On a similar note, was the Bruce Willis-starrer "alternate body" movie called Surrogates (2009) - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0986263/
314 karma · joined February 27, 2008
FWIW, the background is that it has been under a Creative Commons license since 2004, it has had about half a million downloads/readers (guesstimate, of course), is used as a text book for introductory programming courses in at least 8 universities worldwide, and has been translated to at least 5-6 languages by volunteers.
The issue here is copyright, not censorship. All of the author versions that were linked to on these pages are still available -- ACM explicitly grants individual authors the right to post their own versions of their papers on their own pages. All ACM bibliographic data, and tables of contents in the DL, are available without cost to anyone in the world. If you want the copy of a SIGGRAPH paper and an author has posted it, you can still access it without an ACM subscription. Also note there would be no problem with these pages if they linked to the ACM version of the papers. Other lists of papers, compilations that Ke-Sen Huang built (rather than copying the table of contents from a publication) are not affected. Furthermore, the SIGAsia2009 pages Ke-Sen Huang makes available are still there until the papers are available in the ACM DL in the interest of promoting the conference.
The copyright issue that applies is described in this link:
http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Li...
" ACM treats links as citations (references to objects) rather than as incorporations (embedding of objects). Permission is not needed to create links to citations in The Portal (ACM Digital Library or Online Guide to Computing Literature). ACM encourages the widespread distribution of links to the definitive versions of its copyrighted works in the ACM Digital Library and does not require that authors obtain prior permission to include such links in their new works.
However, someone who creates a work or a service whose pattern of links substantially duplicates a copyrighted work should get prior permission from the copyright holder. One example: the creator of "A Table of Contents for the Current Issue of TODS" -- consisting of citations and active links to author-versions of the works in the latest issue of TODS -- needs ACM permission because that creator is reproducing an ACM-copyrighted work. If all the links in the "Table of Contents" pointed to the ACM-held definitive versions, ACM would normally give permission because then the new work advertises an ACM work. To avoid misunderstandings, consult with ACM before duplicating an ACM work via links."
> There’s currently no LaTeX support. Obviously, this is the top-priority feature. This definitely won’t be implemented until the Stack Exchange software is out of beta, but it will probably be implemented shortly thereafter. In the meantime, do your best. You’re welcome to type raw LaTeX, use basic html (e.g. Ω and x<sub>1</sub>), or whatever you would normally write in email.
It's going to be an interesting experiment because people are not really expected to reply back to every message on Twitter, so will people get ticked off if Leo doesn't reply to tweets?
If Leo had instead responded only to really important emails and not every single email, would he have achieved the same results?
I hope Leo posts an update on the same two months from now, would like to see if he has indeed got rid of inboxes (irrespective of whether it is email or twitter)
I found the "Event based modes" concept very useful.
Also:
* Haptic tactile feedback * Fingerprint identification as input method * RFID reader http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerpr...
Nokia developing phone that recharges itself without plug point: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/10/nokia-mobi...
P.S. Regarding the iPhone patents... Patents take around 1-1.5 years to become public information right? If so, then these concepts were what they were working on 2-3 years ago. I shudder to think what they are up to now.
I don't consider open source to be a panacea but w.r.t. government programs, I think it is an option that should be actively considered.
It it analogous to svn:externals ?
As far as I've understood, they were just stances and FUD. They haven't made any specific claims. That's as vague as it can get.
Why throw the baby out with the bath water?
If yes, are there no threats there? If no, have they given any thought to having an official recommendation for new GUI (GNU) projects, at least a language with garbage collection.
And on top of that, it takes 1-2 seconds to open up vs. 14 seconds for Firefox.
(My PC has 3GB RAM, 2GHz Intel Dual core 2 processor, Ubuntu 8.10)
Looks like one-functionality devices are making a comeback.