[...] if you're accused of murder, we're supposed to acquit you if there is a reasonable possibility that you're innocent - even if we think the odds are you're guilty.
Somewhere in that statement lies one of the many problems of our justice system. I can't pinpoint it, and it doesn't seem like anyone else can either, but imagine being the one witness to a violent murder -- you testify, you feel certain that the "suspect" will be found guilty and serve a life sentence in prison, and then because the jury thinks there is some reasonable possibility that he was innocent, he walks. Suddenly, there is a murderer on the loose, and you just testified on the public record that he is a murderer.
And no, I do not remember when they stopped putting out updates. I didn't start using it extensively until version 6.0.162. Before that, I just toyed with it here and there without taking it seriously.
When I eventually buy my first DVD writer, it should be incredibly affordable, even on my college budget. I'm thinking 8x will be fast enough for me, and a much cheaper option once 12x or even 16x becomes the standard.
For convenience, does anyone know the current "standard" rate for external DVD writers?
To answer the question asked, it was incredibly ironic. I mean, that was the entire point! They only wanted to show us that even the worst environmental (or other man-caused) disasters can be beneficial in the rarest, most extreme, most random circumstances!
But considering the world today and asking the same question in the present tense, [sarcasm]is that irony... or coincidence?![/sarcasm]
Repost of this comment, with fixed links. (Mod the other one down!)
* * *
Ad-Aware with Ad-Watch is my personal choice, which requires either the "Plus" ($26.95) or "Professional" ($39.95) edition. You'll have to go through the "Tweak" options to set Ad-Watch to run win Windows starts and start in blocking mode, but once its up -- you don't have to worry about ad/spy-ware much anymore. Just run a comprehensive Ad-Aware scan every week or two, and check the results list to make sure nothing useful is being flagged as spyware! Oh, and Ad-Aware's free version (that does not come with Ad-Watch) is a very effective scanner/cleaner, but it will not stop ad/spy-ware from infiltrating your system -- it can only remove it after the fact, which often requires several minutes (or even hours?) of tweaking after their removal.
Spybot Search & Destroy is my second choice, and except for its tendency to treat files quarantined by Ad-Aware as spyware (well, they are, but they're quarantined!) and to miss a few items that Ad-Aware finds, Spybot is very capable of keeping your PC (mostly) clean. But here's the catch: Spybot is freeware, so it is much more cost-effective than Ad-Aware, but remember the old addage: "You get what you pay for."
I've used both Ad-Aware (more extensively) and Spybot (somewhat extensively) for several months, and here's my suggestion: use Spybot or Ad-Aware's free version at home if your files aren't "top secret" or otherwise crucial to anyone's survival; use Ad-Aware Plus or Professional on business computers (where the company will pay for the license) or if you want to protect your computer from gathering ad/spy-ware in the first place.
There are other options out there, and remember that nothing is perfect... Some legitimate things will be deleted if you're not careful, and some illegitimate things will sneak through no matter how careful you are. The ad/spy-ware-war only marks our attempts to stay ahead of the game.
Spybot Search & Destroy is my second choice, and except for its tendency to treat files quarantined by Ad-Aware as spyware (well, they are, but they're quarantined!) and to miss a few items that Ad-Aware finds, Spybot is very capable of keeping your PC (mostly) clean. But here's the catch: Spybot is freeware, so it is much more cost-effective than Ad-Aware, but remember the old addage: "You get what you pay for."
I've used both Ad-Aware (more extensively) and Spybot (somewhat extensively) for several months, and here's my suggestion: use Spybot or Ad-Aware's free version at home if your files aren't "top secret" or otherwise crucial to anyone's survival; use Ad-Aware Plus or Professional on business computers (where the company will pay for the license) or if you want to protect your computer from gathering ad/spy-ware in the first place.
There are other options out there, and remember that nothing is perfect... Some legitimate things will be deleted if you're not careful, and some illegitimate things will sneak through no matter how careful you are. The ad/spy-ware-war only marks our attempts to stay ahead of the game.
Okay, so their lifespan isn't as interminable as the RIAA and MPAA would like us to believe. This isn't a new development. It's been known about for years, but (for obvious reasons) the mass-producers of these things aren't in a hurry to let us know that they'll only last a little bit longer than the average cassette, and only if you take extraordinarily good care of it every time you handle it for the rest of your (un?)natural life.
A new development, in terms of spacetime and the existence of all things, are these copy-protecte discs that don't even allow us to secure our purchased goods with backup copies.
Oh, and try this one on: last May my car was broken into, and several of my CDs were stolen. Lucky me, I backup most of my CDs. But I was recently approached by someone who was "concerned" about the fact that I have a 50-CD spindle of audio CDR's in my car -- naturally, the person is thinking piracy. And naturally, at least a few of the CDs are pirated copies -- but suppose none of them were: someone could quite plausibly be found guilty of music piracy to the tune of a couple thousand dollars just because their CDs are stolen. After all, if you don't own it, how can you prove that your copies are legit?
I no longer remember the purpose of this, so I'll end on that note. Just food for thought.
...except the article says the RIAA didn't cheat anyone out of anything. The artists failed to update their own contact information, and it was the RIAA legal team that brought this up. For once, the RIAA did something benevolent.
Either that, or they found out someone else was about to come out with it, so they organized a confession before they could be degraded any further in the public's eyes.
Last summer, a major part of the Northeast U.S. was hit by a power outage that knocked out telecommunications and networks in several states. A recent report blames some of the problem on IT policies.
Click here to read more.
Apparently someone didn't read the article that carefully though, because it goes on to say it's "not an IT issue, it's a business issue".
Anyway, the article mentioned it, and I thought it to be a useful comparison. Once again, the problem doesn't seem to be IT, but poor preparedness on the business end of things that allowed this outage to occur.
Messing with the internet crosses the line from intra- to interstate commerce. Now they're messing with Texas!
But seriously, as much as the internet is becoming the the globe's central nervous system, I don't see much problem with a limited suspension of due process rights with a theft of this scale, even if it still just boils down to theft.
The world is becoming increasingly dependent upon internet technology, and if we're going to set ourselves up to take a huge fall if any of it goes wrong, then we need to set up equally huge disincentives (obstacles and punishments) to protect us from the fall.
If whoever's behind it is intelligent on even the lowest significant level, then the plan was to steal and destroy the items. Though... for what purpose?
...so one album can be spliced into one MP3 with 10, 12, or however many tracks, allowing navigation through an album without those annoying pauses between tracks -- especially on MP3 CDs.
Exploring the North Pole in search of Santa Claus would be fruitless, since the North Pole is not solid -- there's nothing but Arctic Ocean and large fragments of ice up there. (I say "up there" -- damn maps have me brainwashed!)
On the other hand, exploring Mt. Ararat for Noah's Ark, while seemingly equally as implausible as searching the North Pole for Santa Claus, is at least a tiny bit more credible simply because we know Mt. Ararat exists, we can pinpoint it on a map, and we can physically go there and climb it.
Further, just as with the historical "Santa Claus", we can accept that perhaps a man called "Noah" (or at least a man that we will call Noah from this vantagepoint in time) once existed and built an ark, kidnapped a few thousands animals, and got the boat stuck in the mountains when the Euphrates flooded some 6000+ years ago.
All those "Great Flood" myths came from somewhere, and while we cannot with any certainty address the (non)involvement of any divine hand, we can with limited certainty address the historical significance and (in)accuracy of what we do know for sure.
Closing thought: maybe we've got the wrong mountain.
The problem with this project from its initial motion is glaring: the followers will believe anything and the skeptics will doubt everything. The only way to prove anything about Noah's ark, Moses' parting of the Red Sea, Jesus' rising on the third day, or God's will and power as the creative force behind all that is... is to go about your business, be a good person in whatever way makes the best sense to you, stop looking for God as if you need proof to believe (or disbelieve), and wait for God himself to appear and prove himself to you.
Maybe we're communicating more, in person and on the phone, because the Internet and cell phone technologies allow us a much broader range of communications and facilitate social activity. Cell phones especially have an effect here, as those who carry them carry them just about everywhere, allowing them to connect to just about anyone at just about any time. With communication being so much easier, and with the human naturally being a social animal, it makes more sense that we choose to socialize rather than sit in isolation listening to music.
Whether we actually hit a recession is not at issue here. Instead, we should focus on the fact that the media has for two years been blaming the Bush administration for what many have called a recession (mild though it may have been). And when the American public here's that less money is on the way, they're probably not going to spend as much on non-necessities like music CDs.
Consider also that the US economy is about 1/5 of the global economy, and combine the slow growth or decline of other major economies around the world, and you've got a global consumer base not as interested in purchasing CDs as they were, say, four years ago.
If we've got the money to spend, most of us spend it, and most of us aren't disciplined enough to hold back from buying frivolous items like music CDs. File-sharing does not detract from CD sales by any significant margin, and even if it does, I say that's a good thing. The entertainment industry needs a reality check. Entertainment is a frivolous and superficial financial venture if there ever was one, and I think we could be spending our money a helluva lot more wisely than on music... and we could be sending the entertainment industry a message, that it should not command such insanely high prices for "popular" entertainment that has no direct beneficial impact on our lives.
You're better off spending your money on charities, furthering education, and making house payments.
Well, almost no impact. According to a new study, "downloads have an effect on sales which is statistically indistinguishable from zero". Monday's NYTimes (free registration) describes the study, in which two economists analyzed file-sharing and sales data over a 17-week period in 2002, using "complex mathematical formulas" to determine that "spikes in downloading had almost no discernible effect on sales", and estimating that "it would take 5000 downloads to reduce the sales of an album by one copy". Naturally, some organizationsdisagree. Also, according to the RIAA's 2003 year end numbers [PDF], sales of CD singles were up 84% from 2002, while overall revenue shrunk from $11.55 to $11.05 billion... which makes perfect sense when you consider economic tendencies since 9/11.
Slashdot Mirror
[...] if you're accused of murder, we're supposed to acquit you if there is a reasonable possibility that you're innocent - even if we think the odds are you're guilty.
Somewhere in that statement lies one of the many problems of our justice system. I can't pinpoint it, and it doesn't seem like anyone else can either, but imagine being the one witness to a violent murder -- you testify, you feel certain that the "suspect" will be found guilty and serve a life sentence in prison, and then because the jury thinks there is some reasonable possibility that he was innocent, he walks. Suddenly, there is a murderer on the loose, and you just testified on the public record that he is a murderer.
Ad-Aware has a free version.
And no, I do not remember when they stopped putting out updates. I didn't start using it extensively until version 6.0.162. Before that, I just toyed with it here and there without taking it seriously.
When I eventually buy my first DVD writer, it should be incredibly affordable, even on my college budget. I'm thinking 8x will be fast enough for me, and a much cheaper option once 12x or even 16x becomes the standard.
For convenience, does anyone know the current "standard" rate for external DVD writers?
To answer the question asked, it was incredibly ironic. I mean, that was the entire point! They only wanted to show us that even the worst environmental (or other man-caused) disasters can be beneficial in the rarest, most extreme, most random circumstances!
But considering the world today and asking the same question in the present tense, [sarcasm]is that irony... or coincidence?![/sarcasm]
Repost of this comment, with fixed links. (Mod the other one down!)
* * *
Ad-Aware with Ad-Watch is my personal choice, which requires either the "Plus" ($26.95) or "Professional" ($39.95) edition. You'll have to go through the "Tweak" options to set Ad-Watch to run win Windows starts and start in blocking mode, but once its up -- you don't have to worry about ad/spy-ware much anymore. Just run a comprehensive Ad-Aware scan every week or two, and check the results list to make sure nothing useful is being flagged as spyware! Oh, and Ad-Aware's free version (that does not come with Ad-Watch) is a very effective scanner/cleaner, but it will not stop ad/spy-ware from infiltrating your system -- it can only remove it after the fact, which often requires several minutes (or even hours?) of tweaking after their removal.
Spybot Search & Destroy is my second choice, and except for its tendency to treat files quarantined by Ad-Aware as spyware (well, they are, but they're quarantined!) and to miss a few items that Ad-Aware finds, Spybot is very capable of keeping your PC (mostly) clean. But here's the catch: Spybot is freeware, so it is much more cost-effective than Ad-Aware, but remember the old addage: "You get what you pay for."
I've used both Ad-Aware (more extensively) and Spybot (somewhat extensively) for several months, and here's my suggestion: use Spybot or Ad-Aware's free version at home if your files aren't "top secret" or otherwise crucial to anyone's survival; use Ad-Aware Plus or Professional on business computers (where the company will pay for the license) or if you want to protect your computer from gathering ad/spy-ware in the first place.
There are other options out there, and remember that nothing is perfect... Some legitimate things will be deleted if you're not careful, and some illegitimate things will sneak through no matter how careful you are. The ad/spy-ware-war only marks our attempts to stay ahead of the game.
Note to self: use the "Preview" option.
Ad-Aware with Ad-Watch is my personal choice, which requires either the "Plus" ($26.95) or "Professional" ($39.95) edition. You'll have to go through the "Tweak" options to set Ad-Watch to run win Windows starts and start in blocking mode, but once its up -- you don't have to worry about ad/spy-ware much anymore. Just run a comprehensive Ad-Aware scan every week or two, and check the results list to make sure nothing useful is being flagged as spyware! Oh, and Ad-Aware's free version (that does not come with Ad-Watch) is a very effective scanner/cleaner, but it will not stop ad/spy-ware from infiltrating your system -- it can only remove it after the fact, which often requires several minutes (or even hours?) of tweaking after their removal.
Spybot Search & Destroy is my second choice, and except for its tendency to treat files quarantined by Ad-Aware as spyware (well, they are, but they're quarantined!) and to miss a few items that Ad-Aware finds, Spybot is very capable of keeping your PC (mostly) clean. But here's the catch: Spybot is freeware, so it is much more cost-effective than Ad-Aware, but remember the old addage: "You get what you pay for."
I've used both Ad-Aware (more extensively) and Spybot (somewhat extensively) for several months, and here's my suggestion: use Spybot or Ad-Aware's free version at home if your files aren't "top secret" or otherwise crucial to anyone's survival; use Ad-Aware Plus or Professional on business computers (where the company will pay for the license) or if you want to protect your computer from gathering ad/spy-ware in the first place.
There are other options out there, and remember that nothing is perfect... Some legitimate things will be deleted if you're not careful, and some illegitimate things will sneak through no matter how careful you are. The ad/spy-ware-war only marks our attempts to stay ahead of the game.
Okay, so their lifespan isn't as interminable as the RIAA and MPAA would like us to believe. This isn't a new development. It's been known about for years, but (for obvious reasons) the mass-producers of these things aren't in a hurry to let us know that they'll only last a little bit longer than the average cassette, and only if you take extraordinarily good care of it every time you handle it for the rest of your (un?)natural life.
A new development, in terms of spacetime and the existence of all things, are these copy-protecte discs that don't even allow us to secure our purchased goods with backup copies.
Oh, and try this one on: last May my car was broken into, and several of my CDs were stolen. Lucky me, I backup most of my CDs. But I was recently approached by someone who was "concerned" about the fact that I have a 50-CD spindle of audio CDR's in my car -- naturally, the person is thinking piracy. And naturally, at least a few of the CDs are pirated copies -- but suppose none of them were: someone could quite plausibly be found guilty of music piracy to the tune of a couple thousand dollars just because their CDs are stolen. After all, if you don't own it, how can you prove that your copies are legit?
I no longer remember the purpose of this, so I'll end on that note. Just food for thought.
...except the article says the RIAA didn't cheat anyone out of anything. The artists failed to update their own contact information, and it was the RIAA legal team that brought this up. For once, the RIAA did something benevolent.
Either that, or they found out someone else was about to come out with it, so they organized a confession before they could be degraded any further in the public's eyes.
Anyway, the article mentioned it, and I thought it to be a useful comparison. Once again, the problem doesn't seem to be IT, but poor preparedness on the business end of things that allowed this outage to occur.
Well, on a completely different network then:
It's no wonder such a kickass internet speed record could be set with superfast computers and near-zero net congestion...
Moderators, quick! Mod this up to put it on the FBI's radar. ;-)
Messing with the internet crosses the line from intra- to interstate commerce. Now they're messing with Texas!
But seriously, as much as the internet is becoming the the globe's central nervous system, I don't see much problem with a limited suspension of due process rights with a theft of this scale, even if it still just boils down to theft.
The world is becoming increasingly dependent upon internet technology, and if we're going to set ourselves up to take a huge fall if any of it goes wrong, then we need to set up equally huge disincentives (obstacles and punishments) to protect us from the fall.
If whoever's behind it is intelligent on even the lowest significant level, then the plan was to steal and destroy the items. Though... for what purpose?
Yes I know. That's not what I'm talking about.
...so one album can be spliced into one MP3 with 10, 12, or however many tracks, allowing navigation through an album without those annoying pauses between tracks -- especially on MP3 CDs.
Maybe we have the wrong mountain. :-)
p.s.-- Your sig at the bottom of that post made it even funnier.
This is not equally plausible by a long shot.
Exploring the North Pole in search of Santa Claus would be fruitless, since the North Pole is not solid -- there's nothing but Arctic Ocean and large fragments of ice up there. (I say "up there" -- damn maps have me brainwashed!)
On the other hand, exploring Mt. Ararat for Noah's Ark, while seemingly equally as implausible as searching the North Pole for Santa Claus, is at least a tiny bit more credible simply because we know Mt. Ararat exists, we can pinpoint it on a map, and we can physically go there and climb it.
Further, just as with the historical "Santa Claus", we can accept that perhaps a man called "Noah" (or at least a man that we will call Noah from this vantagepoint in time) once existed and built an ark, kidnapped a few thousands animals, and got the boat stuck in the mountains when the Euphrates flooded some 6000+ years ago.
All those "Great Flood" myths came from somewhere, and while we cannot with any certainty address the (non)involvement of any divine hand, we can with limited certainty address the historical significance and (in)accuracy of what we do know for sure.
Closing thought: maybe we've got the wrong mountain.
Dude... line-breaks!
Those of us that skim comments for key points and ideas can't locate transitions and segues and, well, I skipped the last 75% of your post.
The problem with this project from its initial motion is glaring: the followers will believe anything and the skeptics will doubt everything. The only way to prove anything about Noah's ark, Moses' parting of the Red Sea, Jesus' rising on the third day, or God's will and power as the creative force behind all that is ... is to go about your business, be a good person in whatever way makes the best sense to you, stop looking for God as if you need proof to believe (or disbelieve), and wait for God himself to appear and prove himself to you.
This is the long version of the George Carlin Corollary to the Ten Commandments (that's what I call it): "Thou shalt keep they religion to thyself."
Life would be better for everyone if we were good for goodness' sake rather than for some deity(ies) or creative power that may not even exist.
This is one of those rare examples when someone deserves a +1 for Flamebait. :-)
Maybe we're communicating more, in person and on the phone, because the Internet and cell phone technologies allow us a much broader range of communications and facilitate social activity. Cell phones especially have an effect here, as those who carry them carry them just about everywhere, allowing them to connect to just about anyone at just about any time. With communication being so much easier, and with the human naturally being a social animal, it makes more sense that we choose to socialize rather than sit in isolation listening to music.
Whether we actually hit a recession is not at issue here. Instead, we should focus on the fact that the media has for two years been blaming the Bush administration for what many have called a recession (mild though it may have been). And when the American public here's that less money is on the way, they're probably not going to spend as much on non-necessities like music CDs.
Consider also that the US economy is about 1/5 of the global economy, and combine the slow growth or decline of other major economies around the world, and you've got a global consumer base not as interested in purchasing CDs as they were, say, four years ago.
If we've got the money to spend, most of us spend it, and most of us aren't disciplined enough to hold back from buying frivolous items like music CDs. File-sharing does not detract from CD sales by any significant margin, and even if it does, I say that's a good thing. The entertainment industry needs a reality check. Entertainment is a frivolous and superficial financial venture if there ever was one, and I think we could be spending our money a helluva lot more wisely than on music... and we could be sending the entertainment industry a message, that it should not command such insanely high prices for "popular" entertainment that has no direct beneficial impact on our lives.
You're better off spending your money on charities, furthering education, and making house payments.
Well, almost no impact. According to a new study, "downloads have an effect on sales which is statistically indistinguishable from zero". Monday's NYTimes (free registration) describes the study, in which two economists analyzed file-sharing and sales data over a 17-week period in 2002, using "complex mathematical formulas" to determine that "spikes in downloading had almost no discernible effect on sales", and estimating that "it would take 5000 downloads to reduce the sales of an album by one copy". Naturally, some organizations disagree. Also, according to the RIAA's 2003 year end numbers [PDF], sales of CD singles were up 84% from 2002, while overall revenue shrunk from $11.55 to $11.05 billion... which makes perfect sense when you consider economic tendencies since 9/11.
"640K should be enough for anyone."
This was true at the time, you insensitive clod!