Comment: Re:How? (Score 1) 322
Comment: Re:Not exactly... (Score 1) 97
If that's true the software tokens are badly broken: their serial number is just a hash of the hostname and the User SID, both of which are easy enough to get remorety.
Nah, I'm sure it's a keyed hash. The server can do this because it has the key.
Comment: Re:When the majority of people break a law... (Score 1) 582
Comment: Re:How? (Score 1) 322
Comment: Re:How? (Score 1) 322
Comment: Re:How? (Score 1) 322
"Artificial reservoirs, such as the Hoover Dam on the Colorado River and the Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River in China, have the opposite effect, locking up water that would otherwise flow into the seas."
But they don't. When you build a new one, then for a few years afterwards they may reduce the flow to the seas, but only as long as the reservoir level is rising. Eventually, they get full, and inflow equals outflow, or we draw them down, and outflow exceeds inflow.
Comment: Re:When the majority of people break a law... (Score 1) 582
When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.
Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.
Montana tried getting rid of speed limits. They changed their minds after a few years, and a bunch of dead drivers. That many people break a law does not necessarily imply that the law is bad.
Oh, I should also mention that Montana didn't change their minds after "a bunch of dead drivers". They were forced to change their minds after the Montana Supreme Court ruled that the "Reasonable and Prudent" standard (they hadn't really gotten rid of all limits, just declined to set a numeric value on them) was so vague as to be unenforceable and that it therefore violated constitutional due process requirements. Even after that, it took six months for the Montana state legislature to get around to creating a new law -- and the reason they weren't in any hurry is because it wasn't really a problem.
Comment: Re:When the majority of people break a law... (Score 1) 582
When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.
Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.
Montana tried getting rid of speed limits. They changed their minds after a few years, and a bunch of dead drivers. That many people break a law does not necessarily imply that the law is bad.
Your example doesn't imply your conclusion. They tried one fix to a broken law, and it didn't work. But there may well be another that does.
Comment: When the majority of people break a law... (Score 2) 582
When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.
Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.