Okay, fine. We'll remove this feature. But not because everyone flipped their shit and hated it. The only reason we're removing it is because it was cost effective to do so. If we could have found a way to profit off of it, you can bet your pimply ass that it would still be in there and on by default.
They're going to steal my imaginary internet points!
Seriously... who gives a shit about Reddit's security? It's a public bulletin board filled with porn, PM_Me_Your_ accounts, cat memes and throwaway accounts trolling any subreddit that actually tries to have a serious discussion. Adding two factor authorization to that is like putting a combination lock on your garbage can.
While generation ships make for some compelling science fiction, the reality is that we have yet to be able to build a sustainable closed biosphere on Earth where we have a ton of advantages like gravity, sunlight, a magnetic field to protect from radiation, no concerns about explosive decompression and a distinct lack of large chunks of rock and ice floating around. Until we understand our own biology and ecosystem more fully, a generation ship wouldn't be a few dozen astronauts dying out of some larger number. Every single one would die.
The judges in the Eastern Texas Division actions may not have broken any laws (it's debatable), but it would be ludicrous to suggest that defendants in patent litigation are receiving fair trials there. A judicial system that unfairly favors one side in a lawsuit is, by definition, corrupt.
I have some canned baby formula from China that may or may not contain enough melamine to destroy your kidneys. If you're willing to chug a case of it, I'll be willing to listen to your arguments that the FDA is prohibited by the constitution.
Not really. Space shifting a blu-ray disc is just a matter of launching the ripper (AnyDVD in my case) and clicking Copy Disc. Three mouse clicks and my part is done so I can go off and do something more fun.
>> but it [copyright] is in no way needed for art to exist. > Yes it is
The only person whose IQ should be in question is the one who literally said that art does not exist without copyright. This is the stupidest thing I've seen posted in this entire topic and you should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking it, much lest posting it where others could read it.
You've confused art with profit. They are not the same thing.
People all over the world make music, paintings, sculpture and every other form of art imaginable. Most of them don't make money and aren't doing it for profit. If copyright was completely abolished, they would continue. Bad poetry written by teenagers in love, silly songs mothers sing to their kids, graffiti on urban buildings, sand castles on the beach... art is built in to human nature and isn't going to go away.
I feel sad for you having bought in to the idea that only something that you have to pay for qualifies as art. You've replaced emotions with dollar signs.
Bullshit. Art existed for tens of thousands of years before the idea of copyright was invented. Copyright was meant to encourage the distribution of art, but it is in no way needed for art to exist.
Then you'd best stick with $20 crack whores. Sure, you're paying for regret and an STD, but you can be pretty sure that you're getting what you paid for.
We'd be back to this shit... never-ending internal wars between different factions vying to try and take over and become the government, except it would be much worse since we have weapons which are far more effective at killing massive numbers of people than we had back then.
Amazon even put instructions for disabling in-app purchases on their web site for those users who have never bothered to explore what's in the settings menu on the tablet.
What isn't easy is making people take time to look at a manual before complaining about missing features.
So when my 5 year old son sees a screen pop up with a button that says "Purchase the in game upgrade" he automatically clicks on the button. There are no settings to prevent that.
You're wrong. There are settings specifically meant to prevent that.
There's a setting that disables in-app purchases and you can use parental controls to prevent purchases without entering a password if you don't want to disable them entirely.
Slashdot Mirror
Please tell me if visiting my relatives who live 6000 miles away is absolutely necessary.
Will either you or they die if you don't visit them? No? Then it is not absolutely necessary, no matter how much you enjoy it.
Okay, fine. We'll remove this feature. But not because everyone flipped their shit and hated it. The only reason we're removing it is because it was cost effective to do so. If we could have found a way to profit off of it, you can bet your pimply ass that it would still be in there and on by default.
They're going to steal my imaginary internet points!
Seriously... who gives a shit about Reddit's security? It's a public bulletin board filled with porn, PM_Me_Your_ accounts, cat memes and throwaway accounts trolling any subreddit that actually tries to have a serious discussion. Adding two factor authorization to that is like putting a combination lock on your garbage can.
While generation ships make for some compelling science fiction, the reality is that we have yet to be able to build a sustainable closed biosphere on Earth where we have a ton of advantages like gravity, sunlight, a magnetic field to protect from radiation, no concerns about explosive decompression and a distinct lack of large chunks of rock and ice floating around. Until we understand our own biology and ecosystem more fully, a generation ship wouldn't be a few dozen astronauts dying out of some larger number. Every single one would die.
The submitter put the brackets in, not the editors.
Mark Zuckerberg literally shit himself from laughing so hard after reading the GOP's whiny little demand for attention.
What the fuck is Google?
if you're going to suggest that a federal judge is corrupt, you should at least have some evidence to support your claim.
This article provides a fairly complete explanation:
https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
The judges in the Eastern Texas Division actions may not have broken any laws (it's debatable), but it would be ludicrous to suggest that defendants in patent litigation are receiving fair trials there. A judicial system that unfairly favors one side in a lawsuit is, by definition, corrupt.
I have some canned baby formula from China that may or may not contain enough melamine to destroy your kidneys. If you're willing to chug a case of it, I'll be willing to listen to your arguments that the FDA is prohibited by the constitution.
It's time for people to start taking responsibility for their own actions.
Unless their actions involve encouraging dangerous behavior, in which case you seem to think they deserve a free pass.
That's now how you donate bitcoins to TPB, which is what my comment is in response to.
I'm not sure which is sadder; this lame attempt at trolling or the number of serious replies that it garnered.
Just how much energy has been wasted mining bitcoins over the years.
Probably less than one billionth of the amount of energy that's been used to view porn on the internet over the same period of time.
Not really. Space shifting a blu-ray disc is just a matter of launching the ripper (AnyDVD in my case) and clicking Copy Disc. Three mouse clicks and my part is done so I can go off and do something more fun.
The art I do is Aikido, a Martial Art, I clearly don't do it for profit, but for fun. And funnily it is an Art that does not need copyright.
And yet, as I quoted before, you literally said that copyright is needed for art to exist.
Art exists outside of copyright. Copyright provides a means of making art more profitable than it might be without copyright, but PROFIT IS NOT ART.
And once again, you've equated art with profit.
Art does not need to be profitable to exist. Art will exist even if the profits dry up. Art is not profit.
Let me repeat what you said earlier:
>> but it [copyright] is in no way needed for art to exist.
> Yes it is
The only person whose IQ should be in question is the one who literally said that art does not exist without copyright. This is the stupidest thing I've seen posted in this entire topic and you should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking it, much lest posting it where others could read it.
You've confused art with profit. They are not the same thing.
People all over the world make music, paintings, sculpture and every other form of art imaginable. Most of them don't make money and aren't doing it for profit. If copyright was completely abolished, they would continue. Bad poetry written by teenagers in love, silly songs mothers sing to their kids, graffiti on urban buildings, sand castles on the beach... art is built in to human nature and isn't going to go away.
I feel sad for you having bought in to the idea that only something that you have to pay for qualifies as art. You've replaced emotions with dollar signs.
Fuck it. Just kill off the entire human race and start over.
Without a monopoly, art will dry up.
Bullshit. Art existed for tens of thousands of years before the idea of copyright was invented. Copyright was meant to encourage the distribution of art, but it is in no way needed for art to exist.
Then you'd best stick with $20 crack whores. Sure, you're paying for regret and an STD, but you can be pretty sure that you're getting what you paid for.
We'd be back to this shit... never-ending internal wars between different factions vying to try and take over and become the government, except it would be much worse since we have weapons which are far more effective at killing massive numbers of people than we had back then.
Since it appears that Amazon doesn't have even that basic level of security,
Set Parental Controls for In-App Purchases
You're right. It would be easy to do that.
So easy, in fact, that it's already been done.
Amazon even put instructions for disabling in-app purchases on their web site for those users who have never bothered to explore what's in the settings menu on the tablet.
What isn't easy is making people take time to look at a manual before complaining about missing features.
So when my 5 year old son sees a screen pop up with a button that says "Purchase the in game upgrade" he automatically clicks on the button. There are no settings to prevent that.
You're wrong. There are settings specifically meant to prevent that.
There's a setting that disables in-app purchases and you can use parental controls to prevent purchases without entering a password if you don't want to disable them entirely.