adamlett

47 ms·

451.
by adamlett 13y ago
> Could you explain the relevant complexity, particularly as it applies to this example? Maybe it's simple if all a parolee has to do is to make sure he spends every single night in the halfway home. That might not make a lot of sen
452.
by adamlett 13y ago
> So long as Disney keeps making use of Mickey Mouse, what economic reason is there to give someone else a crack at the character? You seem to be confusing trademarks and copyright. Disney characters are in fact protected in perpetuity a
453.
by adamlett 13y ago
> But they probably wouldn't be less motivated by longer expirations. If expirations were shorter, say 20 or 30 years after the publication of a work, wouldn't creators be motivated to keep creating so as to not suddenly lose a
454.
by adamlett 13y ago
It's understood to mean a monopoly on the right to produce copies. Not on the right to sell them. Which is why it is (still) legal to sell used books.
455.
by adamlett 13y ago
I believe martial katas were invented as a means for one teacher to teach lots and lots of students at the same time. Like a lot of things of oriental origin, they tend to get romanticized in the west.
456.
by adamlett 13y ago
You seem to be arguing against points I did not make. I did not argue against copyright. I pay for both Netflix, HBO Nordic and Spotify subscriptions. I used to be a paying member of Last.fm when it was available in my country. I have a pai
457.
by adamlett 13y ago
> So let's say your boss refuses to pay you. And when you complain, he berates you for your "sense of entitlement". Would you consider this to be an accurate judgement, or would you consider this to be insult added to inju
458.
by adamlett 13y ago
> that's not what people are insisting on when they talk about their right to get paid for their work. What they're talking about are the copies that do get made without any payment in return Getting paid for work and getting p
459.
by adamlett 13y ago
Copyright is what the word implies: The (exclusive) right to make copies of something. No more, no less. Whether someone can turn that into something you can make money doing, is not and should not be concern for the law. People make works
460.
by adamlett 13y ago
> It's just shocking — absolutly SHOCKING — to see how many artists expect to get paid for their work This is so backwards. Getting paid -- as in getting compensated for work -- is usually something you have agreed upon _before_ you
461.
by adamlett 13y ago
> I have not seen a single stock buyback work I haven't seen a single penguin in the wild, but that doesn't mean they don't exist ;) Berkeshire Hathaway and Teledyne are two companies I know off that have had great success
462.
by adamlett 13y ago
> Stock buybacks are just dead money That is an oversimplification. Apple has more money than it could possibly hope to reinvest in its core business. When that is the case, and when the stock is undervalued as is the case with Apple, st
463.
by adamlett 13y ago
JavaScript and Self don't have classes, but they do have inheritance.
464.
by adamlett 13y ago
Two points: 1) This is (fixed) limit Hold'em; you can't suddenly go all-in. 2) You ask how you could trust the machine. It would be trivial to keep track of all hands played and show that in the situations like the one you describ