oh, i think i would blame microsoft for this. instead of using their clout to standardise connections and drivers, they've often tried to do the exact opposite. the result? every printer needs a driver, every scanner needs a driver, every mobile phone needs a driver, etc. microsoft has dug its own grave here.
this one's pretty easy to answer and i thought about it when i wrote my first post. 2 points:
if you don't hit anybody and nobody notices you're shooting in their direction, i can see the case for revoking your gun license
if you don't hit anybody but people notice and are scared then you have caused them to be scared and that's worse.
can you think of another example? at the moment i can't see much wrong with the basic idea i posited above.
i don't get it. if i write a text and don't kill anybody or drive drunk and don't kill anybody, society may see fit to revoke privileges (for example my driving license) but it shouldn't be able to throw me in prison or fine me because i haven't actually caused anybody any harm.
if however i do hit someone and hurt them, then the law can punish me for it.
not quite. as already posted here, AAPL/GOOG have an obligation to do what the shareholders want. however the shareholders have a moral duty to be good people, just like we all do. being a shareholder in a company does not give you the moral right to behave badly.
the only problem i can think of is wine itself. if i remember correctly, wine has lots of assembly code for x86 in it. it is really one of the very few free software projects to have this.
this argument isn't particularly convincing. i find it hard to believe that a larger company couldn't make the product more cheaply if they wanted to. it is more likely that the larger company just thinks the market isn't lucrative enough to bother with.
If you don't have reproduction rights over digital media, how do you sell performances of photography?
stupid question. but if your question is how do you make money being a photographer: you go to whoever may want to buy the photograph with a copy (or you send them a low quality copy) and ask them if they want to buy it.
yeah. you know, i live in a mountainous area and there aren't any roads and until someone makes a car that can fly they're just totally unfeasable and no one will buy one.
i think we can remove 'total' from the list of possibly beneficial copyright terms. if copyright lasted infinitely long, shakespeare for example, wouldn't have written anything, disney would have been unable to make half of their films, beethoven would have been unable to compose etc. etc.
in some ways this is analagous to the software patent situation. 1 million patents, at any time a further 100 thousand you aren't allowed to read. does you software impede on any of them? good luck finding out.
I know you're just trolling, but i'll explain it. the problem is bus distance, which could be a problem on any project.
the thing you should find extraordinary and really shows how powerful free software is, is that a single person can reuse code to make a project as large as this. this would be unthinkable in the non-free world where you seem to need an army of programmers and lawyers to make the simplest program.
i personally have happy memories of typing in games printed in magazines into a ti99-4a. i never did it enough to learn enough to program the games myself, but it taught me that computers could be programmed. nowadays unless it has a 3d interface where things fade in and out nobody seems to be interested. it is very sad, the way computing has developed.
i'd personally like to add that lisp doesn't work the way i imagine computers work. you look at C code and you think "on this means put this in that register and then save that to the stack" or whatever. but with lisp, unless you've seen an interpreter and worked out how it works (which is actually a lot easier than a C compiler because of things like RP notation), you're swimming. as gerald jay sussmann said, "lisp is the fixed point of the solution of the lisp eval and apply functions". and his audience said "wtf?"
just a comparison to the german church system, where a german vicar recently told me that the collection provided way less than 1% of the total amount the church needed to run and the bulk of the income came through taxes. i can imagine english museums are similar.
here on wikileaks we have details of covert military operations, evidence that the conspiracy theories are true and (particularly risky, this) photos of paintings from the 1790s.
as if british museums get more than 0.1% of their money through selling photos. british museums are paid for through the taxes of the citizens of great britain and northern irland. prohibiting photography used to be about fear of damaging the works of art or annoying the visitors.
well if your photos are of works of art long since in the public domain and your photos have no additional artistic merit, instead trying solely to be a true depiction of the work of art, then no, your photos shouldn't have any sort of copyright protection. infact your photos having copyright protection would be akin to pissing on the graves of the artists who painted the original works.
one has to wonder how a comment like this can get modded 'insightful' and not 'flamebait'.
some quotes:
they never thought about the possibility that someday they will not be "superior" to other people because they work for their PCs while everyone else drinks beer or has sex
The cool things is to have windows that bounce up and down like a good tits. Perhaps that is the closest thing to sex they will have
the Linux community doesn't appreciate quality and freedom
the guys who believe they're awesome because they have to type thousands of sequences like "/isearch:qqvv!!" just to edit a text on Vi,
Slashdot Mirror
oh, i think i would blame microsoft for this. instead of using their clout to standardise connections and drivers, they've often tried to do the exact opposite. the result? every printer needs a driver, every scanner needs a driver, every mobile phone needs a driver, etc. microsoft has dug its own grave here.
this one's pretty easy to answer and i thought about it when i wrote my first post. 2 points:
if you don't hit anybody and nobody notices you're shooting in their direction, i can see the case for revoking your gun license
if you don't hit anybody but people notice and are scared then you have caused them to be scared and that's worse.
can you think of another example? at the moment i can't see much wrong with the basic idea i posited above.
i don't get it. if i write a text and don't kill anybody or drive drunk and don't kill anybody, society may see fit to revoke privileges (for example my driving license) but it shouldn't be able to throw me in prison or fine me because i haven't actually caused anybody any harm.
if however i do hit someone and hurt them, then the law can punish me for it.
not quite. as already posted here, AAPL/GOOG have an obligation to do what the shareholders want. however the shareholders have a moral duty to be good people, just like we all do. being a shareholder in a company does not give you the moral right to behave badly.
the only problem i can think of is wine itself. if i remember correctly, wine has lots of assembly code for x86 in it. it is really one of the very few free software projects to have this.
i'm just looking at the history of this article on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DarwiniusDarwinius
it's incredible how much work is being done here to correct vandalism.
this argument isn't particularly convincing. i find it hard to believe that a larger company couldn't make the product more cheaply if they wanted to. it is more likely that the larger company just thinks the market isn't lucrative enough to bother with.
If you don't have reproduction rights over digital media, how do you sell performances of photography?
stupid question. but if your question is how do you make money being a photographer: you go to whoever may want to buy the photograph with a copy (or you send them a low quality copy) and ask them if they want to buy it.
Fiat justitia ruat caelum :)
yeah. you know, i live in a mountainous area and there aren't any roads and until someone makes a car that can fly they're just totally unfeasable and no one will buy one.
i think we can remove 'total' from the list of possibly beneficial copyright terms. if copyright lasted infinitely long, shakespeare for example, wouldn't have written anything, disney would have been unable to make half of their films, beethoven would have been unable to compose etc. etc.
in some ways this is analagous to the software patent situation. 1 million patents, at any time a further 100 thousand you aren't allowed to read. does you software impede on any of them? good luck finding out.
i think it's actually iQ, so most users of apple products are safe ...
I know you're just trolling, but i'll explain it. the problem is bus distance, which could be a problem on any project.
the thing you should find extraordinary and really shows how powerful free software is, is that a single person can reuse code to make a project as large as this. this would be unthinkable in the non-free world where you seem to need an army of programmers and lawyers to make the simplest program.
those were indeed the good old days :)
i personally have happy memories of typing in games printed in magazines into a ti99-4a. i never did it enough to learn enough to program the games myself, but it taught me that computers could be programmed. nowadays unless it has a 3d interface where things fade in and out nobody seems to be interested. it is very sad, the way computing has developed.
oh god, don't i know it. writing boiler plate code is horrible :(
i think there's a lot of truth in what you say.
i'd personally like to add that lisp doesn't work the way i imagine computers work. you look at C code and you think "on this means put this in that register and then save that to the stack" or whatever. but with lisp, unless you've seen an interpreter and worked out how it works (which is actually a lot easier than a C compiler because of things like RP notation), you're swimming. as gerald jay sussmann said, "lisp is the fixed point of the solution of the lisp eval and apply functions". and his audience said "wtf?"
just let me google that for you ...
v3 is Stallman's attempts at controlling hardware through the copyright regime.
close. v3 is Stallman's (actually it was written by many thousand of volunteers world-wide) attempt to not let hardware control the software.
just a comparison to the german church system, where a german vicar recently told me that the collection provided way less than 1% of the total amount the church needed to run and the bulk of the income came through taxes. i can imagine english museums are similar.
that would be so typical of the modern age.
here on wikileaks we have details of covert military operations, evidence that the conspiracy theories are true and (particularly risky, this) photos of paintings from the 1790s.
i mean, wtf?
but a photograph of a painting is not a derivative work. it's a copy in a different format.
as if british museums get more than 0.1% of their money through selling photos. british museums are paid for through the taxes of the citizens of great britain and northern irland. prohibiting photography used to be about fear of damaging the works of art or annoying the visitors.
well if your photos are of works of art long since in the public domain and your photos have no additional artistic merit, instead trying solely to be a true depiction of the work of art, then no, your photos shouldn't have any sort of copyright protection. infact your photos having copyright protection would be akin to pissing on the graves of the artists who painted the original works.
apple succeeds because of product placement in hollywood.
some quotes:
they never thought about the possibility that someday they will not be "superior" to other people because they work for their PCs while everyone else drinks beer or has sex
The cool things is to have windows that bounce up and down like a good tits. Perhaps that is the closest thing to sex they will have
the Linux community doesn't appreciate quality and freedom
the guys who believe they're awesome because they have to type thousands of sequences like "/isearch:qqvv!!" just to edit a text on Vi,
how can this not be flamebait?