I don't know what kind of education you consider "advanced", but the liberal arts education I got taught me how to look at many angles to a problem and reach a balanced conclusion. This "everything is X" was never a possibility because it defeated the whole point of trying to learn.
Uh, and what's your point exactly? Here's a clue for you: there's no software yet, it's a week old idea. So guess what? Freshmeat is not in the habit of posting something that has no code yet, so that would make/. a pretty good place to talk about it.
Ok, I wasn't going to make any kind of response to your original story (well done btw) or subsequent comments, but I'm going to now:) I really, really disagree that Napster is hurting the little guy. No one I know who uses Napster does so to download small, unknown bands. They are using Napster to either get the song they heard on the radio that they like, or try other songs from a well known artist to see if they'll like the entire CD. I think people who like the indie bands will always support them by buying their CDs.
Personal anecdotal evidence: One of my absolute favorite indie bands (well, sorta, they've had major deals in the past) is a group called Over the Rhine. I'm sure that their music is available on Napster, but I have never once downloaded a song -- I buy their CDs. This goes for other small bands, like the Gufs, a band my brother introduced me to. But where I do download songs is when I know I can get the music at Best Buy, but I don't want to be screwed $18 for a lousy CD. I downloaded a few Paul Oakenfold songs to check it out, loved them a lot, and went out and got his CD Tranceport. (Great album!)
This is all to say, I think people are using Napster to check out the artists they hear on the radio, not search for bands they never heard of and screw them out of $8. And don't forget there are a lot of us, who after hearing something new that they like, will go out and actually buy the music (either at the store or online electronically). Hmm, this is a little long winded, sorry about that.:P
I checked out your site. How do I put this nicely....it sucks. At the very least you could have used slashcode to make it *look* like slashdot. But after skimming your site, I seriously doubt you have the capacity to do that.
Look at all the anti-MS posts on this topic, see any innovation in Slashdot posters? Nope, all spouting the same BS about how MS "steals" ideas.
BTW, you need a lesson in how to formulate an argument. No one reading slashdot is claiming to innovate. They are under no obligation to make original posts just to keep you happy. Microsoft makes that claim, and people are calling them on it. They are hoping that by repeating the mantra of "innovation" over and over, someone else besides Bill Gates might believe it. Looks like you are pretty close to falling for it:(
hate to break this to you, but women have testosterone, too. In fact, that Katz comment could apply to either men *or* women who are acting like fools. Maybe because men have a lot more of it, they are the ones that act like jerks more often? But it's not impossible for women to give out "testosterone-driven insults."
I didn't see Jon saying anyone was too "dumb" to handle the technology, but rather the US lacks the wisdom and the responsiblity to handle the technology. Big difference.
the only one looking foolish is you, falling for such an obivous troll. Grammar-nazi is playing the role of, well, a grammar nazi -- he's got to correct people. Personally, I get a kick out of his posts. (And based on the number of grammatical errors found here on/., this is not such a bad thing) Why don't you lighten up a little...
Jon, please don't stop posting to your own article. We need to see authors interact with the people they are talking to. Thats what makes places like/. great, there can be real dialogue between parties. Please don't let the trolls drag you down, they really are the vocal minority.
Ah, the old "lurkers agree with me in email" argument. Very good.
Uh, no, I think he means most people who email him have taken the time to be rational and respectful, and have read the article. You jerks just wait for his stories so you can post your drivel and get a kick out of everyone seeing your cheap troll. There's no audience when you send a private email...
Especially when the Unhappy Meal (TM) is an orignal invention from Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank. I would expect to see a lawsuit from them sometime soon.
I do believe this was a troll. Not a very good one, but a troll nevertheless. Let's try not to feed them:P
--------
Re:I'm not saying Mozilla is taking forever...
on
Mozilla M16 Released
·
· Score: 1
If you are given something for free, sure you have a "right" to complain about it. Of course you end up looking like a selfish, ungrateful shmuck, but hey, thats your choice and "right" to do that.
bad day...your flamebait post got to me and I didn't keep my cool. No need to call people names, I know. But you really need to re-think what youre saying, because it doesnt follow law precedent or even *common sense* I tell you a secret and you agree not to tell anyone. Then you break that agreement and tell a 3rd party. Who is responsible? you are for breaking the agreement. Does that 3rd party have to keep quiet? No, they didnt agree to it so they arent liable. If anyone is going to be sued, its you for breaking contract, not the 3rd party.
BLAH BLAH BLAH. What a waste of a post. Go back and reread the posts for this story. There are plenty of good ones that explain why a person can't be held responsible for SOMEONE ELSES secret if they never promised to keep it a secret....They do a better job than I ever could. And yes, i stand behind my orginal statement, you are a moron, and your response only seals it.
No one at MacNN entered into an "agreement". THEY DIDNT SIGN AN NDA. They can't be held liable for a contract they NEVER agreed to. So take your "mob mentality" rubbish someplace and start thinking before you open your mouth.
--------
Re:I know I got screwed already...
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
Why did you start using a machine that had the wrong software on it? Why didn't you take care of the problem first? That's what I call impatient and irresponsible. The fault lies with no one but yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what kind of education you consider "advanced", but the liberal arts education I got taught me how to look at many angles to a problem and reach a balanced conclusion. This "everything is X" was never a possibility because it defeated the whole point of trying to learn.
--------
THIS IS NOT FRESHMEAT
/. a pretty good place to talk about it.
Uh, and what's your point exactly? Here's a clue for you: there's no software yet, it's a week old idea. So guess what? Freshmeat is not in the habit of posting something that has no code yet, so that would make
--------
Ok, I wasn't going to make any kind of response to your original story (well done btw) or subsequent comments, but I'm going to now :) I really, really disagree that Napster is hurting the little guy. No one I know who uses Napster does so to download small, unknown bands. They are using Napster to either get the song they heard on the radio that they like, or try other songs from a well known artist to see if they'll like the entire CD. I think people who like the indie bands will always support them by buying their CDs.
:P
Personal anecdotal evidence: One of my absolute favorite indie bands (well, sorta, they've had major deals in the past) is a group called Over the Rhine. I'm sure that their music is available on Napster, but I have never once downloaded a song -- I buy their CDs. This goes for other small bands, like the Gufs, a band my brother introduced me to. But where I do download songs is when I know I can get the music at Best Buy, but I don't want to be screwed $18 for a lousy CD. I downloaded a few Paul Oakenfold songs to check it out, loved them a lot, and went out and got his CD Tranceport. (Great album!)
This is all to say, I think people are using Napster to check out the artists they hear on the radio, not search for bands they never heard of and screw them out of $8. And don't forget there are a lot of us, who after hearing something new that they like, will go out and actually buy the music (either at the store or online electronically). Hmm, this is a little long winded, sorry about that.
--------
I checked out your site. How do I put this nicely....it sucks. At the very least you could have used slashcode to make it *look* like slashdot. But after skimming your site, I seriously doubt you have the capacity to do that.
:(
Look at all the anti-MS posts on this topic, see any innovation in Slashdot posters? Nope, all spouting the same BS about how MS "steals" ideas.
BTW, you need a lesson in how to formulate an argument. No one reading slashdot is claiming to innovate. They are under no obligation to make original posts just to keep you happy. Microsoft makes that claim, and people are calling them on it. They are hoping that by repeating the mantra of "innovation" over and over, someone else besides Bill Gates might believe it. Looks like you are pretty close to falling for it
--------
Wow, that's gotta be one of the worst trolls I've ever read. I guess a good troll is hard to find these days...
--------
hate to break this to you, but women have testosterone, too. In fact, that Katz comment could apply to either men *or* women who are acting like fools. Maybe because men have a lot more of it, they are the ones that act like jerks more often? But it's not impossible for women to give out "testosterone-driven insults."
--------
I believe that was a troll you fell for...hardly worth replying to. If that AC really believes what he said, then pity him, dont feed him.
--------
now that you've "figured it out", why don't you remove Katz articles from your preferences and stop posting to them. Thanks
--------
I didn't see Jon saying anyone was too "dumb" to handle the technology, but rather the US lacks the wisdom and the responsiblity to handle the technology. Big difference.
--------
Looks like the moderators already spotted you as a troll, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt....what on earth are you talking about?!?!?
--------
the only one looking foolish is you, falling for such an obivous troll. Grammar-nazi is playing the role of, well, a grammar nazi -- he's got to correct people. Personally, I get a kick out of his posts. (And based on the number of grammatical errors found here on /., this is not such a bad thing) Why don't you lighten up a little...
--------
the whole *point* of this article is whether linking can be illegal. get a clue.
--------
Jon, please don't stop posting to your own article. We need to see authors interact with the people they are talking to. Thats what makes places like /. great, there can be real dialogue between parties. Please don't let the trolls drag you down, they really are the vocal minority.
--------
Sorry pal, but people complain when Katz doesn't respond, and when he does, we get people like you complaining. He can't seem to win.
--------
Ah, the old "lurkers agree with me in email" argument. Very good.
Uh, no, I think he means most people who email him have taken the time to be rational and respectful, and have read the article. You jerks just wait for his stories so you can post your drivel and get a kick out of everyone seeing your cheap troll. There's no audience when you send a private email...
--------
Especially when the Unhappy Meal (TM) is an orignal invention from Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank. I would expect to see a lawsuit from them sometime soon.
--------
Thanks for telling me I am a moron for what I want. Wow, without your insight, I would have kept on wanting it not realizing how dumb I was.
--------
I do believe this was a troll. Not a very good one, but a troll nevertheless. Let's try not to feed them :P
--------
If you are given something for free, sure you have a "right" to complain about it. Of course you end up looking like a selfish, ungrateful shmuck, but hey, thats your choice and "right" to do that.
--------
It is funny...laugh.
--------
bad day...your flamebait post got to me and I didn't keep my cool. No need to call people names, I know. But you really need to re-think what youre saying, because it doesnt follow law precedent or even *common sense* I tell you a secret and you agree not to tell anyone. Then you break that agreement and tell a 3rd party. Who is responsible? you are for breaking the agreement. Does that 3rd party have to keep quiet? No, they didnt agree to it so they arent liable. If anyone is going to be sued, its you for breaking contract, not the 3rd party.
--------
BLAH BLAH BLAH. What a waste of a post. Go back and reread the posts for this story. There are plenty of good ones that explain why a person can't be held responsible for SOMEONE ELSES secret if they never promised to keep it a secret. ...They do a better job than I ever could. And yes, i stand behind my orginal statement, you are a moron, and your response only seals it.
--------
No one at MacNN entered into an "agreement". THEY DIDNT SIGN AN NDA. They can't be held liable for a contract they NEVER agreed to. So take your "mob mentality" rubbish someplace and start thinking before you open your mouth.
--------
Why did you start using a machine that had the wrong software on it? Why didn't you take care of the problem first? That's what I call impatient and irresponsible. The fault lies with no one but yourself.
--------
666? very interesting....
--------