Yep, screw drinking water regulations, the FDA, nuclear power plant safety standards, hospital hygiene standards, civil engineering regulations etc. It's just holding back those good old free-market guys who want to sell people dirty water, poisonous food (eg. milk with melamine in it), dangerous power plants, dirty hospitals and structurally unsound buildings. After all, they didn't have to buy it! Never give a sucker an even break, right?
Government doesn't make anything. By and large, government just means worthless expense, and pointless obstruction.
I don't want to see you calling the cops next time you get robbed or assaulted. Or calling the fire department when I come round and burn down your house while you're at work.
Given the choice between trusting The People, or trusting that small subset of The People who live by taxing the rest of us and telling us what's good for us, I think I'm going to have to call it for The People.
I think you missed the part where The People get to choose the small subset. If you really don't like taxes and government then go live in Somalia.
Predictably, if you bought the game you might be better off with this torrent:
1 - Unrar offline server folder on desktop;
2 - Edit your "hosts" file in "C:windowssystem32driversetc" by opening it with notepad and adding the folowing lines, then save:
I think we have the same problem as pretty much every democracy: everyone gets a vote, but only a small portion of people actually care/know enough about an issue to make an informed choice.
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
-- Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
And that's why their position is wrong. Under their rules, any copyrighted material be entirely legal for filesharing. Once everything is legal and free on the internet, good luck selling anything.
Look at the plethora of bottled water manufacturers. How the hell do they make any money when it's legal and free to fill up a bottle from any tap?
PROTIP: it's called adding value, business innovation, and marketing.
Let's be honest here. The Pirate Party believes non-commercial filesharing for a song that came out 5 minutes ago should be 100% legal.
IMHO it should be. I still buy concert tickets, merchandise, DVDs, CDs etc. of artists I like. Why should the law be used to prop up an obsolete business model? Let's be honest here: filesharing is hurting record labels much more than it's hurting real artists. Just ask them.
And then those companies that use that copyrighted material immediately have their work on the internet for free.
It is anyway.
For example, if a movie wants to use someone's song in the soundtrack, they have to pay for it. Unfortunately, the movie itself is available for free on the internet (by the Pirate Party's rules). So, the movie-creators don't make any money. So, they can't afford to pay the musician for his music.
Except that Cinemas aren't struggling by any means. Neither are TV networks, hotels, etc. that would pay for the material. Plus I know I would still pay to have a hard copy of awesome movies like Evil Dead 3: Army of Darkness!
The Pirate Party's filesharing stance makes sure that even the "companies have to pay for copyrighted material" stance becomes a lame duck. The only case where creators could get paid is by selling their copyrighted work is in advertisements - e.g. a musician could make money when his money is used in a Car ad, because the Pirate Party hasn't undermined the car-sales market.
I missed the part where the Pirate Party stops artists from touring, selling merchandise, selling CDs, selling DVDs etc. etc.
So, yes, I stand by my original claim: the Pirate Party wants to gut copyright law - making it almost worthless.
Please, if you're an Australian citizen and are concerned at all about ACTA, the Australian internet filter, ridiculous software patents and Big Media's stranglehold on copyright laws then join the Pirate Party Australia!
They only need a few more members to be able to officially register as a political party and it's now FREE TO JOIN! Just print out the form, sign it, scan/photograph it, email it in and be part of the solution.
Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy.
So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?
No.
As long as you don't sell it, Music is free?
No. You have to pay to see live music, you have to pay to buy a CD, you have to pay to buy guaranteed quality music from iTunes. You just don't have to pay to share music you like with other people, ensuring it gets the widest possible audience.
Collective use (what ever the hell that is) is also ok.
Are you sure this is what you want?
Yes. This has (at least) the following positive benefits:
- Killing recording industry (not musician's) profits (I want to help)
- As a side effect of the point above, helping independent music get an equal footing with artists backed by the big four (this could lead to music on the radio which isn't homogeneous shite!!)
- Increasing creativity and artistic output by allowing people to share things they like with each other.
I certainly hope that this can help make sure artists are celebrated on their artistic merits, rather than how much money they can bring in through aggressive, ubiquitous marketing campaigns.
Exactly how much talent did britney spears have, anyway?
By the way, after the reactions to Spore and Bioshock (and a other heavily DRM-ed titles) we tried shipping the recent Prince of Persia without any DRM. Guess what? It was pirated heavily.. more so than any of the previous Prince of Persia games.
How did you get accurate numbers on pirated games?
These responses of move to "XYZ" or move out of the US that are modded "insightful" is simple flamebait and does not help the questioner or add anything new to the discussion.
We get it, lefties. You don't like the US's health care system. Get over it. This guy is not going to move out of the USA simply because of health insurance.
Pfft. So in your view the whole world is 'left', and the US is 'centre' or something?
To use the rather colourful imagery that internet piracy conjures up in a highly imperfect analogy, the file being shared in the swarm is the treasure, the BitTorrent client is the ship, the.torrent file is the treasure map, The Pirate Bay provides treasure maps free of charge and the tracker is the wise old man that needs to be consulted to understand the treasure map.
And? If an online article has a thousand comments supporting one view, what of it? Do you really have such little faith in the general public (a small minority of which even read all the comments on an online news article) that you believe they're going to become confused and change their vote because Anonymous Coward 1, 2, and 3 all say they should?
Why don't we just publish everyone's votes after the next election? After all, people should be prepared to put their name to their opinion shouldn't they?
Protect freedom? I don't think so. It's just another example of Australian politicians deciding that they are better than the average joe, and have to protect the public from freedom by denying it to them. The internet filter is the best example. Why the fuck didn't our founders write a constitution!?
CSIRO's patent which netted it 200 million is not a software patent. It's a hardware patent. Read the patent itself (from way back in 1993) if you don't believe me. The word "software" doesn't even appear in it.
This is exactly the way the patent system is supposed to work. It's supposed to encourage innovation and protect investment. What CSIRO is doing is improving the world. Can you imagine the world today if they hadn't done the research and developed the WIFI technology that everyone takes for granted?
It on the public record that they licensed the technology and expected to receive payments. As the court cases showed, the big tech companies just tried to weasel their way out of actually coughing up the cash after taking the technology and incorporating it into their products.
How can you be mad that this cash is going into cutting edge research projects rather than hookers and coke for some executive's next mediterranean cruise?
Nokia's "open" strategy will pay off big time in the long run. At the moment, their major threat is the iPhone, which inherits all of apple's strengths (RDF, UI design) as well as it's weaknesses (software/hardware lockdown).
The next-gen Nokia phone on the other hand (successor to the N900) will get all the hardware features of the iPhone, but with the openness of a linux software stack. Want to make an app that downloads podcasts? Fine! Want to use your phone as a modem? No problem! In fact, no corporation enforcing their moral or business rules on how you use your phone, or alienation of talented developers!
Maemo and Qt being open source will ensure that the software features of the Maemo platform quickly eclipse those of the artificially limited iPhone platform. Maemo's based on Debian - so Nokia automatically gets just about every open-source software package in existence available on their platform.
I think this is the most serious threat that the turtleneck sweater brigade have yet seen.
Yes, but KMS for HD2XXX to HD5XXX is scheduled to be merged in 2.6.32, plus by that stage there should be serviceable open source 3D support on all the ATI cards.
And you must have rocks in your head if you think that NewsBusters is a credible source. For christ's sake, their slogan is "Exposing Liberal Media Bias".
Media Research Centre has several far-right financial supporters, among them: The Scaife Foundations - Director Richard Mellon Scaife whose fortune was built on the family's ownership of Gulf Oil Corp., Alcoa and Alcan. John M. Olin Foundation - also funds Brookings, Project for the New American Century etc. Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation - another far right group which gives away about $30 million a year to neocon organisations.
PS. And there is a consensus. Here's yet another survey. Is 96.2% of climate science specialists good enough for you?
I'm assuming these are saturated or trans-fats, which are known to cause disease and are already suspected to contribute to neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's Disease, rather than polyunsaturated fats are supposedly good for you. Neither TFA nor the study abstract indicate what they actually fed the rats.
Go outside. pick of a good-sized rock. That's a lethal weapon. Pick up a branch. Lethal weapon. Etc, etc. Almost ANYTHING can be a lethal weapon if used by the right person. Sure, granny might not able to kill you with a rock, but a muscular 20-year old could easily do so.
Guns, on the other hand, even the playing field. Yes, a muscular 20-year old might shoot you, but granny can use the gun to protect herself, too.
And that is better how? I'd much prefer that, if I was the victim of a drive-by, the attackers only had easy access to rocks.
Also, if a rock are so lethal, maybe you should suggest to the army that you can help them out with cheap new weapons in Afghanistan.
Go outside. pick of a good-sized rock. That's a lethal weapon. Pick up a branch. Lethal weapon. Etc, etc. Almost ANYTHING can be a lethal weapon if used by the right person. Sure, granny might not able to kill you with a rock, but a muscular 20-year old could easily do so.
Guns, on the other hand, even the playing field. Yes, a muscular 20-year old might shoot you, but granny can use the gun to protect herself, too.
Slashdot Mirror
Just like Aldous Huxley said it would be.
Regulation doesn't produce things.
Yep, screw drinking water regulations, the FDA, nuclear power plant safety standards, hospital hygiene standards, civil engineering regulations etc. It's just holding back those good old free-market guys who want to sell people dirty water, poisonous food (eg. milk with melamine in it), dangerous power plants, dirty hospitals and structurally unsound buildings. After all, they didn't have to buy it! Never give a sucker an even break, right?
Government doesn't make anything. By and large, government just means worthless expense, and pointless obstruction.
I don't want to see you calling the cops next time you get robbed or assaulted. Or calling the fire department when I come round and burn down your house while you're at work.
Given the choice between trusting The People, or trusting that small subset of The People who live by taxing the rest of us and telling us what's good for us, I think I'm going to have to call it for The People.
I think you missed the part where The People get to choose the small subset. If you really don't like taxes and government then go live in Somalia.
Thankyou! :-)
I was starting to think I was the only one who saw this
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5496065/Assassin_s_Creed_2_Crack_(Final_and_complete)
I think we have the same problem as pretty much every democracy: everyone gets a vote, but only a small portion of people actually care/know enough about an issue to make an informed choice.
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
-- Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
More Linux users (1.65%) than iPhone users (1.37%) !?
That's gotta be some kind of milestone!
And that's why their position is wrong. Under their rules, any copyrighted material be entirely legal for filesharing. Once everything is legal and free on the internet, good luck selling anything.
Look at the plethora of bottled water manufacturers. How the hell do they make any money when it's legal and free to fill up a bottle from any tap?
PROTIP: it's called adding value, business innovation, and marketing.
Let's be honest here. The Pirate Party believes non-commercial filesharing for a song that came out 5 minutes ago should be 100% legal.
IMHO it should be. I still buy concert tickets, merchandise, DVDs, CDs etc. of artists I like. Why should the law be used to prop up an obsolete business model? Let's be honest here: filesharing is hurting record labels much more than it's hurting real artists. Just ask them.
And then those companies that use that copyrighted material immediately have their work on the internet for free.
It is anyway.
For example, if a movie wants to use someone's song in the soundtrack, they have to pay for it. Unfortunately, the movie itself is available for free on the internet (by the Pirate Party's rules). So, the movie-creators don't make any money. So, they can't afford to pay the musician for his music.
Except that Cinemas aren't struggling by any means. Neither are TV networks, hotels, etc. that would pay for the material. Plus I know I would still pay to have a hard copy of awesome movies like Evil Dead 3: Army of Darkness!
The Pirate Party's filesharing stance makes sure that even the "companies have to pay for copyrighted material" stance becomes a lame duck. The only case where creators could get paid is by selling their copyrighted work is in advertisements - e.g. a musician could make money when his money is used in a Car ad, because the Pirate Party hasn't undermined the car-sales market.
I missed the part where the Pirate Party stops artists from touring, selling merchandise, selling CDs, selling DVDs etc. etc.
So, yes, I stand by my original claim: the Pirate Party wants to gut copyright law - making it almost worthless.
None of your claims stand. Including this one.
Please, if you're an Australian citizen and are concerned at all about ACTA, the Australian internet filter, ridiculous software patents and Big Media's stranglehold on copyright laws then join the Pirate Party Australia!
They only need a few more members to be able to officially register as a political party and it's now FREE TO JOIN! Just print out the form, sign it, scan/photograph it, email it in and be part of the solution.
Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy.
So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?
No.
As long as you don't sell it, Music is free?
No. You have to pay to see live music, you have to pay to buy a CD, you have to pay to buy guaranteed quality music from iTunes. You just don't have to pay to share music you like with other people, ensuring it gets the widest possible audience.
Collective use (what ever the hell that is) is also ok.
Are you sure this is what you want?
Yes. This has (at least) the following positive benefits:
- Killing recording industry (not musician's) profits (I want to help)
- As a side effect of the point above, helping independent music get an equal footing with artists backed by the big four (this could lead to music on the radio which isn't homogeneous shite!!)
- Increasing creativity and artistic output by allowing people to share things they like with each other.
I certainly hope that this can help make sure artists are celebrated on their artistic merits, rather than how much money they can bring in through aggressive, ubiquitous marketing campaigns.
Exactly how much talent did britney spears have, anyway?
By the way, after the reactions to Spore and Bioshock (and a other heavily DRM-ed titles) we tried shipping the recent Prince of Persia without any DRM. Guess what? It was pirated heavily.. more so than any of the previous Prince of Persia games.
How did you get accurate numbers on pirated games?
These responses of move to "XYZ" or move out of the US that are modded "insightful" is simple flamebait and does not help the questioner or add anything new to the discussion.
We get it, lefties. You don't like the US's health care system. Get over it. This guy is not going to move out of the USA simply because of health insurance.
Pfft. So in your view the whole world is 'left', and the US is 'centre' or something?
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/24.html
And? If an online article has a thousand comments supporting one view, what of it? Do you really have such little faith in the general public (a small minority of which even read all the comments on an online news article) that you believe they're going to become confused and change their vote because Anonymous Coward 1, 2, and 3 all say they should?
Why don't we just publish everyone's votes after the next election? After all, people should be prepared to put their name to their opinion shouldn't they?
Protect freedom? I don't think so. It's just another example of Australian politicians deciding that they are better than the average joe, and have to protect the public from freedom by denying it to them. The internet filter is the best example. Why the fuck didn't our founders write a constitution!?
In Australia, the left lane is the slow lane.
Yeah, look at what comes out of socialised science!
US citizens are right to be afraid of Obama's socialist^w public health option.
You're an idiot.
CSIRO's patent which netted it 200 million is not a software patent. It's a hardware patent. Read the patent itself (from way back in 1993) if you don't believe me. The word "software" doesn't even appear in it.
This is exactly the way the patent system is supposed to work. It's supposed to encourage innovation and protect investment. What CSIRO is doing is improving the world. Can you imagine the world today if they hadn't done the research and developed the WIFI technology that everyone takes for granted?
It on the public record that they licensed the technology and expected to receive payments. As the court cases showed, the big tech companies just tried to weasel their way out of actually coughing up the cash after taking the technology and incorporating it into their products.
How can you be mad that this cash is going into cutting edge research projects rather than hookers and coke for some executive's next mediterranean cruise?
Nokia's "open" strategy will pay off big time in the long run. At the moment, their major threat is the iPhone, which inherits all of apple's strengths (RDF, UI design) as well as it's weaknesses (software/hardware lockdown).
The next-gen Nokia phone on the other hand (successor to the N900) will get all the hardware features of the iPhone, but with the openness of a linux software stack. Want to make an app that downloads podcasts? Fine! Want to use your phone as a modem? No problem! In fact, no corporation enforcing their moral or business rules on how you use your phone, or alienation of talented developers!
Maemo and Qt being open source will ensure that the software features of the Maemo platform quickly eclipse those of the artificially limited iPhone platform. Maemo's based on Debian - so Nokia automatically gets just about every open-source software package in existence available on their platform.
I think this is the most serious threat that the turtleneck sweater brigade have yet seen.
What will be most interesting is whether people will be willing to make the jump from XP to Win7. XP has held pretty steady since November last year at ~70% market share. Vista never even got to 20%.
Alright, yer 'fugees now. Show Syd the 'fugee face. Sad face.
Yes, but KMS for HD2XXX to HD5XXX is scheduled to be merged in 2.6.32, plus by that stage there should be serviceable open source 3D support on all the ATI cards.
And you must have rocks in your head if you think that NewsBusters is a credible source. For christ's sake, their slogan is "Exposing Liberal Media Bias".
NewsBusters (a fox news favourite) is owned by Media Research Centre, a far-right group whose president Brent Bozell who, among other things, in 2004 accused John Kerry of lying in his testimony to the US Senate foreign relations committee in 1971 because he had depicted US soldiers in a bad light.
Media Research Centre has several far-right financial supporters, among them:
The Scaife Foundations - Director Richard Mellon Scaife whose fortune was built on the family's ownership of Gulf Oil Corp., Alcoa and Alcan.
John M. Olin Foundation - also funds Brookings, Project for the New American Century etc.
Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation - another far right group which gives away about $30 million a year to neocon organisations.
PS. And there is a consensus. Here's yet another survey. Is 96.2% of climate science specialists good enough for you?
I'm assuming these are saturated or trans-fats, which are known to cause disease and are already suspected to contribute to neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's Disease, rather than polyunsaturated fats are supposedly good for you. Neither TFA nor the study abstract indicate what they actually fed the rats.
Unfortunately, one often leads to the other.
Go outside. pick of a good-sized rock. That's a lethal weapon. Pick up a branch. Lethal weapon. Etc, etc. Almost ANYTHING can be a lethal weapon if used by the right person. Sure, granny might not able to kill you with a rock, but a muscular 20-year old could easily do so.
Guns, on the other hand, even the playing field. Yes, a muscular 20-year old might shoot you, but granny can use the gun to protect herself, too.
And that is better how? I'd much prefer that, if I was the victim of a drive-by, the attackers only had easy access to rocks.
Also, if a rock are so lethal, maybe you should suggest to the army that you can help them out with cheap new weapons in Afghanistan.
Face it, a gun is purely designed to maim or kill. It is not a tool and is not designed for any other purpose. The US currently has a worse homicide rate than Albania, Ethiopia, the Ivory Coast and Palestine - and far worse than any other industrialised nation. Please get some reality.
Go outside. pick of a good-sized rock. That's a lethal weapon. Pick up a branch. Lethal weapon. Etc, etc. Almost ANYTHING can be a lethal weapon if used by the right person. Sure, granny might not able to kill you with a rock, but a muscular 20-year old could easily do so.
Guns, on the other hand, even the playing field. Yes, a muscular 20-year old might shoot you, but granny can use the gun to protect herself, too.