You think computer hardware and software are less important than cable?
No, but cable is regulating a limited resource (the ability to tear up the streets to run cables to each house, or even if you include satellite, the spectrum), so needs to be controlled.
There are lots of choices for computer hardware & software, and you could live without it and be a farmer. (You could of course live without cable too, but even if you don't have cable, maybe you have cables strung over your house via eminent domain or something.)
...it will pick my virtuous pockets to pay for *anything*, and that makes it bad. But yes, I am complicit, since I voted for him, twice.. (or arguably voted against Romney, even though I agree with him on some issues.. yet he chickened out and withdrew his 47% comments).
Yes, people can dispute it. I am inferring that you think that intellectual property shouldn't be legally protected.
I think that at least in some cases, companies that are "abusing their monopolies" are just doing good business. I think other monopolies, such as government enabled monopolies (e.g. cable companies) should be even more strongly controlled than they are now.
For something as un-necessary as computer software & hardware, companies should have far less restrictions. The computer companies were stupid to sign contracts for which they paid Microsoft for each box, even if the MS software wasn't installed.
BTW, I'm not a huge fan of MS, but I'm also not a MS hater like the generic slashdot user is. I admire the huge company they've built, but it's sad that a lot of it is slow & buggy.
Yes, 1 TB is less than $100.. 2 TB is definitely there, 3 TB is almost there on a routine basis (and I think has been there a few times on special sales).
I've been catching up on the Freakanomics podcast lately, and there have been several examples of how people will game the system. The most recent one I remember (I'm listening oldest to newest of the ones available) is from the June 20, 2012 episode called "Riding the Herd Mentality". One issue was water usage rules during a drought. But for some stupid reason they still allowed kids to use Slip N Slides. So *allegedly* some people paid kids to use a Slip N Slide on their lawn, to water it.
mostly because they're using specious reasoning like the appeal to authority
Could you give a few examples? (Does this mean I'm appealing to your authority??)
I think Penn is very entertaining (I'm glad he has a podcast again), but I thought B.S. was mostly preaching to the choir with a few times when I very much disagreed with them. That doesn't mean it wasn't entertaining, I just stopped watching it at some point.
Piracy is always bad. Countless real world examples exist of companies and individuals heavily benefitting from so-called piracy. As Neil Gaiman so famously pointed out, think about your favorite book. Did you buy it? For the vast majority of people the answer to that is no. They borrowed the book from a friend, were given it as a gift, read it from the library,
Those other examples are simply consequences of the First Sale Doctrine. They have nothing to do with someone getting a copy of something *in a way that contravenes the law*. (Note, I specifically did NOT say in a way to which the copyright holder objects. Some copyright holders presumably dislike libraries or being able to loan physical books.)
Even if they don't get that connection (that broken == pirated), won't the actual buyers get bug fixes sooner than the pirated versions?
In other words, what if the pirated versions also didn't properly support in-app bug fix upgrades (what if it simulated the download, then the download fails at some random point, or the 'install' fails)?
(BTW, there was originally Candid Radio. Even the Candid Camera I remember watching was almost always reruns in the afternoons, with a prime time special every couple of years.)
Rafea has never left her tiny village of tents in Jordan. Now she is traveling to India to become a solar-energy engineer, in hopes she can return and help her village to become sustainable and self-sufficient.
Wow, if you think HIMYM is vulgar, donâ(TM)t watch âoeTwo and a Half Menâ nor âoeTwo Broke Girlsâ.
I think itâ(TM)s somewhat of a shame that shows have gotten crasser, but Iâ(TM)m also part of the problem because funny is funny. (Heck, there are a couple of âoedirty wordsâ that are now common on early prime time TV nowadays -- d*** and d*bag.)
We used to work 100 hours, laws made that 40 hours. Without laws to enforce even shorter working hours or an more equitable split of resources all productivity gains are being captured by the top few percent. This argues against your claims.
THIS. What sane capitalist would invest his fortune in the destruction of our capitalist system?
I know this is going to SOUND like I'm arguing the opposite of the way I actually feel, butâ¦
Doesn't the whole outsourcing of jobs/manufacturing fit your question?
That "Walmartization" of America seems to a lot of people be 'destroying' the capitalist system.
(I think not, since in the short run it still gives them more profits, which is why it is still capitalistic.. but it can have detrimental effects long term, especially if for example some country we're doing business with now has the majority of the knowledge and then stops making things for us cheaply.)
You can only do Fry is an idiot, so many times and it ceases to be funny.
I agree with this in theory, but disagree with it in actual practice. The Charlie Sheen years of "Two and a Half Men" basically had a couple of jokes - Charlie is sleazy/boozy, Alan is cheap, kid is stupid, mother is uncaring⦠and successfully repeated them over and over.
(..and now with Kutcher, several of the jokes are continuing plus a couple for his character.)
I mean successfully as in funny, not just ratings success. It's very very lowbrow humor (but "Two Broke Girls" is amazingly even more lowbrow, yet still funny), but funny.
BTW, "Big Bang Theory" is great too, and I watch many documentaries & science shows too.
"Let's destroy our planet by trapping and force-feeding coffee beens [sic] to a small mammal, take it's [sic] shit, grind it, put it in boiling water and drink it as a high end novelty drink."
Slashdot Mirror
No, but cable is regulating a limited resource (the ability to tear up the streets to run cables to each house, or even if you include satellite, the spectrum), so needs to be controlled.
There are lots of choices for computer hardware & software, and you could live without it and be a farmer. (You could of course live without cable too, but even if you don't have cable, maybe you have cables strung over your house via eminent domain or something.)
Does this really happen often?
...it will pick my virtuous pockets to pay for *anything*, and that makes it bad. But yes, I am complicit, since I voted for him, twice.. (or arguably voted against Romney, even though I agree with him on some issues.. yet he chickened out and withdrew his 47% comments).
Yes, people can dispute it. I am inferring that you think that intellectual property shouldn't be legally protected.
I think that at least in some cases, companies that are "abusing their monopolies" are just doing good business. I think other monopolies, such as government enabled monopolies (e.g. cable companies) should be even more strongly controlled than they are now.
For something as un-necessary as computer software & hardware, companies should have far less restrictions. The computer companies were stupid to sign contracts for which they paid Microsoft for each box, even if the MS software wasn't installed.
BTW, I'm not a huge fan of MS, but I'm also not a MS hater like the generic slashdot user is. I admire the huge company they've built, but it's sad that a lot of it is slow & buggy.
Yes, 1 TB is less than $100.. 2 TB is definitely there, 3 TB is almost there on a routine basis (and I think has been there a few times on special sales).
I've been catching up on the Freakanomics podcast lately, and there have been several examples of how people will game the system. The most recent one I remember (I'm listening oldest to newest of the ones available) is from the June 20, 2012 episode called "Riding the Herd Mentality". One issue was water usage rules during a drought. But for some stupid reason they still allowed kids to use Slip N Slides. So *allegedly* some people paid kids to use a Slip N Slide on their lawn, to water it.
What's your plan to stop ALL murders?
Could you give a few examples? (Does this mean I'm appealing to your authority??)
I think Penn is very entertaining (I'm glad he has a podcast again), but I thought B.S. was mostly preaching to the choir with a few times when I very much disagreed with them. That doesn't mean it wasn't entertaining, I just stopped watching it at some point.
Always seems? It was 1987. (That's what I thought of too, though.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobro_4000
(Amazing that googling "garbage barge" shows that as the top result.)
So do they, if they fail to land successfully.
AKA "phablet". Yes, it's dumb, but it's widespread.
Which, as has already been pointed out, does NOT include most (any?) Android devices.
BTW, I agree with your main point.
Those other examples are simply consequences of the First Sale Doctrine. They have nothing to do with someone getting a copy of something *in a way that contravenes the law*. (Note, I specifically did NOT say in a way to which the copyright holder objects. Some copyright holders presumably dislike libraries or being able to loan physical books.)
Even if they don't get that connection (that broken == pirated), won't the actual buyers get bug fixes sooner than the pirated versions?
In other words, what if the pirated versions also didn't properly support in-app bug fix upgrades (what if it simulated the download, then the download fails at some random point, or the 'install' fails)?
What do iTunes and FireFox have to do with each other?
iTunes is a separate app, FireFox is a brower.
Yeah, Candid Camera.
(BTW, there was originally Candid Radio. Even the Candid Camera I remember watching was almost always reruns in the afternoons, with a prime time special every couple of years.)
There's an episode of "Independent Lens" about women soldering parts for solar panels..
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/solar-mamas/
Wow, if you think HIMYM is vulgar, donâ(TM)t watch âoeTwo and a Half Menâ nor âoeTwo Broke Girlsâ.
I think itâ(TM)s somewhat of a shame that shows have gotten crasser, but Iâ(TM)m also part of the problem because funny is funny. (Heck, there are a couple of âoedirty wordsâ that are now common on early prime time TV nowadays -- d*** and d*bag.)
Population will shrink to fit current resources?
I know this is going to SOUND like I'm arguing the opposite of the way I actually feel, butâ¦
Doesn't the whole outsourcing of jobs/manufacturing fit your question?
That "Walmartization" of America seems to a lot of people be 'destroying' the capitalist system.
(I think not, since in the short run it still gives them more profits, which is why it is still capitalistic.. but it can have detrimental effects long term, especially if for example some country we're doing business with now has the majority of the knowledge and then stops making things for us cheaply.)
If you want to eat, YES.
Otherwise, how are you going to get the money to pay for the food? Take it from me?
I agree with this in theory, but disagree with it in actual practice. The Charlie Sheen years of "Two and a Half Men" basically had a couple of jokes - Charlie is sleazy/boozy, Alan is cheap, kid is stupid, mother is uncaring⦠and successfully repeated them over and over.
(..and now with Kutcher, several of the jokes are continuing plus a couple for his character.)
I mean successfully as in funny, not just ratings success. It's very very lowbrow humor (but "Two Broke Girls" is amazingly even more lowbrow, yet still funny), but funny.
BTW, "Big Bang Theory" is great too, and I watch many documentaries & science shows too.
The message you're responding to talked of *Federalization*, not *Flanderization*.
all alike?
To be picky, it's only the beans that they grind.