But unless Darl and his buddies end up dirt poor, this has all been fun and games. That's the beauty of corporations: they can misbehave all they want, and when they are eventually killed, no real person has to suffer any meaningful consequences.
To beat the dead horse: this is why corporations shouldn't be treated as equal to humans by the law, because they don't play by the same rules and they don't have the same motivations and limitations. It's unbalanced.
Um, even the prosecuting attorney isn't as ridiculous as you're being:
"As these cases do not involve criminals, but instead quite ordinary people who share their files, any prison sentence would certainly be suspended," Rudström said.
Well if we're going to just throw around personal experience allow me to assure you that I _have_ been locked out for this very reason. You just need to have enough computers (where "enuough" is a moving target set arbitrarily by Apple). I called apple support and they were, after scolding me and telling me they weren't supposed to help, able to eliminate some of the computers I was no longer using and letting me sign up a new one.
DRM sucks. It doesn't prevent anything at all, it annoys legitimate users, and it slows adoption of these new technologies.
Apple knows this, but they have to play with the record industry. They told them before iTunes came out that it would be broken. But they still have to play along.
Whatever. I pay for my music, and then I enjoy it however I like. Wake the hell up, record industry.
I used to laugh at that crap too... until a friend convinced me to try it. I've had mild acne since I was 14 (I'm 32 now). Much to my surprise it works better than anything else I've used. I still get a zit every week or two, but it's a good deal better than it was.
It's basically just a benzoyl peroxide kit, but I've tried other products with the same active ingredient and had less luck. My guess is that it's got to do with the mildness of the cleanser and the moisturizing stuff.
Or maybe it's the celebrity endorsements that makes it work;)
Anyways... just thought I'd throw that out there.
Oh, and to be on topic: I got a flu vaccine at work a couple years back with a needleless injection. It hurt about the same as a needle, but it was quicker.
I think that if copyright didn't exist, then there would be no need for the GPL. By default everything would be available for everyone unless it was secret. And secrets aren't really that easy to keep. I think the GPL was put in place to rebel against the use of copyrights to hinder the public good.
You're confusing "law" with "morality". If you are making your decisions based on law, then this would be inconsistent behavior. If you are making your decision based on morality, then it is not.
Law primarily exists to cut through the subjective nature of morality and force people to agree on an objective set of rules. An objective morailty, almost.
Trouble is, some bad laws get made, and unlike a subjective bad moral decsion, a bad law effects everyone.
Wouldn't it be cool if Apple released the last dot version as a free upgrade for all users when they release a new dot version? Anyone who really wants the latest OSX (like me) will buy it pretty much immediately. I'll have 10.4 as soon as it's available. If they then put 10.3 as a free upgrade for all 10 users, they and their third party developers would only ever have to officially support two versions of the OS. And it would generate huge good will.
Maybe you're right. Patents are sort of a corporate weapon -- and as has been demonstrated that people would rather _everyone_ have a right to a weapon than no one.
But maybe that's just because you can't really enforce that no one has a weapon, so it becomes unfair, and you're better off equalizing everything.
However with patents, we _really_could_ enforce that no one had them (in fact, that would be far easier than enforcing that everyone can have a patent as we do now). Or just limit them to a much smaller duration. My personal feeling is that this would be in the corps best interest. But I doubt they'll see it.
Every time I see a corp get attacked by another corp over patent crap, I say hallelujah. If it happens enough some of these corps will start pushing to get the law changed. God knows it takes a corp to do that.
I wait patiently for the day that intellectual property law is reined in.
Am I the only one in the world who has had regular problems with the iTunes DRM? My wife and I have accounts. I have a mac and a PC, she has two macs. This _should_ be no problem, but over and over there are authorization troubles. I can't play song X, she can't play song Y, or it won't go on the iPod or...
Anyone else have these problems? I'm just about to swear off the whole iTunes thing:/ And it was seeming so promising.
I think a lot of people are going to get annoyed over the next couple years when they switch computers or whatever and lose some or all of thier music collection.
And jesus, I could've downloaded the songs without DRM for free. I paid for this hassle. I guess now that I've paid for them I can go do that without guilt?
Alright: he was certainly a pioneer in the field of UI, and despite anything personal I didn't like about the guy, his advocacy of proper UI design has made my life better.
it was because his ideas on human interface were based on sound principles, and he really did know what he was talking about.
I agree -- he did have a lot of solid ideas. But I also take exception at many of the studies he would cite. Despite being a strong proponent of the scientific method myself, I believe you have to make sure you're looking at the right things in the right way or you can end up with invalid data that looks valid. And sometimes intuition will be a better guide in those cases.
Still, respect to Jef for the many good things he brought to the table.
Of course I'm not seriously making that argument -- it would be stupid. But that was Jef's argument taken to it's logical conclusion. What is wrong with CTRL-S? Is SHIFT-S bad too because it requires two keys? Maybe switching between upper and lower case should be a menu item? Yes, it's ridiculous. That's my point.
He would cite case study after case study of how people would take longer to recall and use a keyboard shortcut than to find the menu item. But he obviously wasn't studying people who knew their way around the program! I don't want computers designed only for newbies! Give them their menu items and give me my shortcuts. I know what I'm doing.
Admittedly, if they're inconsistent, like on Windows, the utility goes down. But even there if you spend much of your time in one or two applications (most people do) it's still better once you learn them.
On the Mac, where the shortcuts are pretty damn consistent (every program I use follows the same conventions) it is a dream.
Of course you want menu items too -- but I couldn't bear listening to him claim that I'd be better off reaching for the mouse and hunting for a close button or selecting File -> New a thousand times a day rather than including it in my 80WPM typing routine.
Did anyone else get the feeling he was a little bit self-aggrandizing? Whenever I would read his stuff, I got the sense that he was very bitter and wanted more credit for the mac. I mean, I am a very happy mac user, and so I do owe this guy a fair share of respect -- but there have been hundreds of other people involved in the invention and refinement of the GUI over the years. Jef spoke as though he was the cornerstone, which I'm not sure fits reality.
I've read bits of the humane interface and I champion the goals of improving UI. But he seemed unwilling to listen to anyone-- he had his opinions (menu selection is faster than key shortcuts) and he refused to let them go despite any argument (if they are, then why don't we type using a dropdown menu? )
Anyways -- he was one of many pioneers, and I am sad he won't get to add more to the field. But he was just one out of many, which he seemed to have a hard time admitting.
I think in many ways the word "religion" exists to differentiate between spiritual beliefs found while questing for self as opposed to spiritual beliefs held by dogma.
But in any case I like your description of the path to truth.
Are you kidding? The entire Old Testament is filled with story after story of the Lord demanding obedience in the face of all reason. The story of Abraham and Isaac is the most ridiculous example of this: in Genesis 22 God demands that a father sacrafice his only son -- an innocent boy. Yes, God stops the sacrafice at the last minute, but the whole point of the story is: don't question God.
The Bible goes on at great length in the law sections (mostly in Deutoronomy) on how you are to follow the absolute letter of the law (including many cases where you are to instructed to kill people) and that you are not allowed to question it or God will open his wrath against you.
You can believe the bible or not -- I have no issue with that. But it most certainly does demand unthinking faith and obedience. I'm not sure which of Jesus' words you are referring to, but I doubt they undo the overall sentiment that God's authority takes precidence over reason.
Sure, and I think that the damage they do to him should exactly equal the damage that was done to apple, to be fair.
What was the damage done to apple? Are they losing sales? Howso? This is a beta release and is most likely to just stir up more interest when the product is released.
Even if they could somehow show lost sales, I'd like them to calculate the value of those lost sales (specifically from this leak) and then give me the percentage of damage against Apple's net worth, then factor it to this Canadian kid's net worth. They'd end up suing him for $10.
The problem, as I see it, is that we've got into a mode of having ridiculous punishments for small crimes. I could go on ad nauseum with examples, but I'm sure you can think of your own.
Science as it is practiced is indeed a religion. But it is not a religion in it's pure form: it is the endless quest to question what is known. In religion, you are given the answers from an authority which you are not really supposed to question.
But that doesn't matter much -- just a point of clarification.
So what is the understanding that you believe both Science and religion leads to?
The bible seems to disagree with you on that point. I can't recall many passages where reason was upheld as a virtue. Usually it's faith and obedience, which are often opposite.
Um, then why aren't we stoning our disobedient children, as instructed in Dt 21:18-21? Or slaughtering peoples who worship other gods as instructed in Dt 13:13-17? These are part of God's unchangable laws. How much of the Old Testament have you read anyways?
If you're anything like most Christians, not much:/
Stuff like that makes you wonder if Jesus himself, a seemingly peaceful teacher, read it himself.
Slashdot Mirror
3. Profit!
This seems like a bad idea overall. Bandwidth wasted for everyone and ghost users on sites that need to track visitors.
And maybe I'm too old school (having been raised on a 14K modem) but my DSL is so fast I don't particularly feel the need for the pages to preload.
Cheers.
But unless Darl and his buddies end up dirt poor, this has all been fun and games. That's the beauty of corporations: they can misbehave all they want, and when they are eventually killed, no real person has to suffer any meaningful consequences.
To beat the dead horse: this is why corporations shouldn't be treated as equal to humans by the law, because they don't play by the same rules and they don't have the same motivations and limitations. It's unbalanced.
Cheers.
Um, even the prosecuting attorney isn't as ridiculous as you're being:
"As these cases do not involve criminals, but instead quite ordinary people who share their files, any prison sentence would certainly be suspended," Rudström said.
Feel foolish now? You should.
Cheers.
Not always worthless. In trademark law, for example, you're only infringing if you're doing it commercially (usually).
Cheers.
Well if we're going to just throw around personal experience allow me to assure you that I _have_ been locked out for this very reason. You just need to have enough computers (where "enuough" is a moving target set arbitrarily by Apple). I called apple support and they were, after scolding me and telling me they weren't supposed to help, able to eliminate some of the computers I was no longer using and letting me sign up a new one.
DRM sucks. It doesn't prevent anything at all, it annoys legitimate users, and it slows adoption of these new technologies.
Apple knows this, but they have to play with the record industry. They told them before iTunes came out that it would be broken. But they still have to play along.
Whatever. I pay for my music, and then I enjoy it however I like. Wake the hell up, record industry.
Cheers.
I used to laugh at that crap too... until a friend convinced me to try it. I've had mild acne since I was 14 (I'm 32 now). Much to my surprise it works better than anything else I've used. I still get a zit every week or two, but it's a good deal better than it was.
;)
It's basically just a benzoyl peroxide kit, but I've tried other products with the same active ingredient and had less luck. My guess is that it's got to do with the mildness of the cleanser and the moisturizing stuff.
Or maybe it's the celebrity endorsements that makes it work
Anyways... just thought I'd throw that out there.
Oh, and to be on topic: I got a flu vaccine at work a couple years back with a needleless injection. It hurt about the same as a needle, but it was quicker.
Cheers.
I think that if copyright didn't exist, then there would be no need for the GPL. By default everything would be available for everyone unless it was secret. And secrets aren't really that easy to keep. I think the GPL was put in place to rebel against the use of copyrights to hinder the public good.
Cheers.
You're confusing "law" with "morality". If you are making your decisions based on law, then this would be inconsistent behavior. If you are making your decision based on morality, then it is not.
Law primarily exists to cut through the subjective nature of morality and force people to agree on an objective set of rules. An objective morailty, almost.
Trouble is, some bad laws get made, and unlike a subjective bad moral decsion, a bad law effects everyone.
Cheers.
Who are you talking to? I'm not complaining about anything. I happily pay for every OSX release. Read my post again if you're confused.
Cheers.
Wouldn't it be cool if Apple released the last dot version as a free upgrade for all users when they release a new dot version? Anyone who really wants the latest OSX (like me) will buy it pretty much immediately. I'll have 10.4 as soon as it's available. If they then put 10.3 as a free upgrade for all 10 users, they and their third party developers would only ever have to officially support two versions of the OS. And it would generate huge good will.
Ah well, not gonna happen.
Cheers.
Maybe you're right. Patents are sort of a corporate weapon -- and as has been demonstrated that people would rather _everyone_ have a right to a weapon than no one.
But maybe that's just because you can't really enforce that no one has a weapon, so it becomes unfair, and you're better off equalizing everything.
However with patents, we _really_could_ enforce that no one had them (in fact, that would be far easier than enforcing that everyone can have a patent as we do now). Or just limit them to a much smaller duration. My personal feeling is that this would be in the corps best interest. But I doubt they'll see it.
Let the wars wage on.
Cheers.
Every time I see a corp get attacked by another corp over patent crap, I say hallelujah. If it happens enough some of these corps will start pushing to get the law changed. God knows it takes a corp to do that.
I wait patiently for the day that intellectual property law is reined in.
Cheers.
Am I the only one in the world who has had regular problems with the iTunes DRM? My wife and I have accounts. I have a mac and a PC, she has two macs. This _should_ be no problem, but over and over there are authorization troubles. I can't play song X, she can't play song Y, or it won't go on the iPod or...
:/ And it was seeming so promising.
Anyone else have these problems? I'm just about to swear off the whole iTunes thing
I think a lot of people are going to get annoyed over the next couple years when they switch computers or whatever and lose some or all of thier music collection.
And jesus, I could've downloaded the songs without DRM for free. I paid for this hassle. I guess now that I've paid for them I can go do that without guilt?
Cheers.
Online music sales are up? We can't have that! Quick! We must jack up the price until we force a black market!
These people are such tools.
Alright: he was certainly a pioneer in the field of UI, and despite anything personal I didn't like about the guy, his advocacy of proper UI design has made my life better.
Thanks Jef.
it was because his ideas on human interface were based on sound principles, and he really did know what he was talking about.
I agree -- he did have a lot of solid ideas. But I also take exception at many of the studies he would cite. Despite being a strong proponent of the scientific method myself, I believe you have to make sure you're looking at the right things in the right way or you can end up with invalid data that looks valid. And sometimes intuition will be a better guide in those cases.
Still, respect to Jef for the many good things he brought to the table.
Cheers.
Of course I'm not seriously making that argument -- it would be stupid. But that was Jef's argument taken to it's logical conclusion. What is wrong with CTRL-S? Is SHIFT-S bad too because it requires two keys? Maybe switching between upper and lower case should be a menu item? Yes, it's ridiculous. That's my point.
He would cite case study after case study of how people would take longer to recall and use a keyboard shortcut than to find the menu item. But he obviously wasn't studying people who knew their way around the program! I don't want computers designed only for newbies! Give them their menu items and give me my shortcuts. I know what I'm doing.
Admittedly, if they're inconsistent, like on Windows, the utility goes down. But even there if you spend much of your time in one or two applications (most people do) it's still better once you learn them.
On the Mac, where the shortcuts are pretty damn consistent (every program I use follows the same conventions) it is a dream.
Of course you want menu items too -- but I couldn't bear listening to him claim that I'd be better off reaching for the mouse and hunting for a close button or selecting File -> New a thousand times a day rather than including it in my 80WPM typing routine.
Cheers.
Did anyone else get the feeling he was a little bit self-aggrandizing? Whenever I would read his stuff, I got the sense that he was very bitter and wanted more credit for the mac. I mean, I am a very happy mac user, and so I do owe this guy a fair share of respect -- but there have been hundreds of other people involved in the invention and refinement of the GUI over the years. Jef spoke as though he was the cornerstone, which I'm not sure fits reality.
I've read bits of the humane interface and I champion the goals of improving UI. But he seemed unwilling to listen to anyone-- he had his opinions (menu selection is faster than key shortcuts) and he refused to let them go despite any argument (if they are, then why don't we type using a dropdown menu? )
Anyways -- he was one of many pioneers, and I am sad he won't get to add more to the field. But he was just one out of many, which he seemed to have a hard time admitting.
Cheers.
Is that as difficult a shift as using a Western Digial hard drive instead of a Quantum?
My company made this amazing AMD "shift" several months ago and I don't think anyone at all noticed. What is so tough about this?
Cheers.
I think in many ways the word "religion" exists to differentiate between spiritual beliefs found while questing for self as opposed to spiritual beliefs held by dogma.
But in any case I like your description of the path to truth.
Cheers.
Are you kidding? The entire Old Testament is filled with story after story of the Lord demanding obedience in the face of all reason. The story of Abraham and Isaac is the most ridiculous example of this: in Genesis 22 God demands that a father sacrafice his only son -- an innocent boy. Yes, God stops the sacrafice at the last minute, but the whole point of the story is: don't question God.
The Bible goes on at great length in the law sections (mostly in Deutoronomy) on how you are to follow the absolute letter of the law (including many cases where you are to instructed to kill people) and that you are not allowed to question it or God will open his wrath against you.
You can believe the bible or not -- I have no issue with that. But it most certainly does demand unthinking faith and obedience. I'm not sure which of Jesus' words you are referring to, but I doubt they undo the overall sentiment that God's authority takes precidence over reason.
Cheers.
Sure, and I think that the damage they do to him should exactly equal the damage that was done to apple, to be fair.
What was the damage done to apple? Are they losing sales? Howso? This is a beta release and is most likely to just stir up more interest when the product is released.
Even if they could somehow show lost sales, I'd like them to calculate the value of those lost sales (specifically from this leak) and then give me the percentage of damage against Apple's net worth, then factor it to this Canadian kid's net worth. They'd end up suing him for $10.
The problem, as I see it, is that we've got into a mode of having ridiculous punishments for small crimes. I could go on ad nauseum with examples, but I'm sure you can think of your own.
Cheers.
Science as it is practiced is indeed a religion. But it is not a religion in it's pure form: it is the endless quest to question what is known. In religion, you are given the answers from an authority which you are not really supposed to question.
But that doesn't matter much -- just a point of clarification.
So what is the understanding that you believe both Science and religion leads to?
Cheers.
The bible seems to disagree with you on that point. I can't recall many passages where reason was upheld as a virtue. Usually it's faith and obedience, which are often opposite.
Cheers.
Um, then why aren't we stoning our disobedient children, as instructed in Dt 21:18-21? Or slaughtering peoples who worship other gods as instructed in Dt 13:13-17? These are part of God's unchangable laws. How much of the Old Testament have you read anyways?
:/
If you're anything like most Christians, not much
Stuff like that makes you wonder if Jesus himself, a seemingly peaceful teacher, read it himself.
Cheers.