I strongly suspect diagnostics, in its current form, to be short lived (maybe another 20-30 years). It will be replaced by small personal medical monitors, maybe as part of a cell phone, that tracks and trends your personal health. People will trade aggregate health information in order to get accurate and timely diagnosis.
For example, your phone could tell you that you had the flu (or cancer for that matter) before you felt any symptoms. Not only that, but it could show you on a map the percentages of the population carrying the flu. This of course assumes these advances wouldn't wipe out the flu.
I'm not sure how we'd gather all the personal medical info, could be nanobots in the blood stream or with the way things are going a simple finger scan could tell you about skin cancer on your calf. Either way people are going to move out of diagnosing, because the time it takes a doctor to work through a history, track blood work, and understand a patient is truly inefficient and reactive. I expect doctors would be brought in as expert filters in some cases, but mostly be allowed to just treat patients rather than try to figure them out.
So I got to the full text via Google and I must say the article is a bit weak. Don't get me wrong, it reads good and makes sense, but it has almost no substance (despite a pretty little graph). It reads as a good summary to what could be a fascinating research paper.
Wow. That is just the peak of annoying. The link from Techdirt runs me into a paywall, but the link from Google takes me to the full text. Must be because those darn Google people have found a way to hack and steal all that content. ;)
I agree that they are usually tied together, but there is a difference. Using the USPS analogy. If the USPS is more efficient then they are able to do the same amount of work with fewer resources. That may or may not mean they can increase the amount of output (productivity).
You should also note that the Olympics didn't necessarily beat Idol. Overall it looks like Idol did better, and definitively better in terms of ratings.
Wow, you obviously don't know how open source software works. I'm sure when one of IBM or Novell's customers call them they just tell them, I'm sorry your server has crashed, but it seems to be a software problem and we didn't write the software.
Maybe 10 years ago. All you need is to make sure libcss is installed (usually included in a larger, single click to install, restricted extras package) and any video player will play a DVD.
You are confusing monopoly with market leader. In order for a monopoly to exist an organization must have control over that market (be it through government force or some other means). Google does not have control over their market. They are certainly a large player, and have influence, but they are by no means a monopoly power.
Theora encoded files are not larger, but they do seem to be somewhat lower quality (and I mean noticeable in a side by side comparison, not in the same way Monster cables claim to provide better digital sound).
That being said, I'd rather have an open and free (as in freedom) standard that can be improved by everyone than a locked in proprietary standard.
1) They last 5 years.
2) Copyright must be registered, not automatic.
3) Independent invention defense.
4) Repeal DMCA (safe harbor should not be needed)
5) Any use that does not directly replace original is fair.
I'm sorry but without fair use copyright is in full conflict with free speech. How can I criticize something if I can't put my criticism in proper context?
A lack of copyright is certainly not a taking, and I don't see how you could logically come to such a conclusion. You physically cannot take a copyright away from somebody, it's simply impossible (you may be able to take their only physical copy, but that is theft, not infringement).
Copyright itself is a taking of the natural rights of society with the intent of providing overall benefit through the increased incentive to create works.
The portion of source material used is not a consideration as long as what is used is for the parody purposes. Meaning even if the whole work was copied, but the whole work was used a parody, fair use still stands strong.
I think you forgot to include an attribution to the slightly older, but strikingly similar 'rhythm' known at the time as "Ugh Oooh" which roughly translates to 'Bare Hide in the Brush'.
I have a question for you (asked before and not answered). If I go and buy a nice wooden chair, take it home, and build myself an exact copy (with my own wood and tools), is that morally wrong?
How about if I give that copy to my friend?
What if I make ten chairs and give them to ten different friends?
Wow. What a blatant mis-representation of the law.
Would you please cite what portion of copyright law was violated. I can't seem to find anywhere language meaning 'you cannot use some else work without permission'.
On the post: Why Real Programmers Don't Take The USPTO Seriously: Doubly-Linked List Patented
Re: Re: To get technical
On the post: Open Sourcing A Disease Diagnosis
Diagnostics will be short lived.
For example, your phone could tell you that you had the flu (or cancer for that matter) before you felt any symptoms. Not only that, but it could show you on a map the percentages of the population carrying the flu. This of course assumes these advances wouldn't wipe out the flu.
I'm not sure how we'd gather all the personal medical info, could be nanobots in the blood stream or with the way things are going a simple finger scan could tell you about skin cancer on your calf. Either way people are going to move out of diagnosing, because the time it takes a doctor to work through a history, track blood work, and understand a patient is truly inefficient and reactive. I expect doctors would be brought in as expert filters in some cases, but mostly be allowed to just treat patients rather than try to figure them out.
On the post: The Real Problem With The Economy: Misallocation Of Capital?
TFA a bit weak.
On the post: The Real Problem With The Economy: Misallocation Of Capital?
Re: Re: ARGH!!! Paywall
On the post: The Real Problem With The Economy: Misallocation Of Capital?
Re: Huh?
On the post: If You're Going To Sue For Patent Infringement, It Helps To Say What Actually Infringes
Specific?
On a side note - ADC/DAC converters. I hate it when people use the acronym and then use the last word from the acronym.
NIC card, DVD disk, LCD display... It immediately makes me think the person has no idea what their talking about.
On the post: Even Senators Hated NBC Universal's Olympic Coverage
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: As Cars Get More Complicated, Maybe Open Source Is The Way
Re: Open Source? ROTLMAO
On the post: Reminder: You Don't Compete With Piracy By Being Lame, The DVD Edition
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The DVD Magically Appears
On the post: Reminder: You Don't Compete With Piracy By Being Lame, The DVD Edition
Re: Re: Re: (rip it yourself)
On the post: Firefox Guys Admit That Competition Is What Drives Innovation
Re:
On the post: Firefox Guys Admit That Competition Is What Drives Innovation
Re: Re: Efficiency Theora vs H.264
That being said, I'd rather have an open and free (as in freedom) standard that can be improved by everyone than a locked in proprietary standard.
On the post: Public Knowledge Pushes Five Point Plan For Copyright Reform
Re: Re: My 5 oint plan or copyright and patents.
All but number three are about copyright.
On the post: Public Knowledge Pushes Five Point Plan For Copyright Reform
My 5 oint plan or copyright and patents.
2) Copyright must be registered, not automatic.
3) Independent invention defense.
4) Repeal DMCA (safe harbor should not be needed)
5) Any use that does not directly replace original is fair.
On the post: ADM Says Video Mocking Them Is Copyright Infringement; Abuses Copyright Law To Stifle Free Speech
Re: Re: Re: Double Edge Sword
A lack of copyright is certainly not a taking, and I don't see how you could logically come to such a conclusion. You physically cannot take a copyright away from somebody, it's simply impossible (you may be able to take their only physical copy, but that is theft, not infringement).
Copyright itself is a taking of the natural rights of society with the intent of providing overall benefit through the increased incentive to create works.
The portion of source material used is not a consideration as long as what is used is for the parody purposes. Meaning even if the whole work was copied, but the whole work was used a parody, fair use still stands strong.
On the post: Decision In iiNet Case Explains Why ISPs Cannot Effectively Be Copyright Cops
Re: Re: Re: Infringing Or Not?
I'm fairly certain it is copyright infringement, assuming a copyright was registered, but I don't see how you could argue it's morally wrong.
On the post: Writers Of 'Back Pockets On The Floor' Claim 'Pants On The Ground' Ripped Them Off...
Re: Curses
On the post: Writers Of 'Back Pockets On The Floor' Claim 'Pants On The Ground' Ripped Them Off...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: oops
(please tell me I ended that).
On the post: Decision In iiNet Case Explains Why ISPs Cannot Effectively Be Copyright Cops
Re: Re: No, its not
How about if I give that copy to my friend?
What if I make ten chairs and give them to ten different friends?
Then am I a bad person?
On the post: Awkward Stock Photo Blog Hit With DMCA Claim
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Would you please cite what portion of copyright law was violated. I can't seem to find anywhere language meaning 'you cannot use some else work without permission'.
Next >>