Seriously, I think some of the Linux distributions are putting themselves in jeopardy by aligning themselves with corporate interests and for accepting and distributing binary blobs from vendors. Corporations are simply using the Linux community as a way of off-loading their development costs.
I just wanted to mention that under no circumstances should a small child (under the age of 5?) be allowed to be near a dog. From what I understand, dogs don't recognize toddlers as human and are likely to snap at, or bite the child if they are startled.
Also, training a dog isn't necessarily difficult. I've seen experienced trainers teach dogs all the basic commands in an hour.
Agreed. At times I really think people should have to be licensed to own an animal. I've seen entirely too many people putting either their animal or another person (typically a small child) at risk of harm due to their own ignorance.
How is this comment relevant to songs that are not yet in the public domain? You can't cry "bullshit" when the author you responded to was most likely talking about current tracks, not public domain ones.
It's relevant because the person I was quoting was talking about copyright law in general. Here's what he said:
You don't get it. Copyright law has nothing to do with money - and everything to do with money. It is written to say that when an artist creates a work, and put it out for consumption, that's what we get to do - consume it. We don't get to use it as source material (other than through influence) for something else.
That's not what the law says. It says that we get to consume it until the time period for the creator's exclusive distribution rights expires. At that point the work falls into the public domain and can be used by everyone.
That's a rather sweeping generalization.
I don't believe that saying, "the problem is that content creators are trying to change the rules of the game" is a sweeping generalization as I did not say all content creators. Perhaps it would have been more clear had I said, "some content creators"?
It is written to say that when an artist creates a work, and put it out for consumption, that's what we get to do - consume it. We don't get to use it as source material (other than through influence) for something else.
Bullshit. Copyright law grants exclusive distribution rights to the creator in exchange for the work eventually becoming part of the public domain. People can use the works for whatever they like once they are in the public domain. For example, the copyright on "Night of the Living Dead" expired recently so now the public can use it for whatever purpose they like.
The problem is that content creators are trying to change the rules of the game. They want the public to grant them copyright protection, but don't want to give the public anything in exchange.
There's no prerequisite for taking an AP test (other than paying the fee), but many high schools (a) require that you take their AP classes, (b) don't offer AP tests that they don't have classes for and (c) don't tell you that you can take the tests elsewhere. Personally, I don't understand the value in an AP class if the focus is on learning how to pass the test versus learning accelerated course material. I'm more than a little shocked that the student in question was able to get 75 hours of AP credit, I seem to recall most tests being worth either 5 or 10 semester hours.
While it's true that many colleges have a policy that you need permission to take more than 18 hours, I never had a problem and scheduled a maximum of 23 hours when I was an undergraduate. Of course after that I decided there was no need to rush and stuck to 16 hour semesters. School was a lot more enjoyable when I wasn't constantly working on three machine projects at a time.
Don't complain that I'm impeding the advance of traffic flow because I'm doing 60 in a 65; complain that the speed limit is only 65.
I agree with your statement about copyright defense, but not this one. I drive the Chicago expressways every day and people in the left lane that can't keep up with traffic should be shot; I don't care if the posted limit is 55, people drive 70+ (actually more like 80+ on I94). People that are in the wrong lane contribute to accidents since there's usually a mile gap in front of them and people are forced to the middle or far right lane to get around 'em.
Yeah, I know you were probably half-serious, but I'm about to head home and I'm guaranteed to encounter at least half a dozen people who are clogging the expressway because they are moving too slow for the lane they're in.
I must admit that I have never used Napster, but wasn't their service clearly illegal from day one? They were redistributing content for which they did not possess a copyright and did not have the copyright holder's permission to do so. What was their rationale for the service being legal?
I do and do not agree that the copyright holders have a legitimate grievance. Yes, people are infringing copyrights and the copyright holders are clearly in the right for defending themselves. However, there's no excuse for suing YouTube for infringement when there are other channels available for resolving the issue. Copyright owners can simply ask that their content be removed, there's absolutely no need to involve the courts. If copyright owners want to attack the source of the problem (the people uploading the content) they're free to do so.
I guess you hadn't heard, but we actually paid money for prisoners in countries like Pakistan. The idea was that people would be compensated for helping the U.S. catch fighters, but it of course turned into a system where innocent people were sold to the U.S. as prisoners.
They're not being forced to do that. The DRM will still be there. They're being forced to give away their DRM technology to other companies (well, they were... the law was changed in such a way that it no longer does anything).
I wasn't aware that Apple was being forced to license the DRM technology; don't they have the option to just drop the DRM (not feasible for them due to the RIAA, I know).
Your arguement appears to be that DRM technology isn't worth protection. Fair enough. But that has nothing to do with the point being made.
No, my argument was that Apple isn't being forced to give anything away. They can just drop the DRM from their files, or license the technology to competitors.
How is requiring Apple to make music and video files downloaded from their iTunes store compatible with media players other than the iPod forcing them to give something away for free? There's nothing being given away. In fact, it's expanding the iTunes market to consumers that couldn't benefit from the service because they don't own an iPod.
If you have a neat idea that could take the world by store, but it will cost a bunch of money to create, why would you want to take that risk if you're going to be forced to give that technology away once it catches on?
Again, Apple's not being required to give away any technology. The requirement is that if they want to sell their product in a certain region, they must obey that region's laws. in this case, the law in question simply prevents Apple from artificially crippling their product so that it only works with their media player.
Apple's DRM is around for two reasons: to make the big media companies happy so they'll license their content, and to help Apple leverage their iTunes store to sell more iPods.
My guess is that you don't live in a state that requires public disclosure of security lapses like this one. If Chase didn't have to inform you about it, why would they?
It's not just a big con, it's incredibly unethical. People should be able to find out what data is stored about them as well as be able to correct erroneous information for no cost. In a computer ethics course I took as an undergraduate we learned about ethical issues related to databases; I can't recall the name of the text we used, but I believe there was a section talking about six ethical principles.
If schools were run more like businesses, we would get our kids educated better for less money. For example: we would expect teachers to get results or be fired (it's nearly IMPOSSIBLE to fire a bad teacher with tenure.)
You seem to be making the questionable assumption that whether or not a child learns is entirely up to the teacher. What about the students whose parents don't value education? Or the students that simply don't want to learn? The typical story I hear (in Chicago) about teachers going into failing schools in an attempt to fix things is that there's a complete lack of discipline: there are fights in the classrom, violent street gang activity in and around the buildings, a refusal to learn on the part of the students, lack of parental involvement, etc. Teachers can't force kids to learn.
Regarding tenure, I wasn't aware that elementary/grade/high schools had such a thing. My mom taught for over twenty years for a small school district in central Illinois and she didn't have tenure. I'll have to ask her about that.
It sounds to me like someone's trying to change the function of the educational system from one that produces people who can learn, think independently and posses critical thinking skills to one that simply produces workers for the corporations.
In this particular case, it sounds like the school is geared towards producing middle managers.
The US throws more money per student than ever, yet we get worse and worse results each year. I don't think it is the lack of money...but, it is management of the schools. The teachers unions are a huge problem...the bureaucracy the entangles every aspect of public schools...and the corruption.
I'd argue that the core problem is a lack of involvement by parents, but that never seems to be mentioned, it's always the school's fault that kids are choosing not to learn. My mother taught special education and fourth grade for over twenty years and had some real horror stories to tell about parents of students. If a child's family doesn't value education, then why blame the school for the outcome?
I almost think we do need to somehow make US schools private run entities...or at least make the schools truely competitive, where people lose jobs and funding for lack of performance. Let the tax dollars follow the kids...lets schools compete for the students and the dollars that follow them.
Again, you don't seem to acknowledge the role students (and their families) play in their own education. Rather than firing possibly good teachers because they have a bunch of students who don't want to learn, why not fire the students? If the kids know they're going to a work camp if they can't maintain decent grades, I think you'll find a lot of them will start putting forth some effort.
This is a good thing! Cursive writing is an abomination and should be driven from the face of the Earth. Seriously. If cursive were so great, then why aren't books printed in cursive?
Do yourself and everyone who reads your writing a favor and use print characters.
OMFG! What are we teaching our kids? Has the curriculum really dumbed down to the point that using PowerPoint is "cricical"?
Apparently. God forbid people simply learn how to prepare meaningful slides and charts for a presentation. Instead they need to include sounds, animations and screen transitions between slides that are practically content-free to deal with the short attention span of the average American.
I believe that kids using computers at school is essential if they're learning how to program, type or use online resources. Barring that, what's the benefit?
That article's talking about Sony's electronics division as a whole. Unfortunately the article on Wired's website doesn't include the charts from the print article as they more aptly depict the massive decline in sales (revenue?) that they've experienced.
One key point from the article is about Sony's cash reserves of just over $6 billion. Goldman-Sachs has predicted that the PS3 will cost Sony just over $2 billion through Q1 of 2007.
Dang it, you guys are seriously going to make me go back and play FFVII; and I just picked up Dirge of Cerberus last night! I did happen to get Yuffie and Vincent for my party, but I don't recall them being "hidden" characters. Did you ever beat all of the weapons? Some of those seemed impossible to beat unless you had Knights of the Round, but maybe I just don't know how to fight them? The one that's underwater (Ruby?) seemed particularly tough IIRC.
FWIW, Dirge of Cerberus is pretty cool, but it almost seems like a horror flick. The mood's pretty dark and some of the characters remind me of vampires.
No, I don't buy Pepsi, I drink Coke:) Thanks for the heads up about the bulbs being sold at CVS. The article only mentioned Wal-Mart, so I figured GE might have had an exclusive arrangement with that retailer. Did you happen to notice if they carried bulbs suitable for recessed lighting? What about bulbs for track lights? TIA!
Slashdot Mirror
Meh, real men run UNIX anyway.
Seriously, I think some of the Linux distributions are putting themselves in jeopardy by aligning themselves with corporate interests and for accepting and distributing binary blobs from vendors. Corporations are simply using the Linux community as a way of off-loading their development costs.
I just wanted to mention that under no circumstances should a small child (under the age of 5?) be allowed to be near a dog. From what I understand, dogs don't recognize toddlers as human and are likely to snap at, or bite the child if they are startled.
Also, training a dog isn't necessarily difficult. I've seen experienced trainers teach dogs all the basic commands in an hour.
Agreed. At times I really think people should have to be licensed to own an animal. I've seen entirely too many people putting either their animal or another person (typically a small child) at risk of harm due to their own ignorance.
It's relevant because the person I was quoting was talking about copyright law in general. Here's what he said:
That's not what the law says. It says that we get to consume it until the time period for the creator's exclusive distribution rights expires. At that point the work falls into the public domain and can be used by everyone.
I don't believe that saying, "the problem is that content creators are trying to change the rules of the game" is a sweeping generalization as I did not say all content creators. Perhaps it would have been more clear had I said, "some content creators"?Bullshit. Copyright law grants exclusive distribution rights to the creator in exchange for the work eventually becoming part of the public domain. People can use the works for whatever they like once they are in the public domain. For example, the copyright on "Night of the Living Dead" expired recently so now the public can use it for whatever purpose they like.
The problem is that content creators are trying to change the rules of the game. They want the public to grant them copyright protection, but don't want to give the public anything in exchange.
There's no prerequisite for taking an AP test (other than paying the fee), but many high schools (a) require that you take their AP classes, (b) don't offer AP tests that they don't have classes for and (c) don't tell you that you can take the tests elsewhere. Personally, I don't understand the value in an AP class if the focus is on learning how to pass the test versus learning accelerated course material. I'm more than a little shocked that the student in question was able to get 75 hours of AP credit, I seem to recall most tests being worth either 5 or 10 semester hours.
While it's true that many colleges have a policy that you need permission to take more than 18 hours, I never had a problem and scheduled a maximum of 23 hours when I was an undergraduate. Of course after that I decided there was no need to rush and stuck to 16 hour semesters. School was a lot more enjoyable when I wasn't constantly working on three machine projects at a time.
Oh, really? Ouch. At least they can get some licensing revenue, or are they also being restricted from naming their own price?
I agree with your statement about copyright defense, but not this one. I drive the Chicago expressways every day and people in the left lane that can't keep up with traffic should be shot; I don't care if the posted limit is 55, people drive 70+ (actually more like 80+ on I94). People that are in the wrong lane contribute to accidents since there's usually a mile gap in front of them and people are forced to the middle or far right lane to get around 'em.
Yeah, I know you were probably half-serious, but I'm about to head home and I'm guaranteed to encounter at least half a dozen people who are clogging the expressway because they are moving too slow for the lane they're in.
I must admit that I have never used Napster, but wasn't their service clearly illegal from day one? They were redistributing content for which they did not possess a copyright and did not have the copyright holder's permission to do so. What was their rationale for the service being legal?
I do and do not agree that the copyright holders have a legitimate grievance. Yes, people are infringing copyrights and the copyright holders are clearly in the right for defending themselves. However, there's no excuse for suing YouTube for infringement when there are other channels available for resolving the issue. Copyright owners can simply ask that their content be removed, there's absolutely no need to involve the courts. If copyright owners want to attack the source of the problem (the people uploading the content) they're free to do so.
I guess you hadn't heard, but we actually paid money for prisoners in countries like Pakistan. The idea was that people would be compensated for helping the U.S. catch fighters, but it of course turned into a system where innocent people were sold to the U.S. as prisoners.
I wasn't aware that Apple was being forced to license the DRM technology; don't they have the option to just drop the DRM (not feasible for them due to the RIAA, I know).
No, my argument was that Apple isn't being forced to give anything away. They can just drop the DRM from their files, or license the technology to competitors.
How is requiring Apple to make music and video files downloaded from their iTunes store compatible with media players other than the iPod forcing them to give something away for free? There's nothing being given away. In fact, it's expanding the iTunes market to consumers that couldn't benefit from the service because they don't own an iPod.
Again, Apple's not being required to give away any technology. The requirement is that if they want to sell their product in a certain region, they must obey that region's laws. in this case, the law in question simply prevents Apple from artificially crippling their product so that it only works with their media player.
Apple's DRM is around for two reasons: to make the big media companies happy so they'll license their content, and to help Apple leverage their iTunes store to sell more iPods.
These days, patents are granted for things that don't even exist. IIRC, Sony has a patent for a neural computer interface.
My guess is that you don't live in a state that requires public disclosure of security lapses like this one. If Chase didn't have to inform you about it, why would they?
It's not just a big con, it's incredibly unethical. People should be able to find out what data is stored about them as well as be able to correct erroneous information for no cost. In a computer ethics course I took as an undergraduate we learned about ethical issues related to databases; I can't recall the name of the text we used, but I believe there was a section talking about six ethical principles.
You seem to be making the questionable assumption that whether or not a child learns is entirely up to the teacher. What about the students whose parents don't value education? Or the students that simply don't want to learn? The typical story I hear (in Chicago) about teachers going into failing schools in an attempt to fix things is that there's a complete lack of discipline: there are fights in the classrom, violent street gang activity in and around the buildings, a refusal to learn on the part of the students, lack of parental involvement, etc. Teachers can't force kids to learn.
Regarding tenure, I wasn't aware that elementary/grade/high schools had such a thing. My mom taught for over twenty years for a small school district in central Illinois and she didn't have tenure. I'll have to ask her about that.
It sounds to me like someone's trying to change the function of the educational system from one that produces people who can learn, think independently and posses critical thinking skills to one that simply produces workers for the corporations.
In this particular case, it sounds like the school is geared towards producing middle managers.
I'd argue that the core problem is a lack of involvement by parents, but that never seems to be mentioned, it's always the school's fault that kids are choosing not to learn. My mother taught special education and fourth grade for over twenty years and had some real horror stories to tell about parents of students. If a child's family doesn't value education, then why blame the school for the outcome?
Again, you don't seem to acknowledge the role students (and their families) play in their own education. Rather than firing possibly good teachers because they have a bunch of students who don't want to learn, why not fire the students? If the kids know they're going to a work camp if they can't maintain decent grades, I think you'll find a lot of them will start putting forth some effort.
This is a good thing! Cursive writing is an abomination and should be driven from the face of the Earth. Seriously. If cursive were so great, then why aren't books printed in cursive?
Do yourself and everyone who reads your writing a favor and use print characters.
Apparently. God forbid people simply learn how to prepare meaningful slides and charts for a presentation. Instead they need to include sounds, animations and screen transitions between slides that are practically content-free to deal with the short attention span of the average American.
I believe that kids using computers at school is essential if they're learning how to program, type or use online resources. Barring that, what's the benefit?
Hell yes. It meant cheap games in the bargain bin at Sears!
Oh, come on! Kool-Aid Man and E.T. were the pinnacle of video game entertainment!
That article's talking about Sony's electronics division as a whole. Unfortunately the article on Wired's website doesn't include the charts from the print article as they more aptly depict the massive decline in sales (revenue?) that they've experienced.
One key point from the article is about Sony's cash reserves of just over $6 billion. Goldman-Sachs has predicted that the PS3 will cost Sony just over $2 billion through Q1 of 2007.
Dang it, you guys are seriously going to make me go back and play FFVII; and I just picked up Dirge of Cerberus last night! I did happen to get Yuffie and Vincent for my party, but I don't recall them being "hidden" characters. Did you ever beat all of the weapons? Some of those seemed impossible to beat unless you had Knights of the Round, but maybe I just don't know how to fight them? The one that's underwater (Ruby?) seemed particularly tough IIRC.
FWIW, Dirge of Cerberus is pretty cool, but it almost seems like a horror flick. The mood's pretty dark and some of the characters remind me of vampires.
No, I don't buy Pepsi, I drink Coke :) Thanks for the heads up about the bulbs being sold at CVS. The article only mentioned Wal-Mart, so I figured GE might have had an exclusive arrangement with that retailer. Did you happen to notice if they carried bulbs suitable for recessed lighting? What about bulbs for track lights? TIA!