In general I would agree with you, but on subjects like law or finance or medicine, there are good reasons that formal advice is restricted to people with sufficient qualifications, and those reasons make just as much sense on-line. I'm not objecting to offering an opinion or sharing personal understanding with good intentions, I'm just objecting to presenting these as if they were statements of fact.
Or the purple wigs.
We seem to be having different conversations. I didn't express any opinion about what you just asked. I just said that your statement that "only the owner of a copyright can enforce it" was wrong.
I advise you to not post your "legal advice recommendations" in an online forum meant for people to hold discussions about relevant topics.
This whole discussion is basically about copyright law. How is challenging objectively wrong information about copyright law not relevant to the topic?
You understand the exact same applies to what you just said yourself?
No, it doesn't. Firstly, you are objectively wrong on this. Secondly, my comments here are based on formal legal advice as it applies in my jurisdiction (the UK).
What is not objective legal knowledge but merely my personal opinion is that posting bad legal advice, and in particular posting incorrect information about copyrights to a forum with a tendency to be less than respectful of copyright, could actually get someone who believed you in trouble. And if you don't think anyone reading Slashdot would believe you, please consider that your objectively wrong post is currently at +5, while my warning citing a specific and verifiable counterexample is currently at 0.
2. China & India, you really need to step up your game.
It's not quite as big a boost to national prestige when hobbyist makers are getting their stuff launched. If SpaceX starts providing unused space for hobby payloads to fly standby, every school science project could get launched.
Only the owner of a copyright can enforce it.
Please don't post legal advice without appropriate qualifications. The above isn't the whole story in many jurisdictions, as there are other factors such as exclusive licensing to consider.
There's nothing wrong with hearing the news later, but people with mobile devices will hear it earlier and clearly a lot of people value that ability to stay up to date and use their time for something interesting when they're just in a coffee shop for a few minutes or on the train home. If you don't value that, then of course you personally don't need those devices.
The US dollar is backed by the full faith and credit of the US government . Bitcoin is backed by absolutely no one
I'll give you one guess as to which of those two I put my trust in.
engineers are not as highly respected in Korean society as they are in say, American society.
Wow. Talk about damning with faint praise.
The phone really brings nothing to the table.
Perhaps not for you. I know plenty of people who go out a lot for business meetings and don't need to take a full laptop any more, because they can get any urgent messages via their phone or other mobile devices. In our household we often use a phone or tablet to get directions and travel news if one of us is driving but has a passenger with mobile Internet. Sometimes it's just nice to get news that your friends got engaged or someone's baby arrived safely when you're out, and mobile social networking apps can tell you. Sure, you could also do all of these things with a laptop, but only if you left it turned on all the time, and it still wouldn't fit in your pocket.
Yeah, the NSA would never abuse all that personal data it's hovering up.
I'm sorry, my bad. For 99.9% of serious content creation, they are just not the right tool for the job. For the last 0.1%, they are a good enough tool to get the job done by a sufficiently skilled practitioner if efficiency is not a consideration.