Off-topic but yes, possessing drugs does make you a crook, if by crook you mean "person breaking the law". It's pretty academic.
Alcohol (and tobacco, for that matter) may both be easily classified as addictive drugs, but society (i.e. johnny tax-man) deems them legal and acceptable, so they are irrelevant to your point.
You're argument is like saying "I like Vista, which is Windows, and 90% of people run Windows, so I'm just as normal as all of them." Sounds like the very definition of delusion to me.
A highly publicized, and dead-wrong, decision like this casts a chill over our freedom of expression.
An amusing and again over-the-top response, especially coming from a Lawyer, and even more so considering the much greater chills to the expression of freedom the people in America seem to take in stride every day (pretty much anything from the Christian Coalition, the MPAA ratings board, don't get me started Patriot Act, etc.) Freedom is probably the most expensive thing you can buy in America, if you can even find it on the shelf in the first place.
And as to this specific example, he wasn't publishing this as an exercise in personal freedom, he was publishing this to make money. J.K. may have led him down the garden path telling him he might be involved later, but in the end she owns the universe she created and has the right to control who profits from it. This isn't Disney co-opting other peoples work into their own portfolio and then lobbying for 150 year ownership, this is an author (and her publisher) protecting her life's work and her very honest (and er, core-American-value-system) right to profit from it.
Freedom of expression has nothing to do with creating an unauthorized derivative work and selling it for cash, and I'll remind you that she (and the corporation that really enforced this rule of law) never cease-and-desisted the website, or discouraged him in any way other than preventing him from profiting off of what was in large part her work.
Seriously, I get that there are a lot of fringe copyright zealots here on old \., but an author protecting her solely-created IP from some little fanboy trying to profit off her work and his "doesn't get out much" Potter addiction hardly warrants this kind of posting.
If this item had been posted as a response to an unbiased (yea, I know where I am) news item on the subject, it would have been modded Troll within minutes.
In my experience it is also far more likely to be dismissed out of hand as well. Police, and members of the military for that matter, are rarely held accountable for their actions other than demotions or dismissal, if for no other reason than that they are part of a system that can and does protect itself.
The fact is the average police officer is a (barely) high school-educated ex-jock who's interest/ability extends no further than the car and gun, and who hasn't the first clue or care how to enforce the basic laws, never mind discerning between real, perceived and obviously ludicrous threats.
The point is there isn't any competition in Canada's telco industry. It is run by a three-company triumvirate, who price-fix and freeze out the competition without so much as a nod by the conservative, lazy government.
But it is as typically short-sighted as most modern corporations are: they are greedy in the short term where can be, unjustifiably smug and contented in the fact that their sheep-like customers will just take it. You'd think that they'd be smart enough to realize that when real competition arrives they will collapse as battered customers flee like rats.
In Canada, these competitors will be arriving shortly and I can't imagine a single incentive that will keep me with Rogers (who, while not participating in this fiasco is equally bad in every other arena).
And for the record, when the new iPhone plans came out I reduced my entire family's accounts to their bare minimum, and made it quite clear that their loss of $200/month in revenue was directly because of their greedy indifference. Hopefully many more people did the same.
Anybody who hits ME with a brick is not going to live to see another day.
Yes, and this mentality has worked so well for America, all throughout its history. Big Stick is a tool of the lazy and ignorant, and a decent part the reason America is moving *down* many the world's quality indexes (standard of living, personal safety, etc.). But who needs statistics when you own a Colt, eh?
Canadians will use a range of proven, less hostile methods to effectively corner the greedy, unethical telcos into a no-win situation. Court, charging back companies for charges introduced post-contract, etc. are all civilized, proven and effective methods.
But good luck with your gun thing, I'm sure your random killing spree of innocent company employees will be effective in resolving your corporate woes.
-imposing smoke on a non-smoker is not a reversible argument; you may like coming home in the same smell category as a cat's asshole, a furry tongue, loss of taste and smell, and an ever-shortening life span, but I don't.
-smokers do place a much higher burden on public health costs (in countries modern enough to have them;) that non-smokers have to absorb. (sure, same argument for alcoholics and fatties, but arguing that is just a diversion from the point)
-modern cigs are nothing more than a highly cultivated and refined designer drug that smokers are *addicted* to; the only difference between cigarettes and heroine or cocaine is that it is a legal drug that it is socially acceptable to be addicted to
-modern society is forced to regulate the unintelligent, inconsiderate and unhealthy in cases where people are not willing to regulate themselves. Many laws exist to regulate public behavior, especially when this behavior affects the health or pocketbooks of others. Bike helmets, seatbelts, child safety seats, gun laws, public shagging (sad, but true), public drinking...all these laws are there for a reason: to manage the stupid, selfish, 'I am an island' behavior of self-destructive impulse-driven dickheads.
There are many more valid arguments for smokers to avoid, but what it comes down to is that smoking is a vile, unhealthy habit that the addicts have no qualms about inflicting upon others. Guys begging on the street for quarters so they can get their next crack fix are less offensive than riding in an elevator with stinky and his phlegmy cough...never mind having to walk through his cloud of toxic shit whenever I walk out of a building.
When smoking bans were introduced for bars and restaurants, a small minority of owners pissed and whined about them and made the same sort of selfish arguments as these. Then the ban came, and these business improved on average 30-40% across the board (even for the dumb-fuck owners who opposed it). Why? Obviously because the minority where no longer able to force their shitty habit onto the rest of us, and we were finally able to go out and taste our food and not come home smelling like the floor of a taxi.
Stop avoiding the arguments. Comparing smoking to segregation laws or telling non-smokers 'suck on it...I have rights to' proves just how asinine and weak your logic is.
Wow, a simple, seemingly obvious (as always, in hindsight) observation that throws a lot of carefully balanced highly theoretical equations out of whack.
Of course, it could prove to be equally inaccurate by failing to take into account some other grand unknown that in turn will prove to be obvious, but I can't help but feel sorry thinking of all those academics sitting around a table of hardly-touched pints and muttering "well, fuck..." to no one in particular.
--
"You're only as smart as the guys you think are smarter than you."
As America continues to whack away with its big stick on the political and corporate stage, they are finding fewer and fewer allies on the world stage. For an obvious example, take a look at how well NATO has their back in Afghanistan (and also, take note that Canada IS one of the few countries that is actually helping them). America used to influence other countries through mutual respect, a desire to emulate them, and the ideals that the country represented. Now all they have left is power, intimidation and threat (sure, they used these tactics before, but the difference is now they *have* to use them...I guess we've all become 'idealogical opponents' in some regard).
And, for the record, the reason our dollar is strong while the American dollar weakens is because of our vast resources; I hardly think that America is in a position to close the borders or restrict trade, considering how soft their trading power has become since they put Bushy in charge of handling their affairs. I'd be more afraid of America weakening to the point they decide Canada is a threat best taken control of than them ever saying "no, we don't want your stinkin' oil/wheat/timber/water/iron/uranium/coal/diamonds/gold/jade/nickel/copper/salmon any more".
Maybe this whole new 'Copyright Axis of Evil' thing is just their prelude...
Just for the folks in the "I wouldn't use it, and I'm an average guy, so nobody is going to want this..." crowd (never mind the obtuse "we're in the high-end image editing business and need our apps close to the metal" gathering), there are in fact a ton of uses for a strictly online photo editing app...especially something lightweight that could be imbedded into a form.
embed into a CMS, or any other app. that has images as a content item
embed in a personals/community site, so uploaders can crop/resize their uploaded photos themselves, or content admins. can do it on the fly (just FYI, I built one of these for a company and productivity increased about 600% vs. download/Photoshop/upload)
any photo submission site, so you can access / edit them from any computer anywhere (like holiday photos from the hotel in Mexico on the 8-year old PC in their lobby)
any online form that requires a photo upload
For the ones that are trying to replicate/steal market share from Photoshop, that probably's a long way off, but for now there a lot of uses for an online image utility.
A little imagination is all that is required...this list took about 30 seconds and I'm sure there are many $$$$ ideas that could grow out of this little segment.
--------------
I don't mind if you piss into the wind, just let me know before you do it...
"thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grammes a week."
--George Orwell, 1984
Only in America could a Corporation have the audacity to suggest...no, not suggest, *say* that technology has been spurred by patent and copyright laws. Perhaps it was, originally, until they got a hold of the fact that it could be used, along with corporate-leaning litigation laws, to stifle competition.
Following this, I'm assuming that Viacom is going to announce that a lack of national health care has made the country healthier by forcing Americans to take better care of themselves.
Never has it been more true than during this shining era of Bush Administration that the world at large has been inclined to take America's advice to change, to "jackboot themselves into line", as an indication they are doing something right. This will only make us Canadians way more likely to loosen, rather than tighten, legislation.
The thing about your World Stage move from friend to bully is that nobody will take you seriously any more, not unless you pull out your big stick. For 'friends' this stick has always been your deep pockets, but thanks to your recent choices in leadership has been whittled away.
Before Bush: $1 US = $1.68 CDN. Today: $1 US = $1.16 CDN (and its been as low as $1.10).
Not such a big stick anymore...top that off with your rough foriegn policy and the increasing ease of global commerce, and suddenly we don't really care so much anymore when you get mad at us.
And, to be clear, dear Americans, this isn't "the politicians" talking, this is America talking...you vote for them, you let them run your country, they are your voice as surely and purely as anything you say yourselves. Only citizens of a dictatorship get to cry innocent.
Sooner or later you guys are going to have to take back what your elected weasels have taken from you. Until then, come on up North, we'll watch some downloaded movies, smoke some fine Cuban cigars, do some online gambling, throw rice at a couple of ladies getting married and freeze our asses off (hey, it's still Canada).
I work at a medium-sized public college in Canada and we do the same thing here, though its more blocking of ports/services and certain file types (i.e. mp3,iTunes store,etc.) than actual web sites (I don't know of any web sites that are restricted).
The reason comes down to bandwidth, and the budget for it. While its gotten better, typically the pipe here is saturated during the day; even the over-zealous use of in-house page caching hasn't helped much. Students who can bittorrent down huge files and transfer tons of music will do it on campus rather than off if they can (wouldn't you?). As to the degree this interferes with legitimate use, any educational institution I've ever worked with is a bureaucracy first and foremost (as bad, or worse, than government), and as such they're far more likely to lean towards protecting the general interest with blanket measures than try to fine-tune the type of access specific students might need.
While blocking specific web sites certainly smacks of censorship more than blocking specific high-bandwidth services/actions, I'd bet this is more of a sloppy band-aid to protect their resources than a school exercising an agenda.
Put another way, this would equal 50 full-time employees doing nothing but surfing online game and auction sites.
This article must have been posted by a Government employee, considering the obtuse view of the statistics.
A less jaded statistic would be:
7,763 Computers / 100,000 lost work hours in a year = 12.9 hours per year per computer terminal.
So, with an average of 50 work weeks, 40 hours per day, thats 2000 hours/12.9 hours, or a total average waste of 0.6% of their work time. And this is without considering breaks, lunch time or pre/post work hours. If this data is accurate, I'd bet people spend more time on personal phone calls, daydreaming, doodling or just plain screwing the pooch than they do looking at boobies or shooting aliens. But that won't stop some dope of a politician from turning into a soapbox issue, wasting $$$$ of better-spent money on studies and easily-broken/obtuse preventative measures, and some poor dude getting sacked for mistyping a URL (well, so he says).
Of course, that said, the number seems incredibly low.
Welcome to the reason I stopped visiting/contributing to/.; the hypocracy of the 'cheap justifying weazel' syndrome that pervades this community: "I shouldn't have to pay for X; everything should be free ('cause I'm just to lazy to earn it for myself)".
It never ceases to amaze me how many excuses people can come up with to not pay for somebody's intellectual property. If you want to own a song, PAY for the bloody thing. If you want to watch a movie, stop pissing your money away on Dorito's and Big Gulps and buck up! Don't pretend that you're standing on a soapbox against Corporate America, musicians who so arrogantly want to get paid for their work, RIAA/MPAA, or anybody else. The fact is, you're just being cheap weazels who can get away with something, and then parrot the self-justifying crap that the other thieving weazels have spouted. I'd be willing to bet that 99% of the people who steal music, movies, and software have never contributed anything to the OSS/intellectual property realm beyond their unfinished Star Wars VII script and a couple of blog postings on Jessica Alba's ass.
I agree that DRM sucks, and rootkits and corporation's dull witted approach to protecting their property sucks too. But the *reason* this stuff exists is because of the weasels like Lord_Dweomer who steal and justify more regularly than evangelists sin and repent.
Justify all you want, but a low-life is a low-life no matter how good or common his excuses might be.
Slashdot Mirror
Off-topic but yes, possessing drugs does make you a crook, if by crook you mean "person breaking the law". It's pretty academic.
Alcohol (and tobacco, for that matter) may both be easily classified as addictive drugs, but society (i.e. johnny tax-man) deems them legal and acceptable, so they are irrelevant to your point.
You're argument is like saying "I like Vista, which is Windows, and 90% of people run Windows, so I'm just as normal as all of them." Sounds like the very definition of delusion to me.
A highly publicized, and dead-wrong, decision like this casts a chill over our freedom of expression.
An amusing and again over-the-top response, especially coming from a Lawyer, and even more so considering the much greater chills to the expression of freedom the people in America seem to take in stride every day (pretty much anything from the Christian Coalition, the MPAA ratings board, don't get me started Patriot Act, etc.) Freedom is probably the most expensive thing you can buy in America, if you can even find it on the shelf in the first place.
And as to this specific example, he wasn't publishing this as an exercise in personal freedom, he was publishing this to make money. J.K. may have led him down the garden path telling him he might be involved later, but in the end she owns the universe she created and has the right to control who profits from it. This isn't Disney co-opting other peoples work into their own portfolio and then lobbying for 150 year ownership, this is an author (and her publisher) protecting her life's work and her very honest (and er, core-American-value-system) right to profit from it.
Freedom of expression has nothing to do with creating an unauthorized derivative work and selling it for cash, and I'll remind you that she (and the corporation that really enforced this rule of law) never cease-and-desisted the website, or discouraged him in any way other than preventing him from profiting off of what was in large part her work.
Seriously, I get that there are a lot of fringe copyright zealots here on old \., but an author protecting her solely-created IP from some little fanboy trying to profit off her work and his "doesn't get out much" Potter addiction hardly warrants this kind of posting.
If this item had been posted as a response to an unbiased (yea, I know where I am) news item on the subject, it would have been modded Troll within minutes.
In my experience it is also far more likely to be dismissed out of hand as well. Police, and members of the military for that matter, are rarely held accountable for their actions other than demotions or dismissal, if for no other reason than that they are part of a system that can and does protect itself. The fact is the average police officer is a (barely) high school-educated ex-jock who's interest/ability extends no further than the car and gun, and who hasn't the first clue or care how to enforce the basic laws, never mind discerning between real, perceived and obviously ludicrous threats.
The point is there isn't any competition in Canada's telco industry. It is run by a three-company triumvirate, who price-fix and freeze out the competition without so much as a nod by the conservative, lazy government.
But it is as typically short-sighted as most modern corporations are: they are greedy in the short term where can be, unjustifiably smug and contented in the fact that their sheep-like customers will just take it. You'd think that they'd be smart enough to realize that when real competition arrives they will collapse as battered customers flee like rats.
In Canada, these competitors will be arriving shortly and I can't imagine a single incentive that will keep me with Rogers (who, while not participating in this fiasco is equally bad in every other arena).
And for the record, when the new iPhone plans came out I reduced my entire family's accounts to their bare minimum, and made it quite clear that their loss of $200/month in revenue was directly because of their greedy indifference. Hopefully many more people did the same.
Anybody who hits ME with a brick is not going to live to see another day.
Yes, and this mentality has worked so well for America, all throughout its history. Big Stick is a tool of the lazy and ignorant, and a decent part the reason America is moving *down* many the world's quality indexes (standard of living, personal safety, etc.). But who needs statistics when you own a Colt, eh?
Canadians will use a range of proven, less hostile methods to effectively corner the greedy, unethical telcos into a no-win situation. Court, charging back companies for charges introduced post-contract, etc. are all civilized, proven and effective methods.
But good luck with your gun thing, I'm sure your random killing spree of innocent company employees will be effective in resolving your corporate woes.
Here are the key issues to argue against:
;) that non-smokers have to absorb. (sure, same argument for alcoholics and fatties, but arguing that is just a diversion from the point)
-imposing smoke on a non-smoker is not a reversible argument; you may like coming home in the same smell category as a cat's asshole, a furry tongue, loss of taste and smell, and an ever-shortening life span, but I don't.
-smokers do place a much higher burden on public health costs (in countries modern enough to have them
-modern cigs are nothing more than a highly cultivated and refined designer drug that smokers are *addicted* to; the only difference between cigarettes and heroine or cocaine is that it is a legal drug that it is socially acceptable to be addicted to
-modern society is forced to regulate the unintelligent, inconsiderate and unhealthy in cases where people are not willing to regulate themselves. Many laws exist to regulate public behavior, especially when this behavior affects the health or pocketbooks of others. Bike helmets, seatbelts, child safety seats, gun laws, public shagging (sad, but true), public drinking...all these laws are there for a reason: to manage the stupid, selfish, 'I am an island' behavior of self-destructive impulse-driven dickheads.
There are many more valid arguments for smokers to avoid, but what it comes down to is that smoking is a vile, unhealthy habit that the addicts have no qualms about inflicting upon others. Guys begging on the street for quarters so they can get their next crack fix are less offensive than riding in an elevator with stinky and his phlegmy cough...never mind having to walk through his cloud of toxic shit whenever I walk out of a building.
When smoking bans were introduced for bars and restaurants, a small minority of owners pissed and whined about them and made the same sort of selfish arguments as these. Then the ban came, and these business improved on average 30-40% across the board (even for the dumb-fuck owners who opposed it). Why? Obviously because the minority where no longer able to force their shitty habit onto the rest of us, and we were finally able to go out and taste our food and not come home smelling like the floor of a taxi.
Stop avoiding the arguments. Comparing smoking to segregation laws or telling non-smokers 'suck on it...I have rights to' proves just how asinine and weak your logic is.
Wow, a simple, seemingly obvious (as always, in hindsight) observation that throws a lot of carefully balanced highly theoretical equations out of whack.
Of course, it could prove to be equally inaccurate by failing to take into account some other grand unknown that in turn will prove to be obvious, but I can't help but feel sorry thinking of all those academics sitting around a table of hardly-touched pints and muttering "well, fuck..." to no one in particular.
--
"You're only as smart as the guys you think are smarter than you."
But my friend, times have changed.
As America continues to whack away with its big stick on the political and corporate stage, they are finding fewer and fewer allies on the world stage. For an obvious example, take a look at how well NATO has their back in Afghanistan (and also, take note that Canada IS one of the few countries that is actually helping them). America used to influence other countries through mutual respect, a desire to emulate them, and the ideals that the country represented. Now all they have left is power, intimidation and threat (sure, they used these tactics before, but the difference is now they *have* to use them...I guess we've all become 'idealogical opponents' in some regard).
And, for the record, the reason our dollar is strong while the American dollar weakens is because of our vast resources; I hardly think that America is in a position to close the borders or restrict trade, considering how soft their trading power has become since they put Bushy in charge of handling their affairs. I'd be more afraid of America weakening to the point they decide Canada is a threat best taken control of than them ever saying "no, we don't want your stinkin' oil/wheat/timber/water/iron/uranium/coal/diamonds/gold/jade/nickel/copper/salmon any more".
Maybe this whole new 'Copyright Axis of Evil' thing is just their prelude...
- embed into a CMS, or any other app. that has images as a content item
- embed in a personals/community site, so uploaders can crop/resize their uploaded photos themselves, or content admins. can do it on the fly (just FYI, I built one of these for a company and productivity increased about 600% vs. download/Photoshop/upload)
- any photo submission site, so you can access / edit them from any computer anywhere (like holiday photos from the hotel in Mexico on the 8-year old PC in their lobby)
- any online form that requires a photo upload
For the ones that are trying to replicate/steal market share from Photoshop, that probably's a long way off, but for now there a lot of uses for an online image utility.A little imagination is all that is required...this list took about 30 seconds and I'm sure there are many $$$$ ideas that could grow out of this little segment.
--------------
I don't mind if you piss into the wind, just let me know before you do it...
Only in America could a Corporation have the audacity to suggest...no, not suggest, *say* that technology has been spurred by patent and copyright laws. Perhaps it was, originally, until they got a hold of the fact that it could be used, along with corporate-leaning litigation laws, to stifle competition.
Following this, I'm assuming that Viacom is going to announce that a lack of national health care has made the country healthier by forcing Americans to take better care of themselves.
Never has it been more true than during this shining era of Bush Administration that the world at large has been inclined to take America's advice to change, to "jackboot themselves into line", as an indication they are doing something right. This will only make us Canadians way more likely to loosen, rather than tighten, legislation.
The thing about your World Stage move from friend to bully is that nobody will take you seriously any more, not unless you pull out your big stick. For 'friends' this stick has always been your deep pockets, but thanks to your recent choices in leadership has been whittled away.
Before Bush: $1 US = $1.68 CDN. Today: $1 US = $1.16 CDN (and its been as low as $1.10).
Not such a big stick anymore...top that off with your rough foriegn policy and the increasing ease of global commerce, and suddenly we don't really care so much anymore when you get mad at us.
And, to be clear, dear Americans, this isn't "the politicians" talking, this is America talking...you vote for them, you let them run your country, they are your voice as surely and purely as anything you say yourselves. Only citizens of a dictatorship get to cry innocent.
Sooner or later you guys are going to have to take back what your elected weasels have taken from you. Until then, come on up North, we'll watch some downloaded movies, smoke some fine Cuban cigars, do some online gambling, throw rice at a couple of ladies getting married and freeze our asses off (hey, it's still Canada).
I work at a medium-sized public college in Canada and we do the same thing here, though its more blocking of ports/services and certain file types (i.e. mp3,iTunes store,etc.) than actual web sites (I don't know of any web sites that are restricted).
The reason comes down to bandwidth, and the budget for it. While its gotten better, typically the pipe here is saturated during the day; even the over-zealous use of in-house page caching hasn't helped much. Students who can bittorrent down huge files and transfer tons of music will do it on campus rather than off if they can (wouldn't you?). As to the degree this interferes with legitimate use, any educational institution I've ever worked with is a bureaucracy first and foremost (as bad, or worse, than government), and as such they're far more likely to lean towards protecting the general interest with blanket measures than try to fine-tune the type of access specific students might need.
While blocking specific web sites certainly smacks of censorship more than blocking specific high-bandwidth services/actions, I'd bet this is more of a sloppy band-aid to protect their resources than a school exercising an agenda.
Put another way, this would equal 50 full-time employees doing nothing but surfing online game and auction sites. This article must have been posted by a Government employee, considering the obtuse view of the statistics.
A less jaded statistic would be:
7,763 Computers / 100,000 lost work hours in a year = 12.9 hours per year per computer terminal.
So, with an average of 50 work weeks, 40 hours per day, thats 2000 hours/12.9 hours, or a total average waste of 0.6% of their work time. And this is without considering breaks, lunch time or pre/post work hours. If this data is accurate, I'd bet people spend more time on personal phone calls, daydreaming, doodling or just plain screwing the pooch than they do looking at boobies or shooting aliens. But that won't stop some dope of a politician from turning into a soapbox issue, wasting $$$$ of better-spent money on studies and easily-broken/obtuse preventative measures, and some poor dude getting sacked for mistyping a URL (well, so he says).
Of course, that said, the number seems incredibly low.
Welcome to the reason I stopped visiting/contributing to /.; the hypocracy of the 'cheap justifying weazel' syndrome that pervades this community: "I shouldn't have to pay for X; everything should be free ('cause I'm just to lazy to earn it for myself)".
It never ceases to amaze me how many excuses people can come up with to not pay for somebody's intellectual property. If you want to own a song, PAY for the bloody thing. If you want to watch a movie, stop pissing your money away on Dorito's and Big Gulps and buck up! Don't pretend that you're standing on a soapbox against Corporate America, musicians who so arrogantly want to get paid for their work, RIAA/MPAA, or anybody else. The fact is, you're just being cheap weazels who can get away with something, and then parrot the self-justifying crap that the other thieving weazels have spouted. I'd be willing to bet that 99% of the people who steal music, movies, and software have never contributed anything to the OSS/intellectual property realm beyond their unfinished Star Wars VII script and a couple of blog postings on Jessica Alba's ass.
I agree that DRM sucks, and rootkits and corporation's dull witted approach to protecting their property sucks too. But the *reason* this stuff exists is because of the weasels like Lord_Dweomer who steal and justify more regularly than evangelists sin and repent.
Justify all you want, but a low-life is a low-life no matter how good or common his excuses might be.