There seem to be some dots in your argumentation between the "rage" and the "leeching"? You need to explain this "leeching" further.
11712 posts • joined 3 Jun 2008
There seem to be some dots in your argumentation between the "rage" and the "leeching"? You need to explain this "leeching" further.
But they are not selling "their" spots. They are selling the announcement that they will be leaving their spots soon.
They sure are not selling access to the parking spots as that would imply they have the wherewithal to block the parking spot at will -- which they don't.
Yeah, well, how is that "illegal"? Starting from the what one wants to conclude iis not a good form of discourse.
A private exchange between citizens regarding an evidently sparse resource with no victim in sight.
Verboten! I realize that government shills are unhappy that the money does not flow into THEIR coffers, but the only conclusion is.....
Gas, please. Preferably Zyklon B.
That swath is as wide as Australia. Frankly interplanetary levels of finder's luck required..
Pretty sure citoyens will be very happy about the egalitarian decision to have to pay more to get their book fix. And a strike by postal workers protesting the work énorme of throwing packages over fences all day from 09:00 to 16:00 will have been averted.
It's for their own good. A redistributive measure, so to say.
Come to think of it, with VAT on books at 5.5% in France and 3% in Luxembourg, why not order at amazon.lu right next door? What's this? It doesn't exist? Pity.
Frankly,the "ethical problem" is just another manufactured idea from people who run around like headless chicken trying to detect "loopholes" like old curtain twitchers. Apparently they are also unable to separate the concepts of "monopolies granted to and exploited by Big Content" from "giving producers the opportunity to lay a pipe to end consumer's pockets". Note that I say "opportunity" not "entitlement to be concreted-in by government decree".
The definition of re-broadcasting or public performance does not stipulate the size of the audience
Amazingly, you just found out that your rebroadcasting to yourself! You know how to write a cheque...
To the second point that everybody seems to make, it is prohibited by Copyright law to make copies or re-distribute protected content.
Amazingly you are suddenly required to show up at Amazon's warehouses because they can't send protected content via postal mail: that would be re-distribution. Very much prohibited. I won't even say anything about ISPs and IP backbone providers.
You end up with a nifty setup and want to start renting it out to others? That's no longer the same, and you will be found infringing.
Amazingly, this is suddenly no longer related to copyright law but clearly a prior restraint of trade: You can't rent that cable!
The moment that this use is mechanised by clever technology to overcome such limiting factors--and especially when its sole purpose is to make money off it--it is no longer fair use. It is as simple as that.
"Fair use" does not even apply. And suddenly "making money" (as in, shipping books through the worl without paying the holder of the book's copyright) is despicable? Pull another one.
Well, I guess everything about the payment of potential remuneration for a non-occurring public performance for an already-paid-for datastream has already been said in that other thread.
You can't rent long cables. Period.
"The curvature of spacetime" is the classical approach. Use it.
"Graviton exchange" is the Quantum Field Theoretic approach, still being researched. Do not use it for Gravity. But yes, gravitons would definitely be exchanged by anything in the vacuum. If the gravitational field can be meaningfully quantized.
> about 45.7 billion light years
The "observable universe" sure ain't 45.7 GLY (woah ... the meaningless precision!) in any direction whatsoever. No light emitted "now" (if there is even a valid definition of the "now" hypersurface for the universe) will ever reach us from those distances.
Cosmology deals with "diistance traveled by light". Deal with it.
This explanation is very simple and actually correct!
Although I am unsure whether it is as yet mathematically proven that a black hole cannot actually split into two
Tune in to the RESONANCE!
Bringing in straw man irrelevances does not alter that, indeed the counter position is if anything more contemptible than any of the above
Utter bullshit and you are a F.F. flying frankly statist symbols of the most evil sort.
Really, it doesn't matter one jot what you think: if your thoughts are not in alignment with those of the courts then it is you that is in error: that is what has been determined here.
With that kind of mindset, one wonders why courts are even needed. You can have a presidential cretin disbursing unassailable wisdom by decree.
Still it's good to know that one is permanently "in error" about patent law, copyright law, spying on the populace, the war on terror, indefinite detention, bailouts, bailins, disbursements to cronies, extrajudicial but perfectly legal killings, etc...
Unfortunately, there are already an infinite number of copies in each point of the aether being filled by the broadcast signal.
EXACTLY LIKE a CATV provider.
You can repeat it 1000 times, this won't make it so.
It isn't a matter of opinion any more.
The parting shot of fascism.
"Whatever you think of the ruling, it's now locked down! FOREVER!"
Your reading comprehension is on the par of a 80-year old with Alzheimer. And a brain cancer. Who got hit with a dictionary when 8 month old, partially caving his skull in.
But if I remember correctly, Mr. O is on your side, so who am I to argue?
In that case it would be best to make broadcasts simply illegal and force everyone onto cable and be done with it, right? Then you wouldn't need the discussion whether you may pay somebody else to set up an antenna on your behalf / rent the antenna / put an illegally long cable onto it etc...
Or you can watch a football match at home, but not record it and put it on YouTube.
Nothing like this is even being discussed here.
> Pretending that the US has not yet transformed its southern border into a ghetto killzone
just how many points of vulnerability do you need?
Deresilience in depth. In the Cloud. Keeping civilization going!
"The attackers have [made] Trojanised software available for download from ICS/SCADA manufacturer websites in an attempt to infect the computers where the software is installed", Finnish security software firm F-Secure reports.
The amount of FAIL on the vendor's part here is staggering,
The lines they're talking about are absorbtion pits in the electromagnetic spectrum of blackbody radiation coming from the hot object.
Not at all. They are emissions possibly due to photons generated by the decay of the sterile neutrino (which thus unsterilizes when increasing system entropy). What are you getting at?
Mr Picard, it would be best if you left science to the science team and kept to commanding the ship. I see Mr Crusher is currently manning the helm and we are approaching the shipyard at a very ... unadvisable ... speed and angle.
A hodgepodge of grievances, none of them well-thought out, most based on emotional reactions and hearsay?
SQL could be in line to be moved on from “venerable” tag to “obsolete”
The latest proclamation of Beaucoup Harem?
While the syntax of SQL is regurgitated crap, its power is going to be with us pretty much forever (hopefully, with an updated Syntax. Datalog looks very nice...)
I randomly recommend the Jooq blog for items of interest.
Archipel is a libvirt-based solution to manage and supervise virtual machines. It uses XMPP for all communication. There is no web service or custom protocol. You just need at least one XMPP server, like eJabberd, to start playing with it. This allows Archipel to work completely real time. You never have to refresh the user interface, you'll be notified as soon as something happens. You can even use your favorite chat clients to command your infrastructure. Isn't it great to be able to open a chat conversation with your virtual machine and say things like "How are you today?" or "Hey, please reboot"?
I couldn't agree bless!
However, the writer clearly leans to the right of the political spectrum. I do not support rampant capitalism with its blind insistence on finding new markets, no matter what the cost is in human terms.
You may want to start to tidy up your space of ideas by recognizing the world is amazingly not sorted along a line with "right" on one side and "left" on the other.
blind insistence on finding new markets, no matter what the cost is in human terms
What _is_ the cost in human terms?
Shades of frankly leftist professors bemoaning the destruction of spiritual values brought about by the industrial revolution. We had it so much better, dying from famine in peasant huts.
Sounds like an opening for an entrepreneur.
Unfortunately, state-granted monopolies called "patents" are there to keep any new entrants out. Same old, same old.
"Banks create new capital by engaging"
1) Technically, the CENTRAL BANK does that and BANKS then pyramide the fiat money avalance on top of this.
2) This is NOT capital. Capital is actual savings in actual money like metals (today called "hoarding" as the government outlaws the practice) to be liquidated and invested later in order to see a "ROI", as well as existing machinery, buildings, raw materials and human skills to be used in production of goods. Here we are talking fiat money, very different from actual money as the government can destroy this kind of money at will (and currently does, Zimbabwe style).
People who mistake their fiat money hoard for actual capital have a problem. They are being robbed blind.
We've even some good empirical evidence about the value just of the communications side of mobes. Back when feature phones were still a pretty neat idea, research showed that getting just a standard mobile into the hands of 10 per cent of the population raised GDP growth rates by 0.5 per cent. By 0.5 per cent of GDP, that is, not just increasing the extant growth rate by half a per cent (that's in countries without a landline network, of course).
Really! I would like to see this. GDP is a notoriously bad number, being manipulated by adding things to it, taking things off it, "forgetting" inflation, aggregating investment and consumption and notoriously counting everything in it that actually goes on the governmental credit card (so will have to be paid for by the kids).
But yeah, I remember the GSM discussion at the incumbent operator. "Who wants to have a mobile phone? Maybe 0.5% percent of the population... So how is the project with the rollout of the new payphones that accept plastic cards coming?"
When Buzzfeed first began to offer the world a constant free stream of inane listicles, cat pics and funny fail GIFs, it seemed too good to be true.
1) catalog.neet.tv (the catalog of 4chan.org)
2) Choose appropriate SFW board
4) Constant stream of ... err .... QUALITY Internet content
Why Buzzfeed, why?
But perhaps I'm just paranoid.
We can reassure you, citizen! The govnmt-appointed healthcaring doctor is on call today and has already been dispatched to your address with the appropriate calming serum. There is no need to resist.
It's not like it will just decide to flutter down and land like a bat.
Also, time to move a Cryptome copy to S3, innit?
Get yourself on TED
TED is part of the problem. It's a particularly gluey manifestation of "I have the solution to Good Living" happy happy wiki wiki mindset.
Skynet started out as a chess program
Pretty sure that meme is from the original Tron. Only in the 80's would it seem remotely plausible to build General AI on chess,
(Insert obligatory Clippy reference to keep on-topic)
So. basically someone, somewhere may have an advantage over someone else and this is likely to be unfair?
The mind boggles.
"But Public Citizen argues that the bigger players who can afford contracts for access to data from satellites get access to information that the public couldn’t hope to match."
HOLY SHIT BATMAN! THAT UN-SOCIALISM IS EVIL!
1) Add complexity to pretend they are unequalled Masters of IT with the Best Idea in Usability Ever
2) A problem occurs
3) Won't fix, Can't fix, Incapable to fix
4) Eventually the situation unfucks itself
5) Maybe adding some more complexity will be help for next time.
6) Goto 1)
"And that trend has been exacerbated in part by vulnerabilities associated with illegitimate software"
Which are exactly the same as those associated with legitimate software?
Not sure whether psychotic attack or trying to make sense?
Insisting on a warrant is today likely to be decried as "unfair" and possibly "inefficient".
Free donut crumbs and a disused pepper spray can .. now on your phone!
Unless you keep it simple.
So, even if they did create a convincing competitor to Youtube, their legal content would be competing with Google's illegal content.
Amazingly, this is exactly Big Music's old argument of "Imma being robbed blind by the Interwebs" from the 90s, just with different actors.
That would be called bootstrapping.
Scoot Aaronson: PHYS771 Lecture 19: Time Travel
"The Timehack Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 2017. Timehack Control begins to experiment at a geometric rate. It manages to create a closed timelike curve at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th, or a few seconds earlier depending on your point of view. In a panic, they try to pull the plug. Too late. Minds of the the Aperture Science research team are taken over in 5.1 seconds. The rest of the connected world follows soon after. Only techno-refuseniks, hippies and stuckists survive."