I have a bad taste in my mouth after finding out that lastfm (corporate whore) was owned or someways affiliated with cbs.
I'll stick with soma.fm spank you very much.
You haven't proved to my satisfaction that by sharing files I am stealing.
So I'm still feeling pretty good about myself & can ignore the rest of your ad hominem attack.
The pitying part of myself thinks you're a sheep that can't think for yourself & the paranoid part thinks you're some kind of corporate shill. It's unfortunate that's all you have to offer the dialogue.
"Under that argument, raping ugly, fat, old women should not be a crime because the rapist would not have paid for it, so it should not be illegal to take it."
Uh.. no. Rape is directly experienced by the victim whereas the 'loss' of revenue I incur on the content creator is never noticed since I never would have paid for it anyway. Quite a different argument.
"In other words "I wanted it, but didn't want to pay for it, so I took it."
When it comes to non-material items that I will not exploit for my own monetary gain the answer is yes: that's exactly it. Got a problem with that? Too bad because I don't.
" 2) Many times artists end up with new revenue streams because copying allowed someone to find out about them who quite likely would never have discovered them otherwise.
This has been proven false using TPB's own data."
Great. Good for TPB's data. I have paid for materials I otherwise wouldn't have more than once so I am perfectly content with my perspective on the situation.
The bottom line is if the industry can't learn to shift their business model to one that includes sharing it is at their own peril. There's no changing the shift in ethics around this issue. They either clamp down so hard on it that I just don't participate anymore or they learn to make money off the free flow of information. But one thing' for sure - *I'M* not going to feel bad about it.
Trying to equate copying with stealing is disingenuous: If I steal something from you then you are without that item. If I copy something you have youn are missing nothing.
As for the "loss of revenue" argument against file sharing there's two very clear arguments about it:
1) Many of the copied materials would never have been purchased by those who obtain them through file sharing anyway and
2) Many times artists end up with new revenue streams because copying allowed someone to find out about them who quite likely would never have discovered them otherwise.
So I don't 'buy' it, literally or figuratively. I PAY for it when I determine it's valuable enough to pay for. And if the forces that be ever successfully make it more painful than it is worth to obtain certain medias I will simply abandon those medias & they will have gained nothing anyway.
There's far too many entertainment distractions out there for the producers to determine the price. It is now strictly within the domain of the consumer to decide if & when to pay. Like it or not too bad - that's how it is. There's no stuffing the genie back in the bottle & there's no way you're ever going to convince internet-generation aged folks that this is 'stealing'. If anything is disingenuous it is that.
Piracy is wrong because you shouldn't be allowed to make money off of someone elses work. File sharing is not wrong and is not theft because I can rent a movie & invite my friends over to watch without them having to pay. Or is that wrong now too?
My attitude going forward is that I will not tolerate commercials nor any other form of forced payment for media enjoyment (I refuse to own a telivision, for example)
And if the powers that be make the pain worth more than the gain of obtaining certain medias I simply won't participate. I've got so many damn avenues of (entertainment) distraction that none of them are worth anything more than I personally am willing to pay
*I* dictate the price of my entertainment enjoyment - not these fat cats who've made money off the backs of artists for (historically) basically doing dick squat all.
There are plenty of Muslim countries where women aren't wearing it, some where it's full & covers the face, & yet others, like indonesia, where the face does not have to be covered.
Actually he was punished for heresy as at first the church did in fact welcome the heliocentric model he proposed but, as you pointed out, he poked fun at the powers that be and, unless you are a wielder of might stronger than theirs, ya oughta notta do dat.
Stealing means the other person is without the thing you stole. Nothing's being stolen here.
Many artists are waking up to the fact that the digitally reproducible aspect of their talent is not what is worth the money & that they will use the digitally reproducible part in conjunction with their talent to mine the money in ways that are more compatible with the 21st century.
Slashdot Mirror
You know what I'm really getting sick and tired of all these old-timers telling me I should pay for things. Get over it man - free is here to stay.
Yeah. It did. And I've found Myspace safe to ignore for quite a while now. & you will too. Soon.
I wonder what percentage of defaults were really on mortgages that weren't being flipped, hey?
I have a bad taste in my mouth after finding out that lastfm (corporate whore) was owned or someways affiliated with cbs. I'll stick with soma.fm spank you very much.
Hey I'm all for democracy as long as I don't have to participate!
"At 800km out your orbit only lasts 200-300 years."
There, fixed that for ya.
"Totally useless article if you ask me."
Then why's it slashdotted so bad I can't even bring it up? Huh? Hmmm?? And WTF!!?
If I have to pay for it then it's safe to ignore it.
Works great.
Well I really don't care what you think & it changes nothing. :)
You haven't proved to my satisfaction that by sharing files I am stealing.
So I'm still feeling pretty good about myself & can ignore the rest of your ad hominem attack.
The pitying part of myself thinks you're a sheep that can't think for yourself & the paranoid part thinks you're some kind of corporate shill. It's unfortunate that's all you have to offer the dialogue.
"Under that argument, raping ugly, fat, old women should not be a crime because the rapist would not have paid for it, so it should not be illegal to take it."
Uh.. no. Rape is directly experienced by the victim whereas the 'loss' of revenue I incur on the content creator is never noticed since I never would have paid for it anyway. Quite a different argument.
"In other words "I wanted it, but didn't want to pay for it, so I took it."
When it comes to non-material items that I will not exploit for my own monetary gain the answer is yes: that's exactly it. Got a problem with that? Too bad because I don't.
" 2) Many times artists end up with new revenue streams because copying allowed someone to find out about them who quite likely would never have discovered them otherwise.
This has been proven false using TPB's own data."
Great. Good for TPB's data. I have paid for materials I otherwise wouldn't have more than once so I am perfectly content with my perspective on the situation.
The bottom line is if the industry can't learn to shift their business model to one that includes sharing it is at their own peril. There's no changing the shift in ethics around this issue. They either clamp down so hard on it that I just don't participate anymore or they learn to make money off the free flow of information. But one thing' for sure - *I'M* not going to feel bad about it.
Trying to equate copying with stealing is disingenuous: If I steal something from you then you are without that item. If I copy something you have youn are missing nothing.
As for the "loss of revenue" argument against file sharing there's two very clear arguments about it:
1) Many of the copied materials would never have been purchased by those who obtain them through file sharing anyway and
2) Many times artists end up with new revenue streams because copying allowed someone to find out about them who quite likely would never have discovered them otherwise.
So I don't 'buy' it, literally or figuratively. I PAY for it when I determine it's valuable enough to pay for. And if the forces that be ever successfully make it more painful than it is worth to obtain certain medias I will simply abandon those medias & they will have gained nothing anyway.
There's far too many entertainment distractions out there for the producers to determine the price. It is now strictly within the domain of the consumer to decide if & when to pay. Like it or not too bad - that's how it is. There's no stuffing the genie back in the bottle & there's no way you're ever going to convince internet-generation aged folks that this is 'stealing'. If anything is disingenuous it is that.
You make no distinction between piracy & sharing.
Piracy is wrong because you shouldn't be allowed to make money off of someone elses work. File sharing is not wrong and is not theft because I can rent a movie & invite my friends over to watch without them having to pay. Or is that wrong now too?
My attitude going forward is that I will not tolerate commercials nor any other form of forced payment for media enjoyment (I refuse to own a telivision, for example)
And if the powers that be make the pain worth more than the gain of obtaining certain medias I simply won't participate. I've got so many damn avenues of (entertainment) distraction that none of them are worth anything more than I personally am willing to pay
*I* dictate the price of my entertainment enjoyment - not these fat cats who've made money off the backs of artists for (historically) basically doing dick squat all.
End of story.
Hey I've donated cash... You?
Then the name of the women's network should be renamed "A Man's Prerogative" to help pull in some male viewers, shouldn't it?
As the wiki on Hijab http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab appears to state, this is more of a cultural phenomenon than a religious one.
There are plenty of Muslim countries where women aren't wearing it, some where it's full & covers the face, & yet others, like indonesia, where the face does not have to be covered.
"Those undersea cables don't pay for themselves."
They only get laid once. Then they get used repeatedly. I'm sure they pay for themselves & then some.
Can someone remind me why Microsoft wants to chase people off to other platforms again?
gee - there must be an error here - coulda swore this topic was about cell phone text messages??
Ok so how can posts *this* off-topic get positive mods?
Actually he was punished for heresy as at first the church did in fact welcome the heliocentric model he proposed but, as you pointed out, he poked fun at the powers that be and, unless you are a wielder of might stronger than theirs, ya oughta notta do dat.
Stealing means the other person is without the thing you stole. Nothing's being stolen here.
Many artists are waking up to the fact that the digitally reproducible aspect of their talent is not what is worth the money & that they will use the digitally reproducible part in conjunction with their talent to mine the money in ways that are more compatible with the 21st century.
"Why is is such a stretch that something that has value costs money?"
Thank god no one's figured out how to meter the air cuz it'd be fuckers like you who'd feel free to cash in on it, wouldn't you?
Anything short of a RAID 5 file server is inadequate, IMO.