People only have so much money to spend and they are going to spend even less on that on extreme luxury items like entertainment. The fact that people don't have an infinite amount of money to spend on pop music is totally a 1st world problem.
The real problem here is that you've got artists that aren't too bright about anything that isn't music having their heads filled with nonsense by media executives. They start drinking their own kool-aid after awhile.
It's far more likely that the explosion of digital media of all kinds has devalued ALL forms of entertainment. If you think you can get a bigger payday from someone else then you're probably just kidding yourself.
You have to compete against EVERYTHING that can distract your customer. This includes freebie tablet games and LOLCats.
Spotify pays up. It's the labels that aren't sharing.
Internet streaming services shouldn't be expected to pay any more per head than any other form of "broadcast" out there. If you put all of this stuff out of business, you will have NO ONE to help promote the talent.
You'll be trapped in a vaccuum where no one can here you b*tch and moan and whine.
> It's easy to give away something that someone else spent money to produce. Hence the need to enforce copyright infringement.
The Media Moguls and corporate shills are just mad that the pirates are making them look bad. The pirates are a cabal of volunteers that are doing better at providing a useful service than media companies owned by some of the biggest megacorps on the planet.
You're embarrassed because you look like an incompetent idiot.
When you aren't fixated on treating your paying customers like shit, a lot of technical challenges suddenly become easier because you aren't making the job harder than it needs to be.
DRM free content stomps all over the officially sanctioned products and services regardless of whether or not that liberated file is paid for or pirated.
You have to give a big pile of money to someone else on a monthly basis before you even have the option of subscribing to HBO (even assuming you have that option where you are).
There is nothing "naive" about that. No what's naive is the assumption that any pirate represents a paying customer. A pirate is someone willing to "buy" your product for $0. That represents the value of "infinity" on your price/demand curve for an inelastic luxury item.
Some people will alway pirate. On the other hand, there is likely some price at which more people will pay you. It may even be to your advantage to price your good at that level.
It's all about making money.
Crime and punishment and artistic megalomania are nothing but red herrings.
It's not that the entertainment industry owes us something. It that the entertainment industry is not owed something. They don't have a right to make money. If they price themselves out of the market or abandon it entirely, then that's no one else's fault but theirs.
Degenerate moochers are just something to distract you from your own failure as an artist or businessman.
> STTNG is priced at $125 a season because there are people who want it that are willing to pay that much for it.
It's funny that Trek should be mentioned here because those shows are available on the pay-per-month streaming services now. There's really not much reason left to buy those sets at any price. Never mind an unrealistic one.
> Nothing would keep a similar virus from attacking Mac if you run any sort of remote access and a weak password.
It's funny you should mention that because I run a daemon that checks/var/log for suspicious activity. When it finds something that looks like a brute force attack, it blocks the attacker with a firewall rule.
Now this thing is a nice ready made app available through my distro's standard repos. But in the old days, I cobbled the same thing together with a bash script.
If you aren't operating under the assumption that you are helpless and the situation itself is helpless, there's actually a lot of stuff that you can do do slow attackers down.
The idea that "it's all about popularity" is one of the most dangerous bits of self-delusion that the Lemming crowd perpetuate. They make it sound like there's no defense when there are a lot of clear an obvious defenses.
The first one is to not be a total idiot and/or tolerate a crap product.
You simply don't have to be trapped into using crapulence you will later feel the need to make excuses for.
> A user can go along time without seeing virus and malware in OSX because OSX holds 7.18% of the market as opposed to Windows 7
That's just the deluded nonsense of a Lemming.
There have been virus ridden minority platforms before. This was quite common back when there were actually other platforms to choose from. Operating systems in those days were much less robust. Viruses were common because those platforms suffered from similar nonsense that Windows does now.
Windows is crap. It gets viruses because it is crap. Being "popular" has nothing to do with it.
The current version of MacOS has fewer viruses because it is built on a solid foundation that isn't undermined by really stupid ideas about usability.
Lemmings just want to pretend that Windows isn't crap and always has been. It's not something that people like. It's something that people TOLERATE because a perception that they are trapped by it being the only well supported platform.
> Scripts sometimes make mistakes. Criminalizing mistakes isn't "obviously correct" as an approach.
Of course it is. Individuals and corporations need to be responsible for their actions. The very basics of society and law will break down otherwise. Whining that "it's too difficult" is simply unacceptable. If you make mistakes that harm others, you need to be accountable for them. If you build a machine that makes those mistakes for you, you still need to be held accountable for them.
As always we have a blatant double standard... "tort reform for the rich, crime and punishment for the poor".
No they have nothing to do with religion. They are just led by Popes and other religious authority figures with the promise of special redemption in heaven for faithful soldiers.
Yeah. Why do something simple like an interface that allows you to watch what you want when you want. Instead subject them to shoddy equipment that may or may not even allow them to time shift properly. Give them something THEY have to PROGRAM. Give them something where what they want to watch might not even be one of the choices for "demand".
No. A "video jukebox" is much simpler.
In fact, this is generally what you are trying to achieve with a non-crap PVR.
You take pensioners and give them a solution that really could be implemented for $100 but instead force them to spend $700 or $1300. That's just retarded. NO ONE here should be making excuses for Apple.
My kid loved MythTV when he was 3 years old. The young are not the users you have to worry about. Even the old aren't necessarily a problem.
It's the lazy/helpless types that are a problem and these come in all age groups. You may find an 80 year old that's much more adaptable to modern computing tech than some 60 year old.
The assumption that Granny can't handle tech is a stupid incorrect stereotype.
I have found the Netflix app to be best thing going on my BD player and on par with the version on the Roku. On the other hand, the other apps like Amazon Prime lag behind their Roku counterparts.
Both Amazon and Walmart are very liberal about returns. So if you find that a particular option doesn't work out, it's not such a great tragedy.
You can return stuff. Been that way since the age of the Dinosaurs.
You would be better off buying DVDs and ripping them.
At least streaming services don't have to conform to some artificial notion of a schedule.
SciFi once tried running the uncut versions of Old Trek. That experiment seemed to end quickly as 60 minute shows turned into 90 minute shows. That's just how long the old episodes were once you took the original material added the modern amount of commercials to it.
Any prime time shows will be butchered to run in a non-prime time slot where the stations can run more ads.
Sounds like the kind of "secret handshake" that no senior citizen would be able to cope with.
This sort of nonsense is why a "simple" interface really isn't.
This should be a global option in any video interface. If you find yourself fumbling to control this on a per video basis then the interface design is crap.
It doesn't matter how much you want to add to the mindless hype.
As long as that FOSS database uses the same mental model and basic syntax as one of the commercial RDBMS products, the amount of tribal knowledge lost from your cheapness will be minimized.
The real problem is that you are far too cheap to pay more than one person to be the keeper of the keys and that person you are underpaying so eggregiously underpaid that they will likely leave at the first opportunity.
Slashdot Mirror
People only have so much money to spend and they are going to spend even less on that on extreme luxury items like entertainment. The fact that people don't have an infinite amount of money to spend on pop music is totally a 1st world problem.
The real problem here is that you've got artists that aren't too bright about anything that isn't music having their heads filled with nonsense by media executives. They start drinking their own kool-aid after awhile.
It's far more likely that the explosion of digital media of all kinds has devalued ALL forms of entertainment. If you think you can get a bigger payday from someone else then you're probably just kidding yourself.
You have to compete against EVERYTHING that can distract your customer. This includes freebie tablet games and LOLCats.
It's not 1950 any more.
> I'm so tired of reading "I help myself to all their stuff but I'll buy their merch". Quit being a freeloader.
"Stop listening to the radio you thieving scum!"
...except it's usually because of "mere entertainment" that we end up with increasingly lopsided laws when it comes to technology.
Hollywood is happily contributing to the construction of the American gulag system.
Spotify pays up. It's the labels that aren't sharing.
Internet streaming services shouldn't be expected to pay any more per head than any other form of "broadcast" out there. If you put all of this stuff out of business, you will have NO ONE to help promote the talent.
You'll be trapped in a vaccuum where no one can here you b*tch and moan and whine.
Why not? You have no idea what is going to happen with the current flavor of the month. It might disappear next month or go on for years and years.
How do you know today what services will still be around in 10 years?
You don't.
Really the best option is to avoid them all entirely and stick to real purchases where you are in complete control of the product you've bought.
My oldest MP3s predate ALL music services.
My oldest MKVs predate ALL video services.
I suspect that I will still be able to use my media horde long after the current flavors of the month are long gone.
Until I can pay for a car in copies of some films from the Pirate Bay, your argument is total nonsense. It's your reasoning that's faulty.
Payment avoidance does not equal a gain.
> It's easy to give away something that someone else spent money to produce. Hence the need to enforce copyright infringement.
The Media Moguls and corporate shills are just mad that the pirates are making them look bad. The pirates are a cabal of volunteers that are doing better at providing a useful service than media companies owned by some of the biggest megacorps on the planet.
You're embarrassed because you look like an incompetent idiot.
When you aren't fixated on treating your paying customers like shit, a lot of technical challenges suddenly become easier because you aren't making the job harder than it needs to be.
DRM free content stomps all over the officially sanctioned products and services regardless of whether or not that liberated file is paid for or pirated.
You cannot subscribe to HBO in isolation.
You have to give a big pile of money to someone else on a monthly basis before you even have the option of subscribing to HBO (even assuming you have that option where you are).
So you cannot in fact "just subscribe to HBO".
You can only charge what the market will bear.
There is nothing "naive" about that. No what's naive is the assumption that any pirate represents a paying customer. A pirate is someone willing to "buy" your product for $0. That represents the value of "infinity" on your price/demand curve for an inelastic luxury item.
Some people will alway pirate. On the other hand, there is likely some price at which more people will pay you. It may even be to your advantage to price your good at that level.
It's all about making money.
Crime and punishment and artistic megalomania are nothing but red herrings.
It's not that the entertainment industry owes us something. It that the entertainment industry is not owed something. They don't have a right to make money. If they price themselves out of the market or abandon it entirely, then that's no one else's fault but theirs.
Degenerate moochers are just something to distract you from your own failure as an artist or businessman.
> STTNG is priced at $125 a season because there are people who want it that are willing to pay that much for it.
It's funny that Trek should be mentioned here because those shows are available on the pay-per-month streaming services now. There's really not much reason left to buy those sets at any price. Never mind an unrealistic one.
Everything is in Texas. That's why they had to start using names like "West" and "White Settlement".
> Nothing would keep a similar virus from attacking Mac if you run any sort of remote access and a weak password.
It's funny you should mention that because I run a daemon that checks /var/log for suspicious activity. When it finds something that looks like a brute force attack, it blocks the attacker with a firewall rule.
Now this thing is a nice ready made app available through my distro's standard repos. But in the old days, I cobbled the same thing together with a bash script.
If you aren't operating under the assumption that you are helpless and the situation itself is helpless, there's actually a lot of stuff that you can do do slow attackers down.
The idea that "it's all about popularity" is one of the most dangerous bits of self-delusion that the Lemming crowd perpetuate. They make it sound like there's no defense when there are a lot of clear an obvious defenses.
The first one is to not be a total idiot and/or tolerate a crap product.
You simply don't have to be trapped into using crapulence you will later feel the need to make excuses for.
> A user can go along time without seeing virus and malware in OSX because OSX holds 7.18% of the market as opposed to Windows 7
That's just the deluded nonsense of a Lemming.
There have been virus ridden minority platforms before. This was quite common back when there were actually other platforms to choose from. Operating systems in those days were much less robust. Viruses were common because those platforms suffered from similar nonsense that Windows does now.
Windows is crap. It gets viruses because it is crap. Being "popular" has nothing to do with it.
The current version of MacOS has fewer viruses because it is built on a solid foundation that isn't undermined by really stupid ideas about usability.
Lemmings just want to pretend that Windows isn't crap and always has been. It's not something that people like. It's something that people TOLERATE because a perception that they are trapped by it being the only well supported platform.
> Scripts sometimes make mistakes. Criminalizing mistakes isn't "obviously correct" as an approach.
Of course it is. Individuals and corporations need to be responsible for their actions. The very basics of society and law will break down otherwise. Whining that "it's too difficult" is simply unacceptable. If you make mistakes that harm others, you need to be accountable for them. If you build a machine that makes those mistakes for you, you still need to be held accountable for them.
As always we have a blatant double standard... "tort reform for the rich, crime and punishment for the poor".
Unless VLC actually includes libdvdcss, no one has any grounds to persecute it.
No they have nothing to do with religion. They are just led by Popes and other religious authority figures with the promise of special redemption in heaven for faithful soldiers.
MythTV is no less of a fail than any other PVR.
It's also much more than a PVR which is helpful if you are interested in consuming your own media. Streamers are still bad at this.
No. The least troublesome would be something that doesn't even try to be a PVR anymore.
A streamer is even simpler. Less useless cruft to get in the way.
Yeah. Why do something simple like an interface that allows you to watch what you want when you want. Instead subject them to shoddy equipment that may or may not even allow them to time shift properly. Give them something THEY have to PROGRAM. Give them something where what they want to watch might not even be one of the choices for "demand".
No. A "video jukebox" is much simpler.
In fact, this is generally what you are trying to achieve with a non-crap PVR.
You take pensioners and give them a solution that really could be implemented for $100 but instead force them to spend $700 or $1300. That's just retarded. NO ONE here should be making excuses for Apple.
My kid loved MythTV when he was 3 years old. The young are not the users you have to worry about. Even the old aren't necessarily a problem.
It's the lazy/helpless types that are a problem and these come in all age groups. You may find an 80 year old that's much more adaptable to modern computing tech than some 60 year old.
The assumption that Granny can't handle tech is a stupid incorrect stereotype.
I have found the Netflix app to be best thing going on my BD player and on par with the version on the Roku. On the other hand, the other apps like Amazon Prime lag behind their Roku counterparts.
Both Amazon and Walmart are very liberal about returns. So if you find that a particular option doesn't work out, it's not such a great tragedy.
You can return stuff. Been that way since the age of the Dinosaurs.
50s TV will be butchered on a broadcast station.
You would be better off buying DVDs and ripping them.
At least streaming services don't have to conform to some artificial notion of a schedule.
SciFi once tried running the uncut versions of Old Trek. That experiment seemed to end quickly as 60 minute shows turned into 90 minute shows. That's just how long the old episodes were once you took the original material added the modern amount of commercials to it.
Any prime time shows will be butchered to run in a non-prime time slot where the stations can run more ads.
Sounds like the kind of "secret handshake" that no senior citizen would be able to cope with.
This sort of nonsense is why a "simple" interface really isn't.
This should be a global option in any video interface. If you find yourself fumbling to control this on a per video basis then the interface design is crap.
It doesn't matter how much you want to add to the mindless hype.
As long as that FOSS database uses the same mental model and basic syntax as one of the commercial RDBMS products, the amount of tribal knowledge lost from your cheapness will be minimized.
The real problem is that you are far too cheap to pay more than one person to be the keeper of the keys and that person you are underpaying so eggregiously underpaid that they will likely leave at the first opportunity.