That's how it's the law in Uruguay: minor can't watch films rated 18+ alone, but they can if accompanied by an adult. Same for films 15+, 12+ and 9+. Anyway, GI Joe and Die Hard 5 are 9+, and only Tarantino-level films get 15+.
It does make sense to me. Anyway, the Supreme Court said that a similar Californa law for videogames was inconstitutional because it restricted freedom of speech, that it, minors were prevented from access to speech. The same will happen here.
Well, baseball is more of an individual team, at least for pitchers and batters. They don't have to coordinate their plays with other players, jsut follow the plan (or improvise). In basketball, passes require at least two players to interact. Also, players without the ball must move correctly, to create spaces where the player with the ball can move to.
Statistics are more reliable in individual sports, or in this case, more reliable to evaluate players who play individually.
Well, there is a patent for the Linke button. There's a patent for a "Dynamic progress marking icon" (progress bar), a "Method and system for placing a purchase order via a communications network" (one-click buying) and an "Internet test-taking method". See more here: https://www.eff.org/patent-busting
I've read the manifest and I disagree radically with several of the proposals.
In my opinion, politics is a team work, but they are anti-party. They propose independent candidates, but in reality you need a team that can do projects. By voting a single person, you don't know who's in the team. That's the point of parties: to vote for a team, where you know what they think and what they want to do, even if you don't know each member of the party.
They mention "multi-center power", which I don't understand if it means decentralization (which we can discuss how much we want) or that some public decisions can be done by specific groups, excluding the rest of the citizens (that's happened here in Uruguay).
They want to "democratize the media". Internet's here, what else do we need? They want to force media companies to break in pieces, when by clicking a web broswer theres gazillions of choices already.
They want to impose quotas to each and every minority, like left-handed, fat people and the kind. That reinforces discrimination, not integrates people.
They want "effective institutions of global governance". That sounds like imperialism to me. They are opposed to national sovereignty.
Last but not least, the manifest never mentions freedom as a basic element of an ideal society. They say that society should be built collectively, in the sense majority decisions must be accepted by everyone. I think that the government shouldn't intervene in private matters, where people should be totally free, but only deal with public issues.
If you build a calculator and patent the machine design, ok, I understand that.
But if you build a computer program that works like a calculator, people can patent a "system that performs mathematical calculations with a button interface". That's ridiculous, because the patent covers all program designs that fit the definition, not just the program that was developed.
Like the Anon says, you shouldn't be abled to patent an idea. Like Niall says, it's happening right now.
Mike, thanks for writing so frequently and deeply about the problems of intellectual property laws. But this article is misleading at some places.
"that should be seen for what it rightfully is: an insulting way of dismissing the public's interest in a law that is for the public's benefit"
The article says that what doesn't belong to policy discussion is "heated rhetoric" and "appealing to emotions".
"You see its true contempt for the public. Apparently the public is simply too stupid to understand copyright law and is easily led astray"
The article says that anti-copyright activists "have played an aggressive role in warping the public's understanding". This criticises them, not the public.
You have good arguments on why their proposals hurt citizens and their behaviour is dangerous, Mike. Please focus on them, and avoid unnecessary drama.
(untitled comment)
Yo dawg, I heard you hate Streisand effect. So you caused some Streisand effect to complain about some Streisand effect.
(untitled comment)
Please call the console "Xbox 180".
(untitled comment)
A 14 year-old isn't a "child", is a teenager.
(untitled comment)
In a "free-market capitalist system", you wouldn't have copyright or patent laws. These restrict some freedoms.
(untitled comment)
"there are people who are interested in, if not what I had for breakfast"
Knowing Obama's meals could be useful if someone tried to poison him. That's the point of spying massively, isn't it?
(untitled comment)
One link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama
(untitled comment)
Stop complaining and start streaming the channel on cbs.com.
(untitled comment)
That's how it's the law in Uruguay: minor can't watch films rated 18+ alone, but they can if accompanied by an adult. Same for films 15+, 12+ and 9+. Anyway, GI Joe and Die Hard 5 are 9+, and only Tarantino-level films get 15+.
It does make sense to me. Anyway, the Supreme Court said that a similar Californa law for videogames was inconstitutional because it restricted freedom of speech, that it, minors were prevented from access to speech. The same will happen here.
(untitled comment)
Well, baseball is more of an individual team, at least for pitchers and batters. They don't have to coordinate their plays with other players, jsut follow the plan (or improvise). In basketball, passes require at least two players to interact. Also, players without the ball must move correctly, to create spaces where the player with the ball can move to.
Statistics are more reliable in individual sports, or in this case, more reliable to evaluate players who play individually.
Re: Re: Unconstitutional
Life plus 50 or 70 years seems unlimited to me.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The United States consumes a quarter of the world's energy and produces a tenth of the world's road vehicles. Yes it matters to me.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"you cannot patent 'a calculator'"
Well, there is a patent for the Linke button. There's a patent for a "Dynamic progress marking icon" (progress bar), a "Method and system for placing a purchase order via a communications network" (one-click buying) and an "Internet test-taking method". See more here: https://www.eff.org/patent-busting
Re: Re:
Oh, I so sorry for you. Single-seat constituencies and first-past-the-post is a terrible combination.
(untitled comment)
I've read the manifest and I disagree radically with several of the proposals.
In my opinion, politics is a team work, but they are anti-party. They propose independent candidates, but in reality you need a team that can do projects. By voting a single person, you don't know who's in the team. That's the point of parties: to vote for a team, where you know what they think and what they want to do, even if you don't know each member of the party.
They mention "multi-center power", which I don't understand if it means decentralization (which we can discuss how much we want) or that some public decisions can be done by specific groups, excluding the rest of the citizens (that's happened here in Uruguay).
They want to "democratize the media". Internet's here, what else do we need? They want to force media companies to break in pieces, when by clicking a web broswer theres gazillions of choices already.
They want to impose quotas to each and every minority, like left-handed, fat people and the kind. That reinforces discrimination, not integrates people.
They want "effective institutions of global governance". That sounds like imperialism to me. They are opposed to national sovereignty.
Last but not least, the manifest never mentions freedom as a basic element of an ideal society. They say that society should be built collectively, in the sense majority decisions must be accepted by everyone. I think that the government shouldn't intervene in private matters, where people should be totally free, but only deal with public issues.
(untitled comment)
Zakida, I don't know where you live, but the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies has proportional representation. That means, if you get X% of votes, you get X% of seats. So each vote counts. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_parliamentary_election,_2010
Re: Re:
If you build a calculator and patent the machine design, ok, I understand that.
But if you build a computer program that works like a calculator, people can patent a "system that performs mathematical calculations with a button interface". That's ridiculous, because the patent covers all program designs that fit the definition, not just the program that was developed.
Like the Anon says, you shouldn't be abled to patent an idea. Like Niall says, it's happening right now.
Re: Re: Illegal numbers
I'm referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number
Re: Re:
I'm sure of that! But I'd prefer that to other taxes.
(untitled comment)
Also, the Lasalle law claims that linking to illegal websites is a crime.
(untitled comment)
Mike, thanks for writing so frequently and deeply about the problems of intellectual property laws. But this article is misleading at some places.
"that should be seen for what it rightfully is: an insulting way of dismissing the public's interest in a law that is for the public's benefit"
The article says that what doesn't belong to policy discussion is "heated rhetoric" and "appealing to emotions".
"You see its true contempt for the public. Apparently the public is simply too stupid to understand copyright law and is easily led astray"
The article says that anti-copyright activists "have played an aggressive role in warping the public's understanding". This criticises them, not the public.
You have good arguments on why their proposals hurt citizens and their behaviour is dangerous, Mike. Please focus on them, and avoid unnecessary drama.