Breach of copyright isn't an inherent "wrong". It's an explicit social contract, particularly so in the US where the Constitution (IIRC) says that copyright is designed "for the progress of the arts". The deal, essentially, is that if you create stuff, the Government will grant and enforce a right to decide what other people can do with it. If Parallels wish to breach this contract - and this is a situation different from, for example, murder, where legalising murder would create social chaos, whereas removing copyright merely removes the profit motive to create content - then they can't turn around and ask that that contract be enforced for them but not for others. That's not fair.
The question here isn't whether two wrongs make a right. The question here is whether you can ask for the enforcement of a contract - a general social contract, but a contract nonetheless - that you ignore. I don't have an obligation to pay a builder who doesn't show up. We don't (morally speaking) have to respect the copyrights of those who ignore copyright.
This would basically wipe out the internet; bookmarks, URLs hard-coded into scripts, and e-mail addresses, amongst other things, would stop working. If you're going to rebuild the internet from scratch...well, good luck.
I imagine that the issue is that the system doesn't recognise (perhaps by having the student's name entered? or by having a database opt-out for the rough drafts?) that Alice's final draft isn't plagarised from Alice's rough draft.
The problem with a multi-party system is that it promotes the extreme members, and extreme parties, even more.
Basically, with proportional representation (which is the way to achieve the kind of system you're proposing), coalitions will need to be built. In order to get a majority, you'll have to bring extremists into the government (because even if they only have 5% of the vote, that's still the difference between a 47% and 52% coalition). This gives them disproportionate influence over government policy - at the risk of pulling a Godwin's, both Hitler and Mussolini gained power in a coalition government.
For a current example, look at Israel, where a party with less than 6% of votes and seats (Gil) controls two Cabinet posts, including the Health Ministry, and two other parties with ~9% of the vote each (Shas and Israel Beytenu) both control a Deputy Prime Minister and a fairly important ministry (Labour and Strategic Affairs respectively).
Not everyone knows the details of the American tax system (myself included), and rest assured that you would also "make everyone think you're stupid" if you tried to comment on United Kingdom taxes.
Nasa's current Cassini mission to Saturn is plodding along at 32km a second
c/10 is 30,000km/s. The article makes the assumption that alien civilizations have advanced enough that their spaceships are 1,000 times faster than ours - not unreasonable.
Actually, whether or not he's proven guilty has no bearing on whether he's the murderer. If he killed these women, then even if he's found innocent by the court, he's the murderer; conversely, if he's wrongfully convicted, that doesn't make him the killer.
I believe that it comes from an example in the original K&R "The C Programming Language". Wikipedia shows that I'm mostly right, but they stole it from one of K's memos.
controllable slats which could be turned to different angles in order to let more or less sunlight through
"And to try and block the machines from their power source, we scorched the sky."
The difference from this case, though, is that you aren't ever allowed to redistribute those things. The basic argument in this case isn't that the software was free, but that the violators had a license to redistribute it (the GPL). They argue that since they had this license, they don't breach copyright; at worst, they failed to adhere to the correct terms of the contract (i.e. can be sued for breach of contract, not prosecuted for a copyright violation).
Of course, the counter-argument is that upon breaching those terms the license was revoked, but meh.
The difference is that the Jedi-religion thing was a mandatory Government census, whereas this petition was voluntary - it's really really hard to contact millions of people, let alone get them to sign something.
They are suffering the deficiencies if they build a house from my house plans (i.e. compile my program). They aren't forced to do either, they can get a prebuilt house or use closed-source software; in both cases they're choosing to use what I make public and suffering the flaws of that, and in neither case should they have any right to dictate my actions.
Bad analogy. What's really happening is I'm designing and building my own house, but I'm putting the schematics on public display. Does this give anyone the right to say I should add a garage, or design the bathroom differently?
They can take my house plans and work off them, if they like, but my house is my house (much like my code is my code), and nobody has the right to tell me what to put in it, even if I do tell them what's currently in it.
Nope. "Brute force" is a security phrase, meaning trying all the possible forms of encryption in order to randomly find the right one.
How it works is, you grab the encrypted data (using this RFID scanner thing), then try using all the different encryption keys you can to decrypt it (using, say, a laptop). When you get usable plaintext (i.e. "OIL 2.74 GALLONS $5.67") then you've cracked the key, and you can use that key to encrypt the phrase "OIL 700 GALLONS $0.00" correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
I knew what a MacGuffin was. I knew who Alfred Hitchcock was. The one thing I didn't know - what the hell Zardoz is - you left out!
Insert your own insensitive clod memes etc.
Straight face? What else do you expect? What brave new world is this, with lawyers who might be capable of laughing?
Breach of copyright isn't an inherent "wrong". It's an explicit social contract, particularly so in the US where the Constitution (IIRC) says that copyright is designed "for the progress of the arts". The deal, essentially, is that if you create stuff, the Government will grant and enforce a right to decide what other people can do with it. If Parallels wish to breach this contract - and this is a situation different from, for example, murder, where legalising murder would create social chaos, whereas removing copyright merely removes the profit motive to create content - then they can't turn around and ask that that contract be enforced for them but not for others. That's not fair.
The question here isn't whether two wrongs make a right. The question here is whether you can ask for the enforcement of a contract - a general social contract, but a contract nonetheless - that you ignore. I don't have an obligation to pay a builder who doesn't show up. We don't (morally speaking) have to respect the copyrights of those who ignore copyright.
I think you'll find 1 = 3/3.
This would basically wipe out the internet; bookmarks, URLs hard-coded into scripts, and e-mail addresses, amongst other things, would stop working. If you're going to rebuild the internet from scratch...well, good luck.
I imagine that the issue is that the system doesn't recognise (perhaps by having the student's name entered? or by having a database opt-out for the rough drafts?) that Alice's final draft isn't plagarised from Alice's rough draft.
The problem with a multi-party system is that it promotes the extreme members, and extreme parties, even more.
Basically, with proportional representation (which is the way to achieve the kind of system you're proposing), coalitions will need to be built. In order to get a majority, you'll have to bring extremists into the government (because even if they only have 5% of the vote, that's still the difference between a 47% and 52% coalition). This gives them disproportionate influence over government policy - at the risk of pulling a Godwin's, both Hitler and Mussolini gained power in a coalition government.
For a current example, look at Israel, where a party with less than 6% of votes and seats (Gil) controls two Cabinet posts, including the Health Ministry, and two other parties with ~9% of the vote each (Shas and Israel Beytenu) both control a Deputy Prime Minister and a fairly important ministry (Labour and Strategic Affairs respectively).
Idiot...or foreigner?
Not everyone knows the details of the American tax system (myself included), and rest assured that you would also "make everyone think you're stupid" if you tried to comment on United Kingdom taxes.
Amerocentricism. Stamp it out.
Nasa's current Cassini mission to Saturn is plodding along at 32km a second
c/10 is 30,000km/s. The article makes the assumption that alien civilizations have advanced enough that their spaceships are 1,000 times faster than ours - not unreasonable.
No, Cisco would sue Apple. That's why Cisco having the trademark matters.
Actually, whether or not he's proven guilty has no bearing on whether he's the murderer. If he killed these women, then even if he's found innocent by the court, he's the murderer; conversely, if he's wrongfully convicted, that doesn't make him the killer.
I believe that it comes from an example in the original K&R "The C Programming Language". Wikipedia shows that I'm mostly right, but they stole it from one of K's memos.
I always thought the saying went "...you're probably right".
You have a five-cent coin and a ten-cent con (this is the one that is not a nickel).
controllable slats which could be turned to different angles in order to let more or less sunlight through "And to try and block the machines from their power source, we scorched the sky."
The difference from this case, though, is that you aren't ever allowed to redistribute those things. The basic argument in this case isn't that the software was free, but that the violators had a license to redistribute it (the GPL). They argue that since they had this license, they don't breach copyright; at worst, they failed to adhere to the correct terms of the contract (i.e. can be sued for breach of contract, not prosecuted for a copyright violation).
Of course, the counter-argument is that upon breaching those terms the license was revoked, but meh.
You only submit an indexed dataset, not your code. Until they tell you you've won and pay up, they'll never see your code, and they'll never profit.
Which is the observed and the predicted value? They only give one number, 1.0001.
I wonder why the name reminds me of Frankenstein. Because Mary Shelley wrote that.
The difference is that the Jedi-religion thing was a mandatory Government census, whereas this petition was voluntary - it's really really hard to contact millions of people, let alone get them to sign something.
Ai feer it wud saund...exactly the same, just be spelt differently.
They are suffering the deficiencies if they build a house from my house plans (i.e. compile my program). They aren't forced to do either, they can get a prebuilt house or use closed-source software; in both cases they're choosing to use what I make public and suffering the flaws of that, and in neither case should they have any right to dictate my actions.
Bad analogy. What's really happening is I'm designing and building my own house, but I'm putting the schematics on public display. Does this give anyone the right to say I should add a garage, or design the bathroom differently?
They can take my house plans and work off them, if they like, but my house is my house (much like my code is my code), and nobody has the right to tell me what to put in it, even if I do tell them what's currently in it.
You realise that "free press" refers to an absence of censorship, not the cost of printing newspapers, right?
Nope. "Brute force" is a security phrase, meaning trying all the possible forms of encryption in order to randomly find the right one.
How it works is, you grab the encrypted data (using this RFID scanner thing), then try using all the different encryption keys you can to decrypt it (using, say, a laptop). When you get usable plaintext (i.e. "OIL 2.74 GALLONS $5.67") then you've cracked the key, and you can use that key to encrypt the phrase "OIL 700 GALLONS $0.00" correctly.