It pisses me off how many Sony fanboys cheered when OtherOS was revoked, and said that the hackers using it were such a small portion of the market that they deserved to get fucked over anyway.
Whatever happened to truth in advertising? When did it become ok to assrape one part of the market to protect another?
The bottom line is that the people who bought the PS3 for OtherOS were retroactively mislead and someone thought so enough that Sony wound up getting sued in 5 different class action lawsuits over it.
People actually blame hackers for piracy, when it's actually pirates being opportunistic thieves taking advantage of the hacker. Pirates "steal" effort from hackers by subverting hacker work for their own ends just like they "steal" from content creators.
The argument that promises were broken fall on deaf ears because most people think that Sony was cool to flip the bird at OtherOS users, simply because hackers are scum that deserve to be cheated anyway.
His booking papers only cite pirate bay activities.
If it was because of hacking, then his paperwork damn well should say so. The fact that it doesn't means that this is nothing but an attempt to use allegations of hacking as an excuse.
Until someone puts their ass on the line and signs a piece of paper under oath as to why he's locked up, I'm not going to believe a word they say.
Thank you for twisting my words. I did not say that big pharma abused scammers. I said that the process big pharma uses against scammers will be abused to go after innocent competitors.
In practice, they will cut off your internet access for even THREATENING to sue them (standard all your base tos clauses), and their pockets are so deep that you'd have an uphill battle and probably go bankrupt first.
The US legal system is rigged to give lawyers preferential access to piggy backing on mankind's natural tendency to be greedy. By forcing you to pay for your own lawyers, they make it lucrative for people to steal from you as long as it's less than the cost of going to court over it.
If it costs you a thousand to cure a hundred dollar injury, you'll be better off at least in the short run looking the other way and letting them get away with it.
In the long run though, making an example out of them serves as a deterrent against future offenders.
And the crux of the problem is that only the elite can afford the second option. The weak and the poor can't afford to be anything but cannon fodder.
There is no way to go after scammers in a way that won't be abused by big pharma to also go after unwanted competition.
Both have the same effect of keeping money out of their pockets and it really doesn't matter to them if our money goes into a scammer's pocket, a competitor's pocket, or stays in our pocket. All they care about is that they're NOT the ones getting it in THEIR pocket.
Which is nice because as a private business your ISP already reserves the right to refuse service for any or no reason.
Even if you're completely innocent, the ISP's legal department will put pressure on customer service to let your strikes stick anyway simply to save themselves paperwork dealing with copyright interests.
Key point: Your ISP is a private business and is not obligated to be fair.
They won't bother standing up for your rights. It's much more convenient for them to take the path of least resistance and cave, invoking private fiat to seal your fate after you're taken down even if you're proven innocent after the fact.
ISPs don't care about copyright unless its theirs. But they do care about a customer attracting a swarm of angry bees to sting their legal department and anyone who makes a nuisance of themselves will be a target for pulling the plug even if innocent.
"We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" is the new catchphrase for "don't piss us off or we'll banish you" where pissing off has nothing to do with right or wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Format your code so that the coders can read it.
If your'e on your own, format how you like.
If you're on someone else's project, format how they like.
The compiler truly does not give a rat's behind about it, so approach it as a people issue.
And that means being prepared to capitulate if someone else in charge wants things done their way.
First move and get all your data out of their hands.
THEN shame them by naming them publicly.
You already gave them a chance to fix it and they got lazy.
I can only base my decisions on what I know and what I can control.
Personally, I think making myself aware of the issues is worth whatever chump change my eyeballs give slashdot to boot the way of their sponsors.
Thinking is not free.
I believe it's already called perjury though.
It fits, because the German dictator wrote the law his way, not unlike how Apple's lobbyists did.
As I said before and I'll say again.
Don't give me this "Apple is only following the rules" when their lobbyists help WRITE them.
Maybe we should condemn microsoft because they actually are guilty as hell and DESERVE to suffer, and not just because we hate their guts?
We punish their reputation by boycotting them.
Understandable maybe but that doesn't automatically make it right.
I opine that screwing people over is wrong no matter what you stand to gain from it.
Established players tend to fight dirty when new contenders get on their turf.
Unless you have significant resolve, trying to enter the market will only get you stomped on by old timers that don't want you around.
It pisses me off how many Sony fanboys cheered when OtherOS was revoked, and said that the hackers using it were such a small portion of the market that they deserved to get fucked over anyway.
Whatever happened to truth in advertising? When did it become ok to assrape one part of the market to protect another?
The bottom line is that the people who bought the PS3 for OtherOS were retroactively mislead and someone thought so enough that Sony wound up getting sued in 5 different class action lawsuits over it.
People actually blame hackers for piracy, when it's actually pirates being opportunistic thieves taking advantage of the hacker. Pirates "steal" effort from hackers by subverting hacker work for their own ends just like they "steal" from content creators.
The argument that promises were broken fall on deaf ears because most people think that Sony was cool to flip the bird at OtherOS users, simply because hackers are scum that deserve to be cheated anyway.
Just FYI, we don't have to abide by your conditions.
The mod points belong to us and we can mod you up or down as we see fit regardless of whether whoever sucks any dog's asshole or not.
Which way you get modded proves nothing.
dod
I'm afraid your typo is indefensible.
His booking papers only cite pirate bay activities.
If it was because of hacking, then his paperwork damn well should say so. The fact that it doesn't means that this is nothing but an attempt to use allegations of hacking as an excuse.
Until someone puts their ass on the line and signs a piece of paper under oath as to why he's locked up, I'm not going to believe a word they say.
Their judicial system is held hostage by the mafia. No judge can safely condemn a mafioso without putting a target on his head.
They are not going to give up their ill gotten clout without a fight.
The best analogy I can think of is medical malpractice.
If you are a professional, and lives are riding on your advice, you shouldn't expect to screw up and get away with it.
This is exactly why we need competition.
Shithead companies that have nothing to fear will abuse everything they can to make a buck.
In fact, the strongest reason to support competition is probably how much they hate it.
Anything that pisses off the bad guys is probably a good thing.
Binding arbitrartion means you can't sue for it in the first place.
Thank you for twisting my words. I did not say that big pharma abused scammers. I said that the process big pharma uses against scammers will be abused to go after innocent competitors.
In theory, yes.
In practice, they will cut off your internet access for even THREATENING to sue them (standard all your base tos clauses), and their pockets are so deep that you'd have an uphill battle and probably go bankrupt first.
The US legal system is rigged to give lawyers preferential access to piggy backing on mankind's natural tendency to be greedy. By forcing you to pay for your own lawyers, they make it lucrative for people to steal from you as long as it's less than the cost of going to court over it.
If it costs you a thousand to cure a hundred dollar injury, you'll be better off at least in the short run looking the other way and letting them get away with it.
In the long run though, making an example out of them serves as a deterrent against future offenders.
And the crux of the problem is that only the elite can afford the second option. The weak and the poor can't afford to be anything but cannon fodder.
Before anyone else makes a snarky reply.
My suggestion is to get business out of government so that our voices as the voting public can be heard.
You misunderstood me so bad on what my point was that I'm not even going to dignify your response with a comment beyond this one.
Credit card companies are IN on this.
Remember that credit cards earn money by charging transaction fees against merchants?
All money funneled to a scammer through a credit card, credit card issuers are getting a cut of it.
There's no effective difference between the government and business due to political corruption.
Nothing is going to go for the greater good so long as the government is a corporate lapdog.
There is no way to go after scammers in a way that won't be abused by big pharma to also go after unwanted competition.
Both have the same effect of keeping money out of their pockets and it really doesn't matter to them if our money goes into a scammer's pocket, a competitor's pocket, or stays in our pocket. All they care about is that they're NOT the ones getting it in THEIR pocket.
Which is nice because as a private business your ISP already reserves the right to refuse service for any or no reason.
Even if you're completely innocent, the ISP's legal department will put pressure on customer service to let your strikes stick anyway simply to save themselves paperwork dealing with copyright interests.
Key point: Your ISP is a private business and is not obligated to be fair.
They won't bother standing up for your rights. It's much more convenient for them to take the path of least resistance and cave, invoking private fiat to seal your fate after you're taken down even if you're proven innocent after the fact.
ISPs don't care about copyright unless its theirs. But they do care about a customer attracting a swarm of angry bees to sting their legal department and anyone who makes a nuisance of themselves will be a target for pulling the plug even if innocent.
"We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" is the new catchphrase for "don't piss us off or we'll banish you" where pissing off has nothing to do with right or wrong.