So they can't sell it, but is it posted somewhere for free as a PDF?
This is culture and advancement of Seuss' style and legacy. If the those sitting on his grave aren't getting paid enough from books they didn't write that they have to shut down something that is an homage as much as anything, the least we can do is keep the culture pushing forward by spreading this underground.
Hard to truly say until the details fully come out, but they don't fit the MO.
The standard FBI created terrorist is a single person without any friends and usually some mental issues that the Feds can convince to do/say the wrong things to government plants so they can do the arresting.
The Whitmer plot appears to involve a small militia group that was planning amongst themselves and needed no outside coercion from the FBI. Therefore it doesn't fit the MO of the FBI created terrorist suspect.
This! We are in a place in history where information is literally a phone away. Can't remember who the 14th president is? Google that shit. Need to know what the density of water or Planck's constant are, you can look them up. Allowing for getting the easy information from the giant information system we all now use would require test creators to write tests that aren't about rote memorization, but maybe that's the point. The people creating these things are still stuck in the days before the internet and are still stuck in the bizarre land where memorization is more important than understanding and application. It's bizarre because that's not how the real world works at all.
Someone always jumps out of the woodwork on these discussions about "all good programmers" and other nonsense about "you use a text editor" so my TODO App deserves a spot in the Library of Congress next to For Whom the Bell Tolls. As software engineer, I'd like to shoot down the idea that software should have copyright yet again.
1) Software is more like a recipe than a novel. It is directions for silicon wafers given life by lightning to take inputs and give outputs. Writing the code is mostly formulaic (once you know what you are trying to do) and much code that does the same function will look very similar, if not sometimes the same. The reason is that at the heart of programming is the practice of writing exacting enough instruction for a box of sand that is very good at doing very dumb things fast to do the right things when so many things can and will go wrong. You are writing procedures. And talking about how your code gets converted to a form to work in the environment, just proves that you are writing meta-procedures that an interpreter can read and write into a language that the computer understands -- even if you don't.
2) Creativity in development is kind of a joke. What are you going to be creative with, variable and method names? Oh great, you figured out how to obfuscate what you are doing by creating an API that no sane person would want to use... Your spaghetti code is so bad the next developer that has to pick up your code will want to look up your address and murder you in your sleep. No matter how cutesy you want to be, you are still writing instructions on how to generate pi. If you really have invented a new algorithm, then patent that. Otherwise, procedures aren't copyrightable.
3) Just because something is the length of a novel, doesn't mean it should be treated like one. No matter the size of the codebase, it isn't a creative endeavor in the same way. Adding features is still adding code that takes inputs, makes calculations, and gives outputs. It is a procedure, and procedures aren't copyrightable.
4) But how will I ever make money as a programmer if I can't copyright my code? You aren't paid to write code, no one is paying you for your k-loc's (or if they are... hopefully you know you are taking money from idiots). You are paid to solve problems. If you could solve the problem with a no-code solution, yay! Some of the best problems are solved by erasing code, reducing bloat and stripping out previous peoples' "creativity". Some other problems involve writing new code, or adapting others code. When you sell your app to someone, they usually don't care how much code you had to write as long as it isn't too large, they are looking for a solution to a problem. Even companies buying startups "for their code" aren't buying them for the copyright in their code -- they want the trade secrets, unique solutions, the how did you solve this problem we can't/won't solve.
And none of this involves copyrighting how to reverse a string so you can sue someone for "copying" your O(n) solution.
This idea breaks down once you start having more than 1 individual in a picture. A photographer takes a picture of a crowd -- does everyone in the crowd have a separate copyright in that picture? Why? Just because you bounce light off your person doesn't mean you had anything to do with the photograph more than just being. If you don't want to by chance have a photograph of yourself taken while out in public, don't go out in public. It's simple enough.
Now the question of "fair use" is more nuanced -- where does it break down when someone uses a picture of you for something -- do you have the right to use it yourself? I'm actually not sure.
It also makes it nearly impossible to cycle the key. The issue with keys on the internet is that they should be switched out every so often. The biggest reason being that better keys often come along and that previously "foolproof" key is actually hackable (see TLS 1.0 and 1.1), but second to that is that no key is 100% unbreakable. Its just that a lot of time is needed to crack/bruteforce/guess. If you change it every so often, then you reset the time it takes to crack it (more or less).
I find it very telling that AOC's comments (about not sweeping the misdeeds of Trump's administration and enablers under the rug, but trying to make sure we remember and hold them accountable) are twisted. Its almost as if the desire for retribution rather than justice, unaccountability of the rich/powerful rather than equality under the law is something they think all Democrats are interested in.
And this is why conspiracy theories prosper. No matter what facts or evidence is explained by people just... well, being people, the conspiracy theorist will see a much more devious meaning behind it and will also move the goalposts as necessary to keep the conspiracy alive.
Or some of us just hide in the shadows posting anonymously until the accusations fly and then log in just to make their "it's a conspiracy" readings go right off the scale.
Thanks for posting the stats. Every time someone throws out "a school shooting a day in America" I have a hard time believing it's true but never know where to look for accurate statistics.
Now if they were to say, "it seems like you hear about a school shooting every day", that's probably way more true. One almost every 2 weeks across the entirety of the nation would probably work into the standard news cycle where just as the last one was starting to taper off a new one occurs.
Yes, yes it can. Part of the legal immigration process includes needing to keep your nose squeaky clean until you can get a more permanent status. Any trouble with law enforcement can get you deported.
That's why its a trope in many movies where the crooked LEO/DA tells the poor immigrant they better do as they are told or they will get them accused of something and get them deported.
I will go one step further. Your example of a dictionary is close but could go further.
The dictionaries can be copyrighted for the explanatory and sample text, but what they cannot copyright is the interface, which for a dictionary is more than just the word.
The interface in every modern dictionary is the word, the type of speech, and the pronunciation. That way everyone who runs across a new word knows how it is supposed to be used and pronounced, not just what the meaning given to it by that specific dictionary.
Its very interesting to see a bunch of people who are not in corporate compliance argue how this is a non-issue and doesn't have to do with GDPR. As someone who is in compliance and is an acting CISO for an American company, let me state a few things.
1. GPDR is a very vague law that waves its hands around "complying" in a lot of vague and general ways that affects a bunch of highly technical industries where vague solutions are not an option. This makes complying in a way that makes the corporation bullet proof very hard. If someone complains and a government lawyer takes up the complaint, the company has to spend lots of time and money to prove they complied with every single little aspect of the law.
2. The penalties for unsuccessfully guarding against a single complaint is €10M-20M or 4% of Gross Worldwide Product (whichever is bigger). For a huge percentage of the businesses in this world, that penalty would destroy the business. Even fighting it might destroy the business.
3. GDPR Article 13 section 3 states: Where the controller intends to further process the personal data for a purpose other than that for which the personal data were collected, the controller shall provide the data subject prior to that further processing with information on that other purpose and with any relevant further information as referred to in paragraph 2.
I can very well understand this company's rules about return. They took the customer's information for the purpose of making a sale. A return is not a sale, and to look up the transaction, process it as returned, and then update that customer's information, it is quite easy to argue the return as a secondary purpose and therefore the business is required by law to notify the customer. I understand it sounds insane to many, but it's a sensible interpretation of the law that if they don't comply with may destroy their business.
And just because someone is quoted as saying "there are other ways to comply with this law" doesn't mean any of those options are better. Lots of big businesses in the USA are still complying with the GDPR by blocking all EU traffic to their websites.
The Great Firewall of China is going to be a joke compared to the Iron Internet Curtain that will be "placed" around the EU IPs if this goes thru.
Now might be a good time to put some money in VPN stocks or start your own VPN company... cause sure as hell there will be some mighty fine IP filters being built once this is rammed thru.
Dude, give it a rest on the undead accounts conspiracy theory.
You said I was a zombie account come back because I didn't sign in for a bunch of years... but I did read and comment... I was just to lazy to sign in, and sometimes too lazy to even use my own name un-signed in.
(untitled comment)
So they can't sell it, but is it posted somewhere for free as a PDF?
This is culture and advancement of Seuss' style and legacy. If the those sitting on his grave aren't getting paid enough from books they didn't write that they have to shut down something that is an homage as much as anything, the least we can do is keep the culture pushing forward by spreading this underground.
Re: ONLY.
Specs might not include it, but it is there. I bought myself these headphones during the summer. I like them.
The Z2s come with a 4ft long 1/8" cord with mic and push button that plugs directly into the right ear housing.
Re:
Hard to truly say until the details fully come out, but they don't fit the MO.
The standard FBI created terrorist is a single person without any friends and usually some mental issues that the Feds can convince to do/say the wrong things to government plants so they can do the arresting.
The Whitmer plot appears to involve a small militia group that was planning amongst themselves and needed no outside coercion from the FBI. Therefore it doesn't fit the MO of the FBI created terrorist suspect.
Re:
This! We are in a place in history where information is literally a phone away. Can't remember who the 14th president is? Google that shit. Need to know what the density of water or Planck's constant are, you can look them up. Allowing for getting the easy information from the giant information system we all now use would require test creators to write tests that aren't about rote memorization, but maybe that's the point. The people creating these things are still stuck in the days before the internet and are still stuck in the bizarre land where memorization is more important than understanding and application. It's bizarre because that's not how the real world works at all.
Re: Re: Umm
Someone always jumps out of the woodwork on these discussions about "all good programmers" and other nonsense about "you use a text editor" so my TODO App deserves a spot in the Library of Congress next to For Whom the Bell Tolls. As software engineer, I'd like to shoot down the idea that software should have copyright yet again.
1) Software is more like a recipe than a novel. It is directions for silicon wafers given life by lightning to take inputs and give outputs. Writing the code is mostly formulaic (once you know what you are trying to do) and much code that does the same function will look very similar, if not sometimes the same. The reason is that at the heart of programming is the practice of writing exacting enough instruction for a box of sand that is very good at doing very dumb things fast to do the right things when so many things can and will go wrong. You are writing procedures. And talking about how your code gets converted to a form to work in the environment, just proves that you are writing meta-procedures that an interpreter can read and write into a language that the computer understands -- even if you don't.
2) Creativity in development is kind of a joke. What are you going to be creative with, variable and method names? Oh great, you figured out how to obfuscate what you are doing by creating an API that no sane person would want to use... Your spaghetti code is so bad the next developer that has to pick up your code will want to look up your address and murder you in your sleep. No matter how cutesy you want to be, you are still writing instructions on how to generate pi. If you really have invented a new algorithm, then patent that. Otherwise, procedures aren't copyrightable.
3) Just because something is the length of a novel, doesn't mean it should be treated like one. No matter the size of the codebase, it isn't a creative endeavor in the same way. Adding features is still adding code that takes inputs, makes calculations, and gives outputs. It is a procedure, and procedures aren't copyrightable.
4) But how will I ever make money as a programmer if I can't copyright my code? You aren't paid to write code, no one is paying you for your k-loc's (or if they are... hopefully you know you are taking money from idiots). You are paid to solve problems. If you could solve the problem with a no-code solution, yay! Some of the best problems are solved by erasing code, reducing bloat and stripping out previous peoples' "creativity". Some other problems involve writing new code, or adapting others code. When you sell your app to someone, they usually don't care how much code you had to write as long as it isn't too large, they are looking for a solution to a problem. Even companies buying startups "for their code" aren't buying them for the copyright in their code -- they want the trade secrets, unique solutions, the how did you solve this problem we can't/won't solve.
And none of this involves copyrighting how to reverse a string so you can sue someone for "copying" your O(n) solution.
Re:
This idea breaks down once you start having more than 1 individual in a picture. A photographer takes a picture of a crowd -- does everyone in the crowd have a separate copyright in that picture? Why? Just because you bounce light off your person doesn't mean you had anything to do with the photograph more than just being. If you don't want to by chance have a photograph of yourself taken while out in public, don't go out in public. It's simple enough.
Now the question of "fair use" is more nuanced -- where does it break down when someone uses a picture of you for something -- do you have the right to use it yourself? I'm actually not sure.
Re: Re:
It also makes it nearly impossible to cycle the key. The issue with keys on the internet is that they should be switched out every so often. The biggest reason being that better keys often come along and that previously "foolproof" key is actually hackable (see TLS 1.0 and 1.1), but second to that is that no key is 100% unbreakable. Its just that a lot of time is needed to crack/bruteforce/guess. If you change it every so often, then you reset the time it takes to crack it (more or less).
Re: Re:
And then post a picture of the key and/or their address on the internet.
Cause real life isn't like the internet until you have thousands of random people trying to break into your house 24/7/365
Re: Re: Re: Re: How does that verse go again?
You mean like the time they beat up an innocent person and then charged them with getting blood on the cop's uniform?
https://www.rt.com/usa/180680-ferguson-henry-davis-blood/
Re: AOC is now making a list of Republican traitors.
I find it very telling that AOC's comments (about not sweeping the misdeeds of Trump's administration and enablers under the rug, but trying to make sure we remember and hold them accountable) are twisted. Its almost as if the desire for retribution rather than justice, unaccountability of the rich/powerful rather than equality under the law is something they think all Democrats are interested in.
Re: Techdirt at long last defends its ZOMBIES.
And this is why conspiracy theories prosper. No matter what facts or evidence is explained by people just... well, being people, the conspiracy theorist will see a much more devious meaning behind it and will also move the goalposts as necessary to keep the conspiracy alive.
Re:
Or some of us just hide in the shadows posting anonymously until the accusations fly and then log in just to make their "it's a conspiracy" readings go right off the scale.
Re: Re: a school shooting every day
Now if they were to say, "it seems like you hear about a school shooting every day", that's probably way more true. One almost every 2 weeks across the entirety of the nation would probably work into the standard news cycle where just as the last one was starting to taper off a new one occurs.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
(sorry, just had to)
Re: Re: Re: Re: The panic over MS-13 and "gangs" and u
That's why its a trope in many movies where the crooked LEO/DA tells the poor immigrant they better do as they are told or they will get them accused of something and get them deported.
Re: Re: Re:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2018/11/08/does-more-policing-make-midd le-schools-safer/
Re: For the technically illiterate
The dictionaries can be copyrighted for the explanatory and sample text, but what they cannot copyright is the interface, which for a dictionary is more than just the word.
The interface in every modern dictionary is the word, the type of speech, and the pronunciation. That way everyone who runs across a new word knows how it is supposed to be used and pronounced, not just what the meaning given to it by that specific dictionary.
Most of you have no idea on corporate compliance
1. GPDR is a very vague law that waves its hands around "complying" in a lot of vague and general ways that affects a bunch of highly technical industries where vague solutions are not an option. This makes complying in a way that makes the corporation bullet proof very hard. If someone complains and a government lawyer takes up the complaint, the company has to spend lots of time and money to prove they complied with every single little aspect of the law.
2. The penalties for unsuccessfully guarding against a single complaint is €10M-20M or 4% of Gross Worldwide Product (whichever is bigger). For a huge percentage of the businesses in this world, that penalty would destroy the business. Even fighting it might destroy the business.
3. GDPR Article 13 section 3 states:
Where the controller intends to further process the personal data for a purpose other than that for which the personal data were collected, the controller shall provide the data subject prior to that further processing with information on that other purpose and with any relevant further information as referred to in paragraph 2.
I can very well understand this company's rules about return. They took the customer's information for the purpose of making a sale. A return is not a sale, and to look up the transaction, process it as returned, and then update that customer's information, it is quite easy to argue the return as a secondary purpose and therefore the business is required by law to notify the customer. I understand it sounds insane to many, but it's a sensible interpretation of the law that if they don't comply with may destroy their business.
And just because someone is quoted as saying "there are other ways to comply with this law" doesn't mean any of those options are better. Lots of big businesses in the USA are still complying with the GDPR by blocking all EU traffic to their websites.
Re:
Now might be a good time to put some money in VPN stocks or start your own VPN company... cause sure as hell there will be some mighty fine IP filters being built once this is rammed thru.
Re: WAIT A SEC! The books were never open! Where's the TOTALS?
You said I was a zombie account come back because I didn't sign in for a bunch of years... but I did read and comment... I was just to lazy to sign in, and sometimes too lazy to even use my own name un-signed in.
More comments from TripMN >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by TripMN.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt