World of Warcraft would be highly pirated if non-sanctioned servers were allowed. The only reason it's not pirated is because of this and the subscription service, period. Good games get pirated just as much, if not more, than crappy games.
He's not talking about the complexity compared to Windows, he's talking about the complexity of developing for a shifting environment. Linux comes in hundreds of different dstros, each with varying degrees of customization, not to mention the ability to completely customize the source itself, further adding to the target that vendors would be aiming for.
I was going to say the same thing. Storage isn't the problem these days, backing up extremely large hard drives or RAID arrays is. Not only that but access speeds are really becoming the greater bottleneck. Scanning through 100GB of photos can take a little while. I'd like to see companies work on faster indexing and file management. Microsoft, give us back the unified file storage in Vista damnit.
If Google is allowed to cal litself a news aggregator and link freely to AP articles, then why shouldn't the NYT or the Washington Post be able to do the same? You don't think they write all their own stories do you? Many news agencies utilize AP stories because the AP has people around the world already in place and who write stories about events in their locales. Google got caught with its pants down and tried to play the "shiny new intarweb" card and the AP didn't blink. If you want to utilize AP stories you have to pay for their service, period. There's nothing wrong or nefarious about this practice whatsoever.
Civil disobedience requires the person breaking the law to be prepared to suffer the consequences in hopes of the law changing. If the law is upheld then what? Are you going to continue to be civilly disobedient and is it even civil disobedience at that point or simply breaking the law? Too many shalsbots talk the talk but are unwilling to suffer the consequences of their actions. They also expect things to change simply because they say so.
The only reason Pikes Peak is so far away by car is because you have to drive to the north side to get to the peak access road. As someone who worked at Cheyenne Mtn AFB from 90-93 I can say that it's reasonable to state that it's close to Pikes peak. I also believe, though I may be mistaken, that Cheyenne Mountain AFB is outside Colorado Springs city limits.
I don't want to use links because I don't necessarily want to work on the files sitting on my back-up drive. If I want to restore the file for whatever reason links would not allow me to do this. Merging the contents is the most efficient method I've come across.
This was a reply to another comment so it's not exactly directed at you but it does address your comment:
"I'm a graphic designer and in Windows I create folders on my desktop for all the current projects I'm working on. Folders at the top level are given the client's name and the first level of subfolders is named after the job code. Within these folders I organize assets, source files, etc. On a second drive I keep all the projects I've ever worked on and maintain the same organization. When I want to back up the current projects I simply grab the client folders I want to backup and drag them to the back-up folder on my second drive. In Windows I'll get a message that says there is already a folder named {client}, would you like to replace the folder with this one? (or something to that effect). When I check "yes to all" and click OK Windows will merge the contents of the desktop folder with the contents of the back-up folder. What this means is all new projects will be copied over and the older projects will be left alone. Now that I'm no longer freelancing I have to use OSX at the design firm where I work. When I tried to setup the same workflow in OSX I discovered that I was losing older projects because when OSX says do you want to replace the folder, they truly mean replace. OSX deletes the destination folder then copies the desktop folder to the back-up folder. I shouldn't have to purchase a third party utility to copy a folder to another drive. By the way, I checked and Linux (at least Ubuntu) performed the operation the same way Windows does and all three OSes use the term "replace"."
First of all, if you're placing random files in folders you wish to keep synchronized in some way perhaps it's your file management that's in question. I'm a graphic designer and in Windows I create folders for all the current projects I'm working on. Folders at the top level are given the client's name and the first level of subfolders is named after the job code. Within these folders I organize assets, source files, etc. On a second drive I keep all the projects I've ever worked on and maintain the same organization. When I want to back up the current projects I simply grab the client folders I want to backup and drag them to the back-up folder on my second drive. In Windows I'll get a message that says there is already a folder named {client}, would you like to replace the folder with this one? (or something to that effect). When I check "yes to all" and click OK Windows will merge the contents of the desktop folder with the contents of the back-up folder. What this means is all new projects will be copied over and the older projects will be left alone. Now that I'm no longer freelancing I have to use OSX at the design firm where I work. When I tried to setup the same workflow in OSX I discovered that I was losing older projects because when OSX says do you want to replace the folder, they truly mean replace. OSX deletes the destination folder then copies the desktop folder to the back-up folder. I shouldn't have to purchase a third party utility to copy a folder to another drive. By the way, I checked and Linux (at least Ubuntu) performed the operation the same way Windows does and all three OSes use the term "replace".
As for font management, I agree, FontBook sucks. I've always used Suitcase on Macs and we use Suitcase X1 where I work now. The problem is fonts and font caches become corrupted, period. Corrupt fonts can bring OSX to its knees (I've witnessed this personally), especially when the font caches become corrupt or become too large. Macs have been notoriously poor at managing fonts (and I don't mean organizing either, though I can see how one might have misunderstood my original post). This is unacceptable for what is supposed to be a modern OS. A font file should not be allowed to affect the OS, especially to the extent they do in OSX.
This is from a post above so it's not directed at you specifically but giv ethis a shot, "...when you do this OSX wipes the existing folder and replaces it with the new content. Try this. Create a folder on your desktop and place four or five sub folders within it. Copy some image files or whatever you want into this folder and pepper the subfolders with similar content, including subfolders. Copy this folder to another location on your system. Go back to your original folder and remove a few of the files and/or folders. Now, copy this same folder to the same place you made your copy then inspect the contents. If you changed any of the contents of your subfolders as well then try your method of copying the contents of the top level folder and lookinto the subfolders. Data is removed during the operation. Both Windows and Linux use the same term "replace" in their dialogs as well but both actually merge the contents of the directories, only overwriting files of the same name after asking. OSX should not do this. This couldn't be more user-unfriendly an operation if Apple tried."
I want this feature to work like it does in Windows and Linux. It's sort of a poor man's synchronization but it woudl be immensely helpful given the way I work.
I don't normally reply to AC's but when you do this OSX wipes the existing folder and replaces it with the new content. Try this. Create a folder on your desktop and place four or five sub folders within it. Copy some image files or whatever you want into this folder and pepper the subfolders with similar content, including subfolders. Copy this folder to another location on your system. Go back to your original folder and remove a few of the files and/or folders. Now, copy this same folder to the same place you made your copy then inspect the contents. If you changed any of the contents of your subfolders as well then try your method of copying the contents of the top level folder and lookinto the subfolders. Data is removed during the operation. Both Windows and Linux use the same term "replace" in their dialogs as well but both actually merge the contents of the directories, only overwriting files of the same name after asking. OSX should not do this. This couldn't be more user-unfriendly an operation if Apple tried.
I currently use Suitcase but fonts can still become corrupt and cause problems. Fontbook simply exacerbates the problem. I'll give FontExplorer a shot though.
I don't care for fancy visual upgrades, I want two serious propblems fixed in OSX.5. First, I want Apple to have folders merge their contents when files or folders of the same name are encountered. Currently there is no easy way to syncoronize the contents of folders with the same name.
Second, Apple needs to fix their craptastic font handling lack of capabilities. In this day in age it is completely unreasonable to allow fonts to run wild and take entire systems down. Fontbook is a joke and I now see why Extensis wasn't afraid of Apple getting into the font management software business.
These two fixes would go a long way to making OSX a lot more usable for me.
But what people? Aren't artists people served by the same government? Or are they second class citizens, slaves to the whims of the online masses simply because you have decided they make too much money and you don't make enough? Why are they not equally protected?
They add value, you fucking moron, by paying the production companies. Television shows are NOT free to make and someone has to pay for the production and developmetn of these shows. Free-loading from someone already paying for the distribution rights which cover the cost of making the shows is not a "business model", period, end of story. Cable companies have to make up for their costs as well. Many people willfully overlook the right of distribution in this "war against copyright" and that's why the majority of slashbots are fucking idiots.
How the fuck do you alter your business model to compete against free-loaders? Could you please explain that to me? Cable companies are already service companies who pay for the rights to broadcast (distribute) intellectual property so they can't shift from a product to a service (like software companies are slowly, and sadly, starting to do). How are they supposed to compete against one person taking the content and passing it onto others for free? If you can't provide a reasonable business model shut the fuck up and quit repeating this stupid fucking suggestion. it's getting very old hearing geeks spout "business model, business model, business model, business model" like they're fucking Steve Ballmer trying to rally developers.
It is, however, the role of government to enforce that nation's laws. In the U.S. and most countries who are members of the Berne Convention, people do not have the right to distribute intellectual property without consent of the copyright holder. Your straw man about governments securing profits for corporations purposefully overlooks what government is really doing. You incorrectly frame the argument so people will be less likely to argue against it even though you are clearly wrong. The state is merely clarifying existing copyright laws to cover emerging technologies which more easily allow broadcasting (distribution) of intellectual property without the copyright holder's consent. Ease of which something can be done is not a good measure of whether or not a law should be reconsidered. Semi and fully automatic weapons make it much easier to go on a killing spree then using an old musket loader. Does this mean we should relax the laws concerning killing others?
You know, this was the first thing I thought when I read this story. I never got the Japanese RPGs with their ridiculous plots (and no, they are not that complex, only convoluted and mind-boggingly stupid) and the lack of any real game play mechanics. These novels take the Japanese RPG and rip whatever soul was left right out of it.
...we call these "Choose Your Own Adventure" novels and I read many when I was a kid. I outgrew them, apparently the Japanese haven't. I guess it's cool, though, because it's Japanese?!? Whatever.
No, they are more than welcome to pony up and pay the cash. They can also distribute applications that communicate with Windows Server as long as they honor the terms of the license they agree to with Microsoft. Ooops, I forgot, OSS advotaces only like it when everyoen has to agre to their terms, not when they have to agree to everyone elses terms.
No, I don't mean center-statist so don't put words in my mouth. My view of center is based on the reality that the ideologies of the left and right are vastly different despite the manner in which many politicians put them into practice. Somewhere in the middle is a balance and government should strive to find the balance for the good of society instead of trying to foist their ideology upon all citizens.
Re:Comments from people who actually create Creati
on
Beginning GIMP
·
· Score: 0, Troll
There is no center but there is a balance. Sometimes you have to give more to the left than the right and sometimes you have to give more to the right then you give to the left. The problem we face in the current U.S. political sphere, and I'd wager in other western democracies as well, is that neither side wants to budge from their position an d whichever political party dominates the government pushes their parties agendas. The people do not enter the equation in any significant manner except to vote. We don't need to reboot the entire government, we just need to kill the two party application that's hogging all the CPU and memory.
The article os full of shit, there is no license when you purchase movies, music, etc. Copyright laws are like any other law, and no other laws act as a license between the individual and the state. Intellectual property has not changed with the advent of the digital world. It's easier to distribute but this doesn't mean the copyright holder should lose their right of distribution. in fact, this the most important right that needs to stay the same. While I agree that things like this Sony contraption should be considered illegal to manufacture, I do not weep for those who are busted for illegally distributing intellectual property.
I really wish people would actually ready USC 17 instead of relying on what they heard about copyright law from a blog on the internet. The conversation to address and improve upon copyright limitations in the digital world would be so much easier.
Slashdot Mirror
World of Warcraft would be highly pirated if non-sanctioned servers were allowed. The only reason it's not pirated is because of this and the subscription service, period. Good games get pirated just as much, if not more, than crappy games.
He's not talking about the complexity compared to Windows, he's talking about the complexity of developing for a shifting environment. Linux comes in hundreds of different dstros, each with varying degrees of customization, not to mention the ability to completely customize the source itself, further adding to the target that vendors would be aiming for.
I was going to say the same thing. Storage isn't the problem these days, backing up extremely large hard drives or RAID arrays is. Not only that but access speeds are really becoming the greater bottleneck. Scanning through 100GB of photos can take a little while. I'd like to see companies work on faster indexing and file management. Microsoft, give us back the unified file storage in Vista damnit.
If Google is allowed to cal litself a news aggregator and link freely to AP articles, then why shouldn't the NYT or the Washington Post be able to do the same? You don't think they write all their own stories do you? Many news agencies utilize AP stories because the AP has people around the world already in place and who write stories about events in their locales. Google got caught with its pants down and tried to play the "shiny new intarweb" card and the AP didn't blink. If you want to utilize AP stories you have to pay for their service, period. There's nothing wrong or nefarious about this practice whatsoever.
Civil disobedience requires the person breaking the law to be prepared to suffer the consequences in hopes of the law changing. If the law is upheld then what? Are you going to continue to be civilly disobedient and is it even civil disobedience at that point or simply breaking the law? Too many shalsbots talk the talk but are unwilling to suffer the consequences of their actions. They also expect things to change simply because they say so.
Profit only helps better quantify the damage to the intellectual property. What part of derivative works does this guy not understand?
The only reason Pikes Peak is so far away by car is because you have to drive to the north side to get to the peak access road. As someone who worked at Cheyenne Mtn AFB from 90-93 I can say that it's reasonable to state that it's close to Pikes peak. I also believe, though I may be mistaken, that Cheyenne Mountain AFB is outside Colorado Springs city limits.
I don't want to use links because I don't necessarily want to work on the files sitting on my back-up drive. If I want to restore the file for whatever reason links would not allow me to do this. Merging the contents is the most efficient method I've come across.
This was a reply to another comment so it's not exactly directed at you but it does address your comment:
"I'm a graphic designer and in Windows I create folders on my desktop for all the current projects I'm working on. Folders at the top level are given the client's name and the first level of subfolders is named after the job code. Within these folders I organize assets, source files, etc. On a second drive I keep all the projects I've ever worked on and maintain the same organization. When I want to back up the current projects I simply grab the client folders I want to backup and drag them to the back-up folder on my second drive. In Windows I'll get a message that says there is already a folder named {client}, would you like to replace the folder with this one? (or something to that effect). When I check "yes to all" and click OK Windows will merge the contents of the desktop folder with the contents of the back-up folder. What this means is all new projects will be copied over and the older projects will be left alone. Now that I'm no longer freelancing I have to use OSX at the design firm where I work. When I tried to setup the same workflow in OSX I discovered that I was losing older projects because when OSX says do you want to replace the folder, they truly mean replace. OSX deletes the destination folder then copies the desktop folder to the back-up folder. I shouldn't have to purchase a third party utility to copy a folder to another drive. By the way, I checked and Linux (at least Ubuntu) performed the operation the same way Windows does and all three OSes use the term "replace"."
First of all, if you're placing random files in folders you wish to keep synchronized in some way perhaps it's your file management that's in question. I'm a graphic designer and in Windows I create folders for all the current projects I'm working on. Folders at the top level are given the client's name and the first level of subfolders is named after the job code. Within these folders I organize assets, source files, etc. On a second drive I keep all the projects I've ever worked on and maintain the same organization. When I want to back up the current projects I simply grab the client folders I want to backup and drag them to the back-up folder on my second drive. In Windows I'll get a message that says there is already a folder named {client}, would you like to replace the folder with this one? (or something to that effect). When I check "yes to all" and click OK Windows will merge the contents of the desktop folder with the contents of the back-up folder. What this means is all new projects will be copied over and the older projects will be left alone. Now that I'm no longer freelancing I have to use OSX at the design firm where I work. When I tried to setup the same workflow in OSX I discovered that I was losing older projects because when OSX says do you want to replace the folder, they truly mean replace. OSX deletes the destination folder then copies the desktop folder to the back-up folder. I shouldn't have to purchase a third party utility to copy a folder to another drive. By the way, I checked and Linux (at least Ubuntu) performed the operation the same way Windows does and all three OSes use the term "replace".
As for font management, I agree, FontBook sucks. I've always used Suitcase on Macs and we use Suitcase X1 where I work now. The problem is fonts and font caches become corrupted, period. Corrupt fonts can bring OSX to its knees (I've witnessed this personally), especially when the font caches become corrupt or become too large. Macs have been notoriously poor at managing fonts (and I don't mean organizing either, though I can see how one might have misunderstood my original post). This is unacceptable for what is supposed to be a modern OS. A font file should not be allowed to affect the OS, especially to the extent they do in OSX.
This is from a post above so it's not directed at you specifically but giv ethis a shot, "...when you do this OSX wipes the existing folder and replaces it with the new content. Try this. Create a folder on your desktop and place four or five sub folders within it. Copy some image files or whatever you want into this folder and pepper the subfolders with similar content, including subfolders. Copy this folder to another location on your system. Go back to your original folder and remove a few of the files and/or folders. Now, copy this same folder to the same place you made your copy then inspect the contents. If you changed any of the contents of your subfolders as well then try your method of copying the contents of the top level folder and lookinto the subfolders. Data is removed during the operation. Both Windows and Linux use the same term "replace" in their dialogs as well but both actually merge the contents of the directories, only overwriting files of the same name after asking. OSX should not do this. This couldn't be more user-unfriendly an operation if Apple tried."
I want this feature to work like it does in Windows and Linux. It's sort of a poor man's synchronization but it woudl be immensely helpful given the way I work.
I don't normally reply to AC's but when you do this OSX wipes the existing folder and replaces it with the new content. Try this. Create a folder on your desktop and place four or five sub folders within it. Copy some image files or whatever you want into this folder and pepper the subfolders with similar content, including subfolders. Copy this folder to another location on your system. Go back to your original folder and remove a few of the files and/or folders. Now, copy this same folder to the same place you made your copy then inspect the contents. If you changed any of the contents of your subfolders as well then try your method of copying the contents of the top level folder and lookinto the subfolders. Data is removed during the operation. Both Windows and Linux use the same term "replace" in their dialogs as well but both actually merge the contents of the directories, only overwriting files of the same name after asking. OSX should not do this. This couldn't be more user-unfriendly an operation if Apple tried.
I currently use Suitcase but fonts can still become corrupt and cause problems. Fontbook simply exacerbates the problem. I'll give FontExplorer a shot though.
I don't care for fancy visual upgrades, I want two serious propblems fixed in OSX.5. First, I want Apple to have folders merge their contents when files or folders of the same name are encountered. Currently there is no easy way to syncoronize the contents of folders with the same name.
Second, Apple needs to fix their craptastic font handling lack of capabilities. In this day in age it is completely unreasonable to allow fonts to run wild and take entire systems down. Fontbook is a joke and I now see why Extensis wasn't afraid of Apple getting into the font management software business.
These two fixes would go a long way to making OSX a lot more usable for me.
But what people? Aren't artists people served by the same government? Or are they second class citizens, slaves to the whims of the online masses simply because you have decided they make too much money and you don't make enough? Why are they not equally protected?
They add value, you fucking moron, by paying the production companies. Television shows are NOT free to make and someone has to pay for the production and developmetn of these shows. Free-loading from someone already paying for the distribution rights which cover the cost of making the shows is not a "business model", period, end of story. Cable companies have to make up for their costs as well. Many people willfully overlook the right of distribution in this "war against copyright" and that's why the majority of slashbots are fucking idiots.
How the fuck do you alter your business model to compete against free-loaders? Could you please explain that to me? Cable companies are already service companies who pay for the rights to broadcast (distribute) intellectual property so they can't shift from a product to a service (like software companies are slowly, and sadly, starting to do). How are they supposed to compete against one person taking the content and passing it onto others for free? If you can't provide a reasonable business model shut the fuck up and quit repeating this stupid fucking suggestion. it's getting very old hearing geeks spout "business model, business model, business model, business model" like they're fucking Steve Ballmer trying to rally developers.
It is, however, the role of government to enforce that nation's laws. In the U.S. and most countries who are members of the Berne Convention, people do not have the right to distribute intellectual property without consent of the copyright holder. Your straw man about governments securing profits for corporations purposefully overlooks what government is really doing. You incorrectly frame the argument so people will be less likely to argue against it even though you are clearly wrong. The state is merely clarifying existing copyright laws to cover emerging technologies which more easily allow broadcasting (distribution) of intellectual property without the copyright holder's consent. Ease of which something can be done is not a good measure of whether or not a law should be reconsidered. Semi and fully automatic weapons make it much easier to go on a killing spree then using an old musket loader. Does this mean we should relax the laws concerning killing others?
You know, this was the first thing I thought when I read this story. I never got the Japanese RPGs with their ridiculous plots (and no, they are not that complex, only convoluted and mind-boggingly stupid) and the lack of any real game play mechanics. These novels take the Japanese RPG and rip whatever soul was left right out of it.
...we call these "Choose Your Own Adventure" novels and I read many when I was a kid. I outgrew them, apparently the Japanese haven't. I guess it's cool, though, because it's Japanese?!? Whatever.
No, they are more than welcome to pony up and pay the cash. They can also distribute applications that communicate with Windows Server as long as they honor the terms of the license they agree to with Microsoft. Ooops, I forgot, OSS advotaces only like it when everyoen has to agre to their terms, not when they have to agree to everyone elses terms.
No, I don't mean center-statist so don't put words in my mouth. My view of center is based on the reality that the ideologies of the left and right are vastly different despite the manner in which many politicians put them into practice. Somewhere in the middle is a balance and government should strive to find the balance for the good of society instead of trying to foist their ideology upon all citizens.
Put lipstick on a pig and you've still got a pig.
There is no center but there is a balance. Sometimes you have to give more to the left than the right and sometimes you have to give more to the right then you give to the left. The problem we face in the current U.S. political sphere, and I'd wager in other western democracies as well, is that neither side wants to budge from their position an d whichever political party dominates the government pushes their parties agendas. The people do not enter the equation in any significant manner except to vote. We don't need to reboot the entire government, we just need to kill the two party application that's hogging all the CPU and memory.
The article os full of shit, there is no license when you purchase movies, music, etc. Copyright laws are like any other law, and no other laws act as a license between the individual and the state. Intellectual property has not changed with the advent of the digital world. It's easier to distribute but this doesn't mean the copyright holder should lose their right of distribution. in fact, this the most important right that needs to stay the same. While I agree that things like this Sony contraption should be considered illegal to manufacture, I do not weep for those who are busted for illegally distributing intellectual property.
I really wish people would actually ready USC 17 instead of relying on what they heard about copyright law from a blog on the internet. The conversation to address and improve upon copyright limitations in the digital world would be so much easier.