A better fix is to capture and prosecute all persons who ever did this and throw the Computer crimes book at them putting the in prison for decades. Following up have Congress do a deep probe of all such criminal activity of the NSA and monitor it heavily to reduce any and all such future behavior. This is completely criminal and needs to be stopped and with great energy.
Why is this fool President? Make it mandatory and I for sure will not vote. Enough is enough. You MUST vote for tweedledee or for tweedledum, comrade! That way they can claim a mandate from the People for whatever oppression they next foist upon you.
Patent law invented largely fol physical inventions in a bygone age where the pace of change was at least an order of magnitude slower certainly need deep revising. As does the notion of what can be legitimately patented. Patenting software is like patenting a mathematical proof or a bit of music.
IP law granting all rights to one party (copyright) for on the order of 99 years or more make no sense at all in an era of rapid innovation and when copying is as easy and ubiquitous as breathing rather than what was the case in the days of old school printing.
I would go for severely restricting what is subject to patent and making open licensing mandatory after 5 years and dropping the patent protection after 15. We want to reward creators and implementation folks, yes. But we don't want to or need to criminalize legitimate productive activity and simply enjoying what our technooloy can bring us to do so.
Lisp is none of the above and all of the above and more. It is "the programmable programming language". Why use something more limited?
No significant average temperature change in 15 years and idiots are still going on about climate change. Yes climates change but getting oneself all worked up for a non-event in any sort of catastrophic terms is ridiculous. The answer to insufficient fresh water in various places is irrigation from desalinization. Which is largely a matter of cheap enough energy.
No one said anything about interpol cops, man. The only one living a fantasy world is you. You're being obtuse.
Right dude. Make inane comment, then wall of text defending said stupid comment with more stupid comments. Good luck with your law degree.
Darth Vader, is that you?
Whether the law exists or doesn't at an international level doesn't matter. In your discussion of state laws applying to an international framework, you are making a false equivalence.
In the case of war crimes and trade law, some effort is put forth by various governments and international courts. Enforcement is available. So to say suddenly that countries can or should do whatever they want within their own legal frameworks is frankly stupid. Lots of countries have much less stable governments than the US. Genocide is a perfect example. If a nation state determined that genocide was legal and started murdering the population, would you simply put forth trade restrictions?
You do know that the US works with Interpol to stop cybercrime, right? That is the very definition of extra-territorial jurisdiction. You seem way out of your depth here, and as I said your ideas seem really poorly thought out.
1) Going to another country simply to resign is not the sanest action.
2) We really need a clear International consensu that governments do NOT have extra-territorial jurisdiction. Actions taken in one country should abide by the laws of that country, not any other country - even if it affects the other country. Any country that refuses to abide by this simple rule (I'm including my own beloved United States which routinely violates this simple legal concept.), should have punitive trade restrictions placed on them.
When I'm in New York state, I have to abide by NYS laws, not New Jerseys. Similarly, when I am in the US, I should abide by the US laws, not any other countries.
#2 is a really poorly thought out idea, in all manner of ways.
When you're in NYS you have to abide by NYS AND US laws. When you're in the US there's no way to force you to abide by US AND international law, which for the most part has no teeth.
Some eastern european country could declare cybercrime completely legal, and now those criminals are not criminals in that country. Not that we have any power to enforce it now.
If it ain't publicly known and reproducible then it ain't science. No public policy or regulation should be based in reasons that are not subject to examination and validation. This is pretty simple.
Many a use for such an engine has a very small net profit percentage. So 5% of gross revenue (not net) can be completely ruinous. That is effectively 5% of sales over $3000 per quarter. What of cases where the unreal engine is used as a subcomponent of our larger product?
Since when does one (roughly) side of a controversy deserve much more examination and aspersions as to whether they are "bought" or not than another? Does anyone seriously believe the pro-AGW folks all are totally un-invested scholars speaking only pure objective truth as they best see it? Give me a break.
Everyone that has some doubt about the official AGW story or claims has been roundly vilified for quite some time now. They have been compared to flat earthers or young earth folks for bothering to voice an opinion. This is not the stance of any sort of enlightened discourse or inquiry. It is a concerted effort to silence and shame critics of a politically aligned position. It has almost nothing to do with real science.
What happened to "free as in freedom, not free as in beer"? It is not true that open source can always be acquired without charge when it comes to new open source software or customization and extensions.
Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.
