This is about private property. I am surprised that you are allowed to have any demonstration at all on someone else's property without permission, unless that is your place of work. How does it apply to public protest on the streets(I know some toll roads are privately owned by companies)?
Some of us don't have Microsoft let alone hearts...
I quite like that:)
Anyone care to improve it its not quite perfect (My favourite being, "In a world without walls and fences, who need windows and gates" - somone ) Microsoft Hearts is a misnomer.
Is that legal? I thought you could make *optimize* something for your own hardware instructions, but can you legally make it worse for other people? And how will we ever know if this happens (there is no benchmark for "havok" engines I think).
Cleaning the most toxic pollution in the world involves cleaning up the Microsoft Windows Registry. And that topic, ladies and gentlemen, is not open to family safe discussions. Oh wait, is it sites you sayin? Oh baby, this goin be good, real good, I can tell you right now.
I was joking! What happened to the usual anti-GOP avalanche of moderation that would've marked me funny no matter the context? Are slashdot mods maturing finally.. can it be true?
Ah, but you see, if you make the monkey take the picture in a national park and the monkey doesn't belong to either of you, then the US of A (or more precisely the state that owns the park) clearly has the copyright over the creativity here. Also, the guy you got the bananas from *can* claim copyright *if and only if* he has given you the bananas for free, in which case he has partial ownership over the apparatus used to produce the photo. Of course, I win over him as well for giving him the idea. The acorn act is copyrighted by god, and I'm very surprised you asked. Unless you get the monkey owned by the state and fed by a purposeful bystander to drop the acorn at my directions onto your camera, then my girlfriend gets the copyright because the gender group she belongs to has patented inventive ways to make trouble.
Well for your information it took about a week for it to be publicly cracked. I am aware of the "delay until I make some dough" argument as well, but it is sadly also nonsensical. There have been games released with no DRM on them whatsoever (Oblivion I believe, which is not exactly low on sales) and the developers simply included a note saying that if you like the game please buy it. It didn't have any real effect since the people who download games know very well that the "copy protection" (god what a silly, clueless notion that is) will be overcome. The idea that people will rush out to get the game if it is DRM'd is silly - those who buy their games will continue to buy them and those who are unable or unwilling will not be "forced" to do so by waiting 5 days.
Plus, you seem to be missing the point - it is my right to communicate whatever information about any subject that does not constitute a danger to personal or national security, to anyone. You cannot tell me to not copy information from one DVD to another..it's stupid. That is why open sourced software works the way it does..the revenues made are usually via sales to big corporations who have custom-built solutions created for them, and it doesn't matter if the code is out in the open, except maybe matters of competition. The individual is usually not the target. With games and other individual-centric products, however, the problem becomes the question of how much revenue is "lost" to the sharing scene. Some say none at all - and let me tell you, it's a valid argument in *some* countries where $50 bucks will NEVER be paid for a CD. Personally, I think publishers of mass media should not worry too much.. lower your prices, respect the nature of information as being free (speech) and you will gain both respect and revenue.
OK, well how about you tell me what software you write and I'll crack it and give it away for free Expected comment, and the answer is this: I don't have any link to the sales output of my software because my compensation is related to my hours of work/value to the sponsoring companies. I don't care if the companies I have provided my code with (which is usual open source by the way) decide to give it to other companies for free - that is totally irrelevant.
Now if you take my software and say you wrote it, I will sue you, and it will be easy. If you try to sell it you need a license to do so because that is commercial activity, and if I don't want it sold I will sue you. Otherwise do what you want with it.. tattoo it in hexadecimal on your back for all I care.. just send me the pics.
All open source licensing schemes are variations on this idea with differing restrictions.
Actually, it DOES have an impact on the enjoyability and quality of the software as a whole, because you have to go through a load of crap to be able to run it without the *malware* that is SECUROM. I am not going to let anybody dictate to me how to use the disk I just bought, and many enlightened geeks share this sentiment, so many will crack their own original game just to spite the publisher. How long will it take for game producers to wake up and get a fvcking clue? You cannot prevent information from being copied while it is being used. Due to it's nature, you can't stop info from being replicated. Or written down as strings of 1 and 0 on toilet paper and hung from trees. Or sung in hymns. Or played as musical notes on a guitar.
Once you give somebody a DVD with (or any medium) "stuff" on it, the intellectual ownership of the "stuff" may reside with you, but the freedom to pursue non-commercial (and therefore unlicensed) activity with information cannot be taken from ANYONE. When I start selling your products under my name, we can talk about IP theft, but I will sure as hell not stick to the 5-install-quota-from-the-heavens that these clowns think we will obey in our own homes.
I am aware that many flames are waiting to be thrown, and that the you're-buying-a-license arguments just can't wait to get out, but let me tell you that it nonsense to a computer scientist. It doesn't matter if the current naive laws are backing the idea that my $50 DVD is not a product on it's own. What matters is that until the geniuses who publish crippled, DRM'd games stop violating the American Constitution, they re going to spend insane amounts of money on futile attempts to control what we naturally can, and will always, do.
PS: I write software (commercial/academic research) for a living.
You think this is far fetched? I have a friend who is an ambassador in the US, and he told me he never talks about anything controversial in the embassy. When they need to discuss something, they go to a restaurant. ALL embassies are spied upon by US intelligence of course. This is supposed to be common knowledge.
And it gets even more complicated. The letter/shape grouping thing is well known in cognitive psychology (it's called Gestalt for Gates' sake) but how exactly the brain parses the words is a difficult question. First you have to consider the fact that context plays an important role, the brain uses it's knowledge of correct syntax to predict the next term - so if I wreit thnigs lkie this then (A) bad grmamar sihthaed (/A) you will realize that after (A) your brain takes much longer to recongnize the words since they don't fit the scenario.
Then you consider the words themselves, and like you said the presence of the characters is important, but not all letters are created equal, especially in latin-based languages. The brain may scan a word by looking at the first 2 letters, then skipping a few, then looking at the last letter to confirm, or maybe it's the first letter only and the rest are "clustered" visually from reading experience (like a familiar painting) or maybe the number of letters scanned varies with the length or the familiarity with the (expected) word..etc..etc. Interesting topic, but then again all topics related to how the brain does non-deterministic reasoning / pattern detection are very exciting because that is what Artificial Intelligence really lacks. The brain has a very different reasoning model than even probabilistic Turing Machines - it very heavily relies on recollection in reasoning, and the cortical activity therein is, in turn, based on retrieving information in a manner that "excites" / retrieves related visual, conceptual and "audio" information because of the nature of the biological "storage". Your neurons are a social lot. The algorithm part of all this is how the brain draws the lines between those recalled dots, and it's probably not too bizarre a program, but until we have decent cellular simulations of the biological brain at the appropriate scale, all this is just guesswork.
The many worlds interpretation is not standard and is considered by most to be rubbish - a lousy get-around to a difficult problem, also because it cannot (by definition) be supported by empirical evidence. IANAP but this came from at least one.
Our current universe is expanding. We don't know what happened before that. You didn't answer the question, genius. What does "before" mean? Or are you just a clueless schlum trying to argue things out with a high school physics background?
That doesn't have to be the case for energy/matter to have always existed. The other case is that energy was floating around forever in a small universe, kind of like the crap in your head. Whatever the case, the word "always" doesn't explain anything about the origin of the matter and it's characteristics, which is why physics departments in universities still exist.
Sure I can. We don't know what happened before the Big Bang, for example. Good, that means you're halfway to understanding that there are things about the very nature of physical existence that are not known and therefore little argument can take place about whether a similarly "unknowable" deity can play a role in all this.
LOL. Yeah right. You are a religious fundamentalist trying to lend credibility to his argument by lying. No, you're just a nameless, clueless kid on the internet and I don't generally lie to anyone let alone random nicknames on a forum. The fact that you think I am supporting my "argument" (and by the way can you tell me what my argument is) by lying about my beliefs is clear evidence that you haven't understood anything I've said so far. And by the way, you're black. Don't try to argue. You're black. I know it because I'm a stranger on the internet and I can tell you things about your racial origins that are true regardless of what you say. I'm having fun, how about you?
I do not believe there is sufficient evidence of a "God", especially as there are many heavy philosophical arguments against him, but I am open to the idea of probabilistic reasoning and debate only where debate can validly apply. I'm not married to my current belief because I (and the whole fucking scientific community) may be very wrong. In fact, being wrong is our only hope of advancement. You on the other hand are an atheist fundamentalist, and I can tell because you stink. That's right, the stench coming from your arrogant little brain is being routed with your packets all the way to my computer, and it makes me want to puke. Don't bother writing back, I don't have more time for you.
I'm sorry but you're still spewing BS. Do you know what "always" means, in the context of contracting/expanding spacetime? How can the idea that the universe has been going through "infinite" cycles (assuming you know what that means) possibly explain the nature of the universe or the causality behind it's characteristics? You have no choice but to accept that much of the pre-big bang (and indeed the early part of the big bang) universe/multi verse is cloudy. The "facts" you are looking for are difficult to find and observe, the reasoning is mostly mathematical based on certain incomplete models. Very little is known, and that is not a problem for me - I'm atheist you moron. It's a problem for you because you're just as "fundie" as the people you are imagining that you are having a conversation with right now. You just can't accept the idea that there are things that are completely unknown and possibly unknowable. You have the answer to everything because otherwise, God would exist, and that can't be possible can it? So instead of throwing insults around at people like a shit-chucking ape without the least provocation, learn to understand what the other side is trying to say.
You have good reason for it to crawl. From the BBC coverage:
[quote] (Retired Air Force Major General)Shepperd said the United States had agreed in a Cold War-era treaty not to fly nuclear weapons. "It appears that what happened was this treaty agreement was violated," he said.
The warheads should have been removed from the missiles before they were attached to the B-52 bomber, according to military officials.[/quote]
So right away you can tell that a cover-up is happening, because decommissioned warheads would not be fixed on cruise missile tips and flown to the base where mideast bombings are staged. It is very possible that both US and Russia violate their agreements in secret, so that part is not a major issue IMHO. But something very unfunny is going on.
Central Command: Blue Bird C451, this is central, do you copy. C541: Copy, over. Central Command: We have good news and bad news for you, over. C541: Ready to reciev orders, over. Central Command: Good news is you're going to be famous. Now your payload.. C541: Yes Sir. Central Command: Can you verify your current payload? C541: Kidney beans and tomatoes sir, over. [Muffled laughter, static] Central Command: Actually, those are nuclear warheads on your left wing, lieutenant. C541: Spicy kidney beans? Over.
Oh please, they were just 6 nukes. My grandma handles more dangerous payloads everyday. Stop whining. Plus, traveling over the fly-over states the pilot probably wouldn't have noticed if he dropped any. Less cows, maybe. Only gripe I have with those fellas is they didn't mistakenly head up north and have an accident, ridding us of the friggin canadians once and for all. We'll never have an opportunity like this again. This could've been the answer to Celine Dion.
Actually, you don't know shit about science, particularly in that you used the word "fact" concerning a part of the universe's history that we know very little about. What came "before" the big bang is a very important question and a whole range of theory, but most string-theoretic versions involve some sort of brane collision incident in higher non-spatial dimensions, that caused everything (where "everything" is a very very small bit of space) to literally pop into existence. Saying that energy and matter "always existed" doesn't explain their existence. In fact, this is why infinite-cycle type theories are generally not satisfactory though they may be correct to a large extent. The truth is that (like the sensible AC replied to me) we don't know yet, and that not-knowing is better than a magic-man myth. There is one thing that I hate more than stupid religious crackpots with an agenda: stupid atheist crackpots with an agenda.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll presume that was a joke, but my sarcasm detectors are on low today.
PS: I'm urinating all over your living room floor right now. It's good for the carpets.
This is about private property. I am surprised that you are allowed to have any demonstration at all on someone else's property without permission, unless that is your place of work. How does it apply to public protest on the streets(I know some toll roads are privately owned by companies)?
I quite like that
Anyone care to improve it its not quite perfect (My favourite being, "In a world without walls and fences, who need windows and gates" - somone ) Microsoft Hearts is a misnomer.
Zonk is also achieving victory in his war on the English Language! (Hint: the word is not bypass)
I for one, think that you're crazy to be doing this, and my immediate neighbors share the sentiment.
Is that legal? I thought you could make *optimize* something for your own hardware instructions, but can you legally make it worse for other people? And how will we ever know if this happens (there is no benchmark for "havok" engines I think).
Troll, eh. How you doing Bill? How's the wife?
Cleaning the most toxic pollution in the world involves cleaning up the Microsoft Windows Registry. And that topic, ladies and gentlemen, is not open to family safe discussions. Oh wait, is it sites you sayin? Oh baby, this goin be good, real good, I can tell you right now.
I was joking! What happened to the usual anti-GOP avalanche of moderation that would've marked me funny no matter the context? Are slashdot mods maturing finally.. can it be true?
Republicans, you mean.
Ah, but you see, if you make the monkey take the picture in a national park and the monkey doesn't belong to either of you, then the US of A (or more precisely the state that owns the park) clearly has the copyright over the creativity here. Also, the guy you got the bananas from *can* claim copyright *if and only if* he has given you the bananas for free, in which case he has partial ownership over the apparatus used to produce the photo. Of course, I win over him as well for giving him the idea. The acorn act is copyrighted by god, and I'm very surprised you asked. Unless you get the monkey owned by the state and fed by a purposeful bystander to drop the acorn at my directions onto your camera, then my girlfriend gets the copyright because the gender group she belongs to has patented inventive ways to make trouble.
Well for your information it took about a week for it to be publicly cracked. I am aware of the "delay until I make some dough" argument as well, but it is sadly also nonsensical. There have been games released with no DRM on them whatsoever (Oblivion I believe, which is not exactly low on sales) and the developers simply included a note saying that if you like the game please buy it. It didn't have any real effect since the people who download games know very well that the "copy protection" (god what a silly, clueless notion that is) will be overcome. The idea that people will rush out to get the game if it is DRM'd is silly - those who buy their games will continue to buy them and those who are unable or unwilling will not be "forced" to do so by waiting 5 days.
Plus, you seem to be missing the point - it is my right to communicate whatever information about any subject that does not constitute a danger to personal or national security, to anyone. You cannot tell me to not copy information from one DVD to another..it's stupid. That is why open sourced software works the way it does..the revenues made are usually via sales to big corporations who have custom-built solutions created for them, and it doesn't matter if the code is out in the open, except maybe matters of competition. The individual is usually not the target. With games and other individual-centric products, however, the problem becomes the question of how much revenue is "lost" to the sharing scene. Some say none at all - and let me tell you, it's a valid argument in *some* countries where $50 bucks will NEVER be paid for a CD. Personally, I think publishers of mass media should not worry too much.. lower your prices, respect the nature of information as being free (speech) and you will gain both respect and revenue.
Now if you take my software and say you wrote it, I will sue you, and it will be easy. If you try to sell it you need a license to do so because that is commercial activity, and if I don't want it sold I will sue you. Otherwise do what you want with it.. tattoo it in hexadecimal on your back for all I care.. just send me the pics.
All open source licensing schemes are variations on this idea with differing restrictions.
Actually, it DOES have an impact on the enjoyability and quality of the software as a whole, because you have to go through a load of crap to be able to run it without the *malware* that is SECUROM. I am not going to let anybody dictate to me how to use the disk I just bought, and many enlightened geeks share this sentiment, so many will crack their own original game just to spite the publisher. How long will it take for game producers to wake up and get a fvcking clue? You cannot prevent information from being copied while it is being used. Due to it's nature, you can't stop info from being replicated. Or written down as strings of 1 and 0 on toilet paper and hung from trees. Or sung in hymns. Or played as musical notes on a guitar.
Once you give somebody a DVD with (or any medium) "stuff" on it, the intellectual ownership of the "stuff" may reside with you, but the freedom to pursue non-commercial (and therefore unlicensed) activity with information cannot be taken from ANYONE. When I start selling your products under my name, we can talk about IP theft, but I will sure as hell not stick to the 5-install-quota-from-the-heavens that these clowns think we will obey in our own homes.
I am aware that many flames are waiting to be thrown, and that the you're-buying-a-license arguments just can't wait to get out, but let me tell you that it nonsense to a computer scientist. It doesn't matter if the current naive laws are backing the idea that my $50 DVD is not a product on it's own. What matters is that until the geniuses who publish crippled, DRM'd games stop violating the American Constitution, they re going to spend insane amounts of money on futile attempts to control what we naturally can, and will always, do.
PS: I write software (commercial/academic research) for a living.
You think this is far fetched? I have a friend who is an ambassador in the US, and he told me he never talks about anything controversial in the embassy. When they need to discuss something, they go to a restaurant. ALL embassies are spied upon by US intelligence of course. This is supposed to be common knowledge.
And it gets even more complicated. The letter/shape grouping thing is well known in cognitive psychology (it's called Gestalt for Gates' sake) but how exactly the brain parses the words is a difficult question. First you have to consider the fact that context plays an important role, the brain uses it's knowledge of correct syntax to predict the next term - so if I wreit thnigs lkie this then (A) bad grmamar sihthaed (/A) you will realize that after (A) your brain takes much longer to recongnize the words since they don't fit the scenario.
Then you consider the words themselves, and like you said the presence of the characters is important, but not all letters are created equal, especially in latin-based languages. The brain may scan a word by looking at the first 2 letters, then skipping a few, then looking at the last letter to confirm, or maybe it's the first letter only and the rest are "clustered" visually from reading experience (like a familiar painting) or maybe the number of letters scanned varies with the length or the familiarity with the (expected) word..etc..etc. Interesting topic, but then again all topics related to how the brain does non-deterministic reasoning / pattern detection are very exciting because that is what Artificial Intelligence really lacks. The brain has a very different reasoning model than even probabilistic Turing Machines - it very heavily relies on recollection in reasoning, and the cortical activity therein is, in turn, based on retrieving information in a manner that "excites" / retrieves related visual, conceptual and "audio" information because of the nature of the biological "storage". Your neurons are a social lot. The algorithm part of all this is how the brain draws the lines between those recalled dots, and it's probably not too bizarre a program, but until we have decent cellular simulations of the biological brain at the appropriate scale, all this is just guesswork.
Psychology is in the dark ages.
The problem with ACs is you can't track them down and make them pay for your new keyboard.
The many worlds interpretation is not standard and is considered by most to be rubbish - a lousy get-around to a difficult problem, also because it cannot (by definition) be supported by empirical evidence. IANAP but this came from at least one.
I do not believe there is sufficient evidence of a "God", especially as there are many heavy philosophical arguments against him, but I am open to the idea of probabilistic reasoning and debate only where debate can validly apply. I'm not married to my current belief because I (and the whole fucking scientific community) may be very wrong. In fact, being wrong is our only hope of advancement. You on the other hand are an atheist fundamentalist, and I can tell because you stink. That's right, the stench coming from your arrogant little brain is being routed with your packets all the way to my computer, and it makes me want to puke. Don't bother writing back, I don't have more time for you.
I'm sorry but you're still spewing BS. Do you know what "always" means, in the context of contracting/expanding spacetime? How can the idea that the universe has been going through "infinite" cycles (assuming you know what that means) possibly explain the nature of the universe or the causality behind it's characteristics? You have no choice but to accept that much of the pre-big bang (and indeed the early part of the big bang) universe/multi verse is cloudy. The "facts" you are looking for are difficult to find and observe, the reasoning is mostly mathematical based on certain incomplete models. Very little is known, and that is not a problem for me - I'm atheist you moron. It's a problem for you because you're just as "fundie" as the people you are imagining that you are having a conversation with right now. You just can't accept the idea that there are things that are completely unknown and possibly unknowable. You have the answer to everything because otherwise, God would exist, and that can't be possible can it? So instead of throwing insults around at people like a shit-chucking ape without the least provocation, learn to understand what the other side is trying to say.
You have good reason for it to crawl. From the BBC coverage:
[quote] (Retired Air Force Major General)Shepperd said the United States had agreed in a Cold War-era treaty not to fly nuclear weapons. "It appears that what happened was this treaty agreement was violated," he said.
The warheads should have been removed from the missiles before they were attached to the B-52 bomber, according to military officials.[/quote]
So right away you can tell that a cover-up is happening, because decommissioned warheads would not be fixed on cruise missile tips and flown to the base where mideast bombings are staged. It is very possible that both US and Russia violate their agreements in secret, so that part is not a major issue IMHO. But something very unfunny is going on.
Moderators: WOOOOOOOOSH! That's the sound of sarcasm being accidentally flown over your head.
Central Command: Blue Bird C451, this is central, do you copy.
C541: Copy, over.
Central Command: We have good news and bad news for you, over.
C541: Ready to reciev orders, over.
Central Command: Good news is you're going to be famous. Now your payload..
C541: Yes Sir.
Central Command: Can you verify your current payload?
C541: Kidney beans and tomatoes sir, over.
[Muffled laughter, static]
Central Command: Actually, those are nuclear warheads on your left wing, lieutenant.
C541: Spicy kidney beans? Over.
Oh please, they were just 6 nukes. My grandma handles more dangerous payloads everyday. Stop whining. Plus, traveling over the fly-over states the pilot probably wouldn't have noticed if he dropped any. Less cows, maybe. Only gripe I have with those fellas is they didn't mistakenly head up north and have an accident, ridding us of the friggin canadians once and for all. We'll never have an opportunity like this again. This could've been the answer to Celine Dion.
Actually, you don't know shit about science, particularly in that you used the word "fact" concerning a part of the universe's history that we know very little about. What came "before" the big bang is a very important question and a whole range of theory, but most string-theoretic versions involve some sort of brane collision incident in higher non-spatial dimensions, that caused everything (where "everything" is a very very small bit of space) to literally pop into existence. Saying that energy and matter "always existed" doesn't explain their existence. In fact, this is why infinite-cycle type theories are generally not satisfactory though they may be correct to a large extent. The truth is that (like the sensible AC replied to me) we don't know yet, and that not-knowing is better than a magic-man myth. There is one thing that I hate more than stupid religious crackpots with an agenda: stupid atheist crackpots with an agenda.