A serious shortfalling of Western democracies is that if the government (and associated media) manage to misinform the majority of the public to believe a lie, they are allowed and expected to act on that lie.
If I hadn't wasted all my modpoints on a debate of the finer points of copyright yesterday, you would certainly be getting a +10 True.
Oh, and it comes in a slick white box, and costs more.
Re:Since the Summary Is Poor. . .
on
DMCA Exemption Time
·
· Score: 2, Informative
This exemption is talking about the right to circumvent copy prevention, not actually the right to copy the media, if I understand it right.
As such you are not breaking the pro DRM clause of the DMCA, but may still be foul of copyright law. Of course, this is where "fair use" becomes relevant.
Re:Within a single device...
on
DMCA Exemption Time
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
How about a simple exemption for "fair use?"
This would of course cover your examples, plus the 6 already listed and any number of other situations where the value of the intellectual property is not in any way lessened.
Re:Since the Summary Is Poor. . .
on
DMCA Exemption Time
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Remove "Fair Use" clause from US copyright
Replace with 6 completely defined cases of limited scope
???
Profit.
I suggest the exemption "Works protected by copyright where copying or circumventing technical protection measures is performed for purposes that would be traditionally considered fair use?"
Thanks - this did the trick perfectly. This particular crashing issue was definitely related to the BBC player, and this seems to have stopped it. Now we're back to the 'mere' 10% or so crash rate that we've all come to know and love anyway!:)
Shame this is now such an old topic so nobody else will see it.
From the summary, it seems that this is being done on the client's computer, before encryption:
The encrypted list of words inside the Tom-Skype software blocks the transmission of these words and records personal information about the customers who send the messages
I'd imagine it's cheaper to pay someone in China, India, etc to do these thing
Cheaper than what?
By the time a piece of software has been developed that can reliably crack the captcha, it is effectively free. Although human-powered cracking isn't expensive, it costs per captcha broken.
Sensors look at facial expressions, body heat and can measure pulse and breathing rate from a distance
...And most importantly, skin colour?
Seriously, is there anything a device like this can do that's either more useful or less invasive than a human watching people walking past and profiling/screening them on what they can see?
As a ps, there are 16 'fields' built into a chip which measures under 30mm x 30mm - each field is significantly smaller than the summary gives the impression of, at about 2.5mm across (although the article's not exactly clear either).
voters have been routinely failing nationwide for years.
However, doctors have made good progress at unravelling the mysteries of their interior designs and workings, and have been making good progress in recent years at 'hacking back together' malfunctioning units.
It should be pointed out that their efforts are being slightly hampered by businesses patenting certain bits of the voter units, methods of interacting with it and chemical processes for alteration of failures and reactions.
Certainly in the UK, a contract which refuses legal recourse (ie "You can't take us to court") is illegal and, therefore, that clause is automatically null and void.
On top of that, courts don't look too kindly on companies attempting to enforce illegal contractual clauses.
Was it not Windows XP, before any service packs, which came with a file in the 'My Videos' which, when opened in a text editor, showed the cracked software version used to create it?
Did anyone ever lose their jobs over that one?
I've had a look on Google but searching for "Windows pirate video" only has one or two results...
The interesting thing here is that I would expect one of two things. Either physical security should be taken seriously, in which case a 'tamperproof' seal should be just that (not hard to design) or an assumption be made (not unreasonably) that physical attack against the machines is unlikely and easily preventable.
A supposedly tamper-proof seal which can be circumvented shows either a cynical disregard for physical safety (ie "we know it's a threat, so we'll put in a seal to make people think we've taken it seriously") or another TSA-style "theatre" solution (ie "we don't think it's a threat, but we'll let people believe that it is, and that we've done something about it").
Both of these interpretations are disturbing. However Hanlon's Razor ("Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity") may of course apply.
Slashdot Mirror
Nightlies shouldn't be used by those that want to use extensions...
I dunno. I use the nightlies at work... I don't use any extensions though.
+1 Missed the point but still sounded vaguely insightful?
A serious shortfalling of Western democracies is that if the government (and associated media) manage to misinform the majority of the public to believe a lie, they are allowed and expected to act on that lie.
If I hadn't wasted all my modpoints on a debate of the finer points of copyright yesterday, you would certainly be getting a +10 True.
Wow, I guess I haven't transcended that elusive line of understanding between 'flamebait' and 'funny' yet...
If this tripe nonsense was in the Daily Mail, I could understand it. But what's it doing on Slashdot?
I seriously hope the current tag, 'bollocks', after only about 20 or so comments, stays there.
Uh, Apple's is an order of magnitude prettier?
Oh, and it comes in a slick white box, and costs more.
This exemption is talking about the right to circumvent copy prevention, not actually the right to copy the media, if I understand it right.
As such you are not breaking the pro DRM clause of the DMCA, but may still be foul of copyright law. Of course, this is where "fair use" becomes relevant.
How about a simple exemption for "fair use?"
This would of course cover your examples, plus the 6 already listed and any number of other situations where the value of the intellectual property is not in any way lessened.
I suggest the exemption "Works protected by copyright where copying or circumventing technical protection measures is performed for purposes that would be traditionally considered fair use?"
Thanks - this did the trick perfectly. This particular crashing issue was definitely related to the BBC player, and this seems to have stopped it. Now we're back to the 'mere' 10% or so crash rate that we've all come to know and love anyway! :)
Shame this is now such an old topic so nobody else will see it.
Can we please have a warning that we're going to be sent to a BBC flash player site?
I don't know why, but it never plays, and manages to crash my browser (Firefox on Ubuntu) reliably 90% of the time when I go to close the tab.
PDF and youtube links pale into insignificance beside whatever the BBC have managed to do to the interwebs with this abomination of a player...
From the summary, it seems that this is being done on the client's computer, before encryption:
The encrypted list of words inside the Tom-Skype software blocks the transmission of these words and records personal information about the customers who send the messages
Writing through a scribe over Skype from mainland China, I can confidently say that messages about Falun Gong are not being
I'd imagine it's cheaper to pay someone in China, India, etc to do these thing
Cheaper than what?
By the time a piece of software has been developed that can reliably crack the captcha, it is effectively free. Although human-powered cracking isn't expensive, it costs per captcha broken.
Sensors look at facial expressions, body heat and can measure pulse and breathing rate from a distance
...And most importantly, skin colour?
Seriously, is there anything a device like this can do that's either more useful or less invasive than a human watching people walking past and profiling/screening them on what they can see?
That's about 11,000 inches, right? Shouldn't take that long.
As a ps, there are 16 'fields' built into a chip which measures under 30mm x 30mm - each field is significantly smaller than the summary gives the impression of, at about 2.5mm across (although the article's not exactly clear either).
... welcome our new nanobot overlords.
Now, where did I put my coffee cup?
However, doctors have made good progress at unravelling the mysteries of their interior designs and workings, and have been making good progress in recent years at 'hacking back together' malfunctioning units.
It should be pointed out that their efforts are being slightly hampered by businesses patenting certain bits of the voter units, methods of interacting with it and chemical processes for alteration of failures and reactions.
Certainly in the UK, a contract which refuses legal recourse (ie "You can't take us to court") is illegal and, therefore, that clause is automatically null and void.
On top of that, courts don't look too kindly on companies attempting to enforce illegal contractual clauses.
Do Americans not have this same protection?
Was it not Windows XP, before any service packs, which came with a file in the 'My Videos' which, when opened in a text editor, showed the cracked software version used to create it?
Did anyone ever lose their jobs over that one?
I've had a look on Google but searching for "Windows pirate video" only has one or two results...
Thanks. Interesting thoughts. Glad you agree with Prof Reiss - that's pretty much exactly what he said too.
Insightful?
Good grief, have you even read what Prof Reiss said? The exact words were:
In other words, science teachers should respectfully explain what science is, and is not, all about.
Hardly looks sackable in context, does it?
Replying to remove my accidental 'Redundant' mod - was meant to be 'insightful.' Oops!
The interesting thing here is that I would expect one of two things. Either physical security should be taken seriously, in which case a 'tamperproof' seal should be just that (not hard to design) or an assumption be made (not unreasonably) that physical attack against the machines is unlikely and easily preventable.
A supposedly tamper-proof seal which can be circumvented shows either a cynical disregard for physical safety (ie "we know it's a threat, so we'll put in a seal to make people think we've taken it seriously") or another TSA-style "theatre" solution (ie "we don't think it's a threat, but we'll let people believe that it is, and that we've done something about it").
Both of these interpretations are disturbing. However Hanlon's Razor ("Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity") may of course apply.
Maybe it's time to sell it off in a garage sale? I know one company that's already put in a good offer for half the countries.