Dark Helmet: How many Assholes we got on this ship, any how? Everyone: Yo! Dark Helmet: I knew it. I'm surrounded by Assholes. *closes helmet* Keep firing, Assholes!
But then, are they TAKING things from the Public Domain, or are they taking steps to PREVENT things from moving to the public domain? Has there been any examples of things that moved into public domain, but then retroactively became private again after legislation changes?
Cos if they're just preventing things from going into public domain, then thats not the same as taking things from the public domain.
Sweet idea, not just for elderley, but for anyone visiting a new supermarket?
the only problem is you'd have to make sure the "markers" get moved around properly - wouldnt leave it up to the 16 year olds who are mostly responsible for packing shelves...
Yeah, but can it stay up all night looking up wikipedia for names of obscure early-90s dance acts and then scour all the torrent sites for full albums instead of just "Best of 90's Dance You Like Me Now?" compilations, and then stare at bittorrent, begging more seeders to come online to increase the speed from 0.01KB/s, and then say "screw it" and download the latest metallica and eminem albums on principle, delete them without listening to them, because it doesnt really like metallica or eminem, and then wander off to youtube to watch old WCW videos?
If not, it can't truly duplicate my torrent experience.
Except its not more information, its just the same information, repeated ad nauseum. Once you have written something, and someone takes a direct copy, how does the average user discern who wrote it, and who copied it?
If it were up to me, the right to anonymous free speech would greatly outweigh the right to sue someone for libel.
Except, you dont have a right to ANONYMOUS free speech, do you? I'm not American, but I thought the constitution protected free speech, not anonymous free speech. Therefore, if you have something you want to say, you better be willing to back it up...
Most people don't know how to copy a CD, so the presumption that I'm returning a Jonas Brothers CD (christmas gift), because I illegally copied it is a minority assumption. Instead of presuming guilt, the stores should presume innocent dissatisfaction, because in 95-99% of cases that's true.
Citation needed.
In any case, since I was not allowed to return the Jonas Brothers CD, I'm now stuck with 15 wasted dollars and a coffee coaster. In what possible way is that fair to the customer? Answer: It isn't. It's pisspoor customer service.
Did the store promise it was going to be the best cd you ever had, or even listenable? No. You may have an expectation that you can return something just because you didnt like it, but thats never been the case with music. Did you ask to listen to the cd in store? Many stores will allow you to do that now.
And you can stop comparing music to food now. The industry is different, the business model is different, the method of production is different, the costs are different and the method of consumption is different.
Precisely. Even the food industry says "return the unused portion for a refund" on their packages. They guarantee satisfaction of their products. Why can't CD and DVD manufacturers do the same?
Because you cant make a copy of a piece of food, then return it and get a completely different piece of food, and thus have two pieces of food despite only having paid for one.
Who are these people? Because Ive got a fair bit of experience playing halo with a controller, so if you sat someone down at a comp with limited experience playing fps' Id cream them, keyboard or no.
On the other hand, put someone down who is a master at it, and they'd cream me.
So what you're really saying is put down two people who have an absolutely identical amount of experience playing with their controller of choice, and the keyboard person will cream them. Which I dont think is necessarily true, but if you find the two people who have absolutely identical experience, i'd be glad to find out.
Im so sick of this, every time the whole fps-keyboard-vs-gamepad argument pops up, someone has to say "a person with a keyboard would cream a person with a gamepad, just because!"
You said, "Of the greatest concern is that the list of what is blocked is secret."
Then you quoted the parent to your comment, which said "The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech." and you said "Exactly!"
Thats why I quoted those three pieces of text in my comment. They were cut and paste directly from your comment. Regardless of how closely they may be linked, they are two separate issues.
Australia is a democracy, we will be blocking your access to child porn (and note I'm not saying you want to access it) inter alia, on the Internet, or anywhere else.
Except, of course, you can't. If you think there's any way for you or the Government or anyone else to effectively manage a list to block every single site on the Internet which contains material which is illegal in Australia, you're deluded. Especially if it's in the hands of the Government, who (and this is an insider's point of view), couldn't quickly organise their way out of a paper bag
In Australia censorship is a given.
Well thats your opinion and you're entitled to it. Me, I like to think that it's a given only because thats the way it's always been, which is not a good enough reason to maintain the status quo, and I'll be voicing my opinion at the protest in Brisbane on Saturday.
Of the greatest concern is that the list of what is blocked is secret.
The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech.
Exactly!
You should decide which one is the biggest concern, because they are seperate things. If the greatest concern is that the blacklist is secret, then you're saying that if the Labour party just came out and said "we censored euthanasia page waystodie.com, because we felt like it", you would be okay with that?
My greatest concern is that no other person should not be controlling what I can and cannot see on the internet, or anywhere else for that matter.
It says that I want the game, but I'm not willing to put up with the drm you put on it.
If you remove the drm, I will buy the game.
How does it say that if you don't tell them that specifically? You interpret your actions one way, but unless you tell them so, they're going to interpret it a different way.
BECAUSE A BUNCH OF CHILDISH ASSHOLES DECIDE THEY'RE ENTITLED TO MORE SHIT THAN THEY CAN AFFORD.
You're totally viewing the relation of piracy to lost sales incorrectly.
Actually, s/he isn't. Didnt mention lost sales, mentioned that if people can't/don't want to pay for something, then they shouldn't be entitled to own the product.
I have a pirated copy of Photoshop on my system. The fact that I pirated Photoshop doesn't mean Adobe lost a sale, because I'd never pay the $699 and buy a copy of Photoshop for the the few little photo edits or whatever that I use it for. Adobe doesn't directly use a sale because I'm running pirated Photoshop, because I'll probably never purchase a copy of Photoshop in my lifetime. If I gave a copy to my buddy it's not like he was ready to buy a copy either and I stole Adobe's sale. If I ever couldn't run pirated Photoshop anymore (or if it became much hassle to crack) then I would just use something else. It's a great product but I don't really need it.
Then you dont deserve to own it. There's plenty of free photo editing tools out there (I assume), and if they're not as easy to use as Photoshop, or they dont have the same level of tools and the like, its because people put a lot of work in to making Photoshop a good product, whereas less work goes into free products, because there's no reward for the owners.
I'm not saying Adobe's losing a sale by you copying their software - I'm saying you have no right to have the software at all - go use the free tools if you don't want to buy it.
Running pirated copies of software is not as carefree and fun as just making a copy. Most of the time you have to take precautions to keep the software cracked and from re-activating. Often you can't use features, update the software or do all kinds of things with a pirated copy.
Slashdot Mirror
If you paid AU$120 for the game, you didnt shop around enough.
If you pay more than AU$100 for ANY console game, you don't shop around enough.
Dark Helmet:
How many Assholes we got on this ship, any how?
Everyone:
Yo!
Dark Helmet:
I knew it. I'm surrounded by Assholes. *closes helmet* Keep firing, Assholes!
But then, are they TAKING things from the Public Domain, or are they taking steps to PREVENT things from moving to the public domain? Has there been any examples of things that moved into public domain, but then retroactively became private again after legislation changes?
Cos if they're just preventing things from going into public domain, then thats not the same as taking things from the public domain.
If we're going to argue semantics, that is.
Not a good idea to let the youth of the nations know that their heroes ate LSD like candy back in the days.
I don't know which nations you're living in, but none of the young people I know consider the Beatles to be heroes...
Sweet idea, not just for elderley, but for anyone visiting a new supermarket?
the only problem is you'd have to make sure the "markers" get moved around properly - wouldnt leave it up to the 16 year olds who are mostly responsible for packing shelves...
Yeah, but can it stay up all night looking up wikipedia for names of obscure early-90s dance acts and then scour all the torrent sites for full albums instead of just "Best of 90's Dance You Like Me Now?" compilations, and then stare at bittorrent, begging more seeders to come online to increase the speed from 0.01KB/s, and then say "screw it" and download the latest metallica and eminem albums on principle, delete them without listening to them, because it doesnt really like metallica or eminem, and then wander off to youtube to watch old WCW videos?
If not, it can't truly duplicate my torrent experience.
And if you were a recording company, you would sue the torrent sites that make all the copying possible?
Sounds familiar...
Except its not more information, its just the same information, repeated ad nauseum. Once you have written something, and someone takes a direct copy, how does the average user discern who wrote it, and who copied it?
They're keeping the offsite backup distributed around the Internet, using the World-Wide Web to store it in real time.
I heard that sometimes the backup even gets updated BEFORE the proper archive? As much as two months before!
Whats up with that?
I swear to god, if IANALBIHBAJ becomes a new internet slang, it will be the greatest day ever.
except it doesnt really work like that, does it?
after saving 2 minutes a day, five days a week for a year, you'd have saved 520 minutes, or nearly nine hours.
But you could only use those hours in one block if you were now leaving and arriving home from work nine hours earlier than you had been before.
You're more likely to just waste that extra minute in minutae at the beginning / end of the day.
If it were up to me, the right to anonymous free speech would greatly outweigh the right to sue someone for libel.
Except, you dont have a right to ANONYMOUS free speech, do you? I'm not American, but I thought the constitution protected free speech, not anonymous free speech. Therefore, if you have something you want to say, you better be willing to back it up...
The average person only has one email address, their work email address
[Citation needed]
picks up where the live-action movie leaves off, allowing players to re-create and re-live the greatest moments from the film
Make up your mind, does it pick up after the movie, or is it set during the movie?
Most people don't know how to copy a CD, so the presumption that I'm returning a Jonas Brothers CD (christmas gift), because I illegally copied it is a minority assumption. Instead of presuming guilt, the stores should presume innocent dissatisfaction, because in 95-99% of cases that's true.
Citation needed.
In any case, since I was not allowed to return the Jonas Brothers CD, I'm now stuck with 15 wasted dollars and a coffee coaster. In what possible way is that fair to the customer? Answer: It isn't. It's pisspoor customer service.
Did the store promise it was going to be the best cd you ever had, or even listenable? No. You may have an expectation that you can return something just because you didnt like it, but thats never been the case with music. Did you ask to listen to the cd in store? Many stores will allow you to do that now.
And you can stop comparing music to food now. The industry is different, the business model is different, the method of production is different, the costs are different and the method of consumption is different.
Precisely. Even the food industry says "return the unused portion for a refund" on their packages. They guarantee satisfaction of their products. Why can't CD and DVD manufacturers do the same?
Because you cant make a copy of a piece of food, then return it and get a completely different piece of food, and thus have two pieces of food despite only having paid for one.
apples and oranges.
Who are these people? Because Ive got a fair bit of experience playing halo with a controller, so if you sat someone down at a comp with limited experience playing fps' Id cream them, keyboard or no.
On the other hand, put someone down who is a master at it, and they'd cream me.
So what you're really saying is put down two people who have an absolutely identical amount of experience playing with their controller of choice, and the keyboard person will cream them. Which I dont think is necessarily true, but if you find the two people who have absolutely identical experience, i'd be glad to find out.
Im so sick of this, every time the whole fps-keyboard-vs-gamepad argument pops up, someone has to say "a person with a keyboard would cream a person with a gamepad, just because!"
it's bullshit, meaningless bullshit.
really? i dont have the same first name and middle initial as my brother...
I don't know about the other rallies, but Brisbane's had a grand total of about 200 people (myself included, if temporarily).
Out of a city of over a million.
We're not quite big enough to be considered a popular movement yet :>
So as their first memorable act they go out to censor the Internet.
I seem to remember them signing off on the Kyoto protocol on their first week in office
And saying sorry to the stolen generation of Australian Aborigines in their first year.
I think both of these things are more memorable than an internet censorship trial.
I never put words into your mouth.
You said, "Of the greatest concern is that the list of what is blocked is secret."
Then you quoted the parent to your comment, which said "The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech." and you said "Exactly!"
Thats why I quoted those three pieces of text in my comment. They were cut and paste directly from your comment. Regardless of how closely they may be linked, they are two separate issues.
Australia is a democracy, we will be blocking your access to child porn (and note I'm not saying you want to access it) inter alia, on the Internet, or anywhere else.
Except, of course, you can't. If you think there's any way for you or the Government or anyone else to effectively manage a list to block every single site on the Internet which contains material which is illegal in Australia, you're deluded. Especially if it's in the hands of the Government, who (and this is an insider's point of view), couldn't quickly organise their way out of a paper bag
In Australia censorship is a given.
Well thats your opinion and you're entitled to it. Me, I like to think that it's a given only because thats the way it's always been, which is not a good enough reason to maintain the status quo, and I'll be voicing my opinion at the protest in Brisbane on Saturday.
Of the greatest concern is that the list of what is blocked is secret.
The biggest concern, of course, is the potential censoring of political speech.
Exactly!
You should decide which one is the biggest concern, because they are seperate things. If the greatest concern is that the blacklist is secret, then you're saying that if the Labour party just came out and said "we censored euthanasia page waystodie.com, because we felt like it", you would be okay with that?
My greatest concern is that no other person should not be controlling what I can and cannot see on the internet, or anywhere else for that matter.
Actually the primary reason ill be at the protest is not the fact that the blacklist is secret, but the fact that there is a blacklist at all.
If they were to come out and say "we're going to blacklist sites, but at least we'll tell you who and why", I still would not find that acceptable.
Uh. No it doesn't.
It says that I want the game, but I'm not willing to put up with the drm you put on it.
If you remove the drm, I will buy the game.
How does it say that if you don't tell them that specifically? You interpret your actions one way, but unless you tell them so, they're going to interpret it a different way.
BECAUSE A BUNCH OF CHILDISH ASSHOLES DECIDE THEY'RE ENTITLED TO MORE SHIT THAN THEY CAN AFFORD.
You're totally viewing the relation of piracy to lost sales incorrectly.
Actually, s/he isn't. Didnt mention lost sales, mentioned that if people can't/don't want to pay for something, then they shouldn't be entitled to own the product.
I have a pirated copy of Photoshop on my system. The fact that I pirated Photoshop doesn't mean Adobe lost a sale, because I'd never pay the $699 and buy a copy of Photoshop for the the few little photo edits or whatever that I use it for. Adobe doesn't directly use a sale because I'm running pirated Photoshop, because I'll probably never purchase a copy of Photoshop in my lifetime. If I gave a copy to my buddy it's not like he was ready to buy a copy either and I stole Adobe's sale. If I ever couldn't run pirated Photoshop anymore (or if it became much hassle to crack) then I would just use something else. It's a great product but I don't really need it.
Then you dont deserve to own it. There's plenty of free photo editing tools out there (I assume), and if they're not as easy to use as Photoshop, or they dont have the same level of tools and the like, its because people put a lot of work in to making Photoshop a good product, whereas less work goes into free products, because there's no reward for the owners.
I'm not saying Adobe's losing a sale by you copying their software - I'm saying you have no right to have the software at all - go use the free tools if you don't want to buy it.
Running pirated copies of software is not as carefree and fun as just making a copy. Most of the time you have to take precautions to keep the software cracked and from re-activating. Often you can't use features, update the software or do all kinds of things with a pirated copy.
Yeah, you're breaking my heart...