DRM is only a problem because vendors don't implement it with the goal of pleasing the consumer.
They do it with the goal of locking out competition, be it from pirates or unsigned indie game devs, so consumer angst is just acceptable collateral damage.
For me, DRM is fine in theory if the only people you piss off are pirates. The minute you cause trouble for innocent consumers you're crossing the line.
In practice, however, DRM stops more than just stealing and is used in an anti-competitive manner, and companies that use DRM have so far univerally proven they are willing to abuse it
People just love to consume, and they're not going to stop it.
If the real problem is too much energy being used, then we may as well admit that humanity is the selfish race we already know it to be in our own hearts.
Eating a big share of the pie just to make sure nobody else takes it away is only going to empty the pan faster.
The fallacy is expecting that humans will cut back on their own usage for the sake of society as a whole.
"Privatize profits, socialize losses" is the motto of the corporate capitalist.
"Privatize losses, socialize profits" is the motto of the naive hippy that gullibly remains unaware of the fact that there are greedy people who cheat the system.
It's hard enough resisting the self interested nature that "looks out for number one" to try and benefit society as a whole.
Holding back when others greedily steam ahead and take your share anyway is almost impossible.
Cutting back on your own portion when others steal your part of the pie anyway only makes them fatter and doesn't save the baker any work.
And then get either fired, sued, or even jailed for illegal wiretapping.
The fact that you recorded the conversation in the first place can get YOU in hot water more than the person you burn lying, and you may well be sent packing yourself before you can bust them.
In Washington state for example, recording a private conversation without consent is a gross misdemeanor.
I've often found that telling the truth and actually being believed are two entirely different things.
I've had quite a few times where some jackass doesn't believe me simply because his scumbag chums are the ones lying and they take their word over mine. Even when I offered rock solid proof.
Also cases where the jackass in question simply just wants to hate my guts and isn't going to be deterred by inconvenient facts.
You have to be able to prove it, and most bosses don't have time in an interview to give you a comprehensive aptitude test. So they trust the school to make that decision for them, and they take a look at your diploma or degree to decide if you've got the goods up in your head.
Since bosses are too busy to check for themselves most of the time, colleges in turn may have no practical incentive to make sure that the students they graduate actually have the skills the bosses want but don't have time to personally verify.
It could also be someone who was just plain chummy with the contact or who paid him off with a favor to make him look good.
Negative references work both ways as well. The boss might not be in a position to know if Eve's torpedo on Alice's being hired was because Eve genuinely thinks Alice sucked at her last job or because Eve is pissed that Bob slept with her instead of Eve.
Slashdot Mirror
Children are easy to exploit.
Could china's stranglehold on rare earths have prompted any of the present price increases?
You raise a good point actually.
Bacteria have to actually survive to pass on their genes.
I think the problem is that antibiotics, with their often one track chemical minds, don't do a thorough job.
But speaking of cattle, I bet spiking their feed with antibiotics doesn't help us humans much.
DRM is only a problem because vendors don't implement it with the goal of pleasing the consumer.
They do it with the goal of locking out competition, be it from pirates or unsigned indie game devs, so consumer angst is just acceptable collateral damage.
Which is why I used the "in theory" qualifier.
Gee, I wonder why they put up with crap games in the first place.
Oh right, no competition thanks to the vendors abusing DRM to lock out rivals as well as pirates.
I bet that if indie game devs got to join the market game quality would go UP and prices might come DOWN.
Yes indeed.
If you're going to measure lost sales, try measuring how much popcorn the pirates actually ate after stealing it from the concessions stand
The only way pirates could be blamed for lost sales above and beyond their own missed purchase is if they are sharing it.
The problem isn't with DRM itself as a concept, it's with the fact that vendors abuse it.
Slippery slope, while a deductive fallacy, has a lot of backing in reality because it makes a damned good inductive argument.
For me, DRM is fine in theory if the only people you piss off are pirates. The minute you cause trouble for innocent consumers you're crossing the line.
In practice, however, DRM stops more than just stealing and is used in an anti-competitive manner, and companies that use DRM have so far univerally proven they are willing to abuse it
Here's something that burns less per person:
Public mass transporation, such as buses and trains.
Also see: bicycles.
Apparently people care more about their own convenience than they do for the welfare of the planet as a whole.
So why did they quit making them?
Not enough profits for the petro industry?
People just love to consume, and they're not going to stop it.
If the real problem is too much energy being used, then we may as well admit that humanity is the selfish race we already know it to be in our own hearts.
Eating a big share of the pie just to make sure nobody else takes it away is only going to empty the pan faster.
The fallacy is expecting that humans will cut back on their own usage for the sake of society as a whole.
"Privatize profits, socialize losses" is the motto of the corporate capitalist.
"Privatize losses, socialize profits" is the motto of the naive hippy that gullibly remains unaware of the fact that there are greedy people who cheat the system.
It's hard enough resisting the self interested nature that "looks out for number one" to try and benefit society as a whole.
Holding back when others greedily steam ahead and take your share anyway is almost impossible.
Cutting back on your own portion when others steal your part of the pie anyway only makes them fatter and doesn't save the baker any work.
And then get either fired, sued, or even jailed for illegal wiretapping.
The fact that you recorded the conversation in the first place can get YOU in hot water more than the person you burn lying, and you may well be sent packing yourself before you can bust them.
In Washington state for example, recording a private conversation without consent is a gross misdemeanor.
See:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.030
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.080
Indeed
I've often found that telling the truth and actually being believed are two entirely different things.
I've had quite a few times where some jackass doesn't believe me simply because his scumbag chums are the ones lying and they take their word over mine. Even when I offered rock solid proof.
Also cases where the jackass in question simply just wants to hate my guts and isn't going to be deterred by inconvenient facts.
This correlation is perhaps not a coincidence?
The fact that you have to do the replacement indicates you are not in agreement after all.
Our competing special interests have us by the balls and neither one of them wants to give up an inch.
Oracle's naysaying about Itanium is nothing more than FUD intended to undermine confidence in a platform relied upon by one of their competitors.
I think that Oracle wanted to sabotage HP by shitting on Itanium.
Oracle's naysaying is nothing more than FUD designed to undermine market confidence.
Thing is if enough vendors believe it, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
There's always promissory estoppel.
Did Oracle let HP rely on any implications?
Could the private sector do it any better?
The government isn't going to be worse than their corporate puppet masters.
I'm actually being quite literal.
Data spill isn't exactly a new phenomenon, and with a government renowned for incompetence you can put two and two together pretty easily.
Just being smart isn't good enough.
You have to be able to prove it, and most bosses don't have time in an interview to give you a comprehensive aptitude test. So they trust the school to make that decision for them, and they take a look at your diploma or degree to decide if you've got the goods up in your head.
Since bosses are too busy to check for themselves most of the time, colleges in turn may have no practical incentive to make sure that the students they graduate actually have the skills the bosses want but don't have time to personally verify.
It could also be someone who was just plain chummy with the contact or who paid him off with a favor to make him look good.
Negative references work both ways as well. The boss might not be in a position to know if Eve's torpedo on Alice's being hired was because Eve genuinely thinks Alice sucked at her last job or because Eve is pissed that Bob slept with her instead of Eve.
Bosses have something that developers don't.
The power to hire and fire as they damn well please, and corporate contact with the clients.
And also the power to give you an ugly reference if you don't kiss their ass.
Sometimes an insane captain would rather sink his own ship rather than let one rat escape undrowned.