Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #240275 > unrolled thread

The future of computing.

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  The future of computing. harryweaver@tutanota.com - 2021-09-22 23:20 +0200
    Re: The future of computing. Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2021-09-23 03:00 +0200
      Re: The future of computing. harryweaver@tutanota.com - 2021-09-23 04:00 +0200
      Re: The future of computing. Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-09-23 04:20 +0200
        Re: The future of computing. Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-09-23 04:30 +0200
          Re: The future of computing. Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-09-23 05:20 +0200
            Re: The future of computing. Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-09-23 12:40 +0200
        OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-09-23 13:40 +0200
          Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-09-23 14:50 +0200
          Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2021-09-24 09:50 +0200
            Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-09-24 15:30 +0200

#240275 — The future of computing.

For those with an interest:

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/5204765206263907088

Cheers!

Harry
-- 
 Sent with Tutanota, the secure & ad-free mailbox. 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#240277

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* On 2021 22 Sep 16:14 -0500, harryweaver@tutanota.com wrote:
> For those with an interest:
> 
> https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/5204765206263907088

Hmmm, as a radio amateur when I see QST, I immediately think of the
membership journal of the American Radio Relay League which has been
published since 1915 with a two year break for the Great War from 1917
to 1919.

Maybe IBM bought the rights to the name!

- Nate

-- 
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240278

23 Sep 2021, 10:58 by n0nb@n0nb.us:

> * On 2021 22 Sep 16:14 -0500, harryweaver@tutanota.com wrote:
>
>> For those with an interest:
>>
>> https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/5204765206263907088
>>
>
> Hmmm, as a radio amateur when I see QST, I immediately think of the
> membership journal of the American Radio Relay League which has been
> published since 1915 with a two year break for the Great War from 1917
> to 1919.
>
> Maybe IBM bought the rights to the name!
>

Perception is dependent on point of observation:
https://www.acronymfinder.com/QST.html

Cheers!

Harry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240279

On Wednesday 22 September 2021 20:58:14 Nate Bargmann wrote:

> * On 2021 22 Sep 16:14 -0500, harryweaver@tutanota.com wrote:
> > For those with an interest:
> >
> > https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/5204765206263907088
>
> Hmmm, as a radio amateur when I see QST, I immediately think of the
> membership journal of the American Radio Relay League which has been
> published since 1915 with a two year break for the Great War from 1917
> to 1919.
>
> Maybe IBM bought the rights to the name!
>
> - Nate

Or the ARRL forgot to renew the copyright. Copyrights were originally 
issued for a period of 7 years, renewable once for an additional 7 
years. Along comes Walt Disney and Mickey Mouse, and Walt had money 
enough to get the law changed so we have the current never expires 
situation by including corporations such as Disney in it definitions of 
authors. If its ever been renewed. But the law today gives me automatic 
copyright over what I write without additional public notice, I think 
for 90 years after I die.

There is something wrong with this picture. 14 years was considered as 
the author having milked his writings for 99% of all they would ever 
generate in income. IMNSHO it (the original version) is still a good 
idea.  Stealing an individuals creativity, and his rewards for being 
creative by awarding the copyright to a corporation, is theft pure and 
simple, and should become somebody lined up against the wall for 3rd 
offence grand larceny. But today, we'ed need Trumps incompleted wall to 
maybe have enough wall.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240280

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, 9:13 PM Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> wrote:

> ....
> There is something wrong with this picture. 14 years was considered as
> the author having milked his writings for 99% of all they would ever
> generate in income. IMNSHO it (the original version) is still a good
> idea.  Stealing an individuals creativity, and his rewards for being
> creative by awarding the copyright to a corporation, is theft pure and
> simple,


Centuries ago a philosopher wrote: Behind every great fortune lies an
equally great crime. In America too I'm afraid.

and should become somebody lined up against the wall for 3rd
> offence grand larceny. But today, we'ed need Trumps incompleted wall to
> maybe have enough wall.
>

No there aren't that many millionaires and billionaires and.... They make
sure of it.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
> --
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240281

On Wednesday 22 September 2021 22:23:29 Nicholas Geovanis wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, 9:13 PM Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> 
wrote:
> > ....
> > There is something wrong with this picture. 14 years was considered
> > as the author having milked his writings for 99% of all they would
> > ever generate in income. IMNSHO it (the original version) is still a
> > good idea.  Stealing an individuals creativity, and his rewards for
> > being creative by awarding the copyright to a corporation, is theft
> > pure and simple,
>
> Centuries ago a philosopher wrote: Behind every great fortune lies an
> equally great crime. In America too I'm afraid.
>
We have no patent on it.

> and should become somebody lined up against the wall for 3rd
>
> > offence grand larceny. But today, we'ed need Trumps incompleted wall
> > to maybe have enough wall.
>
> No there aren't that many millionaires and billionaires and.... They
> make sure of it.
>
This is true, but I'd also include the mba's who's major lesson to those 
billionaires is its ok to do it if you don't get caught. And buy them 
off or do away with the witnesses if you do get caught. Jeffery E. got 
caught but he was not the king pin, just the disposable front man. Same 
game continues, new address & phone number.

> Cheers, Gene Heskett
>
> > --


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240284

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:15 PM Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> wrote:

> On Wednesday 22 September 2021 22:23:29 Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
>
> > No there aren't that many millionaires and billionaires and.... They
> > make sure of it.
> >
> This is true, but I'd also include the mba's who's major lesson to those
> billionaires is its ok to do it if you don't get caught. And buy them
> off or do away with the witnesses if you do get caught. Jeffery E. got
> caught but he was not the king pin, just the disposable front man. Same
> game continues, new address & phone number.
>

I don't want to stress the folks on this list, they've got Debian releases
coming up :-)
So my last comment will be:
I don't see billionaires taking orders from MBAs like you say. Just because
the Victoria's
Secret kingpin did, lots of others distrusted Jeff E including Trumpf.
I'm American so I'm embarrassed using French, but :-)
There's this concept of the bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeoisie and how they
rule
modern societies. It's nothing new and it still works.


> > Cheers, Gene Heskett
> >
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240285 — OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.)

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 10:12:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> Or the ARRL forgot to renew the copyright. Copyrights were originally
> issued for a period of 7 years, renewable once for an additional 7
> years. 

Hmm, without looking it up, I thought the 7/7 years was for patents, and 
copyright was a little different (maybe like 13/13?)?  (But Gene probably 
remembers better than I do.)

> Along comes Walt Disney and Mickey Mouse, and Walt had money
> enough to get the law changed so we have the current never expires
> situation by including corporations such as Disney in it definitions of
> authors. If its ever been renewed. But the law today gives me automatic
> copyright over what I write without additional public notice, I think
> for 90 years after I die.

Something like that, but doesn't sound quite right (wish I had a better 
memory).  Previously copyrighted works are coming into the "public domain" 
year by year, about 95 years after -- oh, maybe it is after the author's 
death?  Maybe there is an alternate path to copyright expiring?  Not sure how 
it works if a corporation owns a copyright -- I don't think it is perpetual.

And, at least some of the relevant laws differ by nation.
 
> There is something wrong with this picture. 14 years was considered as
> the author having milked his writings for 99% of all they would ever
> generate in income. IMNSHO it (the original version) is still a good
> idea.  Stealing an individuals creativity, and his rewards for being
> creative by awarding the copyright to a corporation, is theft pure and
> simple, 

Hmm, I don't think the copyright law nor the government award the copyright to 
a corporation.  If a corporation gets a copyright (or patent) that is based on 
some explicit contractual or implicit (like the "work for hire" doctrine)  
agreement


> Cheers, Gene Heskett

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240288 — Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.)

On Thursday 23 September 2021 07:22:17 rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 10:12:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Or the ARRL forgot to renew the copyright. Copyrights were
> > originally issued for a period of 7 years, renewable once for an
> > additional 7 years.
>
> Hmm, without looking it up, I thought the 7/7 years was for patents,
> and copyright was a little different (maybe like 13/13?)?  (But Gene
> probably remembers better than I do.)

Debatable, mine will be 87 in a few days, but I didn't get political in 
my thinking until I could vote. But before I voted, I felt strong enough 
about the honest man that took my mother and her baby on with without 
ever having enough money to adopt me as Iowa made that a very expensive 
process, so on turning 21 I turned that respect into changing my last 
name to match his.  That I could do for a $20 bill. He is now long gone, 
but has great, great, great grandkids wearing his name.

> > Along comes Walt Disney and Mickey Mouse, and Walt had money
> > enough to get the law changed so we have the current never expires
> > situation by including corporations such as Disney in it definitions
> > of authors. If its ever been renewed. But the law today gives me
> > automatic copyright over what I write without additional public
> > notice, I think for 90 years after I die.
>
> Something like that, but doesn't sound quite right (wish I had a
> better memory).  Previously copyrighted works are coming into the
> "public domain" year by year, about 95 years after -- oh, maybe it is
> after the author's death?

Something like that. The point I was trying to make is that today, the 
law is for sale to the highest bidder. It is no longer "of the people, 
by the people, for the people". One of the reasons I like debian, they 
have set a set of principles and are sticking to them far better than 
today's version of the Republic the founders envisioned in the late 
1700's.

> Maybe there is an alternate path to 
> copyright expiring?  Not sure how it works if a corporation owns a
> copyright -- I don't think it is perpetual.
>
> And, at least some of the relevant laws differ by nation.
>
> > There is something wrong with this picture. 14 years was considered
> > as the author having milked his writings for 99% of all they would
> > ever generate in income. IMNSHO it (the original version) is still a
> > good idea.  Stealing an individuals creativity, and his rewards for
> > being creative by awarding the copyright to a corporation, is theft
> > pure and simple,
>
> Hmm, I don't think the copyright law nor the government award the
> copyright to a corporation.  If a corporation gets a copyright (or
> patent) that is based on some explicit contractual or implicit (like
> the "work for hire" doctrine) agreement
>
> > Cheers, Gene Heskett

Anyway, this is off-topic for this list, and I should apologize for 
bringing up what has been for me, a very sore subject.  So, last post. 

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240295 — Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.)

Hi,

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 07:22:17 -0400
rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:

(...)

> > But the law today gives me
> > automatic copyright over what I write without additional public
> > notice, I think for 90 years after I die.
> 
> Something like that, but doesn't sound quite right (wish I had a better 
> memory).  Previously copyrighted works are coming into the "public
> domain" year by year, about 95 years after -- oh, maybe it is after the
> author's death?  Maybe there is an alternate path to copyright
> expiring?  Not sure how it works if a corporation owns a copyright -- I
> don't think it is perpetual.

according to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths

it's typically Life + 70 years in the U.S., the U.K. and the E.U.
(though, depending on the country, in some cases copyright duration may be
different); in other countries from a quick glance the range seems to be
from 0 (Marshall Islands), Life (Kosovo) to Life + 100 years (Mexico),
with Life + 50 years and Life + 70 years being the most common.

Have a nice day,

Michael

.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

Power is danger.
		-- The Centurion, "Balance of Terror", stardate 1709.2

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#240305 — Re: OT: Copyrights and patents (was: Re: The future of computing.)

Thanks -- some comments below (I guess I had a brain or consciousness -worm 
(analagous to an earworm) and had to dig deeper).  ;-)

On Friday, September 24, 2021 03:45:28 AM Michael Lange wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 07:22:17 -0400
> rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > Something like that, but doesn't sound quite right (wish I had a better
> > memory).  Previously copyrighted works are coming into the "public
> > domain" year by year, about 95 years after -- oh, maybe it is after the
> > author's death?  Maybe there is an alternate path to copyright
> > expiring?  Not sure how it works if a corporation owns a copyright -- I
> > don't think it is perpetual.
> 
> according to
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths
> 
> it's typically Life + 70 years in the U.S., the U.K. and the E.U.
> (though, depending on the country, in some cases copyright duration may be
> different); in other countries from a quick glance the range seems to be
> from 0 (Marshall Islands), Life (Kosovo) to Life + 100 years (Mexico),
> with Life + 50 years and Life + 70 years being the most common.

Thanks.  Some more from other Wikipedia articles clarifies some things for me.

from: 

   * [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths]
[List of countries' copyright lengths]] -- 
` <for the US>
Copyright terms based on authors' deaths[a]

Life + 70 years (works published since 1978 or unpublished works)[236] 	

Copyright terms based on publication and creation dates[a] 	

95 years from publication or 120 years from creation whichever is shorter 
(anonymous works, pseudonymous works, or works made for hire, published since 
1978)[237]

95 years from publication for works published 1964–77; 28 (if copyright not 
renewed) or 95 years from publication for works published 1924–63 (Copyrights 
prior to 1925 have expired, not including copyrights on sound recordings fixed 
prior to February 15, 1972, covered only under state laws.)[238] 
'

Thus, a copyright held by a corporation expires in: 95 years from publication 
or 120 years from creation whichever is shorter (I guess maybe it could be 70 
years after the author's death if originally created by an author and then 
sold to a corporation???)

This varies by country and is subjec to the "rule of the shorter term":

   * [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_the_shorter_term][Rule of the 
shorter term]]
`
The rule of the shorter term, also called the comparison of terms, is a 
provision in international copyright treaties. The provision allows that 
signatory countries can limit the duration of copyright they grant to foreign 
works under national treatment to no more than the copyright term granted in 
the country of origin of the work.
'

Aside, somewhere else (in Wikipedia) I found that the original term for a 
copyright was 14 years with a possible renewal for an additional 14 years.

Aside, somewhere else (in Wikipedia) I found that the original term for a 
patent was up to 14 years (duration established / varied for each patent) with 
a possible renewal for an additonal 7 years.

My brainworm seems satisfied ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web