I'm saying that the greed of the lazy coffee producing system is no more meaningful than the greed of the lazy app developers. None of these people deserve to be paid. They chose to put the time in, and I choose to benefit for free.
coffee is effectively infinite, it grows out of the ground. people have to put in work to make it into something you can conveniently consume, but why bother compensating them for that work? it's exactly the same as the work people put into apps... even less, in fact, it's just bullshit rote work trained monkeys or sufficiently advanced robots can do. the coffee workers only want to be paid because they're greedy.
That's not what the law and a large (but ignored on Slashdot) segment of society says, but you know, being antisocial in the name of YOUR personal greed is just fine. It's only bad when it's someone else's greed, perhaps their greed for compensation for work they've performed? Obviously your greed is more meaningful and deserving of being fulfilled, because hey! you were born, so you've done just about enough thankyouverymuch.
Well based purely on the facts of the situation, it would appear that SOPA illustrates... nothing of the sort. You see, it's not a law, it's a bill. Apparently not a very popular one, at that. For all the frothy bullshit the Slashdot feedback loop has fed you, it really hasn't actually gone anywhere in the legislative process yet.
What I love the most is that the opposition to SOPA seems to be about 5% real issues (namely the impossibility of enforcing it correctly and the damage it would do to the fundamentals of the Internet) and 95% "OMG I WANT MY FREE ENTERTAINMENT!"
The most impassioned argument I heard was from a camgirl who was upset that she might not be able to play music during her shows (obviously benefitting from the creative works of others with no intention of recompense). Truly, expression we need to protect.
Basic rhetorical technique used by politicians. It's not like the populists can tell the difference between a reasoned argument and a spittle-flecked rant, so just jam as much crap in there as you can and make sure to pause for applause.
They don't have to justify it. They set the terms of the deal they are offering. Someone who accepts that deal, then bitches about the terms... why do they get any attention? It's entitled whining. It has nothing to do with "justification" or "rationale" or any of these other fuzzy terms that have no place in the discussion.
It's a simple equation - if you don't like the terms, don't accept the service. Dur. People keep whining about "fair" and "greed" as if these companies should be forced to provide service according to some sort of populist doctrine, as if a cellular data plan with tethering is some sort of human right.
Prepared for what? Are you making the contention that Apple should have published an operating system that runs on hardware they don't sell despite the fact that they don't license their operating system that way?
I know the Apple haters get super-stupid in their zeal but it seems like you should at least understand that would never, ever happen.
I'm sorry, what the heck are you talking about? Did you just define Apple's strategy as something it isn't so you can shoot it down on esoteric technical grounds that are all divorced from the actual market realities?
(that was rhetorical, you did. I don't require confirmation.)
I'm not totally following the point here. Is your entire argument that Apple doesn't make the one machine that fits your needs, so nothing they do is worthwhile?
Or maybe, just maybe, the Slashdottian assumption of corporate malfeasance isn't how the case actually shook out, and the geniuses around here taking the default anti-corporate stance actually have no idea what happened.
I know, horribly unlikely since it only happens that way 95% of the time, but I'm going to take the chance and go with that.
By lumping them together in discussions where the details don't matter, you avoid worrying about details that don't matter. I know the holy book of RMS says you have to fight this wherever you found it, but that war is lost. The world isn't getting rid of intellectual property anytime soon, no matter how amazingly utopian you're sure it will be.
What does the "common" worker bring, outside of common skills that millions of others can bring?
If the best you can do is press a button over and over, you shouldn't feel too down about not really getting the big bucks. I know, I know... on populist Slashdot, we're all for the workers revolution. It's never worked before, but hope springs eternal in the mind of the middle class.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm saying that the greed of the lazy coffee producing system is no more meaningful than the greed of the lazy app developers. None of these people deserve to be paid. They chose to put the time in, and I choose to benefit for free.
coffee is effectively infinite, it grows out of the ground. people have to put in work to make it into something you can conveniently consume, but why bother compensating them for that work? it's exactly the same as the work people put into apps... even less, in fact, it's just bullshit rote work trained monkeys or sufficiently advanced robots can do. the coffee workers only want to be paid because they're greedy.
You need to stop telling people they need to think like you. It's unattractively arrogant, and your opinions aren't objectively superior.
That's not what the law and a large (but ignored on Slashdot) segment of society says, but you know, being antisocial in the name of YOUR personal greed is just fine. It's only bad when it's someone else's greed, perhaps their greed for compensation for work they've performed? Obviously your greed is more meaningful and deserving of being fulfilled, because hey! you were born, so you've done just about enough thankyouverymuch.
Someone actually modded this up? This site really is going downhill...
And I would like to note, because I know how Slashdot will interpret any non-froth as support - I oppose SOPA entirely.
Well based purely on the facts of the situation, it would appear that SOPA illustrates... nothing of the sort. You see, it's not a law, it's a bill. Apparently not a very popular one, at that. For all the frothy bullshit the Slashdot feedback loop has fed you, it really hasn't actually gone anywhere in the legislative process yet.
What I love the most is that the opposition to SOPA seems to be about 5% real issues (namely the impossibility of enforcing it correctly and the damage it would do to the fundamentals of the Internet) and 95% "OMG I WANT MY FREE ENTERTAINMENT!"
The most impassioned argument I heard was from a camgirl who was upset that she might not be able to play music during her shows (obviously benefitting from the creative works of others with no intention of recompense). Truly, expression we need to protect.
Basic rhetorical technique used by politicians. It's not like the populists can tell the difference between a reasoned argument and a spittle-flecked rant, so just jam as much crap in there as you can and make sure to pause for applause.
Where have you been this decade?
And I'll decide when the end is nigh, thankyouverymuch.
They don't have to justify it. They set the terms of the deal they are offering. Someone who accepts that deal, then bitches about the terms... why do they get any attention? It's entitled whining. It has nothing to do with "justification" or "rationale" or any of these other fuzzy terms that have no place in the discussion.
It's a simple equation - if you don't like the terms, don't accept the service. Dur. People keep whining about "fair" and "greed" as if these companies should be forced to provide service according to some sort of populist doctrine, as if a cellular data plan with tethering is some sort of human right.
Only by a definition of evil so watered down as to be applicable to everything from leaving the toilet seat up to charging more for 3D movies.
A bad deal isn't evil, no matter how much you can't resist taking it anyway.
Prepared for what? Are you making the contention that Apple should have published an operating system that runs on hardware they don't sell despite the fact that they don't license their operating system that way?
I know the Apple haters get super-stupid in their zeal but it seems like you should at least understand that would never, ever happen.
I'm sorry, what the heck are you talking about? Did you just define Apple's strategy as something it isn't so you can shoot it down on esoteric technical grounds that are all divorced from the actual market realities?
(that was rhetorical, you did. I don't require confirmation.)
I'm not totally following the point here. Is your entire argument that Apple doesn't make the one machine that fits your needs, so nothing they do is worthwhile?
I gotta say, expressing appreciation for a product seems a lot less pathological than piling hate on it.
1. Nobody* cares
2. Nobody* cares
3. Nobody* cares
4. Nobody* cares
5. Sure. You can have the bullshit one.
*yes, I know, a vanishingly small percentage of you care.
This was mostly tongue-in-cheek.
Awww, was the troll afraid to put his name to the lies?
Yeah hi, this is Slashdot. Apparently you're new here? Which seems unlikely given your UID but one never knows.
Clearly the problem is that we haven't given them enough money.
Or maybe, just maybe, the Slashdottian assumption of corporate malfeasance isn't how the case actually shook out, and the geniuses around here taking the default anti-corporate stance actually have no idea what happened.
I know, horribly unlikely since it only happens that way 95% of the time, but I'm going to take the chance and go with that.
This is to keep Nvidia in the future from making faulty GPUs.
Nothing like dreaming the impossible dream, huh?
Class action lawsuits are about enriching lawyers. Any other effects are unintentional at best.
Hah. Good call.
By lumping them together in discussions where the details don't matter, you avoid worrying about details that don't matter. I know the holy book of RMS says you have to fight this wherever you found it, but that war is lost. The world isn't getting rid of intellectual property anytime soon, no matter how amazingly utopian you're sure it will be.
What does the "common" worker bring, outside of common skills that millions of others can bring?
If the best you can do is press a button over and over, you shouldn't feel too down about not really getting the big bucks. I know, I know... on populist Slashdot, we're all for the workers revolution. It's never worked before, but hope springs eternal in the mind of the middle class.
Is it your contention that you've described the norm, or do you realize that was an exceptional case?