Firstly, it's not stealing. That's logically impossible, and can only be attributed as such due to an emotional reaction to the fictitious loss of one's property arising from ignorance, in some cases willful, about how copyright and intellectual property actually works.
Secondly, the "getting tired of paying $15" was, and is, a justification for a much larger and more serious problem.... content creators and distributors no longer needed to be compensated directly in order to receive copies, or expressions, of the intellectual property. They no longer needed to be accompanied by the licensing in accordance with the laws, or in other words, be authorized.
I'm fucking tired of paying so much for water and gas. However, regardless of my feelings, the utility companies continue to charge those rates and I have exactly one entity to receive it from. The expense and challenge of creating my own water and gas sources are considerable.
Once a content creator adds their contributions to the world, it is far more trivial to distribute that content in a manner in which it can be suitably consumed. MP3's and the emergence of broadband Internet connections made it possible to cheaply distribute all that content. Software which allowed "ripping" of content off CDs enabled legions of younger people to convert intellectual property from a state that required physical distribution, to one that only required the Internet and a hard drive.
Peer to Peer communications software vastly exacerbated the problem by bringing many orders of magnitude more efficiency to the distribution process.
There was no great intellectual movement against the content creators and distributors. It was far more simple than that:
A) You are in a huge bazaar. Merchants are offering their wares and haggling prices. You only have $15, and this allows you to purchase one item, with restrictions on how it can transported and used.
B) You are in an even bigger bazaar. It's a bit more dangerous, and sometimes that banana is really a penis, hiding inside the skin of a banana. However, everything is free. All it cost was the gas to get there.
How can content creators and distributors compete with free?
Therein lies our fundamental problem. It no longer costs nearly as much to create copies of intellectual property and distribute them. The technology and resources are widely available.
The laws and society have simply not kept up, or have been able to adapt to our changes in technology. People, however, adapt extremely quickly. This disparity is the cause for all our strife, and the imminent destruction of free societies.
Hyperbole? Hardly.
The response of content creators and their uber rich distributors is not to adapt themselves to the new world and possibilities, but force the world to adapt back to them. Unfortunately, with great consequences, the only way to allow content creators the temporary control over their works (to benefit all of us, not just them) is to destroy freedom. It's the only way to effectively do it.
That's the real nasty truth of it. People don't want to pay for shit if they don't have to do so . It takes effort, sophistication, and commitment on the part of those that have the ability to not pay, to actually pay.
Most/.'s that claim they are paying, or are willing to pay, only do so because they understand the consequences of not even attempting to compensate the artists.
In most cases, claiming some noble truth, or great cause is what compels you to infringe copyright, is just a lie.
Why go through all that extra energy to simulate a huge cargo bay when the real cargo bay has to be within transporter range anyways?
That would not make sense on a ship, but on a planet it just might. Planets apparently have large scale transporter networks and relays. I would imagine you could have huge underground storage areas full of materials and items and use a holodeck as an interactive catalogue.
Keep in mind though, there are some things that even transporters cannot handle.
IIRC, CDMA and our form of LTE is not compatible overseas. Only a few smart phones are marketed as global phones. I used to have a BB that was made for that purpose.
Phones that are compatible overseas are not the majority of the market.
When my phone was stolen in a diner after walking way from it for maybe two minutes before walking back for it, I had it shut down within 10-15 minutes from another phone.
Even assuming there is a network where a standing order is made to purchase a stolen phone for use, there would still be time required for the logistics of shipping and fulfillment. I just can't see with how important and well used smart phone are, that the window for usage by drug dealers or other criminals would be large enough to be economically viable for all involved.
Problem with this logic is that it assumes that piracy is only practiced by a small percentage of customers.
Once you hit 10% of your customers being 86'd (by SOC#, credit card num, etc.) it will start to affect the bottom line far more than the copyright interests would.
Put it this way... once 50% of your society is in prison, do you really have a society left?
I was very surprised myself. When I head, that Mississippi, of all places, passed a technology law I too was expecting a train wreck that would cripple businesses.
There is nothing at the federal or state level right now that would seem to preclude setting a Caller ID to a number that you own, or contractually represent.
I was not framing Cable TV as a necessity as much as I was framing entertainment as one. It really is. Without some form of release, or ability to deal with the stress, it has immediate and long term effects on your health.
When I mention COL, I am putting it into the context of your entire entertainment budget. That is what Cable Companies don't seem to understand. There is only so much money that an American family can spend per month for entertainment and raising your costs beyond COL, simply to justify the insane and insatiable need for endless corporate growth, is just plain stupid.
It has only worked so far because of how many people have used lines of credit to obscure the fact they don't make enough money to support their lifestyles . A lot of people have had some painful realizations in the last 4 years because of that.
For any company to continually raise the prices of their products and services beyond what somebody is capable of paying as percentage of their income is a level of stupidity relegated to entertainment itself, like The Three Stooges.
That was my point. I realized a long time ago that I did not want to spend, or could I afford to spend, more than $100 per month on a Cable subscription, as a percentage of my monthly income. To get now, what I was getting then, would be even more.
I think that some people value their entertainment through television a heck of a lot more than I do. Obviously, they are willing to pay more. That being said, I just don't see how it possible to continue on with the yearly increases, without being subsidized by lines of credit. That game has a nasty ending to it.
Unless Picard stops for a moment, looks at the viewer, and says, "When I battle Romulans, I like to do so with confidence. Blah Blah Blah anti-perspirant is for me", I don't really care. People drink Coke and Pepsi in real life. It's not distracting for me to see an actor drink a Pepsi, especially when you are not really doing anything that brings your attention to it. Obvious exceptions being crushing it on your head, or sticking it into some girl (that's porn though).
You seemed to be making that point that a DVR coupled with a Cable subscription offered commercial free content, whereas the online offerings I mentioned did not.
That's not entirely true, and overlays are far, far, far, worse than any commercial break could have ever been. In fact, I am willing to bet that overlays would fetch more money if they were ever used to advertise anything other than upcoming shows and other bullshit.
I don't think that is the same thing at all. Setting Caller ID to a number that you have authorization to use is not obfuscation. In fact, in VOIP, that's the only way that you can do it period. Unless you want SIP registration on a per DID basis, or different hosts per DID.
It's not like every business now has a couple of T1 lines coming into the back and splitting off into 25,50,100, etc different distinct lines being plugged into a PBX.
VOIP does not work that way.
Prohibit any person or entity for transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller ID information with the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value.
That's in the federal law. AFAIK, Mississippi is the only state with anti-spoofing laws, and even theirs, does not restrict Caller ID changes that are not misleading or inaccurate.
I would not worry about it. Any law that is going to survive constitutional challenges is going to be federal in nature. So far nothing in any proposed legislation I have seen would stop you from setting Caller ID to a number you have authorization to do so.
As long as you are not trying to be anonymous (blank Caller ID), or putting in deliberately fake phone numbers, you should be fine.
Why not just destroy the entire country of France in cyberspace?
Just take the "edges" and fold "space" up, and Voila! No More France!
No Google Maps No search results with.fr anywhere in the domain Block anything with a French IP address
If you Google anything with France or French in the search terms it comes back with 404. Except french fries. There should be a special page that asks if you meant "Freedom Fries".
It's so bad right now with overlays that most OTA and broadcast programming is downright fucking unwatchable to most people. The web download content however is mercifully bereft of overlay advertisement, as well as the commercials.
I have a hard time seeing where the advertising away from Cable Companies is 1/10th as bad.
These are kids he was talking about. Political talk shows are out.
As for sports, that is the only real thing holding back a lot of guys I know from switching.
That being said, Cable Companies keep raising the costs year after year above and beyond what people are receiving in cost-of-living raises . ESPN, especially. They can go fuck themselves.
Young people are cutting the cords faster than ever, and in the case of kids, never accepting the cord in the first place. That's why the Cable Companies will die.
1) No incentive to younger people to shell out $50-$60 per month (base rate). It's hard enough for younger people to find money in the first place, let alone spend it on stupid shit. It's basically a cell phone plan, or Internet plan in terms of cost. What does it deliver that is as attractive, or more attractive, to younger people than Amazon, Netflix, YouTube, Hulu or pirating?
2) Pricing themselves so high that older people are increasingly looking to save costs by switching to something else. Guys that need to have sports are really just buying it for sports then. That's not an audience that will keep revenue streams at the levels they are now, which means sports would need to increase their revenue streams even more.
Teabagging is a beautiful thing that should not be associated with such negativity. Do you know how much trust it takes to lower your balls into another person's mouth? It's a wonderfully giving act.
Slashdot Mirror
It would be fitting to see Looney Tunes referenced in a patent office filing now wouldn't it?
Firstly, it's not stealing. That's logically impossible, and can only be attributed as such due to an emotional reaction to the fictitious loss of one's property arising from ignorance, in some cases willful, about how copyright and intellectual property actually works.
Secondly, the "getting tired of paying $15" was, and is, a justification for a much larger and more serious problem.... content creators and distributors no longer needed to be compensated directly in order to receive copies, or expressions, of the intellectual property. They no longer needed to be accompanied by the licensing in accordance with the laws, or in other words, be authorized.
I'm fucking tired of paying so much for water and gas. However, regardless of my feelings, the utility companies continue to charge those rates and I have exactly one entity to receive it from. The expense and challenge of creating my own water and gas sources are considerable.
Once a content creator adds their contributions to the world, it is far more trivial to distribute that content in a manner in which it can be suitably consumed. MP3's and the emergence of broadband Internet connections made it possible to cheaply distribute all that content. Software which allowed "ripping" of content off CDs enabled legions of younger people to convert intellectual property from a state that required physical distribution, to one that only required the Internet and a hard drive.
Peer to Peer communications software vastly exacerbated the problem by bringing many orders of magnitude more efficiency to the distribution process.
There was no great intellectual movement against the content creators and distributors. It was far more simple than that:
A) You are in a huge bazaar. Merchants are offering their wares and haggling prices. You only have $15, and this allows you to purchase one item, with restrictions on how it can transported and used.
B) You are in an even bigger bazaar. It's a bit more dangerous, and sometimes that banana is really a penis, hiding inside the skin of a banana. However, everything is free. All it cost was the gas to get there.
How can content creators and distributors compete with free?
Therein lies our fundamental problem. It no longer costs nearly as much to create copies of intellectual property and distribute them. The technology and resources are widely available.
The laws and society have simply not kept up, or have been able to adapt to our changes in technology. People, however, adapt extremely quickly. This disparity is the cause for all our strife, and the imminent destruction of free societies.
Hyperbole? Hardly.
The response of content creators and their uber rich distributors is not to adapt themselves to the new world and possibilities, but force the world to adapt back to them. Unfortunately, with great consequences, the only way to allow content creators the temporary control over their works (to benefit all of us, not just them) is to destroy freedom. It's the only way to effectively do it.
That's the real nasty truth of it. People don't want to pay for shit if they don't have to do so . It takes effort, sophistication, and commitment on the part of those that have the ability to not pay, to actually pay.
Most /.'s that claim they are paying, or are willing to pay, only do so because they understand the consequences of not even attempting to compensate the artists.
In most cases, claiming some noble truth, or great cause is what compels you to infringe copyright, is just a lie .
Why go through all that extra energy to simulate a huge cargo bay when the real cargo bay has to be within transporter range anyways?
That would not make sense on a ship, but on a planet it just might. Planets apparently have large scale transporter networks and relays. I would imagine you could have huge underground storage areas full of materials and items and use a holodeck as an interactive catalogue.
Keep in mind though, there are some things that even transporters cannot handle.
They would still be ignorant and incorrect to call it stealing, whether or not it is in their interests do so.
How does that work for phones with no sim card like CDMA phones with Verizon?
IIRC, CDMA and our form of LTE is not compatible overseas. Only a few smart phones are marketed as global phones. I used to have a BB that was made for that purpose.
Phones that are compatible overseas are not the majority of the market.
You forgot the Good News Everybody!
Yes, but what is that duration? 20 minutes?
When my phone was stolen in a diner after walking way from it for maybe two minutes before walking back for it, I had it shut down within 10-15 minutes from another phone.
Even assuming there is a network where a standing order is made to purchase a stolen phone for use, there would still be time required for the logistics of shipping and fulfillment. I just can't see with how important and well used smart phone are, that the window for usage by drug dealers or other criminals would be large enough to be economically viable for all involved.
Problem with this logic is that it assumes that piracy is only practiced by a small percentage of customers.
Once you hit 10% of your customers being 86'd (by SOC#, credit card num, etc.) it will start to affect the bottom line far more than the copyright interests would.
Put it this way... once 50% of your society is in prison, do you really have a society left?
That makes perfect sense. Just a few things....
What's a bowler, stumps, batsman, or a fielder?
What game are you even talking about?
That's assuming they were even going by a ratio.
What if they just went by the number of peers that connected and downloaded a part?
I love the fact this education was brought to you by SunTzuWarmaster
Hard drives. Apparently that is not considered blank media yet.
Fairly sure.
I was very surprised myself. When I head, that Mississippi, of all places, passed a technology law I too was expecting a train wreck that would cripple businesses.
There is nothing at the federal or state level right now that would seem to preclude setting a Caller ID to a number that you own, or contractually represent.
I was not framing Cable TV as a necessity as much as I was framing entertainment as one. It really is. Without some form of release, or ability to deal with the stress, it has immediate and long term effects on your health.
When I mention COL, I am putting it into the context of your entire entertainment budget. That is what Cable Companies don't seem to understand. There is only so much money that an American family can spend per month for entertainment and raising your costs beyond COL, simply to justify the insane and insatiable need for endless corporate growth, is just plain stupid.
It has only worked so far because of how many people have used lines of credit to obscure the fact they don't make enough money to support their lifestyles . A lot of people have had some painful realizations in the last 4 years because of that.
For any company to continually raise the prices of their products and services beyond what somebody is capable of paying as percentage of their income is a level of stupidity relegated to entertainment itself, like The Three Stooges.
That was my point. I realized a long time ago that I did not want to spend, or could I afford to spend, more than $100 per month on a Cable subscription, as a percentage of my monthly income. To get now, what I was getting then, would be even more.
I think that some people value their entertainment through television a heck of a lot more than I do. Obviously, they are willing to pay more. That being said, I just don't see how it possible to continue on with the yearly increases, without being subsidized by lines of credit. That game has a nasty ending to it.
Overlays are not product placements.
Unless Picard stops for a moment, looks at the viewer, and says, "When I battle Romulans, I like to do so with confidence. Blah Blah Blah anti-perspirant is for me", I don't really care. People drink Coke and Pepsi in real life. It's not distracting for me to see an actor drink a Pepsi, especially when you are not really doing anything that brings your attention to it. Obvious exceptions being crushing it on your head, or sticking it into some girl (that's porn though).
You seemed to be making that point that a DVR coupled with a Cable subscription offered commercial free content, whereas the online offerings I mentioned did not.
That's not entirely true, and overlays are far, far, far, worse than any commercial break could have ever been. In fact, I am willing to bet that overlays would fetch more money if they were ever used to advertise anything other than upcoming shows and other bullshit.
I don't think that is the same thing at all. Setting Caller ID to a number that you have authorization to use is not obfuscation. In fact, in VOIP, that's the only way that you can do it period. Unless you want SIP registration on a per DID basis, or different hosts per DID.
It's not like every business now has a couple of T1 lines coming into the back and splitting off into 25,50,100, etc different distinct lines being plugged into a PBX.
VOIP does not work that way.
Prohibit any person or entity for transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller ID information with the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value.
That's in the federal law. AFAIK, Mississippi is the only state with anti-spoofing laws, and even theirs, does not restrict Caller ID changes that are not misleading or inaccurate.
I would not worry about it. Any law that is going to survive constitutional challenges is going to be federal in nature. So far nothing in any proposed legislation I have seen would stop you from setting Caller ID to a number you have authorization to do so.
As long as you are not trying to be anonymous (blank Caller ID), or putting in deliberately fake phone numbers, you should be fine.
Why not just destroy the entire country of France in cyberspace?
Just take the "edges" and fold "space" up, and Voila! No More France!
No Google Maps .fr anywhere in the domain
No search results with
Block anything with a French IP address
If you Google anything with France or French in the search terms it comes back with 404. Except french fries. There should be a special page that asks if you meant "Freedom Fries".
DVRs do not solve the problem of commercials.
It's so bad right now with overlays that most OTA and broadcast programming is downright fucking unwatchable to most people. The web download content however is mercifully bereft of overlay advertisement, as well as the commercials.
I have a hard time seeing where the advertising away from Cable Companies is 1/10th as bad.
I was expecting to see the article authored by Rick Marshall.
These are kids he was talking about. Political talk shows are out.
As for sports, that is the only real thing holding back a lot of guys I know from switching.
That being said, Cable Companies keep raising the costs year after year above and beyond what people are receiving in cost-of-living raises . ESPN, especially. They can go fuck themselves.
Young people are cutting the cords faster than ever, and in the case of kids, never accepting the cord in the first place. That's why the Cable Companies will die.
1) No incentive to younger people to shell out $50-$60 per month (base rate). It's hard enough for younger people to find money in the first place, let alone spend it on stupid shit. It's basically a cell phone plan, or Internet plan in terms of cost. What does it deliver that is as attractive, or more attractive, to younger people than Amazon, Netflix, YouTube, Hulu or pirating ?
2) Pricing themselves so high that older people are increasingly looking to save costs by switching to something else. Guys that need to have sports are really just buying it for sports then. That's not an audience that will keep revenue streams at the levels they are now, which means sports would need to increase their revenue streams even more.
Dude, that's fucking amazing. It's like refusing to believe in fire, when it is slowly roasting your testicles.
Ohhhh. Well I can understand that. Unfortunate misunderstanding.
Carry on.
but teabagger is already taken.
Dude.. what the fuck?
Teabagging is a beautiful thing that should not be associated with such negativity. Do you know how much trust it takes to lower your balls into another person's mouth? It's a wonderfully giving act.
STFU.
If by productive you mean that Internet porn usage went up thousands upon thousands of percentage points in use... yes.