I've got a nastly little anarchist streak in me. I think it'd be hilarious for the browser wars to play out like this. Download Windows update? IE takes control. Song off iTunes? Safari grabs control back.
Knock down drag out no holds barred browser war, np.
Microsoft already tried the FUD tactic with the 237 infringing patents in the Department of Defense^W^W^W^WLinux. There's people out there literally begging Microsoft to sue them and MS hasn't yet.
What's next....banning books that have too much violent, sadistic content? Sure its not as flashy as the video game, but, it still promotes the same messages....
Pretty sure everyone would be up in arms against that one. I'm not a fan of the bible myself, but I hear I'm an exception...
You win the freakin internet. Best comment I've seen in quite some time. (Oh sure, give me an offtopic if you must, but I'd say giving parent an Insightful would be a much better use of points)
And before any of you accuse me of being a flat earther, be advised that the theory that our ancestors ever really believed in a flat earth has been discredited
How about a geocentric solar system-er? I'll admit it doesn't roll off the tongue as easily...
I'll keep working on it.
I do concur somewhat though with the original point. There's evidence that points to global warming and cooling trends but there's also evidence of increased CO2 and other gas emissions. What I'm pretty sure is solid in the data is the earth IS warming; people just keep arguing over the 'why' part...
However, I'm the sort that would prefer to err on the side of caution. If we CAN curb CO2 to minimise our man-made impact on the environment and let the earth do its own thing, all the better. If it turns out down the road that it was all for naught and we become another hot house, well, at least it'll just be humid; we won't need personal oxygen tanks just to go outside.
If planes are grounded, they're not burning fuel at 35,000 ft, hence less emissions. I haven't seen either, just makin a guess. Don't know what the numbers refer to.
Yea, this could be solved by your employer having a statement in the contract that "Each support call will have a 10 minute duration, minimum" or some similar legalese. Like if AT&T has to go onsite...sure, they're there 15 minutes, but they bill you 4 hours minimum or something insane...
DMCA applies to copyright violations, not outright illegal material. (Hence the 'C' part of the acronym.) You don't send a DMCA takedown to a child pornographer or someone passing around leaked state secrets or whatever else; you send in the FBI right then.
As I understand it, the telcos aren't common-carriers with regards to so-called "data services" anyway, so they can perfectly well get away with this.
This leads me to wonder, if they don't have common-carrier status to data transmission, why hasn't anyone brought the big telcos up for allowing illegal material to go across on their data lines? Seems to me if there wasn't CC status given to data, those types of cases would be slam dunks.
Plus, if they try doing this for copyright violations, what's to keep someone from forcing at&t to follow suit for things like child porn or other illegal content? It can't be too hard to adapt one filtering system to do another task (at least, I'm sure that's how the argument will go.)
Bravo. Beat me to it. Someone give the parent a mod point.
National ID is not at all meant to deal with naturalization. As was said, we've got the green card. Plus, since current citizens would have to get this ID as well, that supercedes any naturalization argument and becomes a generic 'ID' argument, which is not explicitly enumerated.
Thus it falls on Amendment 10: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Now that lawyers are involved, it's pretty clear how Jamie violated their terms.
Here's the term he violated: "You may not work around any technical limitations in the software"
Clearly, by using Microsoft's OWN APIs and their OWN calls, he's working around technical limitations in THEIR OWN software. The obvious way Microsoft should have handled this is to have the Express software ignore the calls in question, or build the software so it expressly forbids addons.
Instead, they were hoping people would follow the spirit of the feature sheet that says "Express does not support addons" and not realize they were just lazy all around and failed both in creating the software and the EULA.
If you actually bothered to read the correspondence like you claimed, you'd realize just how absurd this is, and that goes to the people that modded you informative as well...
Take the karma...why have it if I can't burn it now and again?...
windows with it's constant prompts to do stuff while performing the same task gets very annoying and will quickly train the user to just click the allow, rendering it practically pointless.
Clearly, in order to make users think about this, a 5 second delay has to be introduced before the Allow/Deny buttons are active...
Gotta start somewhere, and I didn't really feel motivated to write an essay. He was at the bottom end of a snowball effect regardless. Proposing to triple car registration fees? Yea, that's an instant black spot...
California has a Republican governor because the Democrats screwed up the recall election in 03. Gray Davis (D) was loathed by the state (having suffered the result of Pete Wilson (R) signing the act to privatize electricity...which gave us rolling blackouts and the whole Enron debacle).
The Democrats wanted to keep Gray in office, so their campaign was "Keep Gray Davis in office...but if you don't want him, vote Cruz Bustamante instead." That didn't go over very well.
By Nov 04, Arnold was very unilateral in office, going at odds with the Democratic Congress (once calling them girlie-men) and also backed four very controversial propositions, each of which got trounced soundly. Since then he's started working with them more often and was able to win over the majority by '06. Arnie's much less conservative now.
Where, exactly, does it say "You cannot make addins for VS Express" in any agreement? No, you can't refer to the feature table. Specifically, this is something that belongs in the EULA. Microsoft might consider it a loophole, but they would need to change the licence to apply it, not try to close the barn door after the cows leave. (Course, then we get into the gray area of updating licences and that's a whole nother topic...they could just release a 'Critical Update' and modify the EULA...)
Licences explicitly state what cannot be done with software, thus everything else is implied allowable. Forbidding addins was not part of the VS Express EULA, thus it was implicitly allowed.
They asked nicely for over two years
They danced around Jamie's question for two years, failing to answer his otherwise simple question with grandstanding. Did you even read the dialogue? MS people consistantly evade the question and instead recite some marketing/legalese hybrid. What would be so hard with "section 13, paragraph 2" or whereever the specific clause is?
What I particularly liked is how different the following dialogue played out:
"Since I'm not a lawyer I shouldn't comment on the license. However if you read the Express SKU EULA you'll see verbiage around reverse engineering, and if you read the VS SDK license (the license that covers all native API's that you're accessing when you QueryService from your add-in) you'll see additional terms that are relevant to your hack. Sorry that I can't be more specific, but I'm just a developer"
That was Dec. 9th, 05, from Jason. One month later, this, also from Jason:
"After speaking with Jason Weber from Microsoft I realized that by adding features to Visual Studio Express I was in breach of the Visual Studio license agreements and copyrights. I have therefore decided to remove support for the Visual Studio Express SKU's from TestDriven.Net. Jason was very supportive of TestDriven.Net's integration into the other Visual Studio 2005 products and I was invited to join the VSIP program. This would allow me to fly to Redmond each quarter and work closely with the Visual Studio development team on deeper integration."
Jason, of course, is just a developer. Why should Jamie even consider namedropping him? On a personal note, I think Jason should have forwarded this request on to the legal department. Seems like a missed opporotunity. Jamie too, but I could see him being rather scared dealing with the Microsoft Nazgul; if it was internally done, legal may have been nice about it.
Think about it, what if MS suddenly just ups and says "Oh, no one can use any non-Microsoft software on Windows, it violates the EULA." Would you go, "oh, ok" or ask "where exactly in the EULA does it say that?" It might be an extreme example, but...how'd that poem go..."but there was no one left?"
If they're able to adapt the multi-junction technology to the consumer grade cells, though, that could be worth it by itself. Seems to me something that they might be able to use prisms for, if all its doing is scattering the wavelength to the more specialized cells.
(Warning: I'm quite probably talking out of my ass...but it sounds interesting and remotely possible with my rudimentary knowledge.)
You say there's no shortage of sunlight, but I'm sure they said that back in the days of coal burning plants. We need our solar cells to be as efficient as possible.
If we run out of coal, we can adapt. But if we blow all our sunlight on inefficient solar cells, the consequences would destroy life as we know it!
Slashdot Mirror
I got an easier one: it's not a flip phone.
Sure, it may be a pithy and innane requirement, but I don't like those flat phone styles in the slightest.
I've got a nastly little anarchist streak in me. I think it'd be hilarious for the browser wars to play out like this. Download Windows update? IE takes control. Song off iTunes? Safari grabs control back.
Knock down drag out no holds barred browser war, np.
Ok, I'll call your bluff... sues on what grounds?
Microsoft already tried the FUD tactic with the 237 infringing patents in the Department of Defense^W^W^W^WLinux. There's people out there literally begging Microsoft to sue them and MS hasn't yet.
So what, exactly, would the claims be?
That'd be bloody brilliant... Introduce a whole demographic to a new browser.
As Microsoft's shown, best way to introduce a user to a new program is to force it on them...
What's next....banning books that have too much violent, sadistic content? Sure its not as flashy as the video game, but, it still promotes the same messages....
Pretty sure everyone would be up in arms against that one. I'm not a fan of the bible myself, but I hear I'm an exception...
You win the freakin internet. Best comment I've seen in quite some time. (Oh sure, give me an offtopic if you must, but I'd say giving parent an Insightful would be a much better use of points)
And before any of you accuse me of being a flat earther, be advised that the theory that our ancestors ever really believed in a flat earth has been discredited
How about a geocentric solar system-er? I'll admit it doesn't roll off the tongue as easily...
I'll keep working on it.
I do concur somewhat though with the original point. There's evidence that points to global warming and cooling trends but there's also evidence of increased CO2 and other gas emissions. What I'm pretty sure is solid in the data is the earth IS warming; people just keep arguing over the 'why' part...
However, I'm the sort that would prefer to err on the side of caution. If we CAN curb CO2 to minimise our man-made impact on the environment and let the earth do its own thing, all the better. If it turns out down the road that it was all for naught and we become another hot house, well, at least it'll just be humid; we won't need personal oxygen tanks just to go outside.
If planes are grounded, they're not burning fuel at 35,000 ft, hence less emissions. I haven't seen either, just makin a guess. Don't know what the numbers refer to.
Are you kidding?
Yes, actually, I was. Well, mostly. I'd say 90% kidding. I was shooting for the +Funny, though.
Yea, this could be solved by your employer having a statement in the contract that "Each support call will have a 10 minute duration, minimum" or some similar legalese. Like if AT&T has to go onsite...sure, they're there 15 minutes, but they bill you 4 hours minimum or something insane...
Catch-22. Best catch there is.
how much do you pay to read? Nothing? not stop yer bitchin!
Just wait until book publishers have their way!
DMCA applies to copyright violations, not outright illegal material. (Hence the 'C' part of the acronym.) You don't send a DMCA takedown to a child pornographer or someone passing around leaked state secrets or whatever else; you send in the FBI right then.
As I understand it, the telcos aren't common-carriers with regards to so-called "data services" anyway, so they can perfectly well get away with this.
This leads me to wonder, if they don't have common-carrier status to data transmission, why hasn't anyone brought the big telcos up for allowing illegal material to go across on their data lines? Seems to me if there wasn't CC status given to data, those types of cases would be slam dunks.
Plus, if they try doing this for copyright violations, what's to keep someone from forcing at&t to follow suit for things like child porn or other illegal content? It can't be too hard to adapt one filtering system to do another task (at least, I'm sure that's how the argument will go.)
Bravo. Beat me to it. Someone give the parent a mod point.
National ID is not at all meant to deal with naturalization. As was said, we've got the green card. Plus, since current citizens would have to get this ID as well, that supercedes any naturalization argument and becomes a generic 'ID' argument, which is not explicitly enumerated.
Thus it falls on Amendment 10: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Why should software be any different? Are there any other industries protected by such a strong veil?
Seeing the success of Microsoft, Ford and GM introduce EULAs for cars...
...You mean Gateway. You even linked to the proper article and got the company wrong.
Now that lawyers are involved, it's pretty clear how Jamie violated their terms.
Here's the term he violated:
"You may not work around any technical limitations in the software"
Clearly, by using Microsoft's OWN APIs and their OWN calls, he's working around technical limitations in THEIR OWN software. The obvious way Microsoft should have handled this is to have the Express software ignore the calls in question, or build the software so it expressly forbids addons.
Instead, they were hoping people would follow the spirit of the feature sheet that says "Express does not support addons" and not realize they were just lazy all around and failed both in creating the software and the EULA.
If you actually bothered to read the correspondence like you claimed, you'd realize just how absurd this is, and that goes to the people that modded you informative as well...
Take the karma...why have it if I can't burn it now and again?...
Very off topic, but I was just thinking...
windows with it's constant prompts to do stuff while performing the same task gets very annoying and will quickly train the user to just click the allow, rendering it practically pointless.
Clearly, in order to make users think about this, a 5 second delay has to be introduced before the Allow/Deny buttons are active...
Same can be said about medical tests done on mice to improve knowledge of how drugs or diseases affect humans.
But mice are RODENTS!
Gotta start somewhere, and I didn't really feel motivated to write an essay. He was at the bottom end of a snowball effect regardless. Proposing to triple car registration fees? Yea, that's an instant black spot...
California has a Republican governor because the Democrats screwed up the recall election in 03. Gray Davis (D) was loathed by the state (having suffered the result of Pete Wilson (R) signing the act to privatize electricity...which gave us rolling blackouts and the whole Enron debacle).
The Democrats wanted to keep Gray in office, so their campaign was "Keep Gray Davis in office...but if you don't want him, vote Cruz Bustamante instead." That didn't go over very well.
By Nov 04, Arnold was very unilateral in office, going at odds with the Democratic Congress (once calling them girlie-men) and also backed four very controversial propositions, each of which got trounced soundly. Since then he's started working with them more often and was able to win over the majority by '06. Arnie's much less conservative now.
Why can't he play by the rules?
Where, exactly, does it say "You cannot make addins for VS Express" in any agreement? No, you can't refer to the feature table. Specifically, this is something that belongs in the EULA. Microsoft might consider it a loophole, but they would need to change the licence to apply it, not try to close the barn door after the cows leave. (Course, then we get into the gray area of updating licences and that's a whole nother topic...they could just release a 'Critical Update' and modify the EULA...)
Licences explicitly state what cannot be done with software, thus everything else is implied allowable. Forbidding addins was not part of the VS Express EULA, thus it was implicitly allowed.
They asked nicely for over two years
They danced around Jamie's question for two years, failing to answer his otherwise simple question with grandstanding. Did you even read the dialogue? MS people consistantly evade the question and instead recite some marketing/legalese hybrid. What would be so hard with "section 13, paragraph 2" or whereever the specific clause is?
What I particularly liked is how different the following dialogue played out:
"Since I'm not a lawyer I shouldn't comment on the license. However if
you read the Express SKU EULA you'll see verbiage around reverse
engineering, and if you read the VS SDK license (the license that covers
all native API's that you're accessing when you QueryService from your
add-in) you'll see additional terms that are relevant to your hack.
Sorry that I can't be more specific, but I'm just a developer"
That was Dec. 9th, 05, from Jason. One month later, this, also from Jason:
"After speaking with Jason Weber from Microsoft I realized that by
adding features to Visual Studio Express I was in breach of the Visual
Studio license agreements and copyrights. I have therefore decided to
remove support for the Visual Studio Express SKU's from TestDriven.Net.
Jason was very supportive of TestDriven.Net's integration into the other
Visual Studio 2005 products and I was invited to join the VSIP program.
This would allow me to fly to Redmond each quarter and work closely with
the Visual Studio development team on deeper integration."
Jason, of course, is just a developer. Why should Jamie even consider namedropping him? On a personal note, I think Jason should have forwarded this request on to the legal department. Seems like a missed opporotunity. Jamie too, but I could see him being rather scared dealing with the Microsoft Nazgul; if it was internally done, legal may have been nice about it.
Think about it, what if MS suddenly just ups and says "Oh, no one can use any non-Microsoft software on Windows, it violates the EULA." Would you go, "oh, ok" or ask "where exactly in the EULA does it say that?" It might be an extreme example, but...how'd that poem go..."but there was no one left?"
If they're able to adapt the multi-junction technology to the consumer grade cells, though, that could be worth it by itself. Seems to me something that they might be able to use prisms for, if all its doing is scattering the wavelength to the more specialized cells.
(Warning: I'm quite probably talking out of my ass...but it sounds interesting and remotely possible with my rudimentary knowledge.)
You say there's no shortage of sunlight, but I'm sure they said that back in the days of coal burning plants. We need our solar cells to be as efficient as possible.
If we run out of coal, we can adapt. But if we blow all our sunlight on inefficient solar cells, the consequences would destroy life as we know it!