The last nine frontpage stories were posted by ScuttleMonkey. Someone on/. must have a job opening for him. Maybe * * Beatles-Beatles can hook him up.;)
... I, for one, enjoy * * Beatles-Beatles's articles. Everything he posts is news to me and the content is stuff that matters to me. I especially love his well-designed, non-sketchy website. If Slashdot would implement his wonderful CSS styles (when you hover over text, it all becomes italicized and underlined with a box drawn around it) my experience here would be great. Is there any way we can make * * Beatles-Beatles a moderator, or better yet, an administrator on Slashdot? That would be excellent.
Keep up the great work ScuttleMonkey and * * Beatles-Beatles!
... the difference between a desired rootkit (encrypted magic folders, which hides and password-protects certain files, for example) and an intruding one? How would it respond? If it can't tell the difference then I hope the response wouldn't be to shut it down or stop it from working but some sort of warning. This seems a little weird though - stopping a software issue with hardware. Does that even make sense?
You say Western culture. What makes you think this isn't also occuring in Eastern cultures? It's a fair criticism - and one I agree with - but why do you think it's limited it to the West? I think if anything it's a side-effect of capitalism or perhaps more accurately greed. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
After reading the article I got to thinking about the controversy surrounding the subjective assessment of a patent. When does a patent become too general? When does it go from covering an invention to covering something that is convention?
I think it's especially terrifying in the computer world because it seems that many USPTO employees don't know what is standard practice and what is innovation. This article from Salon reviews some ridiculous patents and patent claims
Generally subjectivity plays a small role in governmental organizations (think about the IRS and all its coded forms). It seems that the USPTO is a strange organization in that sense. Does anyone know how the process works? To me it seems as if it's just reviewed by a bunch of people who may or may not understand what it is their awarding a patent to.
Not that anyone is still reading this post, but, I just want to reiterate that I rarely cite press releases. And when I do I always attribute.
Also, I just want to stress that Ido consider it wrong to copy something without citation (anything really). What I wrote was a representation of what SOME believe. I also want to stress how few professional journalists do this. At an internship at a very small newspaper my editor gave me press releases and had me make an original article from each one, required that I fact-check each one and asked that I call any sources mentioned in the release and include at least one quote. And this was a tiny newspaper.
As a journalist I have a little inside information for you: sometimes this happens and it's not plagiarism. Let me explain the logic:
The author of the press release has no problem with you copying his or her material. In fact, he or she would prefer it. Press releases are worded in the best possible terms for the company sending them out. So some journalists see no problem using that material. And this isn't plagiarism (technically) since the author of the press release understands and, indeed, hopes it will happen (OED definition of plagiarism: "the wrongful appropriation or purloining, and publication as one's own, of the ideas, or the expression of the ideas (literary, artistic, musical, mechanical, etc.) of another."). Sometimes journalists borrow certain descriptions because the authors, being authorities on the topic (or at least having access to authorities on the topic), know how to phrase things in the most accurate terms.
I, as well as most journalists, don't do this and, in fact, look down on it. But some see no problem with it. And technically it's not plagiarism.
And also, most good journalists, if they do this, will append the statement with "according to the company's press release" which I consider to be an acceptable practice if used sparingly with subjects, such as scientific terminology, that can lose meaning in the translation from the press release to the journalist's writing.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought you'd be interested.
Slashdot Mirror
The last nine frontpage stories were posted by ScuttleMonkey. Someone on /. must have a job opening for him. Maybe * * Beatles-Beatles can hook him up. ;)
... I, for one, enjoy * * Beatles-Beatles's articles. Everything he posts is news to me and the content is stuff that matters to me. I especially love his well-designed, non-sketchy website. If Slashdot would implement his wonderful CSS styles (when you hover over text, it all becomes italicized and underlined with a box drawn around it) my experience here would be great. Is there any way we can make * * Beatles-Beatles a moderator, or better yet, an administrator on Slashdot? That would be excellent. Keep up the great work ScuttleMonkey and * * Beatles-Beatles!
... the difference between a desired rootkit (encrypted magic folders, which hides and password-protects certain files, for example) and an intruding one? How would it respond? If it can't tell the difference then I hope the response wouldn't be to shut it down or stop it from working but some sort of warning. This seems a little weird though - stopping a software issue with hardware. Does that even make sense?
You say Western culture. What makes you think this isn't also occuring in Eastern cultures? It's a fair criticism - and one I agree with - but why do you think it's limited it to the West? I think if anything it's a side-effect of capitalism or perhaps more accurately greed. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
After reading the article I got to thinking about the controversy surrounding the subjective assessment of a patent. When does a patent become too general? When does it go from covering an invention to covering something that is convention?
I think it's especially terrifying in the computer world because it seems that many USPTO employees don't know what is standard practice and what is innovation. This article from Salon reviews some ridiculous patents and patent claims
Generally subjectivity plays a small role in governmental organizations (think about the IRS and all its coded forms). It seems that the USPTO is a strange organization in that sense. Does anyone know how the process works? To me it seems as if it's just reviewed by a bunch of people who may or may not understand what it is their awarding a patent to.
Not that anyone is still reading this post, but, I just want to reiterate that I rarely cite press releases. And when I do I always attribute. Also, I just want to stress that I do consider it wrong to copy something without citation (anything really). What I wrote was a representation of what SOME believe. I also want to stress how few professional journalists do this. At an internship at a very small newspaper my editor gave me press releases and had me make an original article from each one, required that I fact-check each one and asked that I call any sources mentioned in the release and include at least one quote. And this was a tiny newspaper.
The Wikipedia entry has some cool information on lava and some awesome pictures. Here's one of a "lava fountain."
$2,315? Sounds a little steep for me. I'd rather buy a 42-inch plasma TV.
As a journalist I have a little inside information for you: sometimes this happens and it's not plagiarism. Let me explain the logic:
The author of the press release has no problem with you copying his or her material. In fact, he or she would prefer it. Press releases are worded in the best possible terms for the company sending them out. So some journalists see no problem using that material. And this isn't plagiarism (technically) since the author of the press release understands and, indeed, hopes it will happen (OED definition of plagiarism: "the wrongful appropriation or purloining, and publication as one's own, of the ideas, or the expression of the ideas (literary, artistic, musical, mechanical, etc.) of another."). Sometimes journalists borrow certain descriptions because the authors, being authorities on the topic (or at least having access to authorities on the topic), know how to phrase things in the most accurate terms.
I, as well as most journalists, don't do this and, in fact, look down on it. But some see no problem with it. And technically it's not plagiarism.
And also, most good journalists, if they do this, will append the statement with "according to the company's press release" which I consider to be an acceptable practice if used sparingly with subjects, such as scientific terminology, that can lose meaning in the translation from the press release to the journalist's writing.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought you'd be interested.