I am all for EVERYONE having auto insurance. I don't want you rear ending me and destroying my car and possibly hurting me and my family and then have to pay for everything myself because you are a jobless bum.
In turn, I would also like to know I can rear end you and not loose my house and retirement account paying for your bills.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. All insurance does is provide you with an extended payment plan (with terrific overhead) to pay for the accident's you may, or may not have. This makes some sense for liability insurance, since drivers don't really have a choice of who they get hit by. But statistically, most drivers would be better off skipping any extra insurance and using some of the money to keep an emergency fund from which to pay for unforeseen repairs.
I don't think that's really the the point. The patent system isn't about making inventors money, its about providing them a monetary incentive for invention. As long as the potential for profit is there to be chased it doesn't really matter who gets it (within reason of course).
If I go onto a Disney children's forum and post nothing but swear words, and Disney deletes it, is that censorship too?
Yes, that's exactly what it is.
In such a case, it would probably be reasonable, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still the obstruction of ones speech by another, whether you agree with the speaker has nothing to do with it.
Last year our neighbors cat had kittens, one of which my family ended up with. When we got her, she wasn't old enough to stand. Even with a bowl of food always available in the corner, and canned food from time to time, she kills mice on a regular basis.
Is it just me, or are we beginning to lose our perspective amidst all this wanton regulation.
How long will it be before we're arguing that the sharp corners on our muzzle,loaded florescent orange painted, foam-projectile only, civilian class "firearms" are essential to defending our freedom, and that the government has no right to demand that they be covered in padding.
I can see the counter-comments now... How would you feel if your child was bludgeoned to death with one of these murder-tools, knowing it would have been prevented if we'd been proactive enough to regulate the ownership of hard, blunt objects. You can't put a price on safety, I won't have my kids growing up in a world where some wacko can just walk into a store and buy a hard blunt object with no background check, then go and beat an auditorium full of children to death.
Isn't it obvious? To act as a planetary booby-trap for the raptors who were once driven off of this planet. We can only assume that after escaping to the farthest reaches of space and developing a massive space fairing armada, they'd return every 20 million years or so to asses the habitability of their former world. When they return to find their world overrun with fleshy pink things, the fight will be vicious one. After our inevitable defeat, we'll lie in wait on the moon. Years will go by, but eventually, the raptors, satisfied that the world is theirs once again, will dismiss their fleet and and lower their guard. It's at this point that we'll unleash our trap, sterilizing the planet in a nuclear holocaust, so that centuries later, once the radiation has subsided and life returned, we might have earth for ourselves... For another 20 million years.
You don't see this sort of thing in markets with real competition. Try to charge $100 on that bag of cheezie poofs, and the other guys will take your profits by charging $98 dollars a bag, you'll be forced to match them, and so on, until the prices are at the limits of profitability, and can't be lowered any further.
The bottom line is, software improvement is a one time cost, once its done, it's done.
Hardware solutions on the other hand, though cheaper outright, are reoccurring (you'll need keep upgrading that hardware as it becomes outdated) and scale up with demand (if you double your number of servers, you'll need to double this hardware as well)
This is why, except in cases were demand won't increase, or the extra hardware is unlikely to become outdated, software solutions tend to be the more economical choice.
Drive around to a couple of thrift stores or garage sales and pick up a couple interesting appliances he can take apart, give the boy a box of nuts and bolts and some tools and let him go to town.
YMMV, but when I was that age, returning home to find a new appliance on my workbench was like a tiny Christmas.
The results for the "thief" are the same even if the means (and their side effects) are drastically different.
Whether or not your morally right about file sharing being akin to stealing, your logic is full of holes.
By your criteria, buying used games should be theft as well, since your obtaining something that "belongs to someone else" without paying them for it. The fact that your paying someone doesn't change anything, if it did, making buying and selling bootleg media could be considered just as acceptable, as would pirating a game, then burning some money to negate the financial benefit.
I wouldn't really consider the DRM to be a restriction of rights, since the only thing thats being limited is the functionality of the company's own program, gimping their own program was a stupid thing to do, but as long as their upfront about the functionality, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to.
That being said, I'm sure there are numerous DRM free, nearly one-click dvd cloning programs available for free, so I doubt this'll be purchased by any but the ignorant, which kind of makes any debate of the fairness of this companies practices moot.
That's what I thought, until I realized that in making such a claim we'd have to assume that he has the writing ability to pull it off, which seams unlikely, based on the summary.
is there anyone in their right mind who thinks that Google will be as valuable after 30 years as Apple has proven to be?
Bah, don't get bogged down in reality, remember, your on/., where a self-referencing, somewhat off-topic post that adds nothing of value to the discussion can be modded +5 funny.
But more to the point, you have got something to hide, everybody does. Who hasn't broken the law at one stage or another? Speeding? Jaywalked? Partaken of some illicit substance? Blasphemed? (You know why Mary was a virgin? She only had anal sex.) You get the idea, everyone is guilty of something, and that means everyone has something to hide from the government.
Another way to put it is that you have nothing to fear as long long as you don't in any way interfere with, scrutinize, or question the governments actions. You don't have to be guilty of any real crime (however small) these days, if they want to arrest you, there are plenty of selectively enforced and catch-all laws that will easily serve the purpose.
The legal protections on our freedoms have all but dissolved completely. Currently, the only thing protecting the freedoms we have left is the relative media transparency that the Internets been providing (the last thing a police state wants to do is stir up unified public resentment). At the rate things are going, the free internet won't last much longer.
Unless our societies change very much, very quickly, things are going to get ugly.
Slashdot Mirror
If I hadn't already posted I'd mod you up.
This seams so obvious, at very least fine money should be pooled nationally and distributed according to safety statistics or something like that.
The only result of giving fine money to cities is pressure to give out as many tickets as possible, even safety has become a secondary to this.
I am all for EVERYONE having auto insurance. I don't want you rear ending me and destroying my car and possibly hurting me and my family and then have to pay for everything myself because you are a jobless bum.
In turn, I would also like to know I can rear end you and not loose my house and retirement account paying for your bills.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. All insurance does is provide you with an extended payment plan (with terrific overhead) to pay for the accident's you may, or may not have. This makes some sense for liability insurance, since drivers don't really have a choice of who they get hit by. But statistically, most drivers would be better off skipping any extra insurance and using some of the money to keep an emergency fund from which to pay for unforeseen repairs.
I don't think that's really the the point. The patent system isn't about making inventors money, its about providing them a monetary incentive for invention. As long as the potential for profit is there to be chased it doesn't really matter who gets it (within reason of course).
If I go onto a Disney children's forum and post nothing but swear words, and Disney deletes it, is that censorship too?
Yes, that's exactly what it is.
In such a case, it would probably be reasonable, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still the obstruction of ones speech by another, whether you agree with the speaker has nothing to do with it.
most people are not personal friends with aXXo, RELOADED, Fairlight, Outlaws, KLAXXON, etc
True, but it only takes one leak. The speed at which sought-after information propagates between sub-networks is astounding.
Do you have a reliable source for that?
Last year our neighbors cat had kittens, one of which my family ended up with. When we got her, she wasn't old enough to stand. Even with a bowl of food always available in the corner, and canned food from time to time, she kills mice on a regular basis.
Granted, this is idle, but the sensationalist headlines are getting old.
Caus, you know, making oil from slaughter by-products is pretty much the same as "burning cattle for heat"
In case I'm not the only one who immediately wondered what the latency on their display was.
DigitalVersus Monitor Duels
Switch to one of the telecoms many competi... oh wait
The cracked version im running still works fine as of this morning.
Is it just me, or are we beginning to lose our perspective amidst all this wanton regulation.
How long will it be before we're arguing that the sharp corners on our muzzle,loaded florescent orange painted, foam-projectile only, civilian class "firearms" are essential to defending our freedom, and that the government has no right to demand that they be covered in padding.
I can see the counter-comments now...
How would you feel if your child was bludgeoned to death with one of these murder-tools, knowing it would have been prevented if we'd been proactive enough to regulate the ownership of hard, blunt objects. You can't put a price on safety, I won't have my kids growing up in a world where some wacko can just walk into a store and buy a hard blunt object with no background check, then go and beat an auditorium full of children to death.
Am I the only one that immediately thought of the bio-etheric laser from the spirits within?
Isn't it obvious? To act as a planetary booby-trap for the raptors who were once driven off of this planet. We can only assume that after escaping to the farthest reaches of space and developing a massive space fairing armada, they'd return every 20 million years or so to asses the habitability of their former world. When they return to find their world overrun with fleshy pink things, the fight will be vicious one. After our inevitable defeat, we'll lie in wait on the moon. Years will go by, but eventually, the raptors, satisfied that the world is theirs once again, will dismiss their fleet and and lower their guard. It's at this point that we'll unleash our trap, sterilizing the planet in a nuclear holocaust, so that centuries later, once the radiation has subsided and life returned, we might have earth for ourselves...
For another 20 million years.
You don't see this sort of thing in markets with real competition. Try to charge $100 on that bag of cheezie poofs, and the other guys will take your profits by charging $98 dollars a bag, you'll be forced to match them, and so on, until the prices are at the limits of profitability, and can't be lowered any further.
The bottom line is, software improvement is a one time cost, once its done, it's done.
Hardware solutions on the other hand, though cheaper outright, are reoccurring (you'll need keep upgrading that hardware as it becomes outdated) and scale up with demand (if you double your number of servers, you'll need to double this hardware as well)
This is why, except in cases were demand won't increase, or the extra hardware is unlikely to become outdated, software solutions tend to be the more economical choice.
Drive around to a couple of thrift stores or garage sales and pick up a couple interesting appliances he can take apart, give the boy a box of nuts and bolts and some tools and let him go to town.
YMMV, but when I was that age, returning home to find a new appliance on my workbench was like a tiny Christmas.
Make abuse of IP law invisible, and people will tolerate it.
"Keyboard failure, strike F1 to continue"
Bah, you kids these days
What's the problem with just hardwiring programs directly within your hardware?
The results for the "thief" are the same even if the means (and their side effects) are drastically different.
Whether or not your morally right about file sharing being akin to stealing, your logic is full of holes.
By your criteria, buying used games should be theft as well, since your obtaining something that "belongs to someone else" without paying them for it. The fact that your paying someone doesn't change anything, if it did, making buying and selling bootleg media could be considered just as acceptable, as would pirating a game, then burning some money to negate the financial benefit.
I wouldn't really consider the DRM to be a restriction of rights, since the only thing thats being limited is the functionality of the company's own program, gimping their own program was a stupid thing to do, but as long as their upfront about the functionality, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to.
That being said, I'm sure there are numerous DRM free, nearly one-click dvd cloning programs available for free, so I doubt this'll be purchased by any but the ignorant, which kind of makes any debate of the fairness of this companies practices moot.
That's what I thought, until I realized that in making such a claim we'd have to assume that he has the writing ability to pull it off, which seams unlikely, based on the summary.
We did this to ourselves in an overreaction to the trivial terrorist threat.
That's way they call it Terror-ism. If terrorist attacks were any real threat, we'd refer to their actions as warfare.
is there anyone in their right mind who thinks that Google will be as valuable after 30 years as Apple has proven to be?
Bah, don't get bogged down in reality, remember, your on /., where a self-referencing, somewhat off-topic post that adds nothing of value to the discussion can be modded +5 funny.
But more to the point, you have got something to hide, everybody does. Who hasn't broken the law at one stage or another? Speeding? Jaywalked? Partaken of some illicit substance? Blasphemed? (You know why Mary was a virgin? She only had anal sex.) You get the idea, everyone is guilty of something, and that means everyone has something to hide from the government.
Another way to put it is that you have nothing to fear as long long as you don't in any way interfere with, scrutinize, or question the governments actions. You don't have to be guilty of any real crime (however small) these days, if they want to arrest you, there are plenty of selectively enforced and catch-all laws that will easily serve the purpose.
The legal protections on our freedoms have all but dissolved completely. Currently, the only thing protecting the freedoms we have left is the relative media transparency that the Internets been providing (the last thing a police state wants to do is stir up unified public resentment). At the rate things are going, the free internet won't last much longer.
Unless our societies change very much, very quickly, things are going to get ugly.