im anti patent, anti copyright, anti big media, and all it goes with it. im pro unbounded filesharing, free copying too, thanks to the route the media cartels and their government puppets taken in the last few years.
i dont see the point of seeing movies in a movie theater. my home is cozier, more convenient, and it doesnt matter much if i see most movies in cinema screen or a big screen tv.
but still, if movies made for big screen are made like avatar, i wont hesitate from shelling $20 a pop to see them. it was worth every single cent i spent on it, and in my country exchange rate is 1.5 to 1. so basically in usa standards i spent $30 or so on it. i dont regret it.
i dont see the point in pirating it either. i also plan on seeing it again.
industrial revolution started in england, france in the middle of 18th century (1750s), if you totally ignore the previous movements and its precursors in those countries and netherlands, germany. (then HRE, prussia).
php has infinite number of functions because there are infinite number of modules and extensions that can be put in to perform functions ranging from encoding operations, graphic operations to roasting your bread in the morning. of course there is going to be many functions.
no i mean more. ACTA is equivalent with the anti network neutrality attempt the telecoms made back 2-3 years ago. its a BIG threat. yet, eff is taking it as if its another serious but not critical issue.
go to eff mainpage. you wont even see a mention of acta there as of this moment.
what i mean is EFF and other organizations should be banging drums mainly on this, frontpage, doing lobbying and consciousness raising and all, until it gets beaten.
ACTA battle is much more important than any of these, for if it is lost, all of these will be petty issues and already lost by default.
i dont think EFF is doing enough to combat acta. they should be pushing more, and also doing consciousness raising campaigns. Notice how the u.s. govt. and us mainstream media avoids the subject to fool people. its as if nothing is happening, there is no ACTA.
no its not the case. there are factors leading up to world war 2 from 1, however, there are more important underlying social concepts.
ideologies matured.
1789 created the equality principle. but societies of the world were too immature to suck it up properly. instead, it got translated into a 'national ego' format, creating nations and nationalism. 19th century passed with the growing pains of this nationalism phase, leading up to imperialistic ego.
world war 1 greatly cut down these egos to size. people saw that millions of lives got spent over 'nation' and 'empire', and suddenly a huge deal of change happened in the social psychology. brits, very imperial and proud just 6 years ago, didnt want to hear the word 'war' for any reason whatsoever for example. national egos got chopped down everywhere in europe, leading to formation of a more civil mindset to be. however this time, with the nationalism gone, there came the ideology phase. which ideology, rather than which nation would be paramount and rule. this was aided with the wall street crash of course.
the gauntlet was thrown in ww2, and we are living in the ideology that won.
that said, brits really do stir up messes in a lot of places around the world. they should be cut down to size.
what he meant was 'had the nations been trading properly with each other like post ww2, these wouldnt happen'. and he is partially right.
what all accounts miss is the goddamned wall street crisis, (endless history of repetitions) bringing entire world economy down, and causing fundamentalist ideologies to pop up everwhere.
if you ever done business with them, the first thing the contractor on the phone is going to ask, which quality do you want your items. first quality is first quality. your ordinary product produced and sold everywhere, like in usa like in europe. third is the 'chinese' products you know. the cheapest.
back 1.5 or so years ago, ANY retort or comment that criticized apple would be harshly modded down. regardless of its content. however after all the happenings of the last few years, its not as such anymore. so we can say that, at least the apple fans in slashdot, came a long way. probably because they are more tech savvy to know what is right and what is wrong than the regular 'hip' apple fan.
its the first time i heard of this guy, but i like him already. never before the issue with apple was so bluntly and concisely put as below:
It's a sterile Disney-fied walled garden surrounded by sharp-toothed lawyers. The people who create the apps serve at the landlord's pleasure and fear his anger.
first, in the 'free' market you define, there should be no copyright holders. because as soon as you have them, you will need government and its guns to protect and enforce them.
second, there has never been such a rosy case of 'providers cutting their prices down' when a market is settled in earth history. not even when your country was near full free market status. you ended up being owned by 3 people and they set the prices. when there is a 'free' market, copyright holders would go on to patent and copyright anything they can (just like how they are trying to patent even e-shitting in hopes that acta would succeed, since they knew they were preparing it 2-3 years ago), and end up being feudal lords over the domain of thought.
you need to get this straight - 'free market' and 'invisible hand', are all fairy talk, reminiscent of 18th century. when adams hypothesized these, the only power known to monopolize things was the king and its granted monopoly. they thought, if they were removed, then the market should be 'free'. they didnt think at all that, given enough time, private individuals could reach a level of wealth that would rival kings and be de facto kings. it was 18th century after all, all the stuff was untested.
and yet we know. it is basically no more than wishful thinking. a religion. it never worked, just like communism - for both to work, people participating have to be ideal people, abusing and exploiting nothing. there is no such thing on this planet.
a product is sold as defined. provider has to identify what they are selling. the only venue in which providers are allowed to sell undefined water vapor, so far, is in gaming. the eulas come in the form of 'we are selling you entertainment, but we cant define what it is. you have to take it as what you get out of the box, even we dont know what it will be'.
this definition basically equates pong with crysis 2. you buy something but the provider can conveniently evade precisely defining what they are selling you, and can escape the guarantee they have to give.
i set up a lemonade stand first. i make big heaps of money. with that money, i can offer more to the lemon producers and secure better deals. i also can offer much lower prices. i practically can do anything with that money, including buying the entire sidewalk off.
then noone can enter and offer 'competition' to me. if they do, i either can undercut them out, or buy them off.
wealth is power. you need to realize this. back at the end of 19th century your country didnt have any regulations, it was as near as can be to a 'free' market, and you ended up being owned by 3 people.
From the time he wrote that passage until well after WWII the great majority of inventions in the world took place in countries that had a patent system similar to ours.
your understanding of scientific history is beyond flawed.
in between jefferson's time and ww2, information had free flow. scientists, pioneers of scientific age has been sharing their scientific discoveries without holding them hostage. ideas and methods flowed around freely. it was the golden age of discovery.
it was during this time a lot of inventors patented various machinery and inventions based on these FREE FLOWING scientific information and ideas.
the fact that those people patented, does NOT mean that the scientific revolution happened because there were patent systems.
you also lack enough information about scientific history in that a goodly majority of scientific breakthroughs and inventions were made in mainland europe, which did not have a patent system like in u.k., or u.s.
so basically those entrepreneurs in u.s. and u.k. rode free on the free science's ideas and breakthroughs, laying claim to their applications for their own benefit.
the ability to patent an idea may be extremely encouraging to inventors, but it is extremely damaging to science. without science, there can be no ideas.
It has been pretended by some that inventors have a natural and exclusive right to their inventions, and not merely for their own lives, but inheritable to their heirs. But while it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all, it would be singular to admit a natural and even an hereditary right to inventors. It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. By an universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common, is the property for the moment of him who occupies it, but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it. Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society. It would be curious then, if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property. If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody. Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices.
Slashdot Mirror
im anti patent, anti copyright, anti big media, and all it goes with it. im pro unbounded filesharing, free copying too, thanks to the route the media cartels and their government puppets taken in the last few years.
i dont see the point of seeing movies in a movie theater. my home is cozier, more convenient, and it doesnt matter much if i see most movies in cinema screen or a big screen tv.
but still, if movies made for big screen are made like avatar, i wont hesitate from shelling $20 a pop to see them. it was worth every single cent i spent on it, and in my country exchange rate is 1.5 to 1. so basically in usa standards i spent $30 or so on it. i dont regret it.
i dont see the point in pirating it either. i also plan on seeing it again.
industrial revolution started in england, france in the middle of 18th century (1750s), if you totally ignore the previous movements and its precursors in those countries and netherlands, germany. (then HRE, prussia).
yea you do, but you KNOW that you are buying a dresser's separate part, and can add the others on.
in this you dont know whats locked out, what functions are guaranteed and what not.
php has infinite number of functions because there are infinite number of modules and extensions that can be put in to perform functions ranging from encoding operations, graphic operations to roasting your bread in the morning. of course there is going to be many functions.
their latest blog entry on acta is from January 29th, 2010, for fuck's sakes.
no i mean more. ACTA is equivalent with the anti network neutrality attempt the telecoms made back 2-3 years ago. its a BIG threat. yet, eff is taking it as if its another serious but not critical issue.
go to eff mainpage. you wont even see a mention of acta there as of this moment.
what i mean is EFF and other organizations should be banging drums mainly on this, frontpage, doing lobbying and consciousness raising and all, until it gets beaten.
wouldnt this one be better ? i mean, for most of us 'the internet' japan is 'tech gadgets', 'cars' and 'anime'.
dont ask me what it is. i made it out of my ass from some words i saw on a japanese website. its as good as any abbreviation any government makes.
ACTA battle is much more important than any of these, for if it is lost, all of these will be petty issues and already lost by default.
i dont think EFF is doing enough to combat acta. they should be pushing more, and also doing consciousness raising campaigns. Notice how the u.s. govt. and us mainstream media avoids the subject to fool people. its as if nothing is happening, there is no ACTA.
this needs to be fixed.
"These are not the jobs you looking for"
no its not the case. there are factors leading up to world war 2 from 1, however, there are more important underlying social concepts.
ideologies matured.
1789 created the equality principle. but societies of the world were too immature to suck it up properly. instead, it got translated into a 'national ego' format, creating nations and nationalism. 19th century passed with the growing pains of this nationalism phase, leading up to imperialistic ego.
world war 1 greatly cut down these egos to size. people saw that millions of lives got spent over 'nation' and 'empire', and suddenly a huge deal of change happened in the social psychology. brits, very imperial and proud just 6 years ago, didnt want to hear the word 'war' for any reason whatsoever for example. national egos got chopped down everywhere in europe, leading to formation of a more civil mindset to be. however this time, with the nationalism gone, there came the ideology phase. which ideology, rather than which nation would be paramount and rule. this was aided with the wall street crash of course.
the gauntlet was thrown in ww2, and we are living in the ideology that won.
that said, brits really do stir up messes in a lot of places around the world. they should be cut down to size.
what he meant was 'had the nations been trading properly with each other like post ww2, these wouldnt happen'. and he is partially right.
what all accounts miss is the goddamned wall street crisis, (endless history of repetitions) bringing entire world economy down, and causing fundamentalist ideologies to pop up everwhere.
if you ever done business with them, the first thing the contractor on the phone is going to ask, which quality do you want your items. first quality is first quality. your ordinary product produced and sold everywhere, like in usa like in europe. third is the 'chinese' products you know. the cheapest.
- why is it looking so sad ? and down ? on behalf of pirates worldwide, i protest.
back 1.5 or so years ago, ANY retort or comment that criticized apple would be harshly modded down. regardless of its content. however after all the happenings of the last few years, its not as such anymore. so we can say that, at least the apple fans in slashdot, came a long way. probably because they are more tech savvy to know what is right and what is wrong than the regular 'hip' apple fan.
its the first time i heard of this guy, but i like him already. never before the issue with apple was so bluntly and concisely put as below :
It's a sterile Disney-fied walled garden surrounded by sharp-toothed lawyers. The people who create the apps serve at the landlord's pleasure and fear his anger.
He can do advocating for me alright.
first, in the 'free' market you define, there should be no copyright holders. because as soon as you have them, you will need government and its guns to protect and enforce them.
second, there has never been such a rosy case of 'providers cutting their prices down' when a market is settled in earth history. not even when your country was near full free market status. you ended up being owned by 3 people and they set the prices. when there is a 'free' market, copyright holders would go on to patent and copyright anything they can (just like how they are trying to patent even e-shitting in hopes that acta would succeed, since they knew they were preparing it 2-3 years ago), and end up being feudal lords over the domain of thought.
you need to get this straight - 'free market' and 'invisible hand', are all fairy talk, reminiscent of 18th century. when adams hypothesized these, the only power known to monopolize things was the king and its granted monopoly. they thought, if they were removed, then the market should be 'free'. they didnt think at all that, given enough time, private individuals could reach a level of wealth that would rival kings and be de facto kings. it was 18th century after all, all the stuff was untested.
and yet we know. it is basically no more than wishful thinking. a religion. it never worked, just like communism - for both to work, people participating have to be ideal people, abusing and exploiting nothing. there is no such thing on this planet.
a product is sold as defined. provider has to identify what they are selling. the only venue in which providers are allowed to sell undefined water vapor, so far, is in gaming. the eulas come in the form of 'we are selling you entertainment, but we cant define what it is. you have to take it as what you get out of the box, even we dont know what it will be'.
this definition basically equates pong with crysis 2. you buy something but the provider can conveniently evade precisely defining what they are selling you, and can escape the guarantee they have to give.
it is by no means logical.
yea, because he had to. being forced to something due to circumstances or society's pressure does not mean that you condone it.
tax breaks building permits schmock shmeck.
you americans STILL dont get the point.
i set up a lemonade stand first. i make big heaps of money. with that money, i can offer more to the lemon producers and secure better deals. i also can offer much lower prices. i practically can do anything with that money, including buying the entire sidewalk off.
then noone can enter and offer 'competition' to me. if they do, i either can undercut them out, or buy them off.
wealth is power. you need to realize this. back at the end of 19th century your country didnt have any regulations, it was as near as can be to a 'free' market, and you ended up being owned by 3 people.
its science history. if you consider knowing how did we reach this level of civilization trolling, then it is trolling for you, and you should troll.
is legalized in one country"
youre talking about spain.
From the time he wrote that passage until well after WWII the great majority of inventions in the world took place in countries that had a patent system similar to ours.
your understanding of scientific history is beyond flawed.
in between jefferson's time and ww2, information had free flow. scientists, pioneers of scientific age has been sharing their scientific discoveries without holding them hostage. ideas and methods flowed around freely. it was the golden age of discovery.
it was during this time a lot of inventors patented various machinery and inventions based on these FREE FLOWING scientific information and ideas.
the fact that those people patented, does NOT mean that the scientific revolution happened because there were patent systems.
you also lack enough information about scientific history in that a goodly majority of scientific breakthroughs and inventions were made in mainland europe, which did not have a patent system like in u.k., or u.s.
so basically those entrepreneurs in u.s. and u.k. rode free on the free science's ideas and breakthroughs, laying claim to their applications for their own benefit.
the ability to patent an idea may be extremely encouraging to inventors, but it is extremely damaging to science. without science, there can be no ideas.
jefferson as in thomas jefferson
It has been pretended by some that inventors have a natural and exclusive right to their inventions, and not merely for their own lives, but inheritable to their heirs. But while it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all, it would be singular to admit a natural and even an hereditary right to inventors. It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. By an universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common, is the property for the moment of him who occupies it, but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it. Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society. It would be curious then, if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property. If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody. Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices.
he basically says patents are bullshit.
you are exaggerating. it smells like elitism.
did you use php 5 ?