aw give me a break already, so youtube removed an anti scientology link! Ok that's bad, but then again should we really get to see slashdot ramble about that whenever youtube is mentioned? Really...
Sure. Let's let rampant censorship go unmentioned. That way, when the scientologists next eat someone's babies, it will be a surprise to everyone - because there's no forum to ensure that people are forewarned about the evils of a bunch of manipulative business-minded bad-sci-fi fiends operating as a religion for tax purposes. Hey, it's not important.. there are plenty more babies...
Surely it matters not what most people believe, merely what *is* - or more likely, the most well-defined of all the blurred images of 'what is' that can be perceived by the brightest few minds alive ?
Anyhoo.. if I pull-out another phrase from your post:
..genetic gift of a photographic memory for painting..
The idea (of a photographic memory for painting) itself is such a complex one. Sure, it's easily expressed but it plays on a history of all the cutural knowledge we have amassed over the courses of our lives. Imagine trying to define the idea without reference to any of this knowledge; then try to imagine encoding that into a DNA. Then try to imagine that we are able to unwind the instructions to predict how they will interact given that things may play out differently because certain genes may be suppressed due to feedback from the organism's environment. I'm struggling to explain myself here but.. what I'm getting at is the blurry notion of how some abstract collection of abilities may be said to relate to some collection of gene segments and whether some new gene has begun to express itself, thus conferring the previously unknown ability to discern the meaning of DNA on its recipients. I for one will welcome our omnipotent gene-reading overlords, should they arrive and demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt their abilities.
You're welcome for the link. You may be interested that The League of Noble Peers have released all the footage shot for the making of the film into the public arena, to do with as you will: http://footage.stealthisfilm.com/
There's some great footage of Bram Cohen lauging insanely and inappropriately when discussing Bittorrent:D
Disclaimer: Of course I realise that he's a genius and that my tiny mind can't comprehend the many wanderings of it, otherwise I would grasp the appropriateness of the intensity and timing of the laughter, still it's amusing to me nonetheless:D
It's bad because we are too stupid to realise how stupid we are.
In fifty or a hundred years, when 'we' realise that our understanding of <which genes mean what> and <which others moderate that meaning> is flawed, it's too late to say to all those people who've been completely excluded from society and the-world-of-tomorrow "sorry, we made a mistake - doh".
And what does this have anything to do with descrimination based on genetic information?
You must be new here...
..otherwise you'd remember that we've all agreed that every thread's topic should be read as " 'FUCK BUSH!!!' - discuss" once all the main arguments addressing the actual topic have been made.
The most extreme hunger and the most dire thirst are NOTHING compared to the craving I have for a cigarette if I don't have one every few hours.
As an ex-smoker [I smoked for ten years and quit eleven years ago] I find that the following chain of (admittedly somewhat-incoherent) reasoning helped me quit (on the third or fourth attempt):
-- Thinking about the board of directors and the shareholders of tobacco companies; all healthy and wealthy and able to set themselves apart from those poor unfortunates that they prey upon; all profiting from my slow but sure death. They have their tendrils entwined into every aspect of society so that everywhere you look are signals, cues, testimony that smoking is a choice; 'a way to express the "inner you"'.
Children and young adults are seduced by the media (and indeed by the envoys of tobacco, the smokers themselves, who sing its praises to the extent to which they deny their own addiction), into buying something which once tasted will harness their addictive nature and soon will have them 'willingly' consume more and more, despite the growing awareness that it is killing them; simply because some groups of people want your money and will use any means to get it.
Think about it, it's like conversion of matter into energy but it's people's lives being converted into cash. That's all you are, like a cow to the slaughter to tobacco companies. --
So yah, extreme dislike of being maniupulated and abused for (someone else's) profit was stronger than chemical dependence; but that's just me; maybe you like helping them buy yachts and vast mansions and that's your 'choice'.
One can't find an amount of money which balances any particular problem's effects.
[Full disclosure: I smoked for ten years and quit eleven years ago.]
For example; smoking doesn't just affect the smoker. The poison-laden fumes directly affect the smoker and those around her. When said smoker and passive-smoking victims have their lung health reduced by the poison-laden fumes, they are more susceptible to 'colds' which they then spread to their friends, families and coworkers.
It's all very well taking the line that "It's my body and I can do what I like to it" but *you* affect everyone around you to a greater and lesser extent.
Even within an insurance-saleswoman's ideal world, where the effects of all problems may be counter-balanced by a well-defined financial sum, when you're paying extra for health insurance for yourself, you should pay extra for anyone you affected by your choice to reduce your lung health. When I'm forced to take a sick day because you're a walking petri dish because, I want finanacial compensation.. biatch!:)
That whole thing about how the war in Iraq was part of a business arrangement which enabled him to siphon public money into his buddies' bank accounts (handing lucrative contracts to rebuild the Iraq that he destroyed, to the chosen few) isn't a reason, is it? What would you call it though? purely so that we can define terms..
..the oil tycoon will be out and no longer draining the US Treasury into the pockets of his cronies.
For all the bickering about the value of morality and legality in this modern age, corruption at the top demonstrates a clear point; 'break the rules to win'.
SOMEONE on the inside of the great umbrella that is the rainbow-riffic RIAA member corporations _is_ helping the nasty, vile piratey types.
Or, maybe (just maybe:) they are deliberately 'leaking' them so that they can gain massive media attention and recover vast sums of cash, way in excess of those to be gained by actually *selling* their overpriced-POS product?
In my eyes, until the rich and politically powerful are held to the same laws that govern us little people
Dude. That's never gonna work. The rich and politically powerful make these laws to keep us under control. It would limit their maneuverability if they were forced to abide by them too.
The point is to limit our maneuverability so they can run circles around us.
Is Metallica worth the ruination of someone that has pirated their music?
Yes!
Anyone who likes Metallica's 'music' (enough to pirate their music) deserves to be ruined. Being ruined *by* Metallica completes the circle of perfect irony:D
Soon, they will come for you if you happen to do something that doens't make some big corp. money.
Or, you know, if you somehow were to break the law by..
The GP's point still stands. These days, pretty much everything that doesn't make some big corp. money *is* illegal. It makes writing a business plan much easier when you know the legal system is behind you succeeding. Thanks corrupt politians for usering-in a new age of corporate success!
No, he is saying that the copyright holder has to compete with his own product.
That-there is the problem. Their product is overpriced shit. People will barely download it for free. If they priced it more sensibly their returns would be higher.
What they are being denied is the future opportunity to convert some non-buyers into buyers, through the power of mass advertising.
What they either don't/won't realise or refuse to acknowledge is that they are never going to make those conversions.. because their product is overpriced. It's entertainment FOR FUCK'S SAKE! Watch it once then it's useless and so, on balance, to the consumer it should be priced similarly with other things consumed in such a manner (like an overpriced sandwich from a convenience store).
but if they can hurt enough individuals, maybe other individuals will be to scared to continue to download.
..and maybe there'll be noone left who hasn't been a target themselves or doesn't know someone who's been a target or who can't see the way the wind is blowing and still wants to continue giving these corrupt fucks money so they can use it to corrupt the world's legal systems and threaten people with them.
and it's not just your eyes - before you realise you've seen it, your brain has been involved and depending on how much processing the thing gets and whether you're looking for/expecting to see a particular thing and how alert you are and a gazillion other things, this can take a variable amount of time.
So, in future, it won't be comcast throttling the bt of the evil users, it will be comcast's honest, holier-than-thou users legitimately using comcasts own p2p to such an extent that the poor unfortunte evil users' service is regrettably disrupted?
I'm more in favour of 'providing a nominal reason for people from different (often politically adversarial) countries to mix and experience each others' cultures, to enable greater understanding and tolerance to develop.'
Slashdot Mirror
Sure. Let's let rampant censorship go unmentioned. That way, when the scientologists next eat someone's babies, it will be a surprise to everyone - because there's no forum to ensure that people are forewarned about the evils of a bunch of manipulative business-minded bad-sci-fi fiends operating as a religion for tax purposes. Hey, it's not important.. there are plenty more babies...
Flamebait? Remember the moderation guidelines "Flamebait != I am a shareholder in a tobacco company" ?
^__ *That's* flamebait..
Surely it matters not what most people believe, merely what *is* - or more likely, the most well-defined of all the blurred images of 'what is' that can be perceived by the brightest few minds alive ?
Anyhoo.. if I pull-out another phrase from your post:
The idea (of a photographic memory for painting) itself is such a complex one. Sure, it's easily expressed but it plays on a history of all the cutural knowledge we have amassed over the courses of our lives. Imagine trying to define the idea without reference to any of this knowledge; then try to imagine encoding that into a DNA. Then try to imagine that we are able to unwind the instructions to predict how they will interact given that things may play out differently because certain genes may be suppressed due to feedback from the organism's environment. I'm struggling to explain myself here but.. what I'm getting at is the blurry notion of how some abstract collection of abilities may be said to relate to some collection of gene segments and whether some new gene has begun to express itself, thus conferring the previously unknown ability to discern the meaning of DNA on its recipients. I for one will welcome our omnipotent gene-reading overlords, should they arrive and demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt their abilities.
You're welcome for the link. You may be interested that The League of Noble Peers have released all the footage shot for the making of the film into the public arena, to do with as you will: http://footage.stealthisfilm.com/
:D
:D
There's some great footage of Bram Cohen lauging insanely and inappropriately when discussing Bittorrent
Disclaimer: Of course I realise that he's a genius and that my tiny mind can't comprehend the many wanderings of it, otherwise I would grasp the appropriateness of the intensity and timing of the laughter, still it's amusing to me nonetheless
It's bad because we are too stupid to realise how stupid we are.
In fifty or a hundred years, when 'we' realise that our understanding of <which genes mean what> and <which others moderate that meaning> is flawed, it's too late to say to all those people who've been completely excluded from society and the-world-of-tomorrow "sorry, we made a mistake - doh".
The Earth is FLAT (and 6000 years old.) Burn the heretic!!!! etc..
As an ex-smoker [I smoked for ten years and quit eleven years ago] I find that the following chain of (admittedly somewhat-incoherent) reasoning helped me quit (on the third or fourth attempt):
--
Thinking about the board of directors and the shareholders of tobacco companies; all healthy and wealthy and able to set themselves apart from those poor unfortunates that they prey upon; all profiting from my slow but sure death. They have their tendrils entwined into every aspect of society so that everywhere you look are signals, cues, testimony that smoking is a choice; 'a way to express the "inner you"'.
Children and young adults are seduced by the media (and indeed by the envoys of tobacco, the smokers themselves, who sing its praises to the extent to which they deny their own addiction), into buying something which once tasted will harness their addictive nature and soon will have them 'willingly' consume more and more, despite the growing awareness that it is killing them; simply because some groups of people want your money and will use any means to get it.
Think about it, it's like conversion of matter into energy but it's people's lives being converted into cash. That's all you are, like a cow to the slaughter to tobacco companies.
--
So yah, extreme dislike of being maniupulated and abused for (someone else's) profit was stronger than chemical dependence; but that's just me; maybe you like helping them buy yachts and vast mansions and that's your 'choice'.
One can't find an amount of money which balances any particular problem's effects.
:)
[Full disclosure: I smoked for ten years and quit eleven years ago.]
For example; smoking doesn't just affect the smoker. The poison-laden fumes directly affect the smoker and those around her. When said smoker and passive-smoking victims have their lung health reduced by the poison-laden fumes, they are more susceptible to 'colds' which they then spread to their friends, families and coworkers.
It's all very well taking the line that "It's my body and I can do what I like to it" but *you* affect everyone around you to a greater and lesser extent.
Even within an insurance-saleswoman's ideal world, where the effects of all problems may be counter-balanced by a well-defined financial sum, when you're paying extra for health insurance for yourself, you should pay extra for anyone you affected by your choice to reduce your lung health. When I'm forced to take a sick day because you're a walking petri dish because, I want finanacial compensation.. biatch!
That whole thing about how the war in Iraq was part of a business arrangement which enabled him to siphon public money into his buddies' bank accounts (handing lucrative contracts to rebuild the Iraq that he destroyed, to the chosen few) isn't a reason, is it? What would you call it though? purely so that we can define terms..
For all the bickering about the value of morality and legality in this modern age, corruption at the top demonstrates a clear point; 'break the rules to win'.
Or, maybe (just maybe
Yah. You'd think they'd go after those people within their own organizations who are passing-on pre-released albums.
Also, NO, these aren't trade secrets, these are recordings of people saying 'in the motherfucking ghetto, yo!' etc., in-time to music.
Dude. That's never gonna work. The rich and politically powerful make these laws to keep us under control. It would limit their maneuverability if they were forced to abide by them too.
The point is to limit our maneuverability so they can run circles around us.
Yes!
Anyone who likes Metallica's 'music' (enough to pirate their music) deserves to be ruined. Being ruined *by* Metallica completes the circle of perfect irony
The GP's point still stands. These days, pretty much everything that doesn't make some big corp. money *is* illegal. It makes writing a business plan much easier when you know the legal system is behind you succeeding. Thanks corrupt politians for usering-in a new age of corporate success!
That-there is the problem. Their product is overpriced shit. People will barely download it for free. If they priced it more sensibly their returns would be higher.
What they are being denied is the future opportunity to convert some non-buyers into buyers, through the power of mass advertising.
What they either don't/won't realise or refuse to acknowledge is that they are never going to make those conversions.. because their product is overpriced. It's entertainment FOR FUCK'S SAKE! Watch it once then it's useless and so, on balance, to the consumer it should be priced similarly with other things consumed in such a manner (like an overpriced sandwich from a convenience store).
Yep, that sentence is hard to parse; sorry
Dude. They can read words from a piece of paper and *speak* them. Some of the film actors can speak *whilst walking*. Give them their due!
Spending ten or twenty years perfecting the art of manipulating digital information is child's-play compared to speaking in a funny voice.
and it's not just your eyes - before you realise you've seen it, your brain has been involved and depending on how much processing the thing gets and whether you're looking for/expecting to see a particular thing and how alert you are and a gazillion other things, this can take a variable amount of time.
So, in future, it won't be comcast throttling the bt of the evil users, it will be comcast's honest, holier-than-thou users legitimately using comcasts own p2p to such an extent that the poor unfortunte evil users' service is regrettably disrupted?
Guilty as charged.
Woa, I just read about 200 posts on history of WW1 and 2 and how bush sucks then flipped to page 2 - this post is about microsoft!
"To die in honor" makes no sense.. The living decide how you died, not you. Hint: your main goal should be to choose how to live not how to die...
I just don't find a pile of naked iraqies all that funny
btw, fuck you and your president
*dodges 'accidental' friendly fire*
I'm more in favour of 'providing a nominal reason for people from different (often politically adversarial) countries to mix and experience each others' cultures, to enable greater understanding and tolerance to develop.'