Nobody will listen to studies like this, because the producers with a deathgrip on the market don't care about profits. They care about control of the market.
Which is why they get all whiny and bitchy at TWO things:
1. piracy 2. artists bypassing them and going directly to customers
As far as they are concerned, it doesn't matter if money is dodging their own pockets by fair means or foul.
They don't just want to succeed. They also want everyone else to fail.
That said, the bar still has the legal right to ban whoever the fuck they want to for no reason whatsoever. It's their bar and they'll run it as they darn please.
Changing mac and ip addresses for the purpose of evading a ban is much closer to the sort of trespass the CFAA was designed to prevent than mere tos violations.
It's like a bar.
You can get 86'ed any time by the bartender but that's the worst they can do.
I'd go further and confiscate their modem or router if I caught them using it past bedtime.
I'm not going to let my kids grow up to be stubborn insubordinate hooligans.
Honestly, losing internet now is a lot better than losing freedom or a job later.
Teaching children to respect authority for its own sake keeps them out of trouble later. Because like it or not the real world revolves around people doing what the fuck they're told by social superiors.
I know it's not fair. I don't care, neither is the real world.
The key lesson isn't in satiating a biological need for sleep.
It's in discipline, in doing what the fuck you're told by your parents even if you don't like it.
Respect for and obedience to authority, in spite of its detractors, is in fact a valuable life lesson.
Most things in life are under other people's control and learning to do as they say and not piss them off will get you a lot farther than being a rambo who insists on doing things his own way.
You obey traffic rules or you don't get to drive. You obey your boss or you don't get a paycheck. You obey your landlord or you don't get a home. You obey your mother or you don't get privileges.
Any time you are under someone else's rule, you are obliged to obey them. It doesn't even have to be fair. The bottom line is respect for the property of others that you are making use of, as well as the agents representing them, and in that regard their word is law.
Besides, I bet at least half of the "I wanna do things my way" people would quite hypocritically demand the very same obedience they scorn from the authorities they spurn if their roles were reversed.
...All the stuff that made it to the public domain that was retroactively clawed back after Congress extended copyright and didn't grandfather stuff that had already lapsed.
So, however, is capital investment. If you can make more money later by getting into debt now, you can come out ahead later even if you get behind now. The trick is to run the numbers and only use debt when it will beat the interest charges in return on investment.
If the economy is in the toilet it's quite profitable for a government to cut taxes and raise spending to prime the pumps.
Once the fields of the market get watered and the economy starts growing, the feds can harvest a bumper crop in tax revenues later without causing a famine from harvesting it too early.
Government spending to improve the economy is a capital investment just like someone spending money now on better equipment to make more money later. Governments earn their taxes taking care of their citizens just like companies earn their revenues providing products.
Staring only at the balance sheet for one year at a time is short term thinking.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody will listen to studies like this, because the producers with a deathgrip on the market don't care about profits. They care about control of the market.
Which is why they get all whiny and bitchy at TWO things:
1. piracy
2. artists bypassing them and going directly to customers
As far as they are concerned, it doesn't matter if money is dodging their own pockets by fair means or foul.
They don't just want to succeed. They also want everyone else to fail.
If it was china I wouldn't be surprised if those rootkits were backed by chinese officials.
DDoS isn't just looking at the storefront
It's more like hiring a mob of people to hog the entrance so nobody can do business there.
Both.
Clothing bans are a stupid policy.
That said, the bar still has the legal right to ban whoever the fuck they want to for no reason whatsoever. It's their bar and they'll run it as they darn please.
Changing mac and ip addresses for the purpose of evading a ban is much closer to the sort of trespass the CFAA was designed to prevent than mere tos violations.
It's like a bar.
You can get 86'ed any time by the bartender but that's the worst they can do.
Go back and it's trespassing
It's like going to a restaurant.
By default everyone is welcome.
Now the management can kick you out for any reason they want, for violating rules (and techinically even if you don't)
And unless/until that happens you're welcome.
If you go back, however, it's trespassing.
No, actually.
Having the right to say nothing is very important for our freedom, and not just for self incrimination avoidance.
I for one am glad that I don't have to say "heil obama" or regurgitate some pompous prince's idea of an oath.
The first amendment includes the right to remain silent.
Because they're idiots with money to burn on lawyers.
The antivirus is on orion's belt.
Doesn't anyone recycle this crap?
Actually mandatory birth control for welfare recipients might not be such a bad idea.
I go you one better and hoep that the hospital gets sued and wins, then sues back for malicious prosecution and collects punitive damages.
You're liable to get the spelling nazis on you most ironically with that post.
serves the fools right for investing in it in the first place.
Anyone spending real money for virtual goods deserves to be shafted.
I'd go further and confiscate their modem or router if I caught them using it past bedtime.
I'm not going to let my kids grow up to be stubborn insubordinate hooligans.
Honestly, losing internet now is a lot better than losing freedom or a job later.
Teaching children to respect authority for its own sake keeps them out of trouble later. Because like it or not the real world revolves around people doing what the fuck they're told by social superiors.
I know it's not fair. I don't care, neither is the real world.
Simple. They do it before bedtime or not at all.
"productive blah blah blah" is no excuse to show contempt for parental authority.
The parents are in charge and what they say goes, end of discussion.
The key lesson isn't in satiating a biological need for sleep.
It's in discipline, in doing what the fuck you're told by your parents even if you don't like it.
Respect for and obedience to authority, in spite of its detractors, is in fact a valuable life lesson.
Most things in life are under other people's control and learning to do as they say and not piss them off will get you a lot farther than being a rambo who insists on doing things his own way.
You obey traffic rules or you don't get to drive. You obey your boss or you don't get a paycheck. You obey your landlord or you don't get a home. You obey your mother or you don't get privileges.
Any time you are under someone else's rule, you are obliged to obey them. It doesn't even have to be fair. The bottom line is respect for the property of others that you are making use of, as well as the agents representing them, and in that regard their word is law.
Besides, I bet at least half of the "I wanna do things my way" people would quite hypocritically demand the very same obedience they scorn from the authorities they spurn if their roles were reversed.
Control freak parents or not the kids were under their roof so their word was law.
It's been that way ever since the days of cave men.
If the kids don't like those rules they should get jobs and earn some of their own freedom.
Indeed. The lesson learned here is "don't piss off people with guns" rather than anything noble about the constitution.
The cold hard facts that force of arms and intimidation decides things instead of merit.
It needs to start without any clawbacks.
If Congress can always speak with a forked tongue and make promises one session only to break them another session no reform is going to mean squat.
Even if we abolished copyright completely, this clawback proves they can always change their minds and restore the status quo.
Your post is what government does. Mine is about what it's supposed to do.
...All the stuff that made it to the public domain that was retroactively clawed back after Congress extended copyright and didn't grandfather stuff that had already lapsed.
Balanced budgets are good things.
So, however, is capital investment. If you can make more money later by getting into debt now, you can come out ahead later even if you get behind now. The trick is to run the numbers and only use debt when it will beat the interest charges in return on investment.
If the economy is in the toilet it's quite profitable for a government to cut taxes and raise spending to prime the pumps.
Once the fields of the market get watered and the economy starts growing, the feds can harvest a bumper crop in tax revenues later without causing a famine from harvesting it too early.
Government spending to improve the economy is a capital investment just like someone spending money now on better equipment to make more money later. Governments earn their taxes taking care of their citizens just like companies earn their revenues providing products.
Staring only at the balance sheet for one year at a time is short term thinking.
The main thing is that the corporate welfare beneficiaries also have a lot of influence in DC.
Which means that threatening their gravy train is going to derail a lot more than corporate welfare.
The rich threatening to throw a hissy fit if the budget is balanced are the only ones making it not a slam dunk.