It doesn't really matter since the federal government doesn't have jurisdiction anyway. It wouldn't be much different from the federal government telling states that they can't have their blue laws. In this case it just happens to be car dealers rather than bar owners.
The ToS of any residential service I've ever heard of expressly prohibits "servers". It is one of the principal differences between residential and "business" class service.
A stupid user is a stupid user. Everyone is so quick to rush to the soapbox and preach how wonderful their platform of choice is and how awful the others are. I say rush to the box and preach how stupid people are. I say rush to the box and demand that basic computing security be taught to everyone just as proper hygiene and safe sex are. We do not need big brothers, we don't need walled gardens, we need people to know what the hell it is that they're doing with their electronics. Teach people to wash their damn hands, avoid disenfranchised Nigerians, stop opening random email attachments, and stop bloody installing apps that require access to your sensitive data.
Free Oracle (MySQL) may be a competitor to the "not for free" Oracle but I think it still provides value to the company. MySQL has name recognition and reputation, MariaDB is still working on building these. So long as MySQL is around MariaDB will have a harder time doing so and for that reason alone Oracle may well keep MySQL going.
You will have the very same abilities to surreptitiously monitor and record in real-time the private lives of citizens as you would with any smartphone and most other mobile devices. Data is stored in the cloud and open for government intrusion while providing the theater privacy and security. If you don't bungle your public show feigned concern you shouldn't have anything to worry about from the voters on this issue. Now go back to your hookers and blow and leave your fingers out of it.
Don't believe everything you watch on Fox News. It's only that way right now because the pot-smoking, crazy, hippie, pinko-liberals are running things.
In Minnesota, the yellows tend to be quick, but you are also not expected to stop unless it's safe to do so. If you enter the intersection on yellow, it doesn't matter if it changes red while you're in it. The folks waiting on the green are required to ensure the cross traffic has stopped before proceeding.
States are allowed by the U.S. Constitution to be douche bags so long as they do not impinge upon interstate commerce or other federal juridictions. Florida has historically just been a bit douchier than most and this is simply an illustration of that.
We must resist the products of the second law of thermodynamics. If that requires slapping Timothy around every now and then then that's what must be done.
Did I miss something? "The Voice," "American Idol," "America's Got Talent?" No statistics, no hardware, not even politics tangential to technology; nothing but a link to a couple paragraphs on a site for addle brained people whose concerns reach no further than the next amusement to distract them from realizing their own mediocrity.
What the hell Timothy? Have you lost your passion? Did you sell out? Fall on your head?...
It kind of depends upon what you need. Contests will find puzzle solvers, those that would work reasonably well doing research. Contests however, will not be very effective in finding the "big picture" folks that are needed to develop clean, robust architectures. I suspect they may well select against them. You will also almost certainly limit your applicants to college kids, and/or recent graduates looking to establish themselves not those that have already proven their abilities.
You do realize that the medium by which that content was distributed did not lend itself to near zero expense reproduction right? Analog to analog reproduction is inherently lossy. It costs as much (if not more) to photocopy a book and bind those pages into a new one as it does to just buy a legal distribution of the shelves. A product loses its inherent value the moment everyone that wants one can obtain a copy for near zero cost. For now this issue only troubles intellectual property. Soon it will affect tangible goods as well when what used to require a manufacturer can be had from a digital scan and a matter assembler.
Let the networks die with the rest of the Luddites and their business models. I'll happily continue to consume my niche entertainment streaming a la carte from the likes of Netflix and Amazon. I have no interest in hundreds of channels worth of mass consensus crap. I have even less interest when its for ridiculous sums of money.
So let me get this straight. I can offer the assembled software product A for sale, while giving away the unassembled software product A to whomever wants it. Are you for real? If the person or group who expects to use the software I write has already downloaded and compiled the source-code, or downloaded what someone else has already compiled I no longer have a customer to charge. If given the choice between Product A for a price, or Product A for free which would you choose?
So movie houses, authors, software developers, etc. are going to be contracted directly by you and me? I don't know about you but I really couldn't afford to shoulder the entire production cost for the next installment in the James Bond series. I'd also very much like to avoid taking out a second mortgage to pay my favorite author to pen a new novel for me to read.
BTW, you never did tell me what you do to provide for yourself and family.
Charge whom? If I cannot sell my software, if I cannot charge for access to the source code, to whom do I apply for compensation? The government? Your suggestion would only work for one-off software wherein I am contracted to produce it. Your bullet points do not withstand scrutiny. Surely you can neither be so naive nor obtuse. Free IP only works when there is a necessary value addition that the creator may charge for and is equitable to the development investment.
You can't just give a glib, nonsensical answer and expect that to be satisfactory do you? How that would translate into practical application? As a developer working for a company I could charge them for the privilege of having me occupy a seat and perform services. However, if the product of that company was intellectual property, lets say software which they must effectively give away--by requirement of the GPL to give unrestricted access to the source-code--how would they recover on their investment in me? Or lets make it more simple. If I were both developer and publisher of retail software, what would be my source of income?
The thing I find ironic about many (most?) of the advocates of the GPL, the abolishment of copyrights generally, etc. is that they tend not to eat their own dog food. Typically their argument isn't founded upon the underlying ideology of free software. They just want other people's intellectual property for free while still being compensated for their own time and labor. Would I like to be able to live as those for whom money is no object? Absolutely. But what would happen if everyone were given the equal right live that way, to take what they want and offer little to nothing in return?
Where do you work? How do you provide a living for yourself and your family? How do you ensure an equitable return on investment in intellectual property in relation to physical goods when access to intellectual property is minimally fettered by scarcity--the driver of value in physical goods? You cannot have communal intellectual property while retaining capitalistic notions on physical goods without destroying the ability to trade the former for the later.
If communism is a straw man what they hell is a plantation owner?
Quite simple. The GPL is viral in nature. The publisher of any intellectual property derived from or incorporating GPL'd works is itself required to provide free, unrestricted, access to the source code of that property. In so doing the GPL devalues that intellectual property by reducing if not nullifying scarcity.
While it may be possible to establish alternate sources of revenue by selling value added services such packaging or support, it isn't always practical if even possible. In the world of physical goods it makes sense that customers would prefer to pay the restaurant to assemble their burger for them rather than provide them with the ingredients, a recipe, and/or advice on how to assemble and eat it. But when the cost of transformation and reproduction is negligible and no support is required is is next to impossible to derive ROI.
The GPL was created with the notion that every strata of software must be free and open. That's fine and lovely for Stallman but it provides unrealistic restrictions for commercial use. Businesses and individual developers alike donate resources to these communal properties for the benefit of all in a share and share alike manner so that we can focus resources on our real goal--the software we actually want to write and sell. In Stallman's idealistic world perhaps everyone would be communist and no one would care about money and possessions because we'd just step up to a replicator and say "earl grey, hot." But, this idealism does not match the reality on the ground. We depend upon commerce to provide for ourselves and our families.
If you don't like it and want to do something about it then you will have to solve the ultimate problem that has plagued mankind from the beginning, the scarcity of resources, and contention for the same.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't really matter since the federal government doesn't have jurisdiction anyway. It wouldn't be much different from the federal government telling states that they can't have their blue laws. In this case it just happens to be car dealers rather than bar owners.
The part that escaped him from the "no server" clause in his ToS.
The ToS of any residential service I've ever heard of expressly prohibits "servers". It is one of the principal differences between residential and "business" class service.
A stupid user is a stupid user. Everyone is so quick to rush to the soapbox and preach how wonderful their platform of choice is and how awful the others are. I say rush to the box and preach how stupid people are. I say rush to the box and demand that basic computing security be taught to everyone just as proper hygiene and safe sex are. We do not need big brothers, we don't need walled gardens, we need people to know what the hell it is that they're doing with their electronics. Teach people to wash their damn hands, avoid disenfranchised Nigerians, stop opening random email attachments, and stop bloody installing apps that require access to your sensitive data.
Free Oracle (MySQL) may be a competitor to the "not for free" Oracle but I think it still provides value to the company. MySQL has name recognition and reputation, MariaDB is still working on building these. So long as MySQL is around MariaDB will have a harder time doing so and for that reason alone Oracle may well keep MySQL going.
It isn't just the immune system that it affects. It has been shown to decrease muscle strength--including the heart. It also readily reacts with the chlorine in household tap water to form chloroform, a recognized carcinogen.
You will have the very same abilities to surreptitiously monitor and record in real-time the private lives of citizens as you would with any smartphone and most other mobile devices. Data is stored in the cloud and open for government intrusion while providing the theater privacy and security. If you don't bungle your public show feigned concern you shouldn't have anything to worry about from the voters on this issue. Now go back to your hookers and blow and leave your fingers out of it.
Don't believe everything you watch on Fox News. It's only that way right now because the pot-smoking, crazy, hippie, pinko-liberals are running things.
In Minnesota, the yellows tend to be quick, but you are also not expected to stop unless it's safe to do so. If you enter the intersection on yellow, it doesn't matter if it changes red while you're in it. The folks waiting on the green are required to ensure the cross traffic has stopped before proceeding.
Depends. Where does the kid fit within the socioeconomic/racial food-chain?
States are allowed by the U.S. Constitution to be douche bags so long as they do not impinge upon interstate commerce or other federal juridictions. Florida has historically just been a bit douchier than most and this is simply an illustration of that.
Wait... Who were we talking about?
We must resist the products of the second law of thermodynamics. If that requires slapping Timothy around every now and then then that's what must be done.
What a strange euphemism.
Did I miss something? "The Voice," "American Idol," "America's Got Talent?" No statistics, no hardware, not even politics tangential to technology; nothing but a link to a couple paragraphs on a site for addle brained people whose concerns reach no further than the next amusement to distract them from realizing their own mediocrity.
What the hell Timothy? Have you lost your passion? Did you sell out? Fall on your head? ...
Sounds like a point defense system--for when all else fails. The targeting/tracking system need not be limited to the effective range of the laser.
It kind of depends upon what you need. Contests will find puzzle solvers, those that would work reasonably well doing research. Contests however, will not be very effective in finding the "big picture" folks that are needed to develop clean, robust architectures. I suspect they may well select against them. You will also almost certainly limit your applicants to college kids, and/or recent graduates looking to establish themselves not those that have already proven their abilities.
You do realize that the medium by which that content was distributed did not lend itself to near zero expense reproduction right? Analog to analog reproduction is inherently lossy. It costs as much (if not more) to photocopy a book and bind those pages into a new one as it does to just buy a legal distribution of the shelves. A product loses its inherent value the moment everyone that wants one can obtain a copy for near zero cost. For now this issue only troubles intellectual property. Soon it will affect tangible goods as well when what used to require a manufacturer can be had from a digital scan and a matter assembler.
Let the networks die with the rest of the Luddites and their business models. I'll happily continue to consume my niche entertainment streaming a la carte from the likes of Netflix and Amazon. I have no interest in hundreds of channels worth of mass consensus crap. I have even less interest when its for ridiculous sums of money.
So let me get this straight. I can offer the assembled software product A for sale, while giving away the unassembled software product A to whomever wants it. Are you for real? If the person or group who expects to use the software I write has already downloaded and compiled the source-code, or downloaded what someone else has already compiled I no longer have a customer to charge. If given the choice between Product A for a price, or Product A for free which would you choose?
So movie houses, authors, software developers, etc. are going to be contracted directly by you and me? I don't know about you but I really couldn't afford to shoulder the entire production cost for the next installment in the James Bond series. I'd also very much like to avoid taking out a second mortgage to pay my favorite author to pen a new novel for me to read.
BTW, you never did tell me what you do to provide for yourself and family.
Charge whom? If I cannot sell my software, if I cannot charge for access to the source code, to whom do I apply for compensation? The government? Your suggestion would only work for one-off software wherein I am contracted to produce it. Your bullet points do not withstand scrutiny. Surely you can neither be so naive nor obtuse. Free IP only works when there is a necessary value addition that the creator may charge for and is equitable to the development investment.
You can't just give a glib, nonsensical answer and expect that to be satisfactory do you? How that would translate into practical application? As a developer working for a company I could charge them for the privilege of having me occupy a seat and perform services. However, if the product of that company was intellectual property, lets say software which they must effectively give away--by requirement of the GPL to give unrestricted access to the source-code--how would they recover on their investment in me? Or lets make it more simple. If I were both developer and publisher of retail software, what would be my source of income?
The thing I find ironic about many (most?) of the advocates of the GPL, the abolishment of copyrights generally, etc. is that they tend not to eat their own dog food. Typically their argument isn't founded upon the underlying ideology of free software. They just want other people's intellectual property for free while still being compensated for their own time and labor. Would I like to be able to live as those for whom money is no object? Absolutely. But what would happen if everyone were given the equal right live that way, to take what they want and offer little to nothing in return?
Where do you work? How do you provide a living for yourself and your family? How do you ensure an equitable return on investment in intellectual property in relation to physical goods when access to intellectual property is minimally fettered by scarcity--the driver of value in physical goods? You cannot have communal intellectual property while retaining capitalistic notions on physical goods without destroying the ability to trade the former for the later.
If communism is a straw man what they hell is a plantation owner?
Quite simple. The GPL is viral in nature. The publisher of any intellectual property derived from or incorporating GPL'd works is itself required to provide free, unrestricted, access to the source code of that property. In so doing the GPL devalues that intellectual property by reducing if not nullifying scarcity.
While it may be possible to establish alternate sources of revenue by selling value added services such packaging or support, it isn't always practical if even possible. In the world of physical goods it makes sense that customers would prefer to pay the restaurant to assemble their burger for them rather than provide them with the ingredients, a recipe, and/or advice on how to assemble and eat it. But when the cost of transformation and reproduction is negligible and no support is required is is next to impossible to derive ROI.
The GPL was created with the notion that every strata of software must be free and open. That's fine and lovely for Stallman but it provides unrealistic restrictions for commercial use. Businesses and individual developers alike donate resources to these communal properties for the benefit of all in a share and share alike manner so that we can focus resources on our real goal--the software we actually want to write and sell. In Stallman's idealistic world perhaps everyone would be communist and no one would care about money and possessions because we'd just step up to a replicator and say "earl grey, hot." But, this idealism does not match the reality on the ground. We depend upon commerce to provide for ourselves and our families.
If you don't like it and want to do something about it then you will have to solve the ultimate problem that has plagued mankind from the beginning, the scarcity of resources, and contention for the same.