Even if they're customer friendly in some sense they still aren't meeting their vision statement since they're supposed to be a place where you can by anything you want. If I want a book printed on demand by someone else besides their group then they aren't going to let that happen. Hence, a contradiction.
MIT switched it's curriculum from Scheme to Python, and while I'm old enough to be attached to scheme python is a solid language with easy syntax for a beginner. It's also true that the Intro Class is important. Many people bypassed Course 6 at MIT because the first class (6.001) was a bitch for a non programmer. I don't mind a high barrier to entry for course 6 but I can understand why MIT is toning things down and even offering a super intro class for the utterly clueless.
It's not shoplifting. People need to stop comparing downloading music to stealing. It's not. As has been said many times, the issue is actually copyright infringement.
The fact that microsoft and google do that is a sign of how much they see it as a problem. google owns ever two letter permutation of their name. And go to campusfoods.com for a cute animation pointing you in the right direction.
I thought that was the point of the guys in the "wings" they had their super tracking technology which would be able to fairly determine the amount each group should get paid. Of course, there's all sorts of room for corruption with the people who determine who gets paid what. However, it's not the end of the world since they don't determine how much money they get paid, and thus have a smaller incentive for evil.
Solution #1: Let all band/group/artists in.
Solution #2: So I think this is solved through regulation. The agreement should specify the split, thus there's no single compnay who can form a monopoly. If the values want to be changed, I'd say it'd have to be agreed on.
Solution #3: The problem doesn't make sense. People will be doing the same thing they always have been doing, downloading whatever music they want. It's not like they have to pay 5 dollars for each artist. Also, even if it was the case that new artists were somehow excluded, they could still give their music away, and people would still download it.
I think there are some problems with this plan but these aren't it. Although, I think this plan could probably be implemented and most people wouldn't complain too much.
Well, it seems you've a long way to go yet. Yeah, that must be true. Maybe once I learn all the continents, and maybe something about some of those arab countries we're interested in, I'll be able to advance to a stage where I never make mistakes about whether the EEC turned into the EU, or whether the UK, which generally is at odds with the France, Germany controlled EU was a member or not. Well, I can only hope that someday I'm smart like you, who is omniscient.
I was thinking I might eat my hat on that one, but I think the euro thing happened around the time I started becoming cognizant of world affairs, and I tend to conflate the EU and its currency. I'll have to be more careful in the future.
The UK isn't apart of the EU and not privy to it's demands. There are other European agreements the UK is apart of but those are outside of the EU proper.
No it'd be like finding a the recipe for a candy bar, putting a note up at the local grocery store with the recipe printed on it, and then going home and forgetting about it for 2 years. Then getting busted for infringement. How much should she be assessed for that? Anyone who'd ever been to that grocery store might have made a copy... $200,000 seems fair to you? For the extreme magnitude of her crime? It's clearly not fair, and you're probably right that my analogy isn't quite correct, but I don't think yours is incredibly close either. It seems to me just providing a recipe is akin to just providing the tabs and lyrics to a song. If we go a bit into fantasy land, I suppose we could say it was like this:
She finds a recipe and creates a candy bar dispensing machine which she leaves at the supermarket and forgets about for two years.
I'm trying to encapsulate the RIAA's biggest complaint, is that the copies being made available are perfect exact replicas.
People should stop comparing downloading music to stealing. It's not stealing. Stealing is a very different crime. It's copyright infringement.
To change the analogy, it'd be like finding the recipe for a candy bar, and then making exact copies of them, and giving them away for free.
When, you phrase it like that, it's hard to say, well, it was a 55 cent candy bar, so they should pay that much. That's why it's up to the Judges/Jury, they have to essentially guess how many people got free candy bars instead of buying them. There's no definitive method, and so people are screwed. (And this doesn't even take into account punitive damages.)
I see a lot of people on here taking shots at MIT for this "stupid" person it accepted. You guys must feel really special now, probably makes you feel a bit better about this great school you could never attend.
The problem with your analysis it wasn't at all a conscious action/decision for her to wear some leds to the airport. She woke up and was essentially like, "Today, I'm going to wear some leds." Sometimes you wake up and decide to wear red, same thing.
What seems to be the turning point, is that you arbitrarily think it's okay for people to wear red but not for people to wear leds. Because something's less common that makes it a bomb. I shouldn't have to ask my self "Is the next thing I'm about to put on, going to be seen as a bomb?"
Next time I'm going to bomb an airport remind me to put the detonator in an ipod.
The terrorists have won.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if they're customer friendly in some sense they still aren't meeting their vision statement since they're supposed to be a place where you can by anything you want. If I want a book printed on demand by someone else besides their group then they aren't going to let that happen. Hence, a contradiction.
MIT switched it's curriculum from Scheme to Python, and while I'm old enough to be attached to scheme python is a solid language with easy syntax for a beginner. It's also true that the Intro Class is important. Many people bypassed Course 6 at MIT because the first class (6.001) was a bitch for a non programmer. I don't mind a high barrier to entry for course 6 but I can understand why MIT is toning things down and even offering a super intro class for the utterly clueless.
It's not shoplifting. People need to stop comparing downloading music to stealing. It's not. As has been said many times, the issue is actually copyright infringement.
The fact that microsoft and google do that is a sign of how much they see it as a problem. google owns ever two letter permutation of their name. And go to campusfoods.com for a cute animation pointing you in the right direction.
I thought that was the point of the guys in the "wings" they had their super tracking technology which would be able to fairly determine the amount each group should get paid. Of course, there's all sorts of room for corruption with the people who determine who gets paid what. However, it's not the end of the world since they don't determine how much money they get paid, and thus have a smaller incentive for evil.
Solution #1: Let all band/group/artists in. Solution #2: So I think this is solved through regulation. The agreement should specify the split, thus there's no single compnay who can form a monopoly. If the values want to be changed, I'd say it'd have to be agreed on. Solution #3: The problem doesn't make sense. People will be doing the same thing they always have been doing, downloading whatever music they want. It's not like they have to pay 5 dollars for each artist. Also, even if it was the case that new artists were somehow excluded, they could still give their music away, and people would still download it. I think there are some problems with this plan but these aren't it. Although, I think this plan could probably be implemented and most people wouldn't complain too much.
not 100 times brighter, 100 lumens brighter.
fair enough. noted for future reference.
I was thinking I might eat my hat on that one, but I think the euro thing happened around the time I started becoming cognizant of world affairs, and I tend to conflate the EU and its currency. I'll have to be more careful in the future.
The UK isn't apart of the EU and not privy to it's demands. There are other European agreements the UK is apart of but those are outside of the EU proper.
People should stop comparing downloading music to stealing. It's not stealing. Stealing is a very different crime. It's copyright infringement. To change the analogy, it'd be like finding the recipe for a candy bar, and then making exact copies of them, and giving them away for free. When, you phrase it like that, it's hard to say, well, it was a 55 cent candy bar, so they should pay that much. That's why it's up to the Judges/Jury, they have to essentially guess how many people got free candy bars instead of buying them. There's no definitive method, and so people are screwed. (And this doesn't even take into account punitive damages.)
I see a lot of people on here taking shots at MIT for this "stupid" person it accepted. You guys must feel really special now, probably makes you feel a bit better about this great school you could never attend. The problem with your analysis it wasn't at all a conscious action/decision for her to wear some leds to the airport. She woke up and was essentially like, "Today, I'm going to wear some leds." Sometimes you wake up and decide to wear red, same thing. What seems to be the turning point, is that you arbitrarily think it's okay for people to wear red but not for people to wear leds. Because something's less common that makes it a bomb. I shouldn't have to ask my self "Is the next thing I'm about to put on, going to be seen as a bomb?" Next time I'm going to bomb an airport remind me to put the detonator in an ipod. The terrorists have won.