always respect[s] trademarks and other people's intellectual property, and look[s] forward to the next steps in the judicial process.
So a moral vacuum soon filled by buckets of evil. Nature hates a vacuum and none is more easily filled than a vacuum in a courtroom. With buckets of evil. Got that?
Well I thought it worth mentioning - so I guess on this point we disagree;)
1. It's not an anti-Sony campaign, anti-capitalism, anti-establishment or whatever other straw men you want to invent. The only thing in common with people's aim was stopping X Factor getting to number 1
Point taken - however the choice of song seemed to suggest it was something more than simply a musical campaign - why not good old Slade!?
Maybe I was blinded by the choice of song - this is no Xmas Ditty but a polemical rant against the 'Machine', which I guess means Corporations/Governments/Hegemony. Perhaps Dreaming of a White Xmas would have been just as successful!?
How about do what the rest of us do (including those who bought RATM because they wanted X Factor off the top spot), and do what you want, whether or not someone else does it?
I guess my point was nobody would have bought the RATM single without the campaign, and therefore they are just as influenced by media/trends/hype/fashion (whatever you want to call it) as those that buy the X-Factor single. So although it's true interest rose in the Christmas No 1 it will almost certainly be back to the same dirge next year - unless of course someone mounts a similar campaign with a similarly 'appropriate' single;)
I agree there is a difference - but at the end of the day people have made a choice - they have either bought what they were told to buy by Simon Cowell or they have bought what they have been told to buy by some 'part-time rock DJ making a Facebook page', for you the difference is huge for me all I see is people failing to think for themselves.
I think we're all missing the point here - this isn't for the benefit of us mortals but an act to be judged in a 'higher' court - you can count on religious institutions to take 'keeping up appearances' to farcical extremes!
(They stuck a Shelter link on the Facebook page - not quite the same thing!)
Which is good all the same - but on the wider point of sticking two fingers up to the establishment - it is worth mentioning that Rage Against the Machine are signed to the SAME record label as the X-Factor dude and this 'contest' simply pushed the sales of both singles through the roof thereby lining the pockets of Simon Cowell and Sony BMG! And there is the further question as to whether or not it is more 'anti-establishment' being told what to buy by some a TV offering or some grassroots facebook campaign - I'm sure Che would be happy that the revolution is in safe hands;)
Well I was just being flippant - but is flippancy worse than day dreaming!? Sure my solution is like polishing a turd but it at least it aspires to the realms of possibility. Yours, on the other hand, could have been penned by Asimov himself;)
The proper way to resolve this is to make the penalty for falsely sending DMCA takedown notices equal to that of actually committing an infringement. In some cases this can amount to millions of dollars;)
yeah like if i needed to see a naked woman on the internet i'd spend my afternoon fucking around with the clunky zoom on some flash driven monstrosity of dresden town centre!
Back to the point! If by 'climate change people', you mean scientists working in the field of climate change with a specific emphasis on human contribution, then the ones I listen to don't advocate any change in human behaviour. In fact they do exactly what you have posited for the cancer research people, present their data, explain their conclusions and leave the rest to the politicians. If others choose to listen to those that infuse their case with hyperbole (on either side of the discussion) then more fool them.
Perhaps I am alone in not requiring the raw data - there is a point beyond which doubt makes no sense - if we are going to doubt the whole peer-reviewed edifice on which scientists rely to sort the wheat from the chaff - then the discussion shouldn't be about which field we can trust (cancer versus human influenced climate change) but on the how the scientific community present and validate their findings in general.
You got the gist! Patenting a process whereby the poor/least advantaged are specifically targeted for price hikes because they lack the ability to 'influence others' is morally ambiguous at best. But not only that it completely disregards the enfranchising nature of the internet and the way it enables Aunt Mable to touch the lives of thousands/millions via YouTube/Twitter/Facebook/Blog's etc. So someone at Microsoft if not only being a heartless prick - he's being a stupid, luddite, heartless prick!
well i have no idea how annoying outlook is having never used it - but it has to be damn annoying to be worse than evolution. claws is the way forward although the windows port is still a bit limited - no spell checker for example . . .
I guess the point is if a billionaire comes asking then you need to 'monetise your content' too - even if its just implementing a robots.txt 'solution'
Slashdot Mirror
perHpas thIs is oFftopic - but can you get Some Sort of Handle on your Caps addiction?
just let people download the 3 lyrics in the song
3 lyrics? Now that's just greedy - no wonder it's so popular!
always respect[s] trademarks and other people's intellectual property, and look[s] forward to the next steps in the judicial process.
So a moral vacuum soon filled by buckets of evil. Nature hates a vacuum and none is more easily filled than a vacuum in a courtroom. With buckets of evil. Got that?
No it is not worth mentioning:
Well I thought it worth mentioning - so I guess on this point we disagree ;)
1. It's not an anti-Sony campaign, anti-capitalism, anti-establishment or whatever other straw men you want to invent. The only thing in common with people's aim was stopping X Factor getting to number 1
Point taken - however the choice of song seemed to suggest it was something more than simply a musical campaign - why not good old Slade!? Maybe I was blinded by the choice of song - this is no Xmas Ditty but a polemical rant against the 'Machine', which I guess means Corporations/Governments/Hegemony. Perhaps Dreaming of a White Xmas would have been just as successful!?
How about do what the rest of us do (including those who bought RATM because they wanted X Factor off the top spot), and do what you want, whether or not someone else does it?
I guess my point was nobody would have bought the RATM single without the campaign, and therefore they are just as influenced by media/trends/hype/fashion (whatever you want to call it) as those that buy the X-Factor single. So although it's true interest rose in the Christmas No 1 it will almost certainly be back to the same dirge next year - unless of course someone mounts a similar campaign with a similarly 'appropriate' single ;)
Stop using logic - you'll only be accused of trolling . . .
You mean this wasn't supposed to be the start of the uprising - bleh, I'll rehang my pitch fork ;)
I agree there is a difference - but at the end of the day people have made a choice - they have either bought what they were told to buy by Simon Cowell or they have bought what they have been told to buy by some 'part-time rock DJ making a Facebook page', for you the difference is huge for me all I see is people failing to think for themselves.
. . . in going beyond what anyone could consider a normal music purchase
I like your style man - calm, measured, understatement whilst inside you're thinking - WTF 6 Copies!!!
I think we're all missing the point here - this isn't for the benefit of us mortals but an act to be judged in a 'higher' court - you can count on religious institutions to take 'keeping up appearances' to farcical extremes!
I stand corrected and good for them!
are giving the proceeds to Shelter
(They stuck a Shelter link on the Facebook page - not quite the same thing!)
;)
Which is good all the same - but on the wider point of sticking two fingers up to the establishment - it is worth mentioning that Rage Against the Machine are signed to the SAME record label as the X-Factor dude and this 'contest' simply pushed the sales of both singles through the roof thereby lining the pockets of Simon Cowell and Sony BMG! And there is the further question as to whether or not it is more 'anti-establishment' being told what to buy by some a TV offering or some grassroots facebook campaign - I'm sure Che would be happy that the revolution is in safe hands
fingers? showpony!
Well I was just being flippant - but is flippancy worse than day dreaming!? Sure my solution is like polishing a turd but it at least it aspires to the realms of possibility. Yours, on the other hand, could have been penned by Asimov himself ;)
The proper way to resolve this is to make the penalty for falsely sending DMCA takedown notices equal to that of actually committing an infringement. In some cases this can amount to millions of dollars ;)
yeah like if i needed to see a naked woman on the internet i'd spend my afternoon fucking around with the clunky zoom on some flash driven monstrosity of dresden town centre!
Orson? Is that you?
Well a note is limited to the denomination, a debit card is only limited by my balance!
Blimey - it must be cold down in that there bunker ;)
But the climate change people
:)
Back to the point! If by 'climate change people', you mean scientists working in the field of climate change with a specific emphasis on human contribution, then the ones I listen to don't advocate any change in human behaviour. In fact they do exactly what you have posited for the cancer research people, present their data, explain their conclusions and leave the rest to the politicians. If others choose to listen to those that infuse their case with hyperbole (on either side of the discussion) then more fool them.
Perhaps I am alone in not requiring the raw data - there is a point beyond which doubt makes no sense - if we are going to doubt the whole peer-reviewed edifice on which scientists rely to sort the wheat from the chaff - then the discussion shouldn't be about which field we can trust (cancer versus human influenced climate change) but on the how the scientific community present and validate their findings in general.
You got the gist! Patenting a process whereby the poor/least advantaged are specifically targeted for price hikes because they lack the ability to 'influence others' is morally ambiguous at best. But not only that it completely disregards the enfranchising nature of the internet and the way it enables Aunt Mable to touch the lives of thousands/millions via YouTube/Twitter/Facebook/Blog's etc. So someone at Microsoft if not only being a heartless prick - he's being a stupid, luddite, heartless prick!
Skipped the academic bullshit and go straight to profit, because that's what motivated them.
That's a great quote - as we know someone whose primary motivation is profit is bound to be objective!
I guess you would have a better chance if you RTFA. Manuals can be fun too, mind, but they are shoddy for providing stats!
well i have no idea how annoying outlook is having never used it - but it has to be damn annoying to be worse than evolution. claws is the way forward although the windows port is still a bit limited - no spell checker for example . . .
I guess the point is if a billionaire comes asking then you need to 'monetise your content' too - even if its just implementing a robots.txt 'solution'