Well, I'm of two minds on this subject. I have never installed adblock and its ilk, because I know that "free" content comes at a cost. So as much as possible I sit through commercials from network TV's streamed shows, I allow sidebar ads to populate some screen real estate on websites, etc.
But I have my limits.
I suppose in the end that makes me no better than folks who aggressively block every single advertisement in any form -- "We already established what kind of woman you are; now we're just negotiating on the price". But it helps me sleep better at night knowing I'm at least willing to try to give them some of my attention in return for free content.
No. Any mechanism by which copyrights can be maintained forever will be abused. The DisneyCorps of the world will just automate the system to the point that long after human life is extinct, their computers will continue renewing copyright and submitting payments.
Why? Because if they ever let copyright lapse, even on property they doubt will ever make another dime, somebody else might make a profit off that work, and that would be money the copyright holders would feel they lost due to negligence.
How about this: Copyrights can be renewed periodically... by the original creator of the work. Make copyrights non-transferable, and no matter how stubborn and greedy the content creator is, that iron grip will die with him or her.
With heated competition in the world to improve the performance of lasers...
I see what he did there.
Yeah. While I agree with his sentiment, his response was a bit excessive.
Hmmm, sounds like a good application for some kind of EMP emitter.
You don't even need to RTFS, you just need to read the title. It doesn't say the experiment failed; it said it ended in disappointment -- as in, they were disappointed that they can't reduce pesticide use by producing the pheromone. Yes, the experiment successfully answered their question, but as you yourself said, it was not the answer they had hoped for.
Terrible criticism of the summary. I would have expected better from AC than to say the summary was terrible.
I agree, those changes will make it slightly harder to game the system, except for this part:
"...and also reviews voted up by other customers."
Unless those "other customers" are also verified purchasers, there's your loophole. Bots and crowdsourcing can still beat the system.
What do you mean, no choice? Whenever I get one of those popups that says they want my cell phone number "for better security", I click the "no thanks, maybe later" option.
Of course, all that's for nothing if they can dig up phone numbers by any means necessary.
"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne