This is only true if Google is the only entity to do this. If Yahoo eBay and another three random sites start scanning books it will be very hard to monitor. And I do not see a reason why other entities should not have the same rights as Google. Heck, I do not see why *I* should not be allowed to scan and publish until the author opts out.
Defy the hive-mind that the majority of slashdotters are part of at your own peril my friend! Other ways to get to -2 are to suggest that you believe in God or voted for a Republican at any point in time -- and God help you if they find out that you don't know how to program, don't like Linux, and don't like Firefly....those crimes are punishable by death around here!
It would seem that you believe in some invisible, sentient being powerful enough to defeat the omniscient Slashdot Hive Mid. You should be modded to death in a public execution to set an example.
I cannot predict when you will die but I am certain that in 80 yeards you will be gone...
On a more serious note, the average temperature accross the globe in a year is a different object than the weather in a specific location. The earth is pretty much a closed system, apart from receiving light from the sun and dissipating it in part. It is reasonable to have models for that.
It is a violation if 1) it is true; 2) Apple contacted Nokia before selling the phone. And even in this case they should have brought to court immediately, not now.
Market cap is meaningless in this case. It is how much investors would put in Apple/Nokia for a new financial/industrial move. Apple has a very high return rate: they rarely get a product wrong lately. But the investors will not cover the same amount for legal battles, because there is no return, just survival. In that respect Nokia has more cash than Apple.
No need to circumvent for private individuals, fortunately. Our government is sloppy and has not thought of a single way to enforce this. It will be used against competitors to Berlusconi's TVs and against Murdoch's Sky, which is in the scope of the bill. Not that it is so much better...
What is the problem if Google pulls out? What damages have they done? If anything the chinese are going to notice that it is missing and - maybe - grow some little more discomfort with the current governement that can push them to change things...
But his dog does not enter your house, right? and you expect your neighbour to ansure that he does not. So *if* (and it is a big if) wifi can be considered dangerous to this guy he can ask his neighbour to prevent EM waves from entering his house. Like, by covering the walls in metal.
More likely, if the currently harmless spectrum could be proven not harmless then a new one will be tested and allocated and old routers will be outlawed.
faraday cages do not block elecromagnetic waves. lhc will not create a black hole. antimatter cannot be transported in a suitcase. homeopathy has no scientific evidence. earth is not flat.
We have evolution (as in new traits being developed) of plants and bugs due to selective processes. We have evolution of bacteria through adaptation to environment and relative advantage. We observe differentiation of species through ring-species. We can recostruct the evolutionary links between speecies through DNA evidence. We have a pretty, consistent tree of evolution extracted from fossyls. How difficult is it to look at the big picture and say that evolution s the most probable explanation?
If anything it's creationists that must explain what would forbid "macro-evolution" from happening. Why is it qualitatively different from "micro-evolution"?
We never actually oserved a gravitationally activated fusion reaction, but we believe the sun burns that way too. We never observed the light travelling for more than one light year at the same rate either and we still believe that the speed is constant. Science is filled with such extrapolations where something is proven only for small scales and taken to be universally valid.
Maybe, but even then he is taking an arrogant stance in his field of expertise, while they are doing the same outside theirs. I assume he would not do the same when talking about programming, since that would obviously be hypocritical.
I am not willing to pay $5 a month for a 100 meg line to the Internet and have 50% of my paycheck taken away. I will happily pay $100 a month for my fast connection...you pay for your own internet, wireless, etc.
You are misrepresenting the situation. The high taxation is for a myriad of things, including retirement. The landlines are probably around 1%, so you would gain something only if you earn more than 10K/month.
As for unregulated markets they are so terribly inefficient that in the last 10000 there is not a significant instance recorded. All we are left are systems where there is a government on which corporatist nutjobs will blame everything.
They are human beings and you are melodramatic. By your reasoning slaughtering ten children to feed other ten would put me above critics...
Food aid is usually paid by international funds to western corporations so that the money never really leaves the developed world. In turn the corporations like Nestlè send to the starving countries their exceedings that are usually poor quality or expired. This way they make a net profit on the good will of others, and simultaneously undermine the foreign country economy.
This is simply to say that how you help someone is of the utmost importance. Failing to see the consequences makes you an idiot, ignoring them makes you an evil prick.
I know it's not out yet, but the katepart (the editor widget) already has a VI mode that supports most of the original commands and modal editing. Worth giving a try: the betas are getting better and better...
Judgement by "normal" people is something that was feared a lot in writing the Italian Consitution, because we had seen how it worked with fascism. The principle that people support is enough to justify everything is the essence of fascism and one of the scary mantras of Mr. Berlusconi.
It's not so terrible as censorship, in a sense. As the current copyright law stands, sharing copyrighted material is illegal. The court stated that to prevent illegal behaviour it is legitimate that lower courts order ISPs to block sites that are created to break the law. The same would happen with libel, for example. At least in the highest court of the country we can ask that if something is illegal it should not be allowed. It's a nice principle...
OTOH we can push for copyright law to be changed, but with the international agreements in place it is very difficult for any single country to overhaul it.
The patent is not on the chips, probably. And the burden of paying the license is to the one that sells to customers, not subcontractor. If Apple want they can get the cash back from Infineon for breach of contract, if the contract mentions possible patents.
Slashdot Mirror
This is only true if Google is the only entity to do this. If Yahoo eBay and another three random sites start scanning books it will be very hard to monitor. And I do not see a reason why other entities should not have the same rights as Google. Heck, I do not see why *I* should not be allowed to scan and publish until the author opts out.
Defy the hive-mind that the majority of slashdotters are part of at your own peril my friend! Other ways to get to -2 are to suggest that you believe in God or voted for a Republican at any point in time -- and God help you if they find out that you don't know how to program, don't like Linux, and don't like Firefly....those crimes are punishable by death around here!
It would seem that you believe in some invisible, sentient being powerful enough to defeat the omniscient Slashdot Hive Mid. You should be modded to death in a public execution to set an example.
I cannot predict when you will die but I am certain that in 80 yeards you will be gone...
On a more serious note, the average temperature accross the globe in a year is a different object than the weather in a specific location. The earth is pretty much a closed system, apart from receiving light from the sun and dissipating it in part. It is reasonable to have models for that.
So we should read on the site of McIntyre that McIntyre was never wrong and his opponents are picking strawmen. And you call that unbiased?
Yes, they want to be paid from two people instead of charging only one with double (or more) price. Their patents their terms.
Does Apple even have cell-phone related patents? If it does not then theyu should give something else or pay more in cash.
It is a violation if
1) it is true;
2) Apple contacted Nokia before selling the phone.
And even in this case they should have brought to court immediately, not now.
Market cap is meaningless in this case. It is how much investors would put in Apple/Nokia for a new financial/industrial move. Apple has a very high return rate: they rarely get a product wrong lately. But the investors will not cover the same amount for legal battles, because there is no return, just survival. In that respect Nokia has more cash than Apple.
What makes you think that in this semi-dictatorship a public ballot will make the votes for Berlusconi *decrease*?
Ah, and I do not think the bill will pass. Their strategy is to throw as many bad ideas out there that at some point one is bound to pass.
No need to circumvent for private individuals, fortunately. Our government is sloppy and has not thought of a single way to enforce this. It will be used against competitors to Berlusconi's TVs and against Murdoch's Sky, which is in the scope of the bill. Not that it is so much better...
What is the problem if Google pulls out? What damages have they done? If anything the chinese are going to notice that it is missing and - maybe - grow some little more discomfort with the current governement that can push them to change things...
But his dog does not enter your house, right? and you expect your neighbour to ansure that he does not. So *if* (and it is a big if) wifi can be considered dangerous to this guy he can ask his neighbour to prevent EM waves from entering his house. Like, by covering the walls in metal.
More likely, if the currently harmless spectrum could be proven not harmless then a new one will be tested and allocated and old routers will be outlawed.
faraday cages do not block elecromagnetic waves. lhc will not create a black hole. antimatter cannot be transported in a suitcase. homeopathy has no scientific evidence. earth is not flat.
we are on slashdot for god's sake!
We have evolution (as in new traits being developed) of plants and bugs due to selective processes. We have evolution of bacteria through adaptation to environment and relative advantage. We observe differentiation of species through ring-species. We can recostruct the evolutionary links between speecies through DNA evidence. We have a pretty, consistent tree of evolution extracted from fossyls. How difficult is it to look at the big picture and say that evolution s the most probable explanation?
If anything it's creationists that must explain what would forbid "macro-evolution" from happening. Why is it qualitatively different from "micro-evolution"?
We never actually oserved a gravitationally activated fusion reaction, but we believe the sun burns that way too. We never observed the light travelling for more than one light year at the same rate either and we still believe that the speed is constant. Science is filled with such extrapolations where something is proven only for small scales and taken to be universally valid.
Maybe, but even then he is taking an arrogant stance in his field of expertise, while they are doing the same outside theirs. I assume he would not do the same when talking about programming, since that would obviously be hypocritical.
I am not willing to pay $5 a month for a 100 meg line to the Internet and have 50% of my paycheck taken away. I will happily pay $100 a month for my fast connection...you pay for your own internet, wireless, etc.
You are misrepresenting the situation. The high taxation is for a myriad of things, including retirement. The landlines are probably around 1%, so you would gain something only if you earn more than 10K/month.
As for unregulated markets they are so terribly inefficient that in the last 10000 there is not a significant instance recorded. All we are left are systems where there is a government on which corporatist nutjobs will blame everything.
They are human beings and you are melodramatic. By your reasoning slaughtering ten children to feed other ten would put me above critics...
Food aid is usually paid by international funds to western corporations so that the money never really leaves the developed world. In turn the corporations like Nestlè send to the starving countries their exceedings that are usually poor quality or expired. This way they make a net profit on the good will of others, and simultaneously undermine the foreign country economy.
This is simply to say that how you help someone is of the utmost importance. Failing to see the consequences makes you an idiot, ignoring them makes you an evil prick.
Yes, it is. She got what she deserved for killing a person. What is your point?
I know it's not out yet, but the katepart (the editor widget) already has a VI mode that supports most of the original commands and modal editing. Worth giving a try: the betas are getting better and better...
Right, and I can teleport. I just don't do it.
Judgement by "normal" people is something that was feared a lot in writing the Italian Consitution, because we had seen how it worked with fascism. The principle that people support is enough to justify everything is the essence of fascism and one of the scary mantras of Mr. Berlusconi.
It's not so terrible as censorship, in a sense. As the current copyright law stands, sharing copyrighted material is illegal. The court stated that to prevent illegal behaviour it is legitimate that lower courts order ISPs to block sites that are created to break the law. The same would happen with libel, for example. At least in the highest court of the country we can ask that if something is illegal it should not be allowed. It's a nice principle...
OTOH we can push for copyright law to be changed, but with the international agreements in place it is very difficult for any single country to overhaul it.
The patent is not on the chips, probably. And the burden of paying the license is to the one that sells to customers, not subcontractor. If Apple want they can get the cash back from Infineon for breach of contract, if the contract mentions possible patents.
How do you know they did not ask the same to others? Magic eight-ball?