What's so different about that than requiring a drivers license if you want to drive a car either within a state o from one to another? We've had those for years. In either case the government wants to know who you are. Well, for one, you don't need a driver's license to ride in a car, only to drive one, as opposed to commercial air travel where you need an ID to travel at all. Also, responding to the idea of requiring a passport, that would restrict the travel of any non-citizens in the country, as well as those who don't travel often.
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; Exactly what does domestic wiretapping have to do with "the government and regulation of the land and naval forces"? Perhaps you were over-focusing on the "to make rules for the government" portion. Better work on those late 1700's grammar skills.
That's a dangerous and wrong assumption to make. The myth that police have to identify themselves to you is just plain wrong. Police out of uniform not only don't have to tell people that they're police, but they're also allowed to lie about pretty much anything and everything. The umbrella of acts that consist of "entrapment" is radically smaller than most people seem to think it is.
I would think that, in general, people view downloading or making copies of movies as wrong, both morally and legally, and as a result, most people do neither. Taking DVDs specifically, the technology for consumers to easily make copies of video have been around for years, and I'm pretty sure that the DVD purchase and rental markets are still cash cows for movies. Your assertion that, in a world without DRM, no one would want to "invest in the next Star Wars" makes no sense. The DRM on DVD had been essentially broken long before the creation of the latest Star Wars film, so that investment has already been made.
In addition, your assumption that the removal of DRM would cause "all sorts of mix-ups and exciting mashups and derivative works" also makes no sense. Amateurs have long been producing this type of content with both music and movies as source material, with DRM in place. If you are claiming that theses types of combinations could suddenly be professionally produced and widely released, that's just plain wrong. Copyright protects its holders by itself, without the help of DRM. (Anyone remember the Grey Album?) Just because the companies only care to use legal force on large-scale or mainstream distribution doesn't mean they have no protection against consumers without DRM.
Most of your post only makes sense when viewed through the lens of total abolishment of copyright, which is so unwise that few rational people even consider the concept for long. I support copyright (with some reasonable term, but that's another argument), and I think it is the right of the media companies to try to protect that right in whatever way they please. I draw the line when the law steps in to criminalize the circumvention of DRM. That allows companies to restrict fair use of media, amongst other things, and makes the DMCA a radical departure in copyright law.
This headline can be recycled and reused into perpetuity. Chances are with continuing advancements it will always become more affordable than it was last week, month, year, decade, or century.
Slashdot's just trying to do its part. Everyone knows that recyclable headlines are better for the environment.
No, really: the fact that Lieberman won as an independent in Connecticut, Democratic control of the House is modest, and control of the Senate is down to the wire belies your assertion, sir.
So according to you, the fact that one powerful, long-time senator who garnered significant support from Republicans due to his stance on the war, and people from all political views who understand that having a senior senator from your state can be very beneficial, managed to defeat a political rookie is a sign that the Democrats don't have a mandate?
News flash, Lieberman has always leaned Democratic on most issues, and will continue to, despite what capital letter shows up beside his name in parentheses.
So wait, what is your actual problem with the GP? It said that Microsoft created XMLHttpRequest first, with Mozilla making a compatible implementation later in 2002. Those are both true. Nothing in your post actually contradicts the post above. I assume you are trying to say that the Wikipedia article is wrong, and the W3C made the spec first, but that isn't true. The W3C's working draft wasn't published until this year.
trademarks and copyrights are powers assigned to congress by the same clause of the constitution (the copyright clause)
That is not true.
Or, maybe it is.
From Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: The Congress shall have power... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
Sure seems like the same clause to me. Also, while there is no "IP Law", there are certainly laws that outline the current implementation of Congress' power to grant copyrights, which could collectively be called "IP law" (lowercase l).
I'm not really sure how (if we're talking iTunes here), clicking the "Import" button is much harder than clicking the "Burn CD" button.
On the other hand, to burn an album bought online to CD requires two purchases, the album, and blank CDs (and, to a lesser extent, a burner. It's probably pretty hard to buy a computer without one these days, so it's probably essentially a non-issue.) Even though the price of blank CD media is very low, it's just one more thing you have to buy.
Oh come on. Even ignoring any negative stereotypes you may have about the intelligence of security and airport personnel in general, what kind of "intellectual abilities" could identifying battery model numbers require? Valid gripes would include the extra time it would take to check every Apple and Dell battery, or the hassle to passengers, but not claiming that security officers don't have the capability to match numbers on a battery to numbers on a list.
Or do all AM2 CPUs use a newer core that supports it?
Bingo. The socket AM2 cores (Windsor for X2 and Orleans for A64) both support Pacifica. The only AM2 processors that don't are the Sempron line (Manila).
Tyre is and was actually a city, one of the most important ones in the ancient Phoenician empire. Also, it still exists. It's in Lebanon, and probably getting bombed right about now.
Even if I assume your post was a joke and you knew that tyre is the British spelling of tire, you're still wrong.
Does it matter? They still rear ended a simulated car. Who cares if they're not as impaired as someone with a 0.1 BAC?
The point is, they didn't rear-end a simulated car. From the summary:
Three study participants rear-ended the simulated car in front of them. All were talking on cell phones and none was drunk, the researchers said.
The grandparent's point is, the average legal limit of.08 is a conservative one (by design, I'm sure), and many people at.08 are perfectly capable of driving.
Congress did enact a line-item veto, during the Clinton administration. The first time he tried to use it to get rid of some frivolous spending item, the state in question (New York I think) brought suit, and the line-item veto was struck down by the Supreme Court as violating the doctrine of separation of powers. In my opinion, that's the correct decision, since it essentially gives the President some amount of direct control over the contents of individual bills.
As far as I remember, there aren't very many companies that make LCD panels (Samsung, AU Optronics, and NEC maybe?), so most companies are using one of theirs, but the panel itself is not the defining characteristic of the quality of an LCD. Many manufacturers use the same exact panels, but produce displays of very different quality from each other. I guess the point is that there are lots of other "electronics" to take into account for a display that could justify the difference in price.
Of course, you're probably right that Apple displays come with a somewhat heftier price tag than a hypothetical display with the exact same components from a less chic manufacturer.
On another note, would "free-market" (say another company or orginization) prevent Microsoft's implementation of such tools and doom it to failure?
Oh, it's definitely possible, depending on how (or if) Microsoft implements this technology. Assuming it's used on Xbox Live, for example, if they don't allow it to be turned off by users, I could see some kind of move to other services. Of course, it could swing the other way, with such technology attracting concerned parents.
Or maybe they'll use it for something completely different, not at all, or not actually invent it. That being said, it seems like a technology that would have a large market for traditional broadcasters, allowing them to reduce "manual" censorship.
I'm not quite sure how Congress got involved in this, but I'll just make a few points anyway.
1. Bills of attainder simply declare people guilty without benefit of a trial, and ex post facto laws (in this situation) seek to punish people for acts that were legal before the law was enacted. Neither of them deal with blocking something that's "going to happen."
2. If you were looking for something that prohibits the government from blocking speech that's going to happen, the First Amendment's protection of free speech would be a good place, since the courts have ruled that there is almost no situation in which prior restraint of speech or publication is acceptable.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly what does domestic wiretapping have to do with "the government and regulation of the land and naval forces"? Perhaps you were over-focusing on the "to make rules for the government" portion. Better work on those late 1700's grammar skills.
But they won't stop there. They'll make bigger boards and bigger nails, and soon, they will make a board with a nail so big it will destroy them all!
Even if you meant Lightning UK, the answer is still no.
That's a dangerous and wrong assumption to make. The myth that police have to identify themselves to you is just plain wrong. Police out of uniform not only don't have to tell people that they're police, but they're also allowed to lie about pretty much anything and everything. The umbrella of acts that consist of "entrapment" is radically smaller than most people seem to think it is.
I would think that, in general, people view downloading or making copies of movies as wrong, both morally and legally, and as a result, most people do neither. Taking DVDs specifically, the technology for consumers to easily make copies of video have been around for years, and I'm pretty sure that the DVD purchase and rental markets are still cash cows for movies. Your assertion that, in a world without DRM, no one would want to "invest in the next Star Wars" makes no sense. The DRM on DVD had been essentially broken long before the creation of the latest Star Wars film, so that investment has already been made.
In addition, your assumption that the removal of DRM would cause "all sorts of mix-ups and exciting mashups and derivative works" also makes no sense. Amateurs have long been producing this type of content with both music and movies as source material, with DRM in place. If you are claiming that theses types of combinations could suddenly be professionally produced and widely released, that's just plain wrong. Copyright protects its holders by itself, without the help of DRM. (Anyone remember the Grey Album?) Just because the companies only care to use legal force on large-scale or mainstream distribution doesn't mean they have no protection against consumers without DRM.
Most of your post only makes sense when viewed through the lens of total abolishment of copyright, which is so unwise that few rational people even consider the concept for long. I support copyright (with some reasonable term, but that's another argument), and I think it is the right of the media companies to try to protect that right in whatever way they please. I draw the line when the law steps in to criminalize the circumvention of DRM. That allows companies to restrict fair use of media, amongst other things, and makes the DMCA a radical departure in copyright law.
Woosh.
News flash, Lieberman has always leaned Democratic on most issues, and will continue to, despite what capital letter shows up beside his name in parentheses.
So wait, what is your actual problem with the GP? It said that Microsoft created XMLHttpRequest first, with Mozilla making a compatible implementation later in 2002. Those are both true. Nothing in your post actually contradicts the post above. I assume you are trying to say that the Wikipedia article is wrong, and the W3C made the spec first, but that isn't true. The W3C's working draft wasn't published until this year.
What's so unpleasant about being drunk?
Or, maybe it is.
From Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: The Congress shall have power... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
Sure seems like the same clause to me. Also, while there is no "IP Law", there are certainly laws that outline the current implementation of Congress' power to grant copyrights, which could collectively be called "IP law" (lowercase l).
For those of you who don't seem to know, Google searches without quotation marks tend to produce more results.
Maybe for this particular application you'll be looking for genetic data transfer.
I'm not really sure how (if we're talking iTunes here), clicking the "Import" button is much harder than clicking the "Burn CD" button.
On the other hand, to burn an album bought online to CD requires two purchases, the album, and blank CDs (and, to a lesser extent, a burner. It's probably pretty hard to buy a computer without one these days, so it's probably essentially a non-issue.) Even though the price of blank CD media is very low, it's just one more thing you have to buy.
Oh come on. Even ignoring any negative stereotypes you may have about the intelligence of security and airport personnel in general, what kind of "intellectual abilities" could identifying battery model numbers require? Valid gripes would include the extra time it would take to check every Apple and Dell battery, or the hassle to passengers, but not claiming that security officers don't have the capability to match numbers on a battery to numbers on a list.
Tyre is and was actually a city, one of the most important ones in the ancient Phoenician empire. Also, it still exists. It's in Lebanon, and probably getting bombed right about now.
Even if I assume your post was a joke and you knew that tyre is the British spelling of tire, you're still wrong.
The grandparent's point is, the average legal limit of
Erin Brockovich isn't really a movie about whistle-blowing. On the other hand, this is.
As far as I remember, there aren't very many companies that make LCD panels (Samsung, AU Optronics, and NEC maybe?), so most companies are using one of theirs, but the panel itself is not the defining characteristic of the quality of an LCD. Many manufacturers use the same exact panels, but produce displays of very different quality from each other. I guess the point is that there are lots of other "electronics" to take into account for a display that could justify the difference in price.
Of course, you're probably right that Apple displays come with a somewhat heftier price tag than a hypothetical display with the exact same components from a less chic manufacturer.
On another note, would "free-market" (say another company or orginization) prevent Microsoft's implementation of such tools and doom it to failure?
Oh, it's definitely possible, depending on how (or if) Microsoft implements this technology. Assuming it's used on Xbox Live, for example, if they don't allow it to be turned off by users, I could see some kind of move to other services. Of course, it could swing the other way, with such technology attracting concerned parents.
Or maybe they'll use it for something completely different, not at all, or not actually invent it. That being said, it seems like a technology that would have a large market for traditional broadcasters, allowing them to reduce "manual" censorship.
I'm not quite sure how Congress got involved in this, but I'll just make a few points anyway.
1. Bills of attainder simply declare people guilty without benefit of a trial, and ex post facto laws (in this situation) seek to punish people for acts that were legal before the law was enacted. Neither of them deal with blocking something that's "going to happen."
2. If you were looking for something that prohibits the government from blocking speech that's going to happen, the First Amendment's protection of free speech would be a good place, since the courts have ruled that there is almost no situation in which prior restraint of speech or publication is acceptable.
3. Microsoft is not the government. Yet.