All the idiots who say that 'they should be held responsible' fail to realize that this is not the question.. The question IS, wether or not they should face penalties of 1/4 million dollars... Obviously 'stealing' a movie out of a semi-public A/V-room filing cabinet is not of the same magnitude.
Then again, he could sue for copyright infringement:)
Did they un-lose that night in jail? did they un-traumatize otherwise good kids? Did they in turn shove giant wooden dildos up each others asses for being complete shit-faces?
Ignoring your response to the thread above ("bullshit lie" etc etc), your premise is flawed that people don't get pissed about robots replacing their jobs... They do get pissed, because they're out of work either way.. I dont know where you get your facts, but they're out of whack.. There were huge problems when auto manufacturers started switching to robots..
In the end, unless we leave capitalism behind, and work out some sort of feasible socialist (star trek style..) government, we're never going to be able to replace humans with robots simply becuase the economy will go to shit.
Welfare instead of burdening someone trying to run a business...
Interesting concept, but welfare comes from the taxes paid by citizens & corporations.. corporations & wealthy citizens (e.g. busines owners) pay a vast majority of the taxes, so either way it's the same deal.
You continue to make false assumptions as to what I am and am not saying.
All i did in my initial post was correct you.
All i did in response to your reply was 1) correct you again, and 2) point out the fact that the people whom this passive deterrent is supposed to be effective on has already shown a disregard for the law.
If we followed your logic, we would have to 'tag' all the people who DO follow the laws, in an effort to make them even more wary.
First, my point was that parolees are not ex-cons. They become ex-cons when their parole is over. So therefore you can change your statement to say "All parolees are not ex-cons, and not all ex-cons are parolees".
Also, losing the right to vote always seemed a little retarded to me. Think about it -- voting is meant to exercise your ability to change the government. However, if you do something significantly wrong (an ever increasing list), you cannot vote to change the government with which you do not agree... Does that make sense?
I don't remember pretending that this is new.. Where did that happen?
I think that when you submit for a patent, you're taking a risk..
Unfortunately, patents are expensive for the individual to apply for (thousands of dollars in all, including attorney's fees, etc).
However, the USPTO does (or should anyway) do a decent amount of work to earn the money that they ask for when applying for a patent.
I do agree that if 'trivially-findable prior art' exists, then the USPTO should be held liable for granting the patent.. This would include paying the legal fees of those sued by the holder of the patent, but certainly not refunding anything to the patent holder.
The U.S. Government has one gian huge supercomputer that contains ALL the documents and ALL the websites of ALL the different government agencies, an keeps them all under/gov for easy access.
The reason that telecommunications is regulated because of the high cost of entry to the market. If there was no regulation, then the oligopoly that exists would charge exorbitant rates (See Bell, pre breakup).
The broadband providers are in essence the same as the telephone service providers. In this instance, the computer & the VoIP software are parallel to the telephone, and the internet service (which routes the packets) is the equivalent of the switching system run by the telcos.
Internet access, WAS taxed, until (i forget the name) a law passed that prohibited such taxation in the mid 90's.
So, in short, VoIP isn't the same as Voice over POTS because the cost of entry into the market is extremely low -- In fact, there are Free alternatives available such as GnomeMeeting, which supports all of the X.whatever standards, much like NetMeeting.
-Tomaj
P.S. - It's not wise to look back and base future decisions on past necessities simply because you don't want to change the status quo. If things (such as e-mail and VoIP) don't cost anything to provide over other data transmission, then why tax it?.. To preserve an obsolete industry? If th FCC taxes VoIP (which would be hard to do anyway -- change the ports, run encryption), then TelCos are essentially having their cake (as ISPs) and eating it too (as Phone companies). This equates to the Coca Cola company installing temperature sensors into vending machines, jacking up the prices as the temperature rises.
Slashdot Mirror
Odds are, the french don't like you -- why go out of your way to kiss their ass?
Hehehe... good one
:)
All the idiots who say that 'they should be held responsible' fail to realize that this is not the question.. The question IS, wether or not they should face penalties of 1/4 million dollars... Obviously 'stealing' a movie out of a semi-public A/V-room filing cabinet is not of the same magnitude.
Then again, he could sue for copyright infringement
Did they un-lose that night in jail? did they un-traumatize otherwise good kids? Did they in turn shove giant wooden dildos up each others asses for being complete shit-faces?
I didn't think so.
yep.. that got me too, though i've seen it before :(
Also, some mod is a real moron, who OBVIOUSLY DID NOT FOLLOW THE LINK
Point being...? :)
Not quite, he can't kill messenger.exe ;-)
1) Strange that you critisize his anonymity, yet you post as anonymous coward as well.
2) Although unclear, what the parent meant was that this is in the *same spirit* as what microsoft does.. It's a joke. get it? ha. ha. ha.
Instead of closing open protocols, they intend to open closed protocols..
Gooooooood job!
Although i agree with what you are saying, i didn't pick that sentiment up in the post to which i responded.
Ignoring your response to the thread above ("bullshit lie" etc etc), your premise is flawed that people don't get pissed about robots replacing their jobs... They do get pissed, because they're out of work either way.. I dont know where you get your facts, but they're out of whack.. There were huge problems when auto manufacturers started switching to robots..
In the end, unless we leave capitalism behind, and work out some sort of feasible socialist (star trek style..) government, we're never going to be able to replace humans with robots simply becuase the economy will go to shit.
Welfare instead of burdening someone trying to run a business...
Interesting concept, but welfare comes from the taxes paid by citizens & corporations.. corporations & wealthy citizens (e.g. busines owners) pay a vast majority of the taxes, so either way it's the same deal.
Not to nitpick, but
(insert nifty ascii chart here, that slashcode butchered so i didn't include it)
There is no implied relationship of enemy-dom between YOU and IBM...
It turns out the BSA is spreading their nonsense around the world.
I just read a hungarian online newspaper, and BSA Hungary states a drop from 49% to 45% over there.
-Tomaj
Thanks, it's appreciated. :)
You continue to make false assumptions as to what I am and am not saying.
All i did in my initial post was correct you.
All i did in response to your reply was 1) correct you again, and 2) point out the fact that the people whom this passive deterrent is supposed to be effective on has already shown a disregard for the law.
If we followed your logic, we would have to 'tag' all the people who DO follow the laws, in an effort to make them even more wary.
-Tomaj
I'll address your points 1 by 1.
First, my point was that parolees are not ex-cons. They become ex-cons when their parole is over. So therefore you can change your statement to say "All parolees are not ex-cons, and not all ex-cons are parolees".
Also, losing the right to vote always seemed a little retarded to me. Think about it -- voting is meant to exercise your ability to change the government. However, if you do something significantly wrong (an ever increasing list), you cannot vote to change the government with which you do not agree... Does that make sense?
I don't remember pretending that this is new.. Where did that happen?
-Tomaj
Then they're not ex-cons, they are parolees.
Good try!
Laws also exist..
These people did not stop & think twice about breaking the law in the first place either.
-Tomaj
Not in my opinion.
I think that when you submit for a patent, you're taking a risk..
Unfortunately, patents are expensive for the individual to apply for (thousands of dollars in all, including attorney's fees, etc).
However, the USPTO does (or should anyway) do a decent amount of work to earn the money that they ask for when applying for a patent.
I do agree that if 'trivially-findable prior art' exists, then the USPTO should be held liable for granting the patent.. This would include paying the legal fees of those sued by the holder of the patent, but certainly not refunding anything to the patent holder.
-Tomaj
No it is not.
The parent is incorrect.
It's a non-refundable fee -- this fee is actually meant to compensate for the USPTO guys doing a prior art search.
-Tomaj
Sorry, I can't help myself. (This damn 20 second hting is really annoying for a god dammned 1 sentence response.)
Wow!
/gov for easy access.
OHHH I get it...
The U.S. Government has one gian huge supercomputer that contains ALL the documents and ALL the websites of ALL the different government agencies, an keeps them all under
Good job guys, now we're gettin somewhere.
Surely it does.
The reason that telecommunications is regulated because of the high cost of entry to the market. If there was no regulation, then the oligopoly that exists would charge exorbitant rates (See Bell, pre breakup).
The broadband providers are in essence the same as the telephone service providers. In this instance, the computer & the VoIP software are parallel to the telephone, and the internet service (which routes the packets) is the equivalent of the switching system run by the telcos.
Internet access, WAS taxed, until (i forget the name) a law passed that prohibited such taxation in the mid 90's.
So, in short, VoIP isn't the same as Voice over POTS because the cost of entry into the market is extremely low -- In fact, there are Free alternatives available such as GnomeMeeting, which supports all of the X.whatever standards, much like NetMeeting.
-Tomaj
P.S. - It's not wise to look back and base future decisions on past necessities simply because you don't want to change the status quo. If things (such as e-mail and VoIP) don't cost anything to provide over other data transmission, then why tax it?.. To preserve an obsolete industry? If th FCC taxes VoIP (which would be hard to do anyway -- change the ports, run encryption), then TelCos are essentially having their cake (as ISPs) and eating it too (as Phone companies). This equates to the Coca Cola company installing temperature sensors into vending machines, jacking up the prices as the temperature rises.
Your PDA might run an FTP server and telnet, but it doesn't have a CG-Silicon screen.
This is new tech for the clamshell shaped device.
To me, that was a damn confusing summary..
What exactly are they talking about?
What's up man? You're never on aim ;-)
btw - who is scandal??
-Tomaj