Copyrights were never intended to prevent someone from fixing a piece of equipment that they own, be it a tractor or a car.
On that, we wholeheartedly agree!
But John Deere is using an unholy alliance of the DMCA (which is evil incarnate) and an EPA mandate (which are generally evil) that "engine control code must be unmodifiable by the end-user" to construct this legal fiction that the entire TRACTOR is "Licensed not Sold".
Someone needs to test this in Court. I believe the Doctrine of FIrst Sale should prevail.
The software can be made such that it outputs diagnostic codes/messages pinpointing the exact cause.
Simpler than that. Either use a protected bootloader written into the microcontroller itself,and signed binaries; or simply flip the 'Protection" bit found in ALL microcontrollers after they flash it with the engine controller code.
Did Clinton have a choice? I think it was too well supported for him to veto even if he wanted to. IIRC, the DMCA was unanimously voted for in the Senate. Voice vote (which is massive bullshit) in the House of course.
Oh, you mean like that "Voice Vote" at the Rep. Convention yesterday?
"Ayes?" (Incomprehensible din as a Bunch of people shout, with booing and "USA" being shouted along with some "Ayes")
"Nays?" (EXACT SAME Incomprehensible din as a Bunch of people shout, with booing and "Never Trump!) being shouted along with some "Nays")
"The Ayes have it" says the Chair, and walks off stage.
None of that overrides first sale doctrine. John Deere can *try* to sell tractors at a loss and make up for it by overcharging for service, just as car dealerships *try* to get their customers only to use their service centers. But they have no right to force it on them. All this just shows that they're using an untenable business model. Also, you're a fucking moron who knows nothing about anything.
They can refuse to sell service parts, or (more typically) refuse to sell CERTAIN service parts. Many companies do exactly that, and have for years.
Not quite, interventionism is generally a form of protectionism- a political ideology where the objective is to prevent the masses from themselves. John Deere keeps ownership of the tractors for a different reason; to force said farmers to pay them again and again for repairs. AKA capitalism to the degree where the little guy has no choice but to bow down to the 800 pound gorilla.
Yes they do, at least the next time they buy a tractor. There are other brands...
Adults vote with their feet. If the farmers are smart, this will work itself out.
And also on farms as we know them today? Why not have farming more distributed if it can be indoors? If everyone is their own farmer then goodbye traditional farms.
Because it's bloody EXPENSIVE to grow indoors compared with outside. That is only a viable solution where the local climate makes growing seasons too short, or where product quality must be tightly controlled.
THIS is what "Preventing Repair" REALLY looks like.
Apple's Pentalobe screws are NOTHING like threatening DMCA action. Apple hasn't run-around trying to stop the manufacture and sale of Pentalobe screwdrivers, nor filed DMCA Takedown notices for iFixit and other Apple repair videos, nor attempted to stop the booming business of iPhone/iPad repair shops nor those selling repair parts.
This is WAY different, and needs to be stopped. What farmer (or homeowner) in their right mind would buy John Deere at this point?
What is the point of your hate? Why should I use an inferiour OS for my daily work?
I'm not "hating" at all. I was just anticipating a whole bunch of the typical Slashtard "Apple Bad!" comments directed to anyone who DARED "admit" that they have Apple stuff in their setup. Sorry if I wasn't clear in my feelings.
However, I am not sure which the "inferiour" OS was you were talking about? OS X? Or another OS? Because I certainly don't think that OS X/macOS is inferior. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Since you are everything Mac, I am sure you know the answer, but I can't seem to understand this line in TFS.
news which VentureBeat suggests must be making Steve Jobs' ghost weep.
Why would Steve weep? I thought he was kind of the one behind the app store.
Also, wasn't Steve a huge promoter, it seems like a TV show would be right along what he would envision for promoting the Apple way.
LOL! I have no frickin' idea!
I actually went and read TFA (see what you made me do!), and have no more insight now than you about what that obtuse comment is about, sorry! My best guess (and it is exactly that: A guess) would be that Jobs hated television (IIRC), and, although he was certainly the ultimate promoter, would have considered this a "dilution (and cheapening) of the brand" (Apple). I personally think he would have been kinda right about that. But that could just be me "projecting" my opinions onto the ghost of Jobs...
I know that Steve was originally against the idea of iPhone Apps as we know them today. It was allegedly actually feedback from the Developer community that convinced him to Green-Light the original iPhone OS SDK and its attendant App Store concept. And the rest is history...
But while we're talking about Steve Jobs and Apple's Mobile History, I was very surprised to read the other day that, when Apple was in development on the iPad, there was internal debate as to whether to make it an OS X-based Tablet, or essentially a bigger iPhone. What's surprising is that Steve actually preferred the tablet-Mac idea. But he allowed two engineers to "horse-race" the two concepts and present them both to Steve. Well, we all know who won.
But one of the things I wonder about is how far the other guys went in developing an ARM-based "Touch OS X". I am SURE that one (or more) of those creatures exist inside 1 Infinite Loop, along with a MacBook Pro and iMac with touchscreens. I would imagine that's why Apple is so confident that "tablets are tablets and desktops are desktops", rather than just bolting-on Touch to OS X and releasing an "AirTouch" laptop.
So, if we are ANYTHING like the rodent model, an average 200 lb adult male would have to ingest 113 g. Of PURE THC to approach the LD50 point. Since even PRIMO pot has less than 20% precursors to THC (bringing the 113 g number up to 568 g (well over a POUND!), and because only a fraction of that makes it through the conversion point to become delta-9 THC, and only a fraction of that actually makes it into the bloodstream, I would hazard a guess that that is why there isn't considered to be an LD50 for humans.
You're so sure of yourself that you're sure my former housemate must have already been schizophrenic, and I imagine you're fine with the argument that a predisposition would necessarily have manifested itself in the future, drug or no drug. But you're not on solid evidentiary ground.
That theory is not, in fact, 'accepted' in any sense
It was certainly "accepted" and adopted by The National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, who found that MJ did not CAUSE psychosis, but could "uncover" it in certain ALREADY-PREDISPOSED individuals.
Which, according to your own comments, is EXACTLY what happened to your former housemate.
Tell that to someone trying to quit taking them. I've seen it firsthand, and there are voluminous reports that support my argument. Do some research before proving yourself an idiot any further.
It's possible to OD on anything, even water or oxygen. The dose makes the poison.
If someone tells me that it's IMPOSSIBLE to OD on substance X, they're either ignorant, mistaken, or are lying because they have an agenda.
You are correct, of course; but apparently, the monkeys that they forced to "smoke" joint after joint in their study never reached that point. Therefore, for all PRACTICAL purposes, there is NOT an LD50 dose for MJ.
Slashdot Mirror
Copyrights were never intended to prevent someone from fixing a piece of equipment that they own, be it a tractor or a car.
On that, we wholeheartedly agree!
But John Deere is using an unholy alliance of the DMCA (which is evil incarnate) and an EPA mandate (which are generally evil) that "engine control code must be unmodifiable by the end-user" to construct this legal fiction that the entire TRACTOR is "Licensed not Sold".
Someone needs to test this in Court. I believe the Doctrine of FIrst Sale should prevail.
engine software be protected from tampering.
put it on EEPROM.
The software can be made such that it outputs diagnostic codes/messages pinpointing the exact cause.
Simpler than that. Either use a protected bootloader written into the microcontroller itself,and signed binaries; or simply flip the 'Protection" bit found in ALL microcontrollers after they flash it with the engine controller code.
Talk so Monsanto. I think you'll learn these laws are very enforceable.
Not that I agree with them; but they had PATENTS on their side. Bit of a difference, legally.
br. Still undeniably dickish, though.
How enforcable is an "implied license"?
Just exactly as "enforceable" as you think the word "implied" implies.
He did say republicrat, which is a portmanteau of Republican and Democrat...
Portamenteau? Isn't that those slimy little red things they stuff into green olives?
Did Clinton have a choice? I think it was too well supported for him to veto even if he wanted to. IIRC, the DMCA was unanimously voted for in the Senate. Voice vote (which is massive bullshit) in the House of course.
Oh, you mean like that "Voice Vote" at the Rep. Convention yesterday? "Ayes?" (Incomprehensible din as a Bunch of people shout, with booing and "USA" being shouted along with some "Ayes")
"Nays?" (EXACT SAME Incomprehensible din as a Bunch of people shout, with booing and "Never Trump!) being shouted along with some "Nays")
"The Ayes have it" says the Chair, and walks off stage.
Dmca wasn't all bad. Youtube couldn't exist without it.
Bullshit.
None of that overrides first sale doctrine. John Deere can *try* to sell tractors at a loss and make up for it by overcharging for service, just as car dealerships *try* to get their customers only to use their service centers. But they have no right to force it on them. All this just shows that they're using an untenable business model. Also, you're a fucking moron who knows nothing about anything.
They can refuse to sell service parts, or (more typically) refuse to sell CERTAIN service parts. Many companies do exactly that, and have for years.
So basically John Deere is reserving the right to cancel any of these licenses, impound the farmer's tractors, and put him out of a job?
I'd LOVE to see them try.
Not quite, interventionism is generally a form of protectionism- a political ideology where the objective is to prevent the masses from themselves. John Deere keeps ownership of the tractors for a different reason; to force said farmers to pay them again and again for repairs. AKA capitalism to the degree where the little guy has no choice but to bow down to the 800 pound gorilla.
Yes they do, at least the next time they buy a tractor. There are other brands...
Adults vote with their feet. If the farmers are smart, this will work itself out.
And also on farms as we know them today? Why not have farming more distributed if it can be indoors? If everyone is their own farmer then goodbye traditional farms.
Because it's bloody EXPENSIVE to grow indoors compared with outside. That is only a viable solution where the local climate makes growing seasons too short, or where product quality must be tightly controlled.
THIS is what "Preventing Repair" REALLY looks like.
Apple's Pentalobe screws are NOTHING like threatening DMCA action. Apple hasn't run-around trying to stop the manufacture and sale of Pentalobe screwdrivers, nor filed DMCA Takedown notices for iFixit and other Apple repair videos, nor attempted to stop the booming business of iPhone/iPad repair shops nor those selling repair parts.
This is WAY different, and needs to be stopped. What farmer (or homeowner) in their right mind would buy John Deere at this point?
What is the point of your hate? Why should I use an inferiour OS for my daily work?
I'm not "hating" at all. I was just anticipating a whole bunch of the typical Slashtard "Apple Bad!" comments directed to anyone who DARED "admit" that they have Apple stuff in their setup. Sorry if I wasn't clear in my feelings.
However, I am not sure which the "inferiour" OS was you were talking about? OS X? Or another OS? Because I certainly don't think that OS X/macOS is inferior. Quite the opposite, in fact.
For a developer, Apple hardware can't be beat, and the software can't either.
You'll get no argument from me.
I just wish more Slashdotters would "come clean" about the fact that they use and/or admire Macs and OS X.
Because a lot of them do. But like masturbation or peeking into a friend's medicine cabinet, many do it, but few like to talk about it...
Since you are everything Mac, I am sure you know the answer, but I can't seem to understand this line in TFS.
news which VentureBeat suggests must be making Steve Jobs' ghost weep.
Why would Steve weep? I thought he was kind of the one behind the app store.
Also, wasn't Steve a huge promoter, it seems like a TV show would be right along what he would envision for promoting the Apple way.
LOL! I have no frickin' idea!
I actually went and read TFA (see what you made me do!), and have no more insight now than you about what that obtuse comment is about, sorry! My best guess (and it is exactly that: A guess) would be that Jobs hated television (IIRC), and, although he was certainly the ultimate promoter, would have considered this a "dilution (and cheapening) of the brand" (Apple). I personally think he would have been kinda right about that. But that could just be me "projecting" my opinions onto the ghost of Jobs...
I know that Steve was originally against the idea of iPhone Apps as we know them today. It was allegedly actually feedback from the Developer community that convinced him to Green-Light the original iPhone OS SDK and its attendant App Store concept. And the rest is history...
But while we're talking about Steve Jobs and Apple's Mobile History, I was very surprised to read the other day that, when Apple was in development on the iPad, there was internal debate as to whether to make it an OS X-based Tablet, or essentially a bigger iPhone. What's surprising is that Steve actually preferred the tablet-Mac idea. But he allowed two engineers to "horse-race" the two concepts and present them both to Steve. Well, we all know who won.
But one of the things I wonder about is how far the other guys went in developing an ARM-based "Touch OS X". I am SURE that one (or more) of those creatures exist inside 1 Infinite Loop, along with a MacBook Pro and iMac with touchscreens. I would imagine that's why Apple is so confident that "tablets are tablets and desktops are desktops", rather than just bolting-on Touch to OS X and releasing an "AirTouch" laptop.
But I digress...
Laugh all you want, but at the time of release the 15-inch retina Macbook Pro was not that expensive.
Fuck you
Wow! Over his PERSONAL choice of computing platforms?
You're a one-man Apple Pride parade.
At least someone here had the guts to admit on Slashdot that he uses Apple equipment exclusively...
Did you read the whole of that article and conclude it completely supports your argument, or did you just read the bits that did?
This article supports the idea that at the very least there is no 'accepted' theory.
I agree that it is somewhat equivocal; but the preponderance of the evidence supports my assertions.
So, if we are ANYTHING like the rodent model, an average 200 lb adult male would have to ingest 113 g. Of PURE THC to approach the LD50 point. Since even PRIMO pot has less than 20% precursors to THC (bringing the 113 g number up to 568 g (well over a POUND!), and because only a fraction of that makes it through the conversion point to become delta-9 THC, and only a fraction of that actually makes it into the bloodstream, I would hazard a guess that that is why there isn't considered to be an LD50 for humans.
Odd. Never had any withdrawal symptoms myself. And I think I'm pretty much through with what the SSRI line of medication offers.
You may have had the good fortune to have a Dr. that knew how to taper you off them. Good for you. For others though, it doesn't go that smoothly.
Actually, I am.
That theory is not, in fact, 'accepted' in any sense
It was certainly "accepted" and adopted by The National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, who found that MJ did not CAUSE psychosis, but could "uncover" it in certain ALREADY-PREDISPOSED individuals.
Which, according to your own comments, is EXACTLY what happened to your former housemate.
SSRIs are hardly dangerous.
Tell that to someone trying to quit taking them. I've seen it firsthand, and there are voluminous reports that support my argument. Do some research before proving yourself an idiot any further.
It's possible to OD on anything, even water or oxygen. The dose makes the poison.
If someone tells me that it's IMPOSSIBLE to OD on substance X, they're either ignorant, mistaken, or are lying because they have an agenda.
You are correct, of course; but apparently, the monkeys that they forced to "smoke" joint after joint in their study never reached that point. Therefore, for all PRACTICAL purposes, there is NOT an LD50 dose for MJ.
At the same time the government will also get out of their lives when it comes to taxpayer-funded treatment.
Too late. The Reagans already saw to that pretty effectively.