They take so long to build... and they're so bloody expensive.
Name me one nuclear power station that actually went into operation and stayed within budget while it was constructed, operated and shut down agian. Generally speaking, those things become 2-3 times more expensive, and the shutdown and waste treatment and storage are almost never included in the financial picture before construction starts.
I agree that it seems sustainable. I agree that it's good to consider it - but at least include the entire life-cycle of the damned things before you build them.
I do not see why they are required to allow discussions of that subject considering the number of sites where you are free to discuss it.
Apple knows about the review, why should they let you rub their noses into it? Let alone on their forums there are more than enough rabid supporters that keeping these messages off the site means for more peaceful forums. It would simply be a flame war
I have to agree here. There are millions of websites where you are free to discuss whatever you want... but on most websites, when you sign up, you accept that moderators have the right to remove stuff.
Now, a commercial company like Apple would do well to have someone from the communications/PR/marketing or whatever department on that forum to give an objective reply.
But if the company strategy is to keep the problems quiet, then we gotta accept that. That may be immoral, but hey... welcome to the 21st century. Companies happen to be exactly that: immoral, betraying, spying, treasonous and self-serving organizations that are not there to make life better for human kind... No. Companies are there to make their shareholders rich.
DMZ = Demilitarized Zone... right? So, how is it still demilitarized if you place robots with tracking skills and guns in it? (I think it's already full of landmines anyway, but I'm just asking).
Some movement like that (through the galactic plane) could be a reason for some instability in the Oort cloud. The galaxy is chaotic. So many objects, all influencing each other. Lots of motion around several centers of gravity and oscillations through the galactic plane too. Sure, I can see that some (galactically speaking) relatively small objects such as a 10 km rock can change orbit a little.
We would have to prove that the instability sort of peaks every 27 million years. I hate statistics, so I am not going to try that:-)
You were being funny, but I think it's important to point out: we produce about 14 exajoules of energy for electric power a year. We use about 28 exajoules for transportation.
This study seemed to overlook something rather important.
Although you have a strong point here, the energy we need for transportation would go down. We would use less if we used the much efficient electric cars. Gasoline/diesel cars produce loads of waste heat.
I believe the point they're trying (but not really achieving) to make is that more stuff used to be free when it was new and online, and we used to pay mostly for the hardware. Music, movies, all kinds of OS projects were often available for free (although often hacked). Big money steps in and does so after calculating a pay-back time.
I think that most stuff will always be free - hacked, cracked and illegally downloaded perhaps. The main question is simply how much money the average consumer is ready to spend on the digital world, and how much the digital world is willing to give the average consumer for that money.
The consumer wants all for free, and spend less rather than more unless there's something really special which is worth money. And the industry wants us to spend more money, which we won't do, because we don't have it.
-- sure, mods me down because I haven't read most of the article;-)
The United States Economy is built largely on IP law. We export research, science, art and knowledge to other countries which manufacture products based on that investment.
Publishers and Manufacturers just put data on disks and pages. Without IP laws standing in their way they could make DVDs for $0.01 each. They still make just as much profit as before (actually more since they can sell a DVD now for $1 and pocket $0.99 instead of $0.001 profit on manufacturing they would charge before.
They're leading the way because they have no interest in protecting intellectual property.
You seem to suggest that Brazil does no research at all, has no universities, no industry that does any inventions, that it produces no movies, no music, and has no culture.
You're right that it seems that Brazil has little interest to protect IP. But the reason is not because they don't produce any IP themselves. The reason is that they see the added value of sharing it.
If they can dive 7000 feet, then they could reach the BP wellhead.
They don't dive. They climb most of the way (through air). The story says that:
Then in October 2004, Ukranian Alexander Klimchouk, who holds a doctorate in hydrogeology, reached the dry bottom of the world (6,825 feet) inside Krubera (KRU-bera), which is found within the Arabika Massif in the western Caucasus Mountains, in a region of Abkhazia in southeastern Republic of Georgia. (In August 2006, Ukranian cave diver Gennadiy Samokhin reached Krubera’s ultimate depth of 7,188 feet.)
... which means that the actual dive was 111 meters (363 ft) in depth. Nothing special in means of depth (only special because it was in a bloody deep cave in the dark with pointy rocks, dust and creepy monsters that nibble on your toes)
To reach the BP well, they could of course remove all the ocean to make it similarly easy.
Ouch, the feeling of terrible inadequacy, laziness and lack of accomplishment.:P
His equivalent of TV is publishing papers... and staying in touch with the entire scientific world - something which cannot be said about most other politicians. I hope that therefore it's less likely that Chu gets brainwashed by lobbyists.
And on a side note, many people don't just hang in front of the TV in their free time. I for one read slashdot to get my dose of science:-)
You wonder why they're still afraid of terrorists when their ordinary standard normal manholes that exist in every street can just detonate at any moment.
Trouble is that worldwide, politicians are relatively old people who know absolutely nothing about computers, the internet and whatever. They are often too old to have grown up with it. They have no time to learn about this new technology. They are one of the few people who do nearly all their talking and negotiating face-to-face. They still use paper copies of everything they do.
So, I don't think it's surprising that the laws regarding the digital world completely suck and are nearly 100% dictated by the large industry and companies, and are in no way protecting the general public.
Things may change - I just hope that it's not too late.
And therefore, I cheer at any delay - a delay is a victory, because the longer we wait, the bigger the chance that our politicians actually understand the matter at hand.
I think that this technology will show up in military drones before we'll ever see it in general aviation. It sounds great for smaller drones that can stay aloft without ever needing to refuel. Speed is also going to be a huge factor. Most drones, I would think, do not need to fly that fast as most can be launched near the location in which they need to patrol.
Unfortunately, that is the fate of every great invention. First the military uses are abused. Civil applications almost always appear later.
As much as I dislike the developments of autonomous small drones that can fly practically forever... weapons development shouldn't discourage mankind from making inventions and great designs.
At the same time, I wonder how long until there are government / police drones flying at several km altitude over my house continuously (checking on the fact that I have nothing to fear because I have nothing to hide - right?)
Your tank holds 50 liters of fuel. You may have an additional 10 liters in the trunk. But if you get properly stuck, you cannot replenish that either.
You can also just allocate 20% of your battery as a backup, and never drain that.
Also, if you heat your car from a battery, it will heat only the part where you sit. An engine primarily heats itself, with your driver's heating as a waste heat disposal. Not very efficient then.
The correct argument against the (current) electric cars is that their range isn't enough - and that they run out of power soon regardless of the situation. You'd be right about that. And it's slowly being solved.
according to that logic, the Chinese should have a team of 500 people, while the Dutch for example would only have 5 guys on the field.
Or the Chinese would have 100 times as many teams playing for the world cup.
In Asia, they just have very large countries. But each country only sends 1 team. Europe has many small countries. The qualifications generally are in leagues of 5-6 countries, and one or two go through to the world cup.
In many other sports (athletics at the Olympics) it works the normal way, and big countries have more people competing.
You drink, you jump around (call it dancing if you want), you drink some more and dance some more and drink some and dance some. Worse even at festivals where you also sit down in random places, and (not uncommonly) even sleep at random places.
The more you bring to the concert, the more you can lose. I bet not a single concert ends without someone losing a wallet. The more was in that wallet, the bigger the consequences for its owner.
I never take a credit card to such a concert/festival. I only bring a debet card (which nobody can use without a pin-code) and I also leave my ID at home if I don't cross any borders.
I really hope that the venues will only use this tricks against secondary ticket sales in a few cases of the most popular concerts... only when it will sell out really soon.
I agree however that something needs to be done against these parasites that just buy all the tickets, and re-sell them with a margin on top. They add nothing to society. Can't we just outlaw them worldwide?
I know that we can see the milky way, and that the bright band in the middle is that same milky way... but the night's sky is different in winter and summer, and it's different on both hemispheres.
In other words: the galaxy is all around us, and I want to know what part is where.
A good graph has units and numbers, you insensitive clods.
Firstly, I'm Dutch. I know my country. And I don't see the point of the "mistake". It's irrelevant to the discussion of climate change. It's as relevant to the discussion as misspelling the name of one of the authors. It's a mistake, but it doesn't affect the conclusions in any way.
Let me explain:
What this really means is that the Netherlands is still a very flat and low country, and that it's still threatened by climate change. Floods can come from the rising sea level, but also from increased amounts of rain and wilder variations in river water levels. And, because the Netherlands is a river delta, we get it all.
Now, 25% or 26% is below that level. But when there is a spring tide and a storm surge, that number changes A LOT. There are large parts of the country that are just 0.5 or 1 meter above NAP.
Does any of this mean that climate change isn't happening? Is the fact that the Netherlands, in reality, is 50 centimeters higher than suggested in the report going to affect climate models in any way??? I think not.
And anyway, the country is actually slowly sinking... mostly because of drainage. So, give us a little more time, and the report will be accurate.
65 feet away you can still snap a 50000 km2 spill...
So, I don't really see the problem.
There are plenty of cover-ups going on near that oil spill, but this isn't one of them. Also, it is the coast guard making the rule, not BP, making it less suspicious to me:-)
The free world isn't so free anymore...... Because we've all been stupid enough to demand 100% safety and security from our nations (I'm European myself). Problem however is that terrorists are the perfect guerilla fighters. They are just a member of the general public, until they strike. So, the only way to work on this increased safety and security is to treat the entire population of the world as a suspect.
I'm not surprised that the world is turning out the way it is... And, there is no way that we can blame anyone but ourselves for it.
Hardly ever have I encountered anyone arguing that we could do with less security. Nobody says that it's not worth the money... But, actually, we can... Which is why I think we've all been stupid. On the other hand, demanding for less security practically brands you as a terrorist, so asking for it is not exactly smart either:-)
I reckon about 90% of all Slashdotters made/did way more dangerous things when they were younger. I certainly did and I look forward to doing them with my kids too! It's like a ritual part of childhood in my family!
I call it self-education... and it's what kids do.
You start off several months old, barely able to hold stuff in your hands, banging your toy, your bottle or just yourself against whatever you can bang it against. [discovery of muscle power and first impressions of force] Then at the age of 1 kids start dropping everything they can - to see if that particular object also falls to the ground like it seems everything else does. [discovery of gravity]
Then, you proceed through stages where you destroy your own toys, the garden of your parents, countless household objects. [discovery of force, pressure, and material sciences] You hurt yourself thousands of times and you shed countless tears. [discovery of basic medicine]
Then you get to an age that destruction is still fascinating, but you found that there exist objects which you cannot destroy easily. Natural curiosity which you have applied successfully until then will make most kids devise ways to continue the destruction. [discovery of science in general]
And those who are the best at this type of learning we call "Engineers and scientists"... and they are the ones that are making a living from it. They are also the ones that are likely to continue this destruction the longest.
I for one, continued playing with dangerous stuff until... damn, I actually haven't stopped yet. *looks around to see if the police are here already*
p.s. yes, I know there is a line to be drawn somewhere. There are a few people (much less than 1 in a million) who blow up much bigger things. Those are the real terrorists. But honestly, all those people you can count on 1 hand in the entire western world. And most did it out of pure hatred against society, or stupid religious ideas. Not for fun, like kids do. But 14 year old kids who destroy stuff just lack the motive, the ambition, to really hurt society. They just want to destroy stuff, to see if they can do it.
It's the corporations that are most harmful to your freedom.
If you want to learn something about corporations, and why you should fear them, then watch "The Corporation". It's a movie-documentary... and at least when I last watched it, it said it was a free download... so the fact that the 7 websites were taken down at least shouldn't affect your education:-)
Since the late 18th century American legal decision that the business corporation organizational model is legally a person, it has become a dominant economic, political and social force around the globe. This film takes an in-depth psychological examination of the organization model through various case studies. What the study illustrates is that in the its behaviour, this type of "person" typically acts like a dangerously destructive psychopath without conscience.
I haven't checked on the TA-Spring (or simply the spring project) updates anymore... but a year ago, that seemed like one of the best (ever) real time strategy games - as far as I'm concerned up there with the likes of Starcraft... meaning it's up there with the popular windows games.
It has it's problems for the installation (you need separate bots, maps, and sets of units), but that's really why I was hoping to have it included in this gaming distro.
You make a very good case, but you miss one very important point. As the record and movie companies have increased their emphasis that downloading unauthorized copies of their products is illegal I have decreased the amount that I do it to the point that I no longer do so at all. At the same time, I have also decreased the amount of their product that I buy, which has also reached zero.
My failure to buy is not because I cannot afford to. It is not because I don't want to give my money to such jerks. It is because I just can't be bothered to find out whether the product they are selling is good enough to spend my money on.
Sounds like me. I also stopped downloading. The reason is that every move is either already logged, or going to be logged, (to a point where privacy will have vanished completely from the internet) and more and more is illegal (to a point where I probably soon don't know the rules anymore). And with the music industry spending more on lawsuits than on the manufacturing of music, I try to avoid future conflicts with them.
I have an old PC, disconnected from the internet, with has a huge harddisk full of music. I happily use USB-sticks to fill it to the brim with quality stuff that I got from friends. No downloading.
And my view about the lost profits of the music industry? I couldn't care less. People will always make music - with or without those profits. People will always enjoy music too, but more so if it's for free. I don't see why we have to go back to that old model of the 70's and 80's with a few companies 'owning' a few 'superstars'. What's wrong with the 2010 model of an infinite number of small stars? People can buy equipment to record music themselves now. We just don't need the record industry anymore. All we need is someone to organize concerts - and I happily pay for those.
And regarding movies: if we can somehow break the monopoly of Hollywood on our cinema's, then we'll all gain from that.
Slashdot Mirror
They take so long to build... and they're so bloody expensive.
Name me one nuclear power station that actually went into operation and stayed within budget while it was constructed, operated and shut down agian. Generally speaking, those things become 2-3 times more expensive, and the shutdown and waste treatment and storage are almost never included in the financial picture before construction starts.
I agree that it seems sustainable. I agree that it's good to consider it - but at least include the entire life-cycle of the damned things before you build them.
I do not see why they are required to allow discussions of that subject considering the number of sites where you are free to discuss it.
Apple knows about the review, why should they let you rub their noses into it? Let alone on their forums there are more than enough rabid supporters that keeping these messages off the site means for more peaceful forums. It would simply be a flame war
I have to agree here. There are millions of websites where you are free to discuss whatever you want... but on most websites, when you sign up, you accept that moderators have the right to remove stuff.
Now, a commercial company like Apple would do well to have someone from the communications/PR/marketing or whatever department on that forum to give an objective reply.
But if the company strategy is to keep the problems quiet, then we gotta accept that.
That may be immoral, but hey... welcome to the 21st century. Companies happen to be exactly that: immoral, betraying, spying, treasonous and self-serving organizations that are not there to make life better for human kind... No. Companies are there to make their shareholders rich.
DMZ = Demilitarized Zone... right? So, how is it still demilitarized if you place robots with tracking skills and guns in it? (I think it's already full of landmines anyway, but I'm just asking).
Some movement like that (through the galactic plane) could be a reason for some instability in the Oort cloud. The galaxy is chaotic. So many objects, all influencing each other. Lots of motion around several centers of gravity and oscillations through the galactic plane too. Sure, I can see that some (galactically speaking) relatively small objects such as a 10 km rock can change orbit a little.
We would have to prove that the instability sort of peaks every 27 million years. I hate statistics, so I am not going to try that :-)
You were being funny, but I think it's important to point out: we produce about 14 exajoules of energy for electric power a year. We use about 28 exajoules for transportation.
This study seemed to overlook something rather important.
Although you have a strong point here, the energy we need for transportation would go down. We would use less if we used the much efficient electric cars. Gasoline/diesel cars produce loads of waste heat.
I believe the point they're trying (but not really achieving) to make is that more stuff used to be free when it was new and online, and we used to pay mostly for the hardware. Music, movies, all kinds of OS projects were often available for free (although often hacked). Big money steps in and does so after calculating a pay-back time.
I think that most stuff will always be free - hacked, cracked and illegally downloaded perhaps. The main question is simply how much money the average consumer is ready to spend on the digital world, and how much the digital world is willing to give the average consumer for that money.
The consumer wants all for free, and spend less rather than more unless there's something really special which is worth money. And the industry wants us to spend more money, which we won't do, because we don't have it.
-- sure, mods me down because I haven't read most of the article ;-)
It's not crazy or upside down at all.
The United States Economy is built largely on IP law. We export research, science, art and knowledge to other countries which manufacture products based on that investment.
Publishers and Manufacturers just put data on disks and pages. Without IP laws standing in their way they could make DVDs for $0.01 each. They still make just as much profit as before (actually more since they can sell a DVD now for $1 and pocket $0.99 instead of $0.001 profit on manufacturing they would charge before.
They're leading the way because they have no interest in protecting intellectual property.
You seem to suggest that Brazil does no research at all, has no universities, no industry that does any inventions, that it produces no movies, no music, and has no culture.
You're right that it seems that Brazil has little interest to protect IP. But the reason is not because they don't produce any IP themselves. The reason is that they see the added value of sharing it.
If they can dive 7000 feet, then they could reach the BP wellhead.
They don't dive. They climb most of the way (through air). The story says that:
Then in October 2004, Ukranian Alexander Klimchouk, who holds a doctorate in hydrogeology, reached the dry bottom of the world (6,825 feet) inside Krubera (KRU-bera), which is found within the Arabika Massif in the western Caucasus Mountains, in a region of Abkhazia in southeastern Republic of Georgia. (In August 2006, Ukranian cave diver Gennadiy Samokhin reached Krubera’s ultimate depth of 7,188 feet.)
... which means that the actual dive was 111 meters (363 ft) in depth. Nothing special in means of depth (only special because it was in a bloody deep cave in the dark with pointy rocks, dust and creepy monsters that nibble on your toes)
To reach the BP well, they could of course remove all the ocean to make it similarly easy.
Ouch, the feeling of terrible inadequacy, laziness and lack of accomplishment. :P
His equivalent of TV is publishing papers... and staying in touch with the entire scientific world - something which cannot be said about most other politicians. I hope that therefore it's less likely that Chu gets brainwashed by lobbyists.
And on a side note, many people don't just hang in front of the TV in their free time. I for one read slashdot to get my dose of science :-)
You wonder why they're still afraid of terrorists when their ordinary standard normal manholes that exist in every street can just detonate at any moment.
Trouble is that worldwide, politicians are relatively old people who know absolutely nothing about computers, the internet and whatever. They are often too old to have grown up with it. They have no time to learn about this new technology. They are one of the few people who do nearly all their talking and negotiating face-to-face. They still use paper copies of everything they do.
So, I don't think it's surprising that the laws regarding the digital world completely suck and are nearly 100% dictated by the large industry and companies, and are in no way protecting the general public.
Things may change - I just hope that it's not too late.
And therefore, I cheer at any delay - a delay is a victory, because the longer we wait, the bigger the chance that our politicians actually understand the matter at hand.
I think that this technology will show up in military drones before we'll ever see it in general aviation. It sounds great for smaller drones that can stay aloft without ever needing to refuel. Speed is also going to be a huge factor. Most drones, I would think, do not need to fly that fast as most can be launched near the location in which they need to patrol.
Unfortunately, that is the fate of every great invention. First the military uses are abused. Civil applications almost always appear later.
As much as I dislike the developments of autonomous small drones that can fly practically forever... weapons development shouldn't discourage mankind from making inventions and great designs.
At the same time, I wonder how long until there are government / police drones flying at several km altitude over my house continuously (checking on the fact that I have nothing to fear because I have nothing to hide - right?)
You're not being realistic here.
Your tank holds 50 liters of fuel. You may have an additional 10 liters in the trunk. But if you get properly stuck, you cannot replenish that either.
You can also just allocate 20% of your battery as a backup, and never drain that.
Also, if you heat your car from a battery, it will heat only the part where you sit. An engine primarily heats itself, with your driver's heating as a waste heat disposal. Not very efficient then.
The correct argument against the (current) electric cars is that their range isn't enough - and that they run out of power soon regardless of the situation. You'd be right about that. And it's slowly being solved.
I would be inclined to stand back before switching the power on. And I don't think I would leave the kids in the car during the charging operation.
But you're happy to have your kids in a car while you fill it up with 50 liters of some toxic and highly flammable liquid or even gas.
In fact, the entire future of humanity, including all technological advances, was already patented by scifi writers decades ago.
according to that logic, the Chinese should have a team of 500 people, while the Dutch for example would only have 5 guys on the field.
Or the Chinese would have 100 times as many teams playing for the world cup.
In Asia, they just have very large countries. But each country only sends 1 team. Europe has many small countries. The qualifications generally are in leagues of 5-6 countries, and one or two go through to the world cup.
In many other sports (athletics at the Olympics) it works the normal way, and big countries have more people competing.
Concert:
You drink, you jump around (call it dancing if you want), you drink some more and dance some more and drink some and dance some. Worse even at festivals where you also sit down in random places, and (not uncommonly) even sleep at random places.
The more you bring to the concert, the more you can lose. I bet not a single concert ends without someone losing a wallet. The more was in that wallet, the bigger the consequences for its owner.
I never take a credit card to such a concert/festival. I only bring a debet card (which nobody can use without a pin-code) and I also leave my ID at home if I don't cross any borders.
I really hope that the venues will only use this tricks against secondary ticket sales in a few cases of the most popular concerts... only when it will sell out really soon.
I agree however that something needs to be done against these parasites that just buy all the tickets, and re-sell them with a margin on top. They add nothing to society. Can't we just outlaw them worldwide?
Am I the only one who wants to see some units?
I know that we can see the milky way, and that the bright band in the middle is that same milky way... but the night's sky is different in winter and summer, and it's different on both hemispheres.
In other words: the galaxy is all around us, and I want to know what part is where.
A good graph has units and numbers, you insensitive clods.
Firstly, I'm Dutch. I know my country. And I don't see the point of the "mistake". It's irrelevant to the discussion of climate change. It's as relevant to the discussion as misspelling the name of one of the authors. It's a mistake, but it doesn't affect the conclusions in any way.
Let me explain:
What this really means is that the Netherlands is still a very flat and low country, and that it's still threatened by climate change. Floods can come from the rising sea level, but also from increased amounts of rain and wilder variations in river water levels. And, because the Netherlands is a river delta, we get it all.
55% of the country is prone to flooding, but only part of that is lower than the sea... and that also depends on whether you look at the low tide, mid-tide or high-tide. We've invented the 'NAP' for the sea water level... to avoid problems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normaal_Amsterdams_Peil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_the_Netherlands
Now, 25% or 26% is below that level. But when there is a spring tide and a storm surge, that number changes A LOT. There are large parts of the country that are just 0.5 or 1 meter above NAP.
Does any of this mean that climate change isn't happening? Is the fact that the Netherlands, in reality, is 50 centimeters higher than suggested in the report going to affect climate models in any way??? I think not.
And anyway, the country is actually slowly sinking... mostly because of drainage. So, give us a little more time, and the report will be accurate.
65 feet away you can still snap a 50000 km2 spill...
So, I don't really see the problem.
There are plenty of cover-ups going on near that oil spill, but this isn't one of them. Also, it is the coast guard making the rule, not BP, making it less suspicious to me :-)
The free world isn't so free anymore... ... Because we've all been stupid enough to demand 100% safety and security from our nations (I'm European myself). Problem however is that terrorists are the perfect guerilla fighters. They are just a member of the general public, until they strike. So, the only way to work on this increased safety and security is to treat the entire population of the world as a suspect.
I'm not surprised that the world is turning out the way it is... And, there is no way that we can blame anyone but ourselves for it.
Hardly ever have I encountered anyone arguing that we could do with less security. Nobody says that it's not worth the money... But, actually, we can... Which is why I think we've all been stupid. On the other hand, demanding for less security practically brands you as a terrorist, so asking for it is not exactly smart either :-)
I reckon about 90% of all Slashdotters made/did way more dangerous things when they were younger. I certainly did and I look forward to doing them with my kids too! It's like a ritual part of childhood in my family!
I call it self-education... and it's what kids do.
You start off several months old, barely able to hold stuff in your hands, banging your toy, your bottle or just yourself against whatever you can bang it against. [discovery of muscle power and first impressions of force]
Then at the age of 1 kids start dropping everything they can - to see if that particular object also falls to the ground like it seems everything else does. [discovery of gravity]
Then, you proceed through stages where you destroy your own toys, the garden of your parents, countless household objects. [discovery of force, pressure, and material sciences]
You hurt yourself thousands of times and you shed countless tears. [discovery of basic medicine]
Then you get to an age that destruction is still fascinating, but you found that there exist objects which you cannot destroy easily.
Natural curiosity which you have applied successfully until then will make most kids devise ways to continue the destruction. [discovery of science in general]
And those who are the best at this type of learning we call "Engineers and scientists"... and they are the ones that are making a living from it. They are also the ones that are likely to continue this destruction the longest.
I for one, continued playing with dangerous stuff until... damn, I actually haven't stopped yet.
*looks around to see if the police are here already*
p.s. yes, I know there is a line to be drawn somewhere. There are a few people (much less than 1 in a million) who blow up much bigger things. Those are the real terrorists. But honestly, all those people you can count on 1 hand in the entire western world. And most did it out of pure hatred against society, or stupid religious ideas. Not for fun, like kids do.
But 14 year old kids who destroy stuff just lack the motive, the ambition, to really hurt society. They just want to destroy stuff, to see if they can do it.
It's the corporations that are most harmful to your freedom.
If you want to learn something about corporations, and why you should fear them, then watch "The Corporation". It's a movie-documentary... and at least when I last watched it, it said it was a free download... so the fact that the 7 websites were taken down at least shouldn't affect your education :-)
Since the late 18th century American legal decision that the business corporation organizational model is legally a person, it has become a dominant economic, political and social force around the globe. This film takes an in-depth psychological examination of the organization model through various case studies. What the study illustrates is that in the its behaviour, this type of "person" typically acts like a dangerously destructive psychopath without conscience.
source: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379225/plotsummary
I haven't checked on the TA-Spring (or simply the spring project) updates anymore... but a year ago, that seemed like one of the best (ever) real time strategy games - as far as I'm concerned up there with the likes of Starcraft... meaning it's up there with the popular windows games.
It has it's problems for the installation (you need separate bots, maps, and sets of units), but that's really why I was hoping to have it included in this gaming distro.
You make a very good case, but you miss one very important point. As the record and movie companies have increased their emphasis that downloading unauthorized copies of their products is illegal I have decreased the amount that I do it to the point that I no longer do so at all. At the same time, I have also decreased the amount of their product that I buy, which has also reached zero.
My failure to buy is not because I cannot afford to. It is not because I don't want to give my money to such jerks. It is because I just can't be bothered to find out whether the product they are selling is good enough to spend my money on.
Sounds like me.
I also stopped downloading. The reason is that every move is either already logged, or going to be logged, (to a point where privacy will have vanished completely from the internet) and more and more is illegal (to a point where I probably soon don't know the rules anymore). And with the music industry spending more on lawsuits than on the manufacturing of music, I try to avoid future conflicts with them.
I have an old PC, disconnected from the internet, with has a huge harddisk full of music. I happily use USB-sticks to fill it to the brim with quality stuff that I got from friends. No downloading.
And my view about the lost profits of the music industry? I couldn't care less. People will always make music - with or without those profits. People will always enjoy music too, but more so if it's for free. I don't see why we have to go back to that old model of the 70's and 80's with a few companies 'owning' a few 'superstars'.
What's wrong with the 2010 model of an infinite number of small stars? People can buy equipment to record music themselves now. We just don't need the record industry anymore. All we need is someone to organize concerts - and I happily pay for those.
And regarding movies: if we can somehow break the monopoly of Hollywood on our cinema's, then we'll all gain from that.