Comment We can't have an erasable Internet (Score 1) 210
There is no such thing as DRM, and apps to save "unsaveable" Snapchat images are legion.
This is a fool's quest, and whoever wrote this WSJ piece is woefully ignorant of their subject.
There is no such thing as DRM, and apps to save "unsaveable" Snapchat images are legion.
This is a fool's quest, and whoever wrote this WSJ piece is woefully ignorant of their subject.
I liked the comment explaining where Internet Libertarians come from:
And if you grow up in your parent's basement, then you are shaped by an environment where the fundamental constraints on what you want to do are shaped neither by scarcity nor malignance, but _by genuine good intent_. Your relatives probably don't wan't you to spend all day smoking pot and playing video games; in some cases they will over-estimate just how much of a bad thing that is. And even if they _are_ right, it's not like anyone facing such hectoring is going to admit it.
Pretty much every libertarian position can be understood in that frame of restrictive but benevolent authority being the root of all 'real' problems. It's a rare parent who literally tortures their kids, so torture is, at best, not a 'real' issue, not a priority. But many make them do stuff for their health, so mandatory health insurance is a big deal. Pretty much no parents kill their child with drones, many read their diaries. And so on.
So to libertarians, Bitcoin is like wages from a fast food job as opposed to an allowance; lets you buy what you want without someone else having a veto. Only money that doesn't judge you can be considered entirely yours...
Alicia would like your takedown notice to investigate. (Please do let the world know the results.)
Povinator - do you have a copy of the DMCA notice that can be put up? A copy that people can link to would be most useful.
Until Elsevier DMCAs you for the preprint. http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4527505&cid=45622313
Turns out they lied: they will DMCA you putting up a preprint. http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4527505&cid=45622313
They go after preprints. http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4527505&cid=45622313
This claim is false. Elsevier send DMCA notices for preprints. http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4527505&cid=45622313
Until they DMCA you for the preprint, of course. http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4527505&cid=45622313
This claim is false: they go after preprints.
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4527505&cid=45622313
I have asked Alicia Wise of Elsevier for an explanation, after her claim that they never do this.
But Alicia Wise, Director of Access & Policy at Elsevier, says that couldn't possibly have happened!
I've called it to her attention. Possibly she will even respond! Who knows?
Or the Chronicle, at least: http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/posting-your-latest-article-you-might-have-to-take-it-down/48865
By "edited by Elsevier", you mean of course "edited by someone else not getting paid either".
Claiming copyright on layout - a mechanical function - is severely questionable given Bridgeman v. Corel. Sweat of the brow does not earn you a copyright in the US.
Here's the Chronicle on this kerfuffle: http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/posting-your-latest-article-you-might-have-to-take-it-down/48865 The scientists are not happy.
At the end of every speech, announce: "Elsevier delenda est."
This has made the Chronicle: http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/posting-your-latest-article-you-might-have-to-take-it-down/48865
Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.
