So laws that govern the IRL effect of internet actions are ok? If someone gets a massive DDOS and the attacker is bragging online about doing it, they should get complete immunity because their actions don't affect the real world? or are you just saying that it should be analogous to harrassment? if that's the case are there any instances where the analogy of internet to real world aren't clear-cut? is a ddos harrassment or if it's a web-store does it count as loitering, or b&e? if it's a hospital system could an up-tight prosecutor try to pass it off as attempted murder, even though the lagged system has nothing to do with the closed circuit ICU machines?

i'm not advocating for the **AA, anything that hurts them is good for everyone else in the world. but to suggest a completely lawless internet seems kinda naive.

An internet without any legal enforcement could be a bad thing. I shop on the internet, and I'd really hate it if there were no legal system deterants for people trying to hack amazon to steal my card number (accepting the fact that credit card fraud would still be crime on its own).

I'm not at all on the side of the **AA though. With the copyright term extensions they've lobbied, they have been actively "stealing" from our public domain for a long time. I feel that, If people knew how the **AA has been (much more apt to the analogy) "stealing" from them, they'd start to see how messed up the system has become. Perhaps there will be a SOPA style call in day to get the next term extension stopped.

I don't think contract law has quite devolved to the state of "By having read this license agreement you have accepted it". Though with the state of EULAs i can' fault you for assuming it's that bad.

lets try an experiment though:
by having read this comment you've agreed to send me 10 dollars.

I don't think you have to agree to a EULA to play xbox games. At least I never have, also typically when I buy them at a store i get a "sales receipt" these two things together seem like pretty good evidence for me having purchased the software.

I am still legally bound by copyright laws in my country, but just because your copy of windows tells you it is licensed doesn't mean all software is licensed...not even entirely sure your copy of windows is licensed, because any agreements were made after you legally purchased it (and you do have an invoice or receipt).

Blender.

When learning complex and powerful software look for two things: Cross-platform & Open-source.
Cross-platform code is usually much more stable, having a healthy abstraction layer from the os.
Open-source: It can never be taken away from you - say you learn autocad, and use 1 feature allot, then there is a new version of windows and it's not compatible with your autocad, so you get new autocad, but that feature isn't there anymore. if it were opensource you could maybe do something about it.

You put the two of them together and you also get the benefit of possibly flying anywhere in the world, and being able to download powerful software that you already know how to use on whatever computer they have there.

I started 3d modeling on truespace, and the many hours (and dollars) i spent on that are gone forever now.

"useful articles" don't get any copyright protection.

things like this can get patents, but patents don't last as long. the venerable ar-15 has no unexpired patents. that's why there are so many different ar15 designs out there. ar15 manufacturers (like stag, adams arms, zombie defense, dpms, yhm) aren't licensing the design from eugene stoner, armalite, or colt.

patents related mechanical engineering are also much less consolidated than the copyrights of major record labels and movie studios. so there is less of a coordinated effort (and less money to spend) in pursuit of legal action in the event of patent violation.

not just oil, iraq had a much weaker military than the dprk.

I don't think the US Navy is allowed to attack people on US soil with F18s at the moment. I'm pretty sure the US military in general (aside from the recent change regarding drones) isn't allowed to do that.

If I had the mod points.

this is an old video but very important
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

throughout time military helmets have had a certain amount of weight to them.

Such systems are about training a pilot to use a real jet. a real jet has an large amount of very small controls.
here's an enthusiast simulator startup video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBFb45nPSNs
in a military simulator you can physically interact with all of those switches. so I would guess the military doesn't use VR goggles yet because of the latency and the difficulty of tracking exactly where the pilot's hands are.

I think that's the other way around. at least with race-car games it's the other way around. in those you do several input and physics frames, and render every fourth frame or so. or they can be asynchronous, with the render thread drawing the latest complete physics frame.

Nicely worded.

If I only had the mod points...and there were a "+1 quotable".

Clarification: I've almost always been able to resell my PC games. Only relatively recently has DRM really been difficult to get away from. I've been playing PC games since the early 90s and there was a time without DRM restricted resale.

Almost never?

I've almost _always_ been able to resell my games. Fallout 3 was late 2008, thats the last big bethesda game i can recall without drm. Aside from the past 5 years of drm bs, I'd say being able to resell is the norm. Though I guess if you're younger you may think it's always been this sucky.

Shouldn't really be able to copyright the look on guns.

The utilitarian nature of these objects should make them useful articles
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl103.html
which can't be copyrighted (though I'm sure they're trying).

Various parts could be covered by design patent, but quite allot of cool military hardware should have no patent on it anymore (barret's 1982 rifle shouldn't have any live patents anymore given the 14-20 year lifespan).

Side note on creative IP litigation: In the EA vs. Textron lawsuit. Textron alleges EA, in violating their trade dress, is confusing gamers about Textron's involvement(lack thereof) in the game. Hopefully EA will win on free speech grounds; and then games, like other forms of artistic expression, won't be as encumbered by licensing fees.

you must cache it on your computer and that, in a technical sense, is duplication.

still what you are saying is *probably* right (insofar as no wealthy copyright holder has yet forced the us courts to decide).