Let the industry keep tightening the rope that will eventually hang it. I'm will not even *consider* using a system, or purchasing anything that relies on DRM- especially from Microsoft and *AA. Ultimately, the most secure DRM in the world won't mean squat if nobody supports the products that use it. Boot that, Microsoft.
Most people didn't do it to cheat artists, they did it because they had no choice.
Please stop perpetuating such utter nonsense. They CLEARLY had a choice, but simply refused to exercise the required displine. I exercised that choice (and still am). I have no regrets whatsover, and I can honestly say I played an honorable game, even if the RIAA is a greedy whore of an organization.
Well, a copy belongs to them after it's given/bought.
I was referring to copy that is NOT bought, but downloaded, or "borrowed" from somone that typically has neither the ownership, nor the authority to make such an arrangment.
It could have been paid for. There's nothing stopping that in this scheme.
I refer you to my previous point.
I'd gather they've got permission from their friend to possess it. Otherwise, why would they make the copy and give it to them?
I again refer you to my initial point. How can a friend give permission to borrow something he doesn't own? In other words, if he/she doesn't own the copyright, there is no authority to copy it, except that which is granted by the author. If, by "borrow" you mean that one fully relinquishes all rights to a given media item to someone else for the duration, then that may very well be acceptible. Copying, however, is not.
The problem with your arguments are that most apply just as equally to another competitor coming in and producing a product that's virtually identical to the original something, then giving it away
No, the difference lies in the permission granted by the author. If it's the intent of the author of the free version to give it away, then so be it. It has nothing to do with the terms under which the competitor chooses to make it's product available.
Your bottled water analogy isn't applicable, since you freely disclose that the water isn't owned by anyone. Copyrighted material, on the other hand, is.
If I take my CD of , say, Frank Zappa, or whatever, and copy it to my friend, nobody lost anything, but someone gained something.
Theft of value. That "someone" is benefitting from something that a) does not belong to them, b) they did not pay for, c) they do not have permission to possess, and d) required the consumption of resources by the other party.
he same amount of developer time is taken up if 1 person dowloads it or 1 million people do
The reality of digital media is that entails incrementally less cost per copy as far as the developer is concerned, but the potential value derived from the media by each downloader remains constant. The question is, then, regardless of the cost to the developer, why should it cost any less if you're the first downloader, or the 1,000,000th downloader?
All of the pomp and circumstance has nothing to do with control, or with a publisher's rights over the seller's rights. They're only trying to make it fair for everyone.
One of my favorites was Mister Twister at Elitch Gardens in Denver. It was a wooden coaster, so it had this "give" as it rounded the tracks, and it was VERY bumpy, such that you could swear it would bounce off the tracks any moment. As if this wasn't enough, you'd plunge into a few seconds of complete darkness just before the end of the ride. It was quite fun.
As of late, I thought it had been fairly well established that technology does nothing to help students learn more, or learn better. When I see stories like this, it makes me wonder which crony's friend/relative is getting the contract.
IF you still need to select "Turn Off Computer" (which is totally lame), then it translates to, "start to turn off the computer". What sense does that make for a new user? Even more lame...the "Turn Off Computer" option allows you to Restart the computer...something completely opposite.
I have no idea where this innovative UI stuff came from, but if it's still there in Longhorn, I'm surprised they're sticking with it.
If you re-read his post, it clearly states that he wasn't interested in lining someone else's pockets, while he gets nothing. I see nothing wrong with this.
I would agree that it's good to have the theoretical background, but without the desire to learn new things, I'd say it's much less useful than following the trend du jour.
At first it was one of the most incredibly over-designed publications I'd ever seen- to the point that reading it (isn't that what you're supposed to do?) was difficult. After a while someone saw the light and calmed it down quite a bit. I then started to like it - some of the articles I thought were actually quite good. I haven't received it for a while now (I hope I don't get a collection letter saying I owe them for 5 years ; ) ), but hearing stuff like this really doesn't serve as much of an incentive.
While I understand your point, I don't think the distro has much to do with the way in which a given GUI toolkit is used. Gnome can be abused every bit as much as KDE. It all boils down to whether or not the contributors to open source software are willing to go the extra milw when it comes to how they set up their UI.
..that a huge company like Cisco, a name that is synonymous with the term 'network,' looks kind of silly not having addressed these issues prior to this disclosure. I can understand their defensive stance- they were clearly caught with their pants down. Just the same, that doesn't make it excusable. My level of respect for Cisco just rocketed down a few notches.
Assuming you are U.S.citizen, it's too bad you can't share your brilliance with our nation's founders- they had some very serious "personal issues" with the way the world worked.
If you'd take a moment to familiarize yourself with current political climate, you'd know that there is a very strong leaning toward corporate favoritism. This is what has allowed the DMCA to pass, and this is what makes for continued lobbying by corporations like Disney for extended copyrights, or for increasingly restrictive use rights with respect to digital technology. This is where complaining has gotten us.
Complaining does no good. Action, however, can move mountains, if enough people pitch in and help.
I suppose there's nothing at all wrong with patronizing a company if you don't have a problem with the theft of obviousness that has become a hallmark of many of its patents.
One day a friend brought in an extra computer from home- there he had a wireless network, which is secured with encryption. Since his wireless networking was on by default, he didn't realize that once he booted his box and started surfing, that it wasn't happening on our network. Apparently someone in the building had a wide-open wi-fi access point. The only way I realized what was happening is that I did not see any traffic on our network from his box.
This could have easily continued all day without anyone being the wiser. I'd sure hate to think that he could have been arrested for unauthorized access, since it was the result of two contributory factors.
I think these efforts are great. I realize that everyone here probably already has a bias, but let's not forget about what motivates people - one source of motivation is passion.
If someone were to take an old junker (car) and rebuild it in his/her garage, tinkering a bit here, a bit there, eventually there might be something really worthy to show for it. Even if there isn't, so what? Perhaps the joy is in the process, and not necessarily the result.
Slashdot Mirror
Let the industry keep tightening the rope that will eventually hang it. I'm will not even *consider* using a system, or purchasing anything that relies on DRM- especially from Microsoft and *AA. Ultimately, the most secure DRM in the world won't mean squat if nobody supports the products that use it. Boot that, Microsoft.
Most people didn't do it to cheat artists, they did it because they had no choice.
Please stop perpetuating such utter nonsense. They CLEARLY had a choice, but simply refused to exercise the required displine. I exercised that choice (and still am). I have no regrets whatsover, and I can honestly say I played an honorable game, even if the RIAA is a greedy whore of an organization.
Well, a copy belongs to them after it's given/bought.
I was referring to copy that is NOT bought, but downloaded, or "borrowed" from somone that typically has neither the ownership, nor the authority to make such an arrangment.
It could have been paid for. There's nothing stopping that in this scheme.
I refer you to my previous point.
I'd gather they've got permission from their friend to possess it. Otherwise, why would they make the copy and give it to them?
I again refer you to my initial point. How can a friend give permission to borrow something he doesn't own? In other words, if he/she doesn't own the copyright, there is no authority to copy it, except that which is granted by the author. If, by "borrow" you mean that one fully relinquishes all rights to a given media item to someone else for the duration, then that may very well be acceptible. Copying, however, is not.
The problem with your arguments are that most apply just as equally to another competitor coming in and producing a product that's virtually identical to the original something, then giving it away
No, the difference lies in the permission granted by the author. If it's the intent of the author of the free version to give it away, then so be it. It has nothing to do with the terms under which the competitor chooses to make it's product available.
Your bottled water analogy isn't applicable, since you freely disclose that the water isn't owned by anyone. Copyrighted material, on the other hand, is.
If I take my CD of , say, Frank Zappa, or whatever, and copy it to my friend, nobody lost anything, but someone gained something.
Theft of value. That "someone" is benefitting from something that a) does not belong to them, b) they did not pay for, c) they do not have permission to possess, and d) required the consumption of resources by the other party.
he same amount of developer time is taken up if 1 person dowloads it or 1 million people do
The reality of digital media is that entails incrementally less cost per copy as far as the developer is concerned, but the potential value derived from the media by each downloader remains constant. The question is, then, regardless of the cost to the developer, why should it cost any less if you're the first downloader, or the 1,000,000th downloader?
All of the pomp and circumstance has nothing to do with control, or with a publisher's rights over the seller's rights. They're only trying to make it fair for everyone.
One of my favorites was Mister Twister at Elitch Gardens in Denver. It was a wooden coaster, so it had this "give" as it rounded the tracks, and it was VERY bumpy, such that you could swear it would bounce off the tracks any moment. As if this wasn't enough, you'd plunge into a few seconds of complete darkness just before the end of the ride. It was quite fun.
As of late, I thought it had been fairly well established that technology does nothing to help students learn more, or learn better. When I see stories like this, it makes me wonder which crony's friend/relative is getting the contract.
Start Menu->Turn Off Computer
Then a dialog appears with the following options: Stand By or Turn Off or Restart
The Turn Off Computer option is at the very bottom of the Start menu.
IF you still need to select "Turn Off Computer" (which is totally lame), then it translates to, "start to turn off the computer". What sense does that make for a new user? Even more lame...the "Turn Off Computer" option allows you to Restart the computer...something completely opposite.
I have no idea where this innovative UI stuff came from, but if it's still there in Longhorn, I'm surprised they're sticking with it.
raise some pigs. : )
If you re-read his post, it clearly states that he wasn't interested in lining someone else's pockets, while he gets nothing. I see nothing wrong with this.
If I had mod points, I'd mod you up. Interesting post.
I would agree that it's good to have the theoretical background, but without the desire to learn new things, I'd say it's much less useful than following the trend du jour.
At first it was one of the most incredibly over-designed publications I'd ever seen- to the point that reading it (isn't that what you're supposed to do?) was difficult. After a while someone saw the light and calmed it down quite a bit. I then started to like it - some of the articles I thought were actually quite good. I haven't received it for a while now (I hope I don't get a collection letter saying I owe them for 5 years ; ) ), but hearing stuff like this really doesn't serve as much of an incentive.
While I understand your point, I don't think the distro has much to do with the way in which a given GUI toolkit is used. Gnome can be abused every bit as much as KDE. It all boils down to whether or not the contributors to open source software are willing to go the extra milw when it comes to how they set up their UI.
right here
The Register sees this an RIAA tax imposed on the students at large.
Funny. Do you honestly think these guys did what they did all by themselves? Riiiiight.
Assuming you are U.S.citizen, it's too bad you can't share your brilliance with our nation's founders- they had some very serious "personal issues" with the way the world worked.
If you'd take a moment to familiarize yourself with current political climate, you'd know that there is a very strong leaning toward corporate favoritism. This is what has allowed the DMCA to pass, and this is what makes for continued lobbying by corporations like Disney for extended copyrights, or for increasingly restrictive use rights with respect to digital technology. This is where complaining has gotten us.
Complaining does no good. Action, however, can move mountains, if enough people pitch in and help.
I suppose there's nothing at all wrong with patronizing a company if you don't have a problem with the theft of obviousness that has become a hallmark of many of its patents.
Do the world a favor and spend a couple of minutes to see if there are any vendors besides amazon that sell this book.
One day a friend brought in an extra computer from home- there he had a wireless network, which is secured with encryption. Since his wireless networking was on by default, he didn't realize that once he booted his box and started surfing, that it wasn't happening on our network. Apparently someone in the building had a wide-open wi-fi access point. The only way I realized what was happening is that I did not see any traffic on our network from his box.
This could have easily continued all day without anyone being the wiser. I'd sure hate to think that he could have been arrested for unauthorized access, since it was the result of two contributory factors.
I think these efforts are great. I realize that everyone here probably already has a bias, but let's not forget about what motivates people - one source of motivation is passion.
If someone were to take an old junker (car) and rebuild it in his/her garage, tinkering a bit here, a bit there, eventually there might be something really worthy to show for it. Even if there isn't, so what? Perhaps the joy is in the process, and not necessarily the result.
Code on Syllable, SkyOS.