> stricter copyright laws help the media corps sell more product, and GWB is in favor of anything that helps US corps sell more stuff.
Please note, I am not favoring GWB over anything or anyone else with my statement, but isn't it Capitalism that is in favor of anything that helps (US in this case) corps sell more stuff?
> The aim of copyright law should not be to find some middle ground... [...] > to create an environment that makes as much stuff available to as many people as cheaply as possible > making sure that content creators are well rewarded for getting into the creation business
Please excuse my ignorance, but isn't what you described just another way of explaining "middle ground"?
This isn't necessarily a reply, as much as I felt like ranting and this was the easiest place.
Well, at least I have got my mind straight. Judging by the average posted opinion of Slashdotters, they're all downloading MP3s and Music for the purpose of testing them out, and not because they can get free movies and music.
Screw that, I'll go with honesty. I download music because to me, it's worth the 2 minutes to download it (sometimes not even that), but not worth the money to blow on CDs. Especially since the RIAA has decided (AFAIK) that CD singles aren't worthwhile any more. I don't download movies because I hate the crappy quality -- unless of course, it's unavailable anywhere else.
Is it theft? No, it is not. It _IS_ sharing, as much as some like to think I'm net-lifting (is that a real term, or did I make it up?). Is it illegal? Damned right it is, not that I care. I'm not doing for civil disobedience, I'm not doing it to "screw the man." I'm doing it because it's something I want, and I don't want to deal with "the man" and his outdated, overpriced, prepackaged crap.
Is it morally right? To quote someone else's.sig, "To the rational mind there can be no offense, no obscenity, no blasphemy - only information of greater or lesser value." That means, I think "morality" is a bunch of bullshit created by some people who feel the need to dictate what I do.
Does that mean I'm evil? Sure, why not. I'm going to "Hell" for pirating music and software, and I'll be damned to eternity by running Helldot.org on a SPARC-1 over a 9600 baud modem, running the latest and greatest version of Windows 3.0. Yay.
Am I on a high horse? eh, maybe, it's hard to categorize oneself. Do I delude myself by giving excuses for breaking the law? Absolutely not, I know I am breaking the law, I just don't give a shit. Don't try and use any stupid analogies either, as they rarely make sense and are never actually applicable.
You seem to be implying that the post in question seemed overly-patriotic or something... I saw nothing like that, and you attack anonymously (turnabout is fair play) claiming he is full of shit? Man, look in a fucking mirror.
> lets just say his penis is 3 1/2 feet long......Which makes me wonder of those penis enlargment methods/whatever actually work. And where can I buy it without giving money to spammers?
Um, IANAL (no shit, how many lawyers read/.) but ideally, it would negate it. Since it is an End-User License Agreement, you would have to agree to it for it to apply. But, of course, with MS-Law no one really has a clue.
Linux appreciation/zealotry is about ideals. It's not that we necessarily want to look at the components, but just that we have the option to do it if we are so truly paranoid.
> I get hoards of e-mail every week, as new vulnerabilites are continually found [...] > The fact that Slashdot immediately jumps all over Microsoft for this is ludicrous. Get a life.
This is true, Slashdot should have given up already on trying to report these things. There are so many holes that it should just be assumed that "Microsoft security" is an oxymoron. It would be just as useful to have a post every Monday titled "Yup, Microsoft products are still shoddy/shitty." Then in it list the hundreds of vulnerabilities found the previous week. But that would cut the number of stories by half!
Just as an aside, what is an IE administrator? If a company needs a job solely for patching a friggin' browser, something might just be wrong with that browser.
> "There's no hole that needs to be plugged," he said.
Except, possibly, the "hole" that gets "plugged" every time someone uses a VeriSign service... Of course, that's not needed, it's given as a free service from Verisign.
"Free ass-fucking at www.verisign.com!" Only $35 a year.
> Another factor is that limitations often result in better work
That's a good point. Instead of just throwing money/GFX at it, they had to think their way out of it. It could (and probably usually does) make for better work.
If you don't like it, go to Kuro5hin. Otherwise, quit whining. I am fine with, and sometimes even like the bad posting. It means they aren't anal retentive (like you, obviously -- Obligatory Flamebait) and make mistakes. Holy shit, you mean people make mistakes? If I wanted perfect grammar, I'll go to a news site. I want stuff that interests me, so I couldn't care much less whether or not they grammar-checked the post. IT'S NOT THE FRIGGING POINT. So get off your doped-up horse and try bitching about something important to people who can do something about that important thing, instead of bitching for the sake of being arrogant.
I don't even think I'll ever download the program, but I donated $5 because I had it sitting in my PayPal account and like to show support for a good idea. Now, what to do with the 43 cents left in my account... Hmmm
> Rather than assume a superintelligence would dismiss its parents as 'redundant', I'd assume it'd help us join them -- and even if not, sentient AI isn't the only kind of computation capable of engineering a brain-to-machine bridge.
Hey, just what we all want! To be assimilated into the collective! (Laugh, boy! It's a joke, see?)
Well, in all reality I suppose you should be able to buy a submachine gun, as long as you don't use it to kill people. A warhead is an over-the-top argument, and obviously not taken seriously. I also thing John Q. Yuppie SHOULD donate money for low-emissions research... As long as he wants lower emissions.
How about since YOU are the one who wants lower emissions, YOU send money to Ford to do it. Or how about telling Ford you want lower-emissions cars. Hell, they have them already, BUY ONE! Just don't tell me what I can or cannot buy, simply because you think I shouldn't spend my money on something stupid (and yes, SUVs are IMO a stupid waste of money).
I totally disagree with what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it -- Paraphrased from someone smart.
This is the only statement I have a big problem with. The Consumer should never be forced to change, the manufacturers should offer what the consumer wants. If the consumer wants a wimpy little car, more power to them. If they want a gas-guzzling SUV, let them waste their money. But don't expect anyone to change, especially a large number of people all at once.
> I have 3 Dreamcasts that friends gave me without even asking that I wouldn't mind loosing.
Well, if you're not too worried about losing them, I'd take one off your hands for ten bucks... plus shipping of course... Hrm, Slash-bay.... or is it E-Dot? Bay-Dot?
> but wouldn't you think carrying a Dreamcast into a company would attract attention, if not suspicion?
It might attract a few glances (assuming you were carrying it openly, and not in a bag of some sort), but I doubt anyone would think you were going to attach a game console to their network for scanning purposes...
> Sure, but the Boston Tea Party was carried out by a group of citizens that by and large had the support of most of the citizens.
WHAT??!?!?!? The Boston Tea Party was carried out by a group of RADICALS, and only a small percentage of the people actually cared. The citizens did not give any support, they didn't know what was going on! If you really think the majority of our citizens wanted to break away from Britain, try reexamining history. It was the political-types who wanted to break away, because they knew they would be better off that way. They did things that had to be done to serve the betterment of the people, whether or not the people actively strived for it.
Slashdot Mirror
> stricter copyright laws help the media corps sell more product, and GWB is in favor of anything that helps US corps sell more stuff.
Please note, I am not favoring GWB over anything or anyone else with my statement, but isn't it Capitalism that is in favor of anything that helps (US in this case) corps sell more stuff?
> The aim of copyright law should not be to find some middle ground...
[...]
> to create an environment that makes as much stuff available to as many people as cheaply as possible
> making sure that content creators are well rewarded for getting into the creation business
Please excuse my ignorance, but isn't what you described just another way of explaining "middle ground"?
This isn't necessarily a reply, as much as I felt like ranting and this was the easiest place.
.sig, "To the rational mind there can be no offense, no obscenity, no blasphemy - only information of greater or lesser value." That means, I think "morality" is a bunch of bullshit created by some people who feel the need to dictate what I do.
Well, at least I have got my mind straight. Judging by the average posted opinion of Slashdotters, they're all downloading MP3s and Music for the purpose of testing them out, and not because they can get free movies and music.
Screw that, I'll go with honesty. I download music because to me, it's worth the 2 minutes to download it (sometimes not even that), but not worth the money to blow on CDs. Especially since the RIAA has decided (AFAIK) that CD singles aren't worthwhile any more. I don't download movies because I hate the crappy quality -- unless of course, it's unavailable anywhere else.
Is it theft? No, it is not. It _IS_ sharing, as much as some like to think I'm net-lifting (is that a real term, or did I make it up?). Is it illegal? Damned right it is, not that I care. I'm not doing for civil disobedience, I'm not doing it to "screw the man." I'm doing it because it's something I want, and I don't want to deal with "the man" and his outdated, overpriced, prepackaged crap.
Is it morally right? To quote someone else's
Does that mean I'm evil? Sure, why not. I'm going to "Hell" for pirating music and software, and I'll be damned to eternity by running Helldot.org on a SPARC-1 over a 9600 baud modem, running the latest and greatest version of Windows 3.0. Yay.
Am I on a high horse? eh, maybe, it's hard to categorize oneself. Do I delude myself by giving excuses for breaking the law? Absolutely not, I know I am breaking the law, I just don't give a shit. Don't try and use any stupid analogies either, as they rarely make sense and are never actually applicable.
You seem to be implying that the post in question seemed overly-patriotic or something... I saw nothing like that, and you attack anonymously (turnabout is fair play) claiming he is full of shit? Man, look in a fucking mirror.
> lets just say his penis is 3 1/2 feet long... ...Which makes me wonder of those penis enlargment methods/whatever actually work. And where can I buy it without giving money to spammers?
Okay, good point. I should have said:
[A large part of my] Linux appreciation/zealotry is about [my] ideals.
I don't like when I am incorrectly included in generalized statements, I shouldn't do it to others.
Um, IANAL (no shit, how many lawyers read /.) but ideally, it would negate it. Since it is an End-User License Agreement, you would have to agree to it for it to apply. But, of course, with MS-Law no one really has a clue.
Speaking of moot points, I'll use one now.
Linux appreciation/zealotry is about ideals. It's not that we necessarily want to look at the components, but just that we have the option to do it if we are so truly paranoid.
That said, I agree with you anyway.
> I get hoards of e-mail every week, as new vulnerabilites are continually found
[...]
> The fact that Slashdot immediately jumps all over Microsoft for this is ludicrous. Get a life.
This is true, Slashdot should have given up already on trying to report these things. There are so many holes that it should just be assumed that "Microsoft security" is an oxymoron. It would be just as useful to have a post every Monday titled "Yup, Microsoft products are still shoddy/shitty." Then in it list the hundreds of vulnerabilities found the previous week. But that would cut the number of stories by half!
Just as an aside, what is an IE administrator? If a company needs a job solely for patching a friggin' browser, something might just be wrong with that browser.
> For now, my PC is safe from Microsoft forced modifications
Just wanted to point out that just because you didn't see a EULA that said they would do something doesn't mean that they won't do it anyway.
> "There's no hole that needs to be plugged," he said.
Except, possibly, the "hole" that gets "plugged" every time someone uses a VeriSign service... Of course, that's not needed, it's given as a free service from Verisign.
"Free ass-fucking at www.verisign.com!" Only $35 a year.
> Another factor is that limitations often result in better work
That's a good point. Instead of just throwing money/GFX at it, they had to think their way out of it. It could (and probably usually does) make for better work.
If you don't like it, go to Kuro5hin. Otherwise, quit whining. I am fine with, and sometimes even like the bad posting. It means they aren't anal retentive (like you, obviously -- Obligatory Flamebait) and make mistakes. Holy shit, you mean people make mistakes? If I wanted perfect grammar, I'll go to a news site. I want stuff that interests me, so I couldn't care much less whether or not they grammar-checked the post. IT'S NOT THE FRIGGING POINT. So get off your doped-up horse and try bitching about something important to people who can do something about that important thing, instead of bitching for the sake of being arrogant.
That is 100% exactly the point.
> they generally beach themselves due to poisoning or internal injuries casued by human actions and byproducts.
Can you give any examples of this? I hear a lot of strange "environmentalist" claims that never have any weight or support.
I don't even think I'll ever download the program, but I donated $5 because I had it sitting in my PayPal account and like to show support for a good idea. Now, what to do with the 43 cents left in my account... Hmmm
> Rather than assume a superintelligence would dismiss its parents as 'redundant', I'd assume it'd help us join them -- and even if not, sentient AI isn't the only kind of computation capable of engineering a brain-to-machine bridge.
Hey, just what we all want! To be assimilated into the collective! (Laugh, boy! It's a joke, see?)
Well, in all reality I suppose you should be able to buy a submachine gun, as long as you don't use it to kill people. A warhead is an over-the-top argument, and obviously not taken seriously. I also thing John Q. Yuppie SHOULD donate money for low-emissions research... As long as he wants lower emissions.
How about since YOU are the one who wants lower emissions, YOU send money to Ford to do it. Or how about telling Ford you want lower-emissions cars. Hell, they have them already, BUY ONE! Just don't tell me what I can or cannot buy, simply because you think I shouldn't spend my money on something stupid (and yes, SUVs are IMO a stupid waste of money).
I totally disagree with what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it -- Paraphrased from someone smart.
> The psychology of the consumer has to change
This is the only statement I have a big problem with. The Consumer should never be forced to change, the manufacturers should offer what the consumer wants. If the consumer wants a wimpy little car, more power to them. If they want a gas-guzzling SUV, let them waste their money. But don't expect anyone to change, especially a large number of people all at once.
Two obligatory points I have not seen yet... (maybe because they were modded down)...
1) Wonder what a beowulf cluster of those would work like (bad-dum dum[b])
2) Once this is mass-produced, overclockers could do amazing things, considering the likely heat-dissipating properties of such a product.
(Hey, I'm here to post, not to think!)
> I have 3 Dreamcasts that friends gave me without even asking that I wouldn't mind loosing.
Well, if you're not too worried about losing them, I'd take one off your hands for ten bucks... plus shipping of course... Hrm, Slash-bay.... or is it E-Dot? Bay-Dot?
> but wouldn't you think carrying a Dreamcast into a company would attract attention, if not suspicion?
It might attract a few glances (assuming you were carrying it openly, and not in a bag of some sort), but I doubt anyone would think you were going to attach a game console to their network for scanning purposes...
> Sure, but the Boston Tea Party was carried out by a group of citizens that by and large had the support of most of the citizens.
WHAT??!?!?!? The Boston Tea Party was carried out by a group of RADICALS, and only a small percentage of the people actually cared. The citizens did not give any support, they didn't know what was going on! If you really think the majority of our citizens wanted to break away from Britain, try reexamining history. It was the political-types who wanted to break away, because they knew they would be better off that way. They did things that had to be done to serve the betterment of the people, whether or not the people actively strived for it.
> ... assuming of course that by "grass" you're talking about the stuff that grows on your lawn...
Oh man, wish I had "grass" growing all over my lawn.. WOO HOOoo..
(-1, worthless comment)
Thank you very much, that is exactly what I was thinking.