What surprised me is that it goes on to say that with all those translations, you still "only" reach 3/4 of the earth's population.
I can believe that 1/4 of the earth's population is not a native-speaker of one of those languages, but it's hard to believe there are that many people who do not have some level of understanding of any of the world's 28 most common languages. Are there really 1.5 billion people who don't communicate with the rest of the world (except through translation)?
IANAL, but as far as I know, you cannot copyright facts or ideas, only the expression of those ideas. Although the notice claims that the order of the items in the list are copyrighted, I doubt a court would agree.
The factual information regarding sports results, rankings, etc. is not copyright-able, but the expression of those facts is. You should be able to copy the data (but not any commentary / opinions) by re-writing/re-typing it, but if you photocopied the newspaper page, then you could be in trouble.
1. The scientists are right and Einstein wasn't 100% correct. ... If option (1) is true, it means we're entering that sort of post-Einsteinian "What the hell's going on here" phase in science, where we have a theory that we thought is good and we have some measurements which we also know are good and conflict with the theory.
If you replace "Einstein" with "Newton", isn't this pretty much the same argument as before the theory of relativity? "Newtonian physics" explained things well enough that it took scientists centuries to realize there were things that it could not explain. In most situations, Newton's "laws" and formulas still give you better than 99% accuracy. I doubt Einstein ever thought, "Relativity completely answers everything, and no one will ever find any problems with it." He surely realized that "Einsteinian physics" explains more than "Newtonian physics" and gives you more accurate results but future physicists would likely find areas where his theories don't work.
That's what we're seeing now. Sooner or later someone will find a better model of how the universe works and we'll start using that. I'm not sure we (humans) will ever figure it all out, but we keep refining our theories and expanding our understanding.
After a day, if the story is ongoing, the original article is likely to be replaced by an update. Real-life example: Over the weekend, the NY Times Science section had these stories in a row: "Shuttle astronauts complete spacewalk", "shuttle astronauts inspect tiles", "shuttle Discovery meets space station", "shuttle Discovery set for launch". (paraphrased) Clearly, the first story in the list is the most recent and, were I looking for news on the Discovery, I'd probably click that one.
That is pretty typical of many online news sources. In most cases, you don't gain anything by looking at the older articles because 99% of their information is copied into newer articles. You're really getting "new versions" of the same article.
In this respect, web news is more similar to TV / radio than newspapers. When you watch TV news, you typically get the same stories 30 minutes later with the addition of any new developments. Although most news websites portray themselves as "online newspapers", they are really a mixture of newspapers, magazines, TV / radio news, and other features unique to the web.
I-294? If you're talking about Chicago traffic, try driving I-90 heading towards O'Hare from the suburbs. In a 55 mph zone, you can comfortably go 85-90, and you'll still get the maniacs that pass you like you're standing still!
Not that I advocate violating the speed limit, but unless the traffic gets pretty heavy NO ONE is going under 75.
Also typical in American contracts is the opportunity for your attorney to review the contract. I'm sure for most legal matters he is represented by his record label's lawyers, but he should hire his own lawyer when it comes to signing contracts with the record label. If he had a lawyer review this contract (very likely) and the lawyer failed to fully explain the consequences of signing it (also very likely), then the lawyer either (a) did not have to proper knowledge and experience to understand the contract, or (b) didn't bother to read it carefully.
So it's the lawyer's fault for doing a bad job and it's Al's fault for hiring a bad lawyer.
I am not arguing for or against DRM. I just think Apple needs to make up its mind on what it wants to do. I can't understand why the company would use the "honor system" when it comes to licenses for OS X (client), but implement serial number restrictions for OS X Server. For several years they say, "You can download the source for the kernel and compile a version customized to your liking." And now they say, "You can't compile your own kernel for an Intel Mac because we don't trust you (even though we trust not to do anything illegal with your PPC Mac)."
And unless the Intel version of the kernel is completely different from the PPC version (which I doubt), there is nothing to stop a less-than-ethical group from porting the PPC kernel to run on non-Apple machines, pirating the rest of the OS X (Intel) components, and creating the "free OS X" Apple is appearently trying to avoid.
My point is, with Apple's current stance on licensing and how they choose to enforce (or not) their rights, negative backlash from closing the Intel version of the kernel source seems to be much larger than the anti-piracy gains of doing it.
Wow... I'm surprised at that. I know you cannot have multiple servers w/ the same serial number, so I expected the "client" version to have the same limitation. If there is no copy protection and they don't have any way of telling how many machines you upgrade, why would someone pay more to get more licences? If you assume all Mac users are ethical and do not violate license agreement, then I guess they would pay for licenses. I would question the judgement of anyone who believes Mac users are somehow more ethical than everyone else and feels strongly enough to ignore the possibility that they are not ethical.
I do know that the 10.4 (maybe only server version?) installer will not install on older machines that do not meet certain requirements. I don't know how this is checked, but can't a OS X (Intel) installer check for required hardware (e.g. Apple BIOS) before installing?
If the machine is not an Apple, where would they get the rest of the OS? You can't buy OS X (Intel); you can only get it by buying a Mac.
I don't know off-hand the details of Apple's copy-protection, but they do have methods to keep me from buying one copy of OS X 10.4 (PPC) and using it to upgrade all of my older PPC Macs. Those same methods should work for Intel Macs.
Sure, Darwin is available, but how is that comparable with OS X? It's not. The base, sure, but anything above 'ls' and you're not in an enviroment that even tries to be similar; it feels like lip service only.
Yes, that is true, but...
... if the src was available all of a sudden 'free' versions of OS X would appear everywhere, and since they run on Intel now they could/would be running on any x86 box. No, they wouldn't run as smooth, which would again damage Apple's cred as having a 'rock solid' OS.
... this sentence seems to contradict your earlier statement. The open-source kernel (Darwin) is NOT the same as OS X. The primary advantage of keeping Darwin open is to allow people to customize the way their kernel functions. What works best for Apple's "average user" may not work best for me, and I'd like to opportunity to make changes to suit my situation.
Since many key components of OS X (e.g. Aqua, the user interface) are not open-source, you could not download enough parts of OS X to assemble a "free OS X" that would have nearly the features of the official version, and would be unlikely to run most OS X applications. I sincerely doubt anyone would find a reason to use this environment. Either they would pay for full Mac OS X to run their OS X apps, or they would run a completely free and open-source OS on their hardware and get apps that work with that.
As far as I can see, keeping the kernel open source does not hurt Apple's profits nearly as much as the backlash their announcement that they're closing it.
If we're looking at Wikipedia, it also says the following "The edge of this bubble [the heliosphere] is known as the termination shock; the point at which the solar wind collides with the opposing winds of the interstellar medium." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_system#Farthes t_regions)
It appears this is a region where the forces of solar wind are approximately equal to the forces of interstellar winds.
To modify your analogy, it's as if you are waving your hand at the same time as someone else is waving their hand. There is a point I can stand at where the gravitational force of your hand and the other persons hand will be equal. The relative masses and distances of the hands determine this point. This is somewhat similar to "Lagrangian points". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point)
"...based on all the variable energy in the solar system."
What about the energy outside the solar system? Although the distance is much greater between the sun and neighboring stars, those stars do have a gravitational effect on the movement of the sun, the planets, and all other objects in the solar system. They probably have an electro-magnetic effect as well.
"This is because the difficulty and cost in producing these media better restrict access to those that are better educated."
That is true (in most cases), but the "difficulty and cost" also result in additional editing and proofreading. Certainly in the case of a book, the text may be read by many people (author, author's friends, collegues, editors, etc.) before going to the publisher.
Unfortunately, those people do not always understand the author's meaning (e.g. technical writing), so you'll still find dumb mistakes in the manual or textbook you just spent $100 on.
"(i) allows users to create web pages or profiles that provide information about themselves and are available to other users; and
"(ii) offers a mechanism for communication with other users, such as a forum, chat room, email, or instant messenger."
So a commercial website is inherently more dangerous to children just because it's commercially operated??? I guess that means they can't eliminate my position and outsource the web services unless they to block in-district access to all of our district and school web pages.
I don't have time to rewatch it right now (plus all my DVDs are packed up in a box), but I recall getting the impression that "the big Hutt" was not Jabba.
Are you sure Jabba was in Episode I? I just remember references to "the Hutts". Several of them (of various sizes) appear on screen at the pod race. Do they ever specify which (if any) of them are Jabba?
Slashdot Mirror
I can believe that 1/4 of the earth's population is not a native-speaker of one of those languages, but it's hard to believe there are that many people who do not have some level of understanding of any of the world's 28 most common languages. Are there really 1.5 billion people who don't communicate with the rest of the world (except through translation)?
IANAL, but as far as I know, you cannot copyright facts or ideas, only the expression of those ideas. Although the notice claims that the order of the items in the list are copyrighted, I doubt a court would agree.
The factual information regarding sports results, rankings, etc. is not copyright-able, but the expression of those facts is. You should be able to copy the data (but not any commentary / opinions) by re-writing/re-typing it, but if you photocopied the newspaper page, then you could be in trouble.
If you replace "Einstein" with "Newton", isn't this pretty much the same argument as before the theory of relativity? "Newtonian physics" explained things well enough that it took scientists centuries to realize there were things that it could not explain. In most situations, Newton's "laws" and formulas still give you better than 99% accuracy. I doubt Einstein ever thought, "Relativity completely answers everything, and no one will ever find any problems with it." He surely realized that "Einsteinian physics" explains more than "Newtonian physics" and gives you more accurate results but future physicists would likely find areas where his theories don't work.
That's what we're seeing now. Sooner or later someone will find a better model of how the universe works and we'll start using that. I'm not sure we (humans) will ever figure it all out, but we keep refining our theories and expanding our understanding.
That is pretty typical of many online news sources. In most cases, you don't gain anything by looking at the older articles because 99% of their information is copied into newer articles. You're really getting "new versions" of the same article.
In this respect, web news is more similar to TV / radio than newspapers. When you watch TV news, you typically get the same stories 30 minutes later with the addition of any new developments. Although most news websites portray themselves as "online newspapers", they are really a mixture of newspapers, magazines, TV / radio news, and other features unique to the web.
That'd be nice, but my current commute takes me across half of McHenry County and all of Lake County.
Is it too much to ask that we can get at least ONE east-west road that has two lanes each way all the way across Lake County?
I-294? If you're talking about Chicago traffic, try driving I-90 heading towards O'Hare from the suburbs. In a 55 mph zone, you can comfortably go 85-90, and you'll still get the maniacs that pass you like you're standing still!
Not that I advocate violating the speed limit, but unless the traffic gets pretty heavy NO ONE is going under 75.
Also typical in American contracts is the opportunity for your attorney to review the contract. I'm sure for most legal matters he is represented by his record label's lawyers, but he should hire his own lawyer when it comes to signing contracts with the record label. If he had a lawyer review this contract (very likely) and the lawyer failed to fully explain the consequences of signing it (also very likely), then the lawyer either (a) did not have to proper knowledge and experience to understand the contract, or (b) didn't bother to read it carefully.
So it's the lawyer's fault for doing a bad job and it's Al's fault for hiring a bad lawyer.
I am not arguing for or against DRM. I just think Apple needs to make up its mind on what it wants to do. I can't understand why the company would use the "honor system" when it comes to licenses for OS X (client), but implement serial number restrictions for OS X Server. For several years they say, "You can download the source for the kernel and compile a version customized to your liking." And now they say, "You can't compile your own kernel for an Intel Mac because we don't trust you (even though we trust not to do anything illegal with your PPC Mac)."
And unless the Intel version of the kernel is completely different from the PPC version (which I doubt), there is nothing to stop a less-than-ethical group from porting the PPC kernel to run on non-Apple machines, pirating the rest of the OS X (Intel) components, and creating the "free OS X" Apple is appearently trying to avoid.
My point is, with Apple's current stance on licensing and how they choose to enforce (or not) their rights, negative backlash from closing the Intel version of the kernel source seems to be much larger than the anti-piracy gains of doing it.
Wow... I'm surprised at that. I know you cannot have multiple servers w/ the same serial number, so I expected the "client" version to have the same limitation. If there is no copy protection and they don't have any way of telling how many machines you upgrade, why would someone pay more to get more licences? If you assume all Mac users are ethical and do not violate license agreement, then I guess they would pay for licenses. I would question the judgement of anyone who believes Mac users are somehow more ethical than everyone else and feels strongly enough to ignore the possibility that they are not ethical.
I do know that the 10.4 (maybe only server version?) installer will not install on older machines that do not meet certain requirements. I don't know how this is checked, but can't a OS X (Intel) installer check for required hardware (e.g. Apple BIOS) before installing?
If the machine is not an Apple, where would they get the rest of the OS? You can't buy OS X (Intel); you can only get it by buying a Mac.
I don't know off-hand the details of Apple's copy-protection, but they do have methods to keep me from buying one copy of OS X 10.4 (PPC) and using it to upgrade all of my older PPC Macs. Those same methods should work for Intel Macs.
Yes, that is true, but...
Since many key components of OS X (e.g. Aqua, the user interface) are not open-source, you could not download enough parts of OS X to assemble a "free OS X" that would have nearly the features of the official version, and would be unlikely to run most OS X applications. I sincerely doubt anyone would find a reason to use this environment. Either they would pay for full Mac OS X to run their OS X apps, or they would run a completely free and open-source OS on their hardware and get apps that work with that.
As far as I can see, keeping the kernel open source does not hurt Apple's profits nearly as much as the backlash their announcement that they're closing it.
If we're looking at Wikipedia, it also says the following "The edge of this bubble [the heliosphere] is known as the termination shock; the point at which the solar wind collides with the opposing winds of the interstellar medium." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_system#Farthes t_regions)
It appears this is a region where the forces of solar wind are approximately equal to the forces of interstellar winds.
To modify your analogy, it's as if you are waving your hand at the same time as someone else is waving their hand. There is a point I can stand at where the gravitational force of your hand and the other persons hand will be equal. The relative masses and distances of the hands determine this point. This is somewhat similar to "Lagrangian points". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point)
"...based on all the variable energy in the solar system."
What about the energy outside the solar system? Although the distance is much greater between the sun and neighboring stars, those stars do have a gravitational effect on the movement of the sun, the planets, and all other objects in the solar system. They probably have an electro-magnetic effect as well.
"This is because the difficulty and cost in producing these media better restrict access to those that are better educated."
That is true (in most cases), but the "difficulty and cost" also result in additional editing and proofreading. Certainly in the case of a book, the text may be read by many people (author, author's friends, collegues, editors, etc.) before going to the publisher.
Unfortunately, those people do not always understand the author's meaning (e.g. technical writing), so you'll still find dumb mistakes in the manual or textbook you just spent $100 on.
So a commercial website is inherently more dangerous to children just because it's commercially operated??? I guess that means they can't eliminate my position and outsource the web services unless they to block in-district access to all of our district and school web pages.
Yeah!!! Job security!!!
I guess I need to practice my Huttese.
I don't have time to rewatch it right now (plus all my DVDs are packed up in a box), but I recall getting the impression that "the big Hutt" was not Jabba.
Are you sure Jabba was in Episode I? I just remember references to "the Hutts". Several of them (of various sizes) appear on screen at the pod race. Do they ever specify which (if any) of them are Jabba?