| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Comments:
<0> wlfshmn_: Sure, then I'd know how to dance, dress, and I'd get all the blonde white women.
<0> OldMonk: Around here that's called a farmer's tan. heh
<1> synapsis: you can get those while white too. but then you would most likely be gay
<2> smsie: you imperialist types wouldn['t know anything about a thing called ``sun'' anyway
<0> wlfshmn_: Yeah. But even I have standards.
<3> OldMonk: I know about Sun. It's a **** newspaper
<4> anyway, it is time for me to run home
<2> smsie: see? :)
<3> OldMonk: I see the sun about once a month...any more is a waste
<2> wlfshmn: don't -- catch a bus instead!
<0> We have 330 days of sun here.
<3> OldMonk: and in fairness, I actually hate strong sunlight (maybe I'm a vampire)
<5> OldMonk: In the summer, it takes us Scottish folk 4 weeks to turn from blue to white ;)
<4> OldMonk: well, yeah, that was the plan.
<0> And the most intense sun in all of the .us
<3> Tron: in Scotland, that's how long summer *lasts* :)
<2> Tron: hehheh -- here it's instant :)
<4> OldMonk: if I ran home I would expire when I got home
<5> smsie: Precisely ;)
<2> smsie: i love it and the vitamin d it provides
<5> smsie: Then we revert back to our native blue ;)
<4> Tron: You -do- know that you scotts are still southerners? ;)
<3> OldMonk: I hate it and the blinding headaches it provides
<6> 4 weeks? i beg to differ
<0> Tron: So Scots are all Smurfs. Got it.
<6> in Scotland, the summer lasts about 8 days randomly distributed throughout the so-called summer months
<4> synapsis: Jupp. There is only one scottish female in the entire highlands.
<0> hah
<2> smsie: try drinking mixed fruit juice full of whisky at an open kiosk at 45C sometime... that's when you get a real taste of sun and heat
<3> OldMonk: no thanks. I'll just stay here where the climate is mild
<0> 45C is mild.
<0> Nice and sunny.
<4> Tron: Glasgow is about 2 degrees further south than I am at the moment
<0> Just don't have vinyl seats in your car.
<6> smsie: s/mild/miserable/
<0> hah
<4> Tron: and I'm in southern sweden, damn it
<4> anyway, off to home. laters
<6> later wlfshmn
<5> wlfshmn: heheh
<0> I'm the same latitude as Iraq, parts of India, etc... so I'm used to it.
<7> Meh
<5> PW
<2> synapsis: where are you?
<0> PeeWee
<7> Capt'n
<0> OldMonk: Arizona. Southwest deserts of the .us
<2> ah
<3> Arizona, where the men are mean and the women are meaner
<7> synapsis: Are you cheeksie?
<0> smsie: The women are cattle.
<3> the definition of a virgin is someone who can run faster than her brother
<2> bwaahaahaa!
<5> PolarWolf: I was thinking that ;)
<0> PolarWolf: If I was, I sure wouldn't be on IRC right about now.
<8> bwhahahahahaha
<3> lotsa banjo players in them there parts
<7> synapsis: Doth not call me "PeeWee" then :)
<0> Banjo players are to the east, actually.
<0> We have a lot of those huge mexican guitars.
<0> With a man screaming in spanish to play it.
<9> He just walked in
<9> Coincidence? I think not
<9> Cicalinuxol sound awfully spanish
<10> crap. I need to upgrade dspam. it seems to be missing more things
<11> Oh my god.. It seems a judge in California has said that "perfect 101" is right when they claim copy violation by google since google shows thumbnails of their pictures online.
<11> s/since/because/
<10> Lion-O: yup
<7> Lion-O: Aye
<11> Have those morons never heard of robots.txt ?
<12> Go stupid liberal judges in California!
<2> Lion-O: yeah, it rocks!
<7> Lion-O: That's besides the point
<10> Lion-O: dude, you know how many crawlers ignore robots.txt
<7> Lion-O: The point is that Google indexes piccies, caches and reproduces
<11> PolarWolf: IMO its not. They offer this stuff for free, and google is but a service helping people to find the way to their website.
<11> PolarWolf: True.. But when you click such pictures you end up on the main site.
<13> Lion-O: guess what - they want google to index them, just not the images....
<2> but they're still copying it and making it available publically
<7> Lion-O: That's also besides the point.
<7> Lion-O: Google caches and reproduces without permission of the copyright holder.
<11> PolarWolf: I think this may have a bigger impact. This also implies that google (or any other search engine) isn't allowed to just pick up any website and store it.
<7> Lion-O: Aye
<2> yup.
<11> s/website/website contents/
<13> google is very good about respecting robots.txt - but not being indexed by google is a deathknell for most companies
<11> PolarWolf: in other words; less freedom on the net. imo this thing ****s.
<7> Lion-O: That's always been slippery anyway. Why is google caching information which already disappeared off the web?
<3> schitzo: the point is that google's crawler (AFAIK) respects robots.txt
<7> Lion-O: Like, I as author could claim that Google is violating my copyright in keeping copies longer than I wish to have available publicly.
<13> if google indexed them in text, but not in images, they will be perfectly happy - but robots.txt isn't set up to do that
<11> PolarWolf: That is true. But for how long? Their caches are good to take the load of big websites. Or when you wish to translate a site.
<5> Heheh... next thing'll be "SCO sues Google for stealing it's intellectual property"... "Darl Mc Bride stated : 'We have evidence that Googled copied over 2 million pictures from our main SCO web server resource'" ;)
<7> Lion-O: Doesn't matter. The point is that Google has the obligation to make sure it doesn't violate my rights.
<3> DaveHowe: sure it is. You can put all your images in a given directory and exclude that directory in robots.txt
<13> smsie: but there is no way to tell google to index just the text without the images
<3> DaveHowe: robots.txt is a list of directorys not to index. Pus the directories ytou don't want indexed in there (the one with the images for example) and it won't be indexed
<7> smsie: I as a copyright holder should not be required to protect my content from caching or crawling, the crawler's owner is responisble for making sure they don't violate my licenses and copyrights
<2> it's like MS paying sco to **** linux -- you get big enough and someone gets palpitations
<11> PolarWolf: Do they? You could also make sure your rights are made clear before displaying the contents (say a popup or something) which would block the search engine.
<13> smsie: I know. but that would require them to change their site structure to accomodate it
<7> smsie: It's mostly an academic discussion, I agree. But that's the US law for ya.
<5> Personally, I say, if you don't want your content to be crawled over or cached, don't publish it on the open internet.
<13> smsie: they could also link all their images from another site and put their robots.txt there
<11> Tron: Ayups
<11> Tron: or put a lock on it.
<3> PolarWolf: that's naive though. The crawler has NO reasonable way to do that given the amount of information. It takes virtually zero effort for you as holder to do it
<11> smsie: keyword (IMO anyway) in this is: US Law.
<7> Lion-O: Why do *I* have to take action to make sure my already protected rights are reprotected from companies who wish to cache and index?
<3> Lion-O: yeah, well, US law is ****ed up anyway
<11> PolarWolf: why do you have to keep your house locked down ?
<5> Have a quick front page. Require a login to enable the human browsing to see the main content of your site.
<13> still, I suspect google will exact their usual Death Penalty and remove that site entirely
<7> smsie: Besides the point. Laws aren't made with technical limitations in mind.
<7> smsie: The law is literal.
<2> i believe technically the company suing google has the law on their side.
<2> not a question of .us or otherwise
<7> Lion-O: Same issue, 'ish.
<7> Lion-O: That's why burglary is illegal.
<3> PolarWolf: you don't. "echo 'user-agent: *\nDisallow: *' > $WEBROOT/robots.txt"
<11> PolarWolf: Not really. After all; if the house looks like a restaurant then its perfectly legal for people to walk in when things aren't locked down.
<3> PolarWolf: in *exactly* the same way as your phone number goes in the book, unless you ask for it not to be
<11> PolarWolf: Which comes down to "what is burgelary" :P If your house is not locked down, fully open, is it illegal for people to walk in? The law says it is. But if you reflect this to the internet...
<3> it's opt-out rather than opt-in, but that shouldn't be illegal
<7> smsie: That's because I'm not the owner of my phone number
<3> PolarWolf: if there *were* no way to opt out, then you'd have a valid point
<7> But I notice you're stuck in a line of thought the law doesn't care about
<2> google is copying content over which it has no rights at all
<7> Sorry, Google is in trouble with this one
<3> PolarWolf: oh, I don;t care what the law cares about...the law is stupid
<7> smsie: Yeah, but since that is what we're dealing with in this case
<3> PolarWolf: google will win anyway
<7> The law doesn't care one iota whether or not you agree with it
<11> PolarWolf: the big problem is indeed the stubborness of the law. Trying to apply laws which apply to real life onto the Internet. It can't work this way.
<3> PolarWolf: google will (probably) just say "okay, send us a cease and desist and we'll remove all your ontent from the archive. End of problem"
<3> PolarWolf: how many companies will want google not to index them?
<7> Lion-O: Yeah, well, that's how it works until we find a better system
<2> Lion-O: it's not a question of real life vs the internet -- google is violating copyright pure and simple
<7> smsie: That's besides the point too :)
<7> smsie: All those nuances don't matter. At all.
<13> ALL search engines violate copyright - its impossible to index the web without doing so
<3> PolarWolf: it's what will probably happen...and the companies will **** themselves
<2> DaveHowe: not really -- if you don't cache you're fine
<7> smsie: The law is literal, and literally speaking, they're infringing a copyright.
<14> Why not just put a copyright notice in the IPTC information, and then Google could simply agree to not cache an image if the comment field contained a ?
<3> PolarWolf: actually, literally speaking, it's a VERY grey area (at least in the US)
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
#AllNiteCafe
#linux
#ubuntu
#linux
#mysql
#AllNiteCafe
#teens
#london
#skype
fifa2003
|
|