We've become jaded because companies like Google are such an exception to the norm that it's ridiculous; we truly are becoming "like paper clips" in too many places, especially in the fields that Slashdot users work in. Or have none of us lost or known someone that has lost a job due to outsourcing? For God's sake, it was news when Microsoft brought back the stupid towel policy!
Clearly some people like this music. It gets bought, it gets downloaded.
That's not exactly a definitive statement, though. I've stated in the past that a majority of people will buy essentially what they are told to. If a band is publicized enough, they will be bought, downloaded, you name it. Just saying, in most cases, that the fact that people buy certain artists proves that they are quality doesn't say much. William Hung's CD debuted at #34, for God's sake!
They don't care about the smaller bands. They don't care about the smaller labels. This is all about the Big Four.
See, the RIAA knows that people will buy whatever is shuffled in front of them. Feed a hungry person a shit sandwich, and he'll eat it. Therefore, they know if they can create a virtual monopoly on the market, then they will have complete control over the entire music industry in this country. So what if the smaller bands fall? So what if the smaller independent labels fall? More weight to throw behind the corporate bands, to get those tickets moving, get those CDs moving (with increased copy protection, BTW; how many CDs can't even be played in the car?), get that merch moving... get that money coming in!
And it doesn't even matter who the musicians are. If you put a random band's mug - could be any band - on some posters, and give them glitzy enough production, they will sell, and sell well. It doesn't matter who it is; enough marketing will eventually make a profit. So the RIAA can afford to force people to play by their rules; those that play, they'll get paid attention to. Those that don't... well, you've seen it.
Slashdot users are the exception; we are educated enough to see through this shit. But we're a vast minority, and the fact of the matter is that Joe Q. Randomguy isn't going to bother with a fight of this magnitude; I mean, shit, the new Fall Out Boy is out! That obviously trumps the fact that he could be paying for a $20+ CD that he can't copy, can't play in certain players, and has to register? Obviously, those 10 or so songs are worth it~
Between this and software that recognizes through webcams weather or not we're watching ads on our computers, we're all becoming quite the consumer sheep, aren't we? People will fall for this if they're given something shiny enough to take the sting of their liberties being stripped out.
You know... with all of these digital rights management programs out, you know what this makes me realize? That my analogue VCR will ALWAYS have a home should I want to record something~
If the terrorists hated our freedoms, then the Netherlands would be fucking DUST! As would Denmark, and Sweden, and Switzerland and Canada and every country that's truly freer than we are, but... I don't think Osama Bin Laden sent those planes sent those planes to attack us because he hated our freedom, I think he sent them because of our support for Israel and our ties to the Saudi family and all our military bases in Saudi Arabia. You know why I think that? Because THAT'S WHAT HE FUCKING SAID! - David Cross
It's sickening how often we can reference Orwell nowadays, but that is where we've landed ourselves. Speaking of Orwell, how has history viewed Stalin?
People are going to say "well, if you're doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about". As if people have the right to judge me, of course. And that's the problem: who's doing the judging? Just what is "wrong" and "right"? Yes, we know that something that hurts another person is definately wrong, I'm not debating those issues. What I'm debating is someone searching for evidence to support themselves, and using nothing but circumstantial evidence.
For instance, say it's a rape (this is hypothetical). They don't have DNA evidence, but you're a suspect. You didn't do it. Well, hey, look at that, didn't you use your credit card to rent a porno? Or sign up for a porn site? Or make a purchase at an adult novelty store? I guess you really are a pervert...
The thing about this is that yes, that above example has a remote chance of happening, but the fact of the matter is that IT DOES HAVE THAT CHANCE. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, after all. And furthermore, not only could the government use this to build a possible profile against anyone from potential terrorists to potential dissidents (we already consider anyone that calls out against a war or a policy "un-American"), but it could be used as marketing fodder. This brings us much, much closer to - even unofficially - government sanctioned products; think Budweiser can come out with Victory Beer? And if you think this is highly sceptical, remember who got that contract to clean up in Iraq.
It's getting to the point where everything about our lives will be indexed and viewable to anyone that wants to within any reason whatsoever. We are becoming a fascist government with just enough Democracy to fool people into thinking they're in charge. Something needs to be done. NOW.
To respond to that, I'll borrow a page from the Ropple Playbook:
<blockquote>I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.</blockquote>
Full Disclosure: I was weaned on Microsoft product as a young boy, with the exception of a brief incubation period with the old Macintosh operating systems. Started with MS-DOS 5.0 and went up from there, really cutting my teeth on Windows 3.1 running off of DOS 6.0. I went up the line, learning primarily on Windows systems - 95, 98, NT 4.0, 2000 and up - with the exception of a brief period in high school where we had to use OS/6. I have primarily been a Windows user for my entire life that I've been involved with computers.
That said, I am not very happy with Microsoft, to the point where I recently decided that, yes, I would take the Linux plunge, and try to learn to make the operating system hum. I am certainly capable; I've got enough qualifications - both universal and MS-acquired - to ensure that I'm no dummy when it comes to any computer system. What I learned after awhile was that, while most modern Linux OSes are indeed superior in terms of doing most daily tasks, the system did not compete in one key area: games.
This sounds stupid, right? Well, let's look at the key components of my PC Gaming repertoire:
Football Manager/Worldwide Soccer Manager 2007 - No Linux version, haven't gotten it to work with WINE yet.
Pro Evolution Soccer 6 - No Linux version, almost surely a WINE casualty.
Gametap - Please. Gametap barely works without a hitch in Windows.
Various console emulators - Good SNES and NES support, limited for others, nonexistant for more obscure emulators.
So what does that mean? It means that if I want to play those games, I have to run Windows. Simply HAVE to. The only actual game on that list that even has support for any other non-Windows based OS is Football Manager, which has a Mac version. As for the emulators, just because the emulators work doesn't necessarily mean that I'll be able to find drivers for my controllers. I use an XBox 360 controller on my PC, and from the looks of it, getting that thing to work in Linux might as well be an all-day event.
When I tell Linuxvangelists this, they tell me to get alternate games on Linux, which, at best, are inferior versions of their more popular sibling titles. Furthermore, they look at my games as if I was a corporate whore for playing them. "Why would you need to play Pro Evolution? That's closed source!". As if they have the right to judge my, or anyone else's, gaming habits, based on weather or not it has a GNU attached to it.. While I have the temerity to pat someone like this on the head and give them a LFS installation to keep them busy for awhile, that's going to turn off - rather, already HAS turned off - a large part of the community that would look towards Linux as a viable alternative to paying $400 a pop to Microsoft everytime they are determined to be a pirate. That cannot happen; having to search forums is hard enough on the average end user, you think they want to be told that they're too stupid to run Linux when they finally get there?
Until these two very basic things are taken care of, I will continue to dual-boot XP and Kubuntu. And that means I will still spend the majority of my time in XP, as the benefits of using Kubuntu, to me, are offset by the fact that I am a certified expert in all things Microsoft as it is, and therefore, my expertise eliminates 95% of the problems your average end user has with the OS. Why load Windows just to play a game when I can literally use it for everything I need?
Wait, Apple has advocated removing DRM? Don't make me laugh. They don't care if people pirate music, per se; they know it's a relatively minor sector of the market. They care about keeping their things exclusive, so that no one else can use it. If that business model isn't called DRM, then fine, but basically, the fact of the matter is that their whole business model - everything from OS-X to their music files (and, according to Charlie Demerjian at INQ, their iPhone) are exclusive. You cannot legally change them. So when they start advocating the end of DRM? They're lying. Or they're not thinking of DRM in the same way I am.
I think you're advocating a monopoly on the music industry and not even realizing it, honestly. I might have misunderstood the intention of your insight, but what you're essentially saying is that Apple is the only company that can be trusted with both DRM and keeping prices down. A monopoly does the exact opposite; Apple has shown in the past that it is willing to abuse it's DRM laws, and if they're the only game in town, I would expect those prices to go up (new albums have already gone up a few bucks on iTunes, it's starting already. And I buy a lot of my music on iTunes).
Furthermore, the iPod does not have the best record known to man when it comes to being a reliable piece of hardware. They have stated, more or less, that the expected life expectancy of an iPod is a year, no more; anymore than that, and you're essentially crap out of luck, I hope you enjoy buying your new unit. There are portable units that have better reliability records, such as the Creative Zen; personally, I'd rather keep the competition in there, instead of allowing Apple to sit on it's laurels.
Come to think of it, I only BOUGHT an iPod last week instead of a Zen for two reasons: 1) because I started with iTunes music, and therefore, it's iPod or I'm out of luck, but most important, I bought iTunes because 2) All the other legit music services have their own WMA based DRM, and if the Zune has proven anything, it's only that DRM is an absolute nightmare with it, with the way they essentially told everyone that prior music bought with Yahoo, Napster and everyone else was worthless, and had to be bought again. It's the lesser of the two evils, by far. But getting rid of what little competition iTunes and the iPod has is not wise. That's what is being advocated with your comment (unless my interpretation is incorrect), and it will do much more to hurt the average user than help.
There's one company missing from the Open Document party here, and without it playing along, I don't see this lasting long.
I am, of course, talking about Microsoft. They refuse to accept the Open standard.
Until that happens, there will be problems. Yes, you could have.odt documents sent internally, but what if someone has to send a document to someone outside the company? Microsoft Office does not recognize.odt, and if you think that you can train someone to remember to send.doc files to outside users, and keep internal documents to.odt, then I have a bridge to sell you.
That's my problem: nowadays, EVERYONE wants an NCV (no confidence vote). I love Canada, and I'm extremely distressed that I have to get my news about my native country from Canoe and CBC, but the political cilmate lately is not a good one. The NDP wants an NCV over Kyoto, for Pete's sake!
The sponsorship scandal set a precident that I'm not sure I'm comfortable with. Electing Harper and the rest of the conservatives was a knee-jerk reaction to that. I'm afraid of what is next.
The last time I checked, "Microsoft" had not become a verb. When we search for something, we "Google" it nowadays. We can't say Microsoft has achieved that status with anything... not yet. Maybe when someone overprices a new product that does virtually nothing new, we can say they "Microsofted" the product? Oh! How about when someone releases a product that limits what you can do with said product and locks it up if you don't follow the rules? Is that "Microsofting"?
All I know is that whenever someone is so successful that they break the rules of English, then they've kinda-sorta surpassed you on the relevancy scale.;)
It makes no sense. Everyone wants a vote of No Confidence for everything nowadays; it's worse than American politics. Can you imagine if America did this? We'd have had about 590 Presidents by now! "Hey! I didn't get that funding for the inner cities! I'm starting a no confidence vote!" "Oh no! That Congressman was caught saying something off the record! No confidence!" "Oh lord, our President was caught with his pecker in a fat chick's mouth! No confidence, he obviously has no standards!"
Everyone wanted the Liberals out because of the Sponsorship scandal. Now, everyone realizes they overreacted, and wants to fix it. It seems like every time I log into CBC.ca, someone - usually the NDP - is putting forth one of those fashionable no-confidence votes. They're so en-vogue
Well, for one, 9/11 directly affected America. Yes, I'm aware that the entire country of Canada was right there helping America, but it happened in New York. That, and our hyperactive media and likes to trumpet it all the time; I'd imagine the same thing would happen to my native land if Toronto and Ottawa were attacked.
This isn't meant to say that America has justification for what it does to their peoples' rights; it doesn't. But that's a main reason why it works in America, while Canadians - and for the sake of disclosure, I am a Canadian native that lives in, and is a citizen of America - have finally rose up and said "if this is protection, we don't want to be protected".
Good for Canada.
How does that apply to this situation? If one company didn't want to take this person on, then the other two could have. Since all three did, yes, that removes his options, but you know what? According to our free trade laws, they all have a right to refuse service. If that's a problem, he can go with a smaller firm. The firm is too small to make a dent? Their fault, not Google's or Yahoo's; Rome and Google weren't built in a day, you know.
To have a capitalist market, you need to have controls, but you can't have it set up so that it's selective; you can't just selectively pick on the big companies because they're big, because then, you're telling smaller companies, essentially, that they don't WANT to get too big, because they'll be cut down to size. You're essentially saying "You all have freedom to do whatever you want... EXCEPT YOU GUYS! You're too successful! >:["
What you are advocating is not Capitalism, because your ideal has more to do with socialism than capitalism. You really can't have it both ways.
So basically, the stuff that the OS comes with itself is the only thing that's frozen? The applications and their versions, etc.? I think I got it. Thanks.
I realize I'm ignorant, being a guy weaned on Windows and all, but... doesn't "frozen code" defeat the whole purpose of Linux, GNU and the Open Source movement? I'm confuzzled.
So basically, it's OK for any of us that own a website to allow any kind of advertisers we want, but if you're a large company like Google or Microsoft, you all of a sudden have to be charity?
I realize it's fashionable for people to attack THE MAN!!!11, but they have rights in this just like everyone else.
Besides, they can't take on another advertiser. They're too busy showing full sized banners for those stupid spyware-filled 3D IM things, among other crap.
Slashdot Mirror
We've become jaded because companies like Google are such an exception to the norm that it's ridiculous; we truly are becoming "like paper clips" in too many places, especially in the fields that Slashdot users work in. Or have none of us lost or known someone that has lost a job due to outsourcing? For God's sake, it was news when Microsoft brought back the stupid towel policy!
Clearly some people like this music. It gets bought, it gets downloaded.
That's not exactly a definitive statement, though. I've stated in the past that a majority of people will buy essentially what they are told to. If a band is publicized enough, they will be bought, downloaded, you name it. Just saying, in most cases, that the fact that people buy certain artists proves that they are quality doesn't say much. William Hung's CD debuted at #34, for God's sake!
They don't care about the smaller bands. They don't care about the smaller labels. This is all about the Big Four.
See, the RIAA knows that people will buy whatever is shuffled in front of them. Feed a hungry person a shit sandwich, and he'll eat it. Therefore, they know if they can create a virtual monopoly on the market, then they will have complete control over the entire music industry in this country. So what if the smaller bands fall? So what if the smaller independent labels fall? More weight to throw behind the corporate bands, to get those tickets moving, get those CDs moving (with increased copy protection, BTW; how many CDs can't even be played in the car?), get that merch moving... get that money coming in!
And it doesn't even matter who the musicians are. If you put a random band's mug - could be any band - on some posters, and give them glitzy enough production, they will sell, and sell well. It doesn't matter who it is; enough marketing will eventually make a profit. So the RIAA can afford to force people to play by their rules; those that play, they'll get paid attention to. Those that don't... well, you've seen it.
Slashdot users are the exception; we are educated enough to see through this shit. But we're a vast minority, and the fact of the matter is that Joe Q. Randomguy isn't going to bother with a fight of this magnitude; I mean, shit, the new Fall Out Boy is out! That obviously trumps the fact that he could be paying for a $20+ CD that he can't copy, can't play in certain players, and has to register? Obviously, those 10 or so songs are worth it~
Didn't AOL get into a lot of trouble for this?
Personally... we knew this was going to happen. Anyone that's surprised is a fool.
Between this and software that recognizes through webcams weather or not we're watching ads on our computers, we're all becoming quite the consumer sheep, aren't we? People will fall for this if they're given something shiny enough to take the sting of their liberties being stripped out.
You know... with all of these digital rights management programs out, you know what this makes me realize? That my analogue VCR will ALWAYS have a home should I want to record something~
It's funny because it's true.
It's sickening how often we can reference Orwell nowadays, but that is where we've landed ourselves. Speaking of Orwell, how has history viewed Stalin?
People are going to say "well, if you're doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about". As if people have the right to judge me, of course. And that's the problem: who's doing the judging? Just what is "wrong" and "right"? Yes, we know that something that hurts another person is definately wrong, I'm not debating those issues. What I'm debating is someone searching for evidence to support themselves, and using nothing but circumstantial evidence.
For instance, say it's a rape (this is hypothetical). They don't have DNA evidence, but you're a suspect. You didn't do it. Well, hey, look at that, didn't you use your credit card to rent a porno? Or sign up for a porn site? Or make a purchase at an adult novelty store? I guess you really are a pervert...
The thing about this is that yes, that above example has a remote chance of happening, but the fact of the matter is that IT DOES HAVE THAT CHANCE. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, after all. And furthermore, not only could the government use this to build a possible profile against anyone from potential terrorists to potential dissidents (we already consider anyone that calls out against a war or a policy "un-American"), but it could be used as marketing fodder. This brings us much, much closer to - even unofficially - government sanctioned products; think Budweiser can come out with Victory Beer? And if you think this is highly sceptical, remember who got that contract to clean up in Iraq.
It's getting to the point where everything about our lives will be indexed and viewable to anyone that wants to within any reason whatsoever. We are becoming a fascist government with just enough Democracy to fool people into thinking they're in charge. Something needs to be done. NOW.
We tried. TWICE. It did not work.
I find Microsoft's rules a little too obnoxious for my liking.
So... I break them. With a smile on my face, and a hop in my step.
To respond to that, I'll borrow a page from the Ropple Playbook:
:)
<blockquote>I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.</blockquote>
Take that for what you will, old friend.
Full Disclosure: I was weaned on Microsoft product as a young boy, with the exception of a brief incubation period with the old Macintosh operating systems. Started with MS-DOS 5.0 and went up from there, really cutting my teeth on Windows 3.1 running off of DOS 6.0. I went up the line, learning primarily on Windows systems - 95, 98, NT 4.0, 2000 and up - with the exception of a brief period in high school where we had to use OS/6. I have primarily been a Windows user for my entire life that I've been involved with computers.
That said, I am not very happy with Microsoft, to the point where I recently decided that, yes, I would take the Linux plunge, and try to learn to make the operating system hum. I am certainly capable; I've got enough qualifications - both universal and MS-acquired - to ensure that I'm no dummy when it comes to any computer system. What I learned after awhile was that, while most modern Linux OSes are indeed superior in terms of doing most daily tasks, the system did not compete in one key area: games.
This sounds stupid, right? Well, let's look at the key components of my PC Gaming repertoire:
Football Manager/Worldwide Soccer Manager 2007 - No Linux version, haven't gotten it to work with WINE yet.
Pro Evolution Soccer 6 - No Linux version, almost surely a WINE casualty.
Gametap - Please. Gametap barely works without a hitch in Windows.
Various console emulators - Good SNES and NES support, limited for others, nonexistant for more obscure emulators.
So what does that mean? It means that if I want to play those games, I have to run Windows. Simply HAVE to. The only actual game on that list that even has support for any other non-Windows based OS is Football Manager, which has a Mac version. As for the emulators, just because the emulators work doesn't necessarily mean that I'll be able to find drivers for my controllers. I use an XBox 360 controller on my PC, and from the looks of it, getting that thing to work in Linux might as well be an all-day event.
When I tell Linuxvangelists this, they tell me to get alternate games on Linux, which, at best, are inferior versions of their more popular sibling titles. Furthermore, they look at my games as if I was a corporate whore for playing them. "Why would you need to play Pro Evolution? That's closed source!". As if they have the right to judge my, or anyone else's, gaming habits, based on weather or not it has a GNU attached to it.. While I have the temerity to pat someone like this on the head and give them a LFS installation to keep them busy for awhile, that's going to turn off - rather, already HAS turned off - a large part of the community that would look towards Linux as a viable alternative to paying $400 a pop to Microsoft everytime they are determined to be a pirate. That cannot happen; having to search forums is hard enough on the average end user, you think they want to be told that they're too stupid to run Linux when they finally get there?
Until these two very basic things are taken care of, I will continue to dual-boot XP and Kubuntu. And that means I will still spend the majority of my time in XP, as the benefits of using Kubuntu, to me, are offset by the fact that I am a certified expert in all things Microsoft as it is, and therefore, my expertise eliminates 95% of the problems your average end user has with the OS. Why load Windows just to play a game when I can literally use it for everything I need?
Wait, Apple has advocated removing DRM? Don't make me laugh. They don't care if people pirate music, per se; they know it's a relatively minor sector of the market. They care about keeping their things exclusive, so that no one else can use it. If that business model isn't called DRM, then fine, but basically, the fact of the matter is that their whole business model - everything from OS-X to their music files (and, according to Charlie Demerjian at INQ, their iPhone) are exclusive. You cannot legally change them. So when they start advocating the end of DRM? They're lying. Or they're not thinking of DRM in the same way I am.
Furthermore, the iPod does not have the best record known to man when it comes to being a reliable piece of hardware. They have stated, more or less, that the expected life expectancy of an iPod is a year, no more; anymore than that, and you're essentially crap out of luck, I hope you enjoy buying your new unit. There are portable units that have better reliability records, such as the Creative Zen; personally, I'd rather keep the competition in there, instead of allowing Apple to sit on it's laurels.
Come to think of it, I only BOUGHT an iPod last week instead of a Zen for two reasons: 1) because I started with iTunes music, and therefore, it's iPod or I'm out of luck, but most important, I bought iTunes because 2) All the other legit music services have their own WMA based DRM, and if the Zune has proven anything, it's only that DRM is an absolute nightmare with it, with the way they essentially told everyone that prior music bought with Yahoo, Napster and everyone else was worthless, and had to be bought again. It's the lesser of the two evils, by far. But getting rid of what little competition iTunes and the iPod has is not wise. That's what is being advocated with your comment (unless my interpretation is incorrect), and it will do much more to hurt the average user than help.
I am, of course, talking about Microsoft. They refuse to accept the Open standard.
Until that happens, there will be problems. Yes, you could have .odt documents sent internally, but what if someone has to send a document to someone outside the company? Microsoft Office does not recognize .odt, and if you think that you can train someone to remember to send .doc files to outside users, and keep internal documents to .odt, then I have a bridge to sell you.
The sponsorship scandal set a precident that I'm not sure I'm comfortable with. Electing Harper and the rest of the conservatives was a knee-jerk reaction to that. I'm afraid of what is next.
All I know is that whenever someone is so successful that they break the rules of English, then they've kinda-sorta surpassed you on the relevancy scale. ;)
Everyone wanted the Liberals out because of the Sponsorship scandal. Now, everyone realizes they overreacted, and wants to fix it. It seems like every time I log into CBC.ca, someone - usually the NDP - is putting forth one of those fashionable no-confidence votes. They're so en-vogue
Well, for one, 9/11 directly affected America. Yes, I'm aware that the entire country of Canada was right there helping America, but it happened in New York. That, and our hyperactive media and likes to trumpet it all the time; I'd imagine the same thing would happen to my native land if Toronto and Ottawa were attacked. This isn't meant to say that America has justification for what it does to their peoples' rights; it doesn't. But that's a main reason why it works in America, while Canadians - and for the sake of disclosure, I am a Canadian native that lives in, and is a citizen of America - have finally rose up and said "if this is protection, we don't want to be protected". Good for Canada.
To have a capitalist market, you need to have controls, but you can't have it set up so that it's selective; you can't just selectively pick on the big companies because they're big, because then, you're telling smaller companies, essentially, that they don't WANT to get too big, because they'll be cut down to size. You're essentially saying "You all have freedom to do whatever you want... EXCEPT YOU GUYS! You're too successful! >:["
What you are advocating is not Capitalism, because your ideal has more to do with socialism than capitalism. You really can't have it both ways.
So basically, the stuff that the OS comes with itself is the only thing that's frozen? The applications and their versions, etc.? I think I got it. Thanks.
I realize I'm ignorant, being a guy weaned on Windows and all, but... doesn't "frozen code" defeat the whole purpose of Linux, GNU and the Open Source movement? I'm confuzzled.
So basically, it's OK for any of us that own a website to allow any kind of advertisers we want, but if you're a large company like Google or Microsoft, you all of a sudden have to be charity? I realize it's fashionable for people to attack THE MAN!!!11, but they have rights in this just like everyone else. Besides, they can't take on another advertiser. They're too busy showing full sized banners for those stupid spyware-filled 3D IM things, among other crap.