that the same site would have an article on servers, so I tried to visit the link.... and then I understood.
This is the first Slashdot joke which I've seen which is almost impossible to "whoosh" at.
> The media conglomerate that buys the rights off of you will take the full > 150 years (or whatever) of copyright into account....
And also the probability that someone will be interested in more than 60 years, which is really, really small. Smaller, in fact, than winning most lotteries, I would guess.
> The simple fact that this particular lawyer has had at least one of > the judges recommend sanctions speaks volumes about just what kind > of morals they have.
Someone should add this tidbit, with linked evidence, to the guy's Wikipedia article, no? His article reads like a press release right now.
> be it by crossing 5th avenue at the wrong moment
When I was a lot younger (and spacier), after about a year and a half of living in Manhattan, I was walking on 51st St. and suddenly a ladybug landed on my hand. I was so surprised and thrilled at that (being the opposite of a real "city boy") that I crossed 5th Av. against the light (or mostly against the light) and only a few minutes after understood what I had done.
I claimed that the original argument was that every time society decides to "protect" itself by making something illegal, there is a price to pay. And neither you, nor "Mr Ploppy" understood that argument.
Yes, I understand that it might be worthwhile passing laws outlawing pointy kitchen knives. I am not a member of British society, so I cannot pass judgement on that.
The original argument was "It's called free society, people die, deal with it." In other words, it is clear that it's stupid to think that society, at all costs, must prevent young people murdering each other. But I rather think you'd also agree with that, no?
Slashdot Mirror
I know about Evernote (from previous postings here), are there others which are worthwhile?
A pity, as I had wanted to aggregate the exposure of personal info to Google....
I found out about it when someone canned "Vertical Limit", one of Sony's movies which was pushed that way, here on Slashdot. Can't find my post anymore....
See Wikipedia or the BBC.
From a commonly used online dictionary:
> 4. to have the right or qualifications to: He can change whatever he wishes in the script.
Repeat after me: words often have more than one meaning.
Epic fail.
Seriously, if they thought that abolishing the Constitution would bring more money into their and their customers' (the record labels') pockets, you don't think they'd do it? Given how they behave now?
I think they are worried that a grass-roots campaign against using unreasonable statutory damages against the (non-commercial) "everyman" will be more effective than all the money they've invested / are investing in Congressional lobbying.
Of course, they are lucky that the defendent isn't a famous retired football player!
Have you thought about using a separate Firefox profile which is only for banking? This would enable you to maintain temporal continuity in the other profile.
> "Troll" is not a synonym for "disagrees with me and therefore is bad".
I totally agree with that. "Troll" like everything else is a judgment call. You came across like a troll. See Vexorian's post for more explanation.
Personally, I didn't judge you a troll for the "I don't use Linux" post; in fact, I have no problem with people for whom Linux doesn't cut it and I am very aware of some of the reasons which might cause that.
The "Kopete is terrible" post by itself also didn't bring you over my threshold, but the combination of the two passed the threshold.
One of the big differences between the FOSS world and Windows / MacOS is the rate at which applications can evolve feature-wise and interface-wise. For some, this is great, for others, a catastrophe. This makes me doubt that anyone who uses Windows (and I assumed Windows without FOSS, given the complaint of your post: "integration") as their primary computing platform would be able to properly pass judgment on any particular FOSS application.
Next time, qualify with "Last time I tried Linux, in Monthname Yearnumber, Kopete was terrible. " and you will be much less likely to be judged a troll.
>> money time and power
> you can usually get someone else to foot the legal bill.
> If not, I get to sue for legal fees.
Well, I suppose two out of three isn't bad....
> You'd be the first I've seen. Kopete is terrible.
How would you know?
You should put a bit more effort into making your trolling consistent, no?
Your analogy doesn't seem to fit reality.
Or did you just manage to totally obscure your meaning by being cute?
Your second attack scenario is interesting but you missed something in your dismissal of the first.
> That scenario still comes under "making available,"
As mentioned above, if RIAA download these files from Person C's computer (C having downloaded it via P2P) and find out during discovery that Person C is not Person A, they might well think they have a case against Person A for distributing to Person C.
> Tell me why the geek who fears his own shadow downloads an executable
> from a source like Pirate Bay.
Just off the top of my head:
OK, then posters with zero-size sigs have penises of infinite size, and posters without sigs have penises of imaginary size.
Understand that I'm undermining my mathematical reputation, here, just to satisfy your pedantry, so don't expect me to reply to any more posts. Thread closed! :)
5) And if you manage to find the manned threat in space, it takes much less effort to neutralize/kill it (compared to the case where it is in a breathable atmosphere and where having heavy armor is possible).
Forgot the third possibility --- boot into Linux from USB or mini-CDROM. I leave CDROMs of live Linux distros at friends houses just for this purpose!
I don't even trust the Windows boxes in my own house.
I have two solutions:
So if you know ahead of time that you will be going to that friend's house, you can just change your password to a temporary one before leaving your house.
Yeah, and how is he supposed to decrypt it, in his head? I'm assuming of course, that he's not Bruce Schneier.
Especially since if it were true, sig-less posters would have penises of infinite size...
I would guess that in Wikipedia the balance of power would be more even than in most other places. If the guy's staffer starts a sanitizing edit war, there's the whole arbitration process, etc., which is set up for this kind of situation.
I'm not claiming that the change will necessarily be accepted in the end, but if no one tries, for sure nothing will happen.
I didn't figure out what you meant at first and was intrigued that the same site would have an article on servers, so I tried to visit the link.... and then I understood.
This is the first Slashdot joke which I've seen which is almost impossible to "whoosh" at.
That's not quite the whole story.
Your mileage will certainly vary according to jurisdiction, of course.
P.S. I love your Slashdot ID, it's really hot!
> The media conglomerate that buys the rights off of you will take the full ....
> 150 years (or whatever) of copyright into account
And also the probability that someone will be interested in more than 60 years, which is really, really small. Smaller, in fact, than winning most lotteries, I would guess.
> The simple fact that this particular lawyer has had at least one of
> the judges recommend sanctions speaks volumes about just what kind
> of morals they have.
Someone should add this tidbit, with linked evidence, to the guy's Wikipedia article, no? His article reads like a press release right now.
> be it by crossing 5th avenue at the wrong moment
When I was a lot younger (and spacier), after about a year and a half of living in Manhattan, I was walking on 51st St. and suddenly a ladybug landed on my hand. I was so surprised and thrilled at that (being the opposite of a real "city boy") that I crossed 5th Av. against the light (or mostly against the light) and only a few minutes after understood what I had done.
I claimed that the original argument was that every time society decides to "protect" itself by making something illegal, there is a price to pay. And neither you, nor "Mr Ploppy" understood that argument.
Yes, I understand that it might be worthwhile passing laws outlawing pointy kitchen knives. I am not a member of British society, so I cannot pass judgement on that.
The original argument was "It's called free society, people die, deal with it." In other words, it is clear that it's stupid to think that society, at all costs, must prevent young people murdering each other. But I rather think you'd also agree with that, no?