Why doesn't someone who is going to put content under a closed license have to prove that they created the work in question? Can't they just as easily (if not easier) take some open source or creative commons content, and put it under a closed license, doing the same thing you described, but in reverse?
To be fair, if you're choosing between Flash and Silverlight, you've already ruled out iOS, and most other mobile phones, as platforms for your webapp. Unless you're gonna spend the time to make a pure HTML version, or an app for each platform.
Agreed that's why the Government shouldn't be able to record every conversation I have. However, if I'm having a conversation with another private party (or hell, maybe even the Government), I should be able to record said conversation, at the very least for note taking purposes, and at the worst for a CYA measure. In the former case, a courtesy notice that I am recording would be nice, and probably expected. I'm not so sure about the latter.
My understanding is that this ruling didn't cover phone conversations, as the incident in question took place face to face. As in, the guy set his iPhone into Voice Memo mode, and did his business with the other guy.
From what I understand, the case isn't about Android's use of Linux, but about the customized JVM which runs on top of Linux. Does the OIN cover things that run on Linux as well? Such as, if I were running Apache or some other http server?
Actually, if he's in the US, what he wrote (and, as it turns out, what I'm writing at this very moment!) is already copyrighted, and was copyrighted the moment it was published on Slashdot. Its not registered, thus no copyright tag, but it still is copyrighted.
No, that was the whole point of this thread. There isn't actually much government interference in this market. The main problem is the huge, natural barriers to entry. That is why we need Net Neutrality. There is no guarantee that any competition will arise, or that it will be effective.
Really? Cause they seem to be pretty big factors themselves. Remember, a lot of franchise agreements have been struck down already. The problem is that the people who could compete, the big ISPs, don't want to.
Read the fucking post. And what do you mean, "It probably counts DSL as just one ISP." If there's one provider of DSL, then there's one provider of DSL.
The rules change when you're a company. Especially when you're a company involved in telecommunications. Phone service providers, for instance, must treat all phone calls over their lines equally, whether you call someone on your phone provider's network or not.
Wrong. At least in South Dakota, the only two cell providers up until very recently were both CDMA based (Verizon & Alltel). And then one bought the other.
The barriers to entry are not solely induced by the government. Stuff like equipment, and tearing up roads takes buttloads of cash. Cash your competitor has already paid off, allowing them to lower prices while you still struggle to become established.
Are you willing to sacrifice tomorrow's next-get websites and webapps to a set of corporations who will dictate what is and is not allowed on the network?
Look at the history of meat safety before the government got involved. It was disgusting; there was almost no sanitation involved, and being a meatpacker was quite dangerous.
Out of curiosity, how did that end up working out for everyone? I've long posited that such a thing is necessary for the internet infrastructure, maybe even that the municipality owned the pipes, letting everyone else offer services on them.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering that the nearest post office (or in this case UPS/FedEx office) could be dozens of miles away, it does seem quite unreasonable.
Why doesn't someone who is going to put content under a closed license have to prove that they created the work in question? Can't they just as easily (if not easier) take some open source or creative commons content, and put it under a closed license, doing the same thing you described, but in reverse?
No. I'm pretty sure that one can exercise their right to bear arms, and defend themselves and their state properly without having nuclear weapons.
Opposing the spread of nuclear weapons does not mean that one instantly wants to be "coddled from cradle to grave".
To be fair, if you're choosing between Flash and Silverlight, you've already ruled out iOS, and most other mobile phones, as platforms for your webapp. Unless you're gonna spend the time to make a pure HTML version, or an app for each platform.
Agreed that's why the Government shouldn't be able to record every conversation I have. However, if I'm having a conversation with another private party (or hell, maybe even the Government), I should be able to record said conversation, at the very least for note taking purposes, and at the worst for a CYA measure. In the former case, a courtesy notice that I am recording would be nice, and probably expected. I'm not so sure about the latter.
My understanding is that this ruling didn't cover phone conversations, as the incident in question took place face to face. As in, the guy set his iPhone into Voice Memo mode, and did his business with the other guy.
From what I understand, the case isn't about Android's use of Linux, but about the customized JVM which runs on top of Linux. Does the OIN cover things that run on Linux as well? Such as, if I were running Apache or some other http server?
Actually, if he's in the US, what he wrote (and, as it turns out, what I'm writing at this very moment!) is already copyrighted, and was copyrighted the moment it was published on Slashdot. Its not registered, thus no copyright tag, but it still is copyrighted.
I'm 80% sure that C++ had operator overloading. I wouldn't be surprised if Java didn't, though.
No, that was the whole point of this thread. There isn't actually much government interference in this market. The main problem is the huge, natural barriers to entry. That is why we need Net Neutrality. There is no guarantee that any competition will arise, or that it will be effective.
With what fucking money? Maybe you don't believe so, but requiring 7 metric buttloads of cash IS a barrier to entry by itself.
Really? Cause they seem to be pretty big factors themselves. Remember, a lot of franchise agreements have been struck down already. The problem is that the people who could compete, the big ISPs, don't want to.
Read the fucking post. And what do you mean, "It probably counts DSL as just one ISP." If there's one provider of DSL, then there's one provider of DSL.
The rules change when you're a company. Especially when you're a company involved in telecommunications. Phone service providers, for instance, must treat all phone calls over their lines equally, whether you call someone on your phone provider's network or not.
Wrong. At least in South Dakota, the only two cell providers up until very recently were both CDMA based (Verizon & Alltel). And then one bought the other.
The barriers to entry are not solely induced by the government. Stuff like equipment, and tearing up roads takes buttloads of cash. Cash your competitor has already paid off, allowing them to lower prices while you still struggle to become established.
Are you willing to sacrifice tomorrow's next-get websites and webapps to a set of corporations who will dictate what is and is not allowed on the network?
You mean the same USPS that, up until the recent economic downturn and rise of email, was actually running a profit?
Look at the history of meat safety before the government got involved. It was disgusting; there was almost no sanitation involved, and being a meatpacker was quite dangerous.
Why would a person's willingness to tell a baby to piss off affect his legislating ability?
Out of curiosity, how did that end up working out for everyone? I've long posited that such a thing is necessary for the internet infrastructure, maybe even that the municipality owned the pipes, letting everyone else offer services on them.
Congratulations. You are an anomaly. The vast majority of people have access to only one or two ISPs. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/03/national-broadband-plan-arrives-quoting-shakespeare.ars
If there's no competition, then there's no free market.
Ugh. I have IBD. I can't imagine how bad that'd be if my poop was gold.
Brawndo, the Thirst Mutilator!