PBS very carefully censors what they reveal, in order to continue supporting their "we need more government" viewpoint. Case in point - this morning they interviewed a guy for 10 minutes about why everyone should be pro-government-run healthcare. Never once did they cover the other side.
Slanted. Biased.
The other side of the debate is Miss McCaughey & Co. Since the republicans currently employ the "monty python parrot sketch denial" method for debate, PBS could safely leave them with zero air time on this subject. If you can provide to me one well written thoughtful opinion piece to the contrary that I cannot trivial dismantle by exposing fallacies and factual errors, we can have a debate. The opposition right now is in attack mode, they have no alternative.
FYI, since you play with commodore 64s, you might be getting ready for Medicare. I expect you to decline Medicare coverage when you reach 65. Eat your own dog food IMO.
There is no claim that organic foods are more nutritious.
Technically incorrect. I direct you to the Nutritional Considerations page of the Organic Trade Association. http://www.ota.com/organic/benefits/nutrition.html
There are many claims that organic food is nutritionally superior to conventional alternatives.
The UK FSA study is narrow in scope, and it's purpose was to provide a counterpoint to statements like "Research by visiting chemistry professor Theo Clark and undergraduate students at Truman State University in Missouri found organically grown oranges contained up to 30 percent more vitamin C than those grown conventionally."
Have you ever stopped to think that if you have fantastic technical skills and nobody will hire you, perhaps it isn't your technical skills that need work?
^^^there isn't enough bolt font in the world to give this quote it's due attention
Dear Mr Z,
My boss knows exactly what software we use in our product. So does our legal department. So does IT, because they make all the source code in it available. Investors know what powers the company as well, in fact the CEO probably brags to them about the companies extensive use of open source (like Oracle, IBM, and Google).
Mathematicians are plagiarists. We copy theories and proofs all the time. Welcome to the universe.
And I used to think that all open source developers were selfless. BOY WAS I A MORON.
Your quote from NASDAQ.com talks about NASDAQ trading services uptime, not about MDDS uptime. MDDS != NASDAQ trading service no matter how much you wish it to be. Let me quote from the NASDAQ article:
"Avergage daily matched volume in all U.S. securities was 2.2 billion shares, a 13% increase over May 2008."
The 4 node installation of MDDS can process 100,000 transactions per day, so where are the other two billion one hundred and ninety nine million nine hundred thousand transactions coming from?
Now that your pathetic attempt to conflate NASDAQ trading system uptime with MDDS uptime has been dispelled, that leaves you with 3 microsoft articles saying how great windows is. Congratulations, you have passed your M$ marketing shill certification program.
NASDAQ does not mention MDDS anywhere on their website that I could find. Please find a page served by nasdaq.com that mentions they even sell MDDS to anyone, I could find no mention of anyone who buys or receives the MDDS service anywhere.
The NASDAQ exchange has 99.999% uptime. It is running SuperMontage (proprietary RTOS developed by NASDAQ) and TIBCO (proprietary OS & Middlewary developed by TIBCO).
MDDS is not the exchange, it is a reporting system tacked onto a reporting system.
"MDDS receives direct feeds from NASDAQÃ(TM)s trade reporting system, and collects the data, storing it in SQL Server 2005."
Some tiny 4 node SQL server installation running 100K transactions per day is not the same as the NASDAQ stock exchange system running 3-5 billiion trades per day.
Again, I am sorry your bosses at Microsoft assigned you the task of spinning the crash & burn of the LSE system. Hope the rest of your 4th of July weekend is better.
Anonymous Coward posting rabid pro-MS bold font on Slashdot. How is the weather in Redmond?
Sorry you got stuck with this crap job of FUDing on/.
The system you described probably does in fact exist inside of NASDAQ, although you can't be certain because they make no mention of MDDS whatsoever on their website. Go ahead and search for it at www.nasdaq.com. In fact, search for it on Google as well, you get citations only from microsoft.com, msn.com, and windowsfs.com. Now try searching for SuperMontage, or TIBCO and NASDAQ, you will get the phone book.
You honestly think NASDAQs quote matching system's back-end is a SQL server???
As for your "99.999% uptime" claim, that claim is made by NASDAQ for NASDAQ trading, not for MDDS which they do not even mention or market. So there is no proof that the SQL server cluster trumpeted only by MS, MSN.com, and windowsfs.com has 99.999% uptime. Try again.
Your sources are Microsoft, MSN, and a website/magazine about windows funded by Microsoft. The Iranian national news service couldn't be more biased than that.
Like I said, it is clever marketing. Even after I pointed the fail to you, you still missed it.
You think MDDS is their trading system? It is not
Supermontage is what is executing NASDAQ trades (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/supermontage.asp)
The citations I posted were older because that was when Supermontage was rolled out.
Your FUD rolls off me like water on lotus leaves:)
Here is what actually does the work you claim MDDS does (http://www.tibco.com/resources/customers/successstory_nasdaq.pdf )
I was just going to post this, but you beat me to it. The NASDAQ Supermontage trading trading system ran on HP Nonstop hardware (which is where the Tandem/MIPS technology ended up) and I believe is now using Itanium. The system is was home grown by NASDAQ and they have a good in house software division.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=101738
I don't know if that switch actually happened, but claiming NASDAQ trades on Windows is certainly not correct.
The marketing was clever enough to fool anyone who would believe Windows can have that sort of performance and uptime;)
BD+ is the same old "distribute the key/hide the algorithm" style of DRM. The key is the VM or "fingerprint" of the player, the algorithm is the execution code on the blu-ray disc. The disc asks the player questions, and checks the answers against a scorecard. If the Blu-Ray player can play the disc, a computer program that emulates the player can play it as well. Then the next release of Blu-Ray discs disallow that player's fingerprint or VM. So you either update the fingerprint, or pick a new VM (preferably the best selling Sony Blu-Ray player) to emulate. Rinse, repeat.
The only difference I see between this scheme and the one for games on the commodore 64 is the size and complexity of the key.
a.) Listening to the video would not get you in trouble, but uploading it might.
b.) Relying on the ISP to not divulge the connection between your name and your IP address is obfuscation, not to be confused with actual security. One should use an anonymous proxy to post things you do not want traced back to you.
c.) You should destroy all your porn after viewing and fapping.
d.) Relying on the authorities not having the inclination to prosecute you is also a bad idea.
The ars article talks about MediaSentry needing a Minnesota license, fair use defense, expectation of privacy, and wiretapping laws. This summary talks about rules of evidence;
402 Irrelevance
403 Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time
602 Lack of Personal Knowledge
702 "Testimony by experts" (fact testimony or opinion testimony based upon "scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge" must be based on sufficient facts or data, must be product of reliable principles and methods, and principles and methods must have been applied reliably to the facts of the case")
802 Hearsay
IANAL, but those seem quite different.
Movies: Alternate sources of revenue involve product placement, advertising, streaming, and enhanced theater like IMAX. They must adapt to the new distribution channels, or die. Slowly on the life support from congress or no. Charging an exorbitant fee for what now costs almost nothing just so Tom Cruise can donate millions to the church of L Ron Hubbard does not strike a chord of sympathy in me.
TV shows: I don't see Bloomberg news or reality TV having profit issues. Bad sitcoms spoon fed through government mandated monopolies are having a rough time of it.
Books: Anyone can write anything anywhere that everyone everywhere can read all instantly, why should anyone be paid for doing what anyone can do from the smallest child to the oldest altzheimers victim. A timely analysis of a situation is another thing altogether, I would pay for information before others have received it.
... Did he invent the math system behind it? The algebra, the calculus?...
I call bullshit on you, mr grasshopper.
Of course there isn't any way we can pay back Newton and/or Leibniz for inventing calculus. We are the first to give credit where due--the book has several hundred references to related work, which appeared in the interval between my father's first papers (1950's) and our (C) date. But we can pay forward by helping the next generation (of engineers that are interested in our field) get a real head start on their careers. We do this all the time, our volunteer work includes free lectures and design reviews (for just a couple of examples).
As far as the publishing technology goes, we did pay what the creators asked, we didn't steal any of that.
Let me tell you, I was pissed when some a**hole scanned the book and posted it.
Hurry up and die, I can wait 75 years to build on your work, I don't think I can wait the duration of your life on top of that. Before you shuffle off this mortal coil, please forward your profits and penalties to the heirs of the people named in your bibliography. I would hate to sit on the shoulders of a thief.
P.S. I just sent the great great great great great great grandson of Billy Shakes 50 cents for his timely turn of phrase from Hamlet.
I still fail to see how it is keeping anyone from creating anything. This part of the logic just doesn't add up!
It does seem to be keeping a bunch of people without an original thought in their heads from mashing together a bunch of other peoples work and calling it original.
So the people who invented gene therapy did not have an original though in their heads because they mashed together a bunch of stuff about DNA and genes and diseases that other scientists discovered. The nerve of some people.
Creating an exact duplicate of a work is still an act of creation, just an unoriginal one. Taking a photograph of a photograph is also an act of creation, only slightly more original than the last example. Scanning a photograph, and emailing it to your friend is also an act of creation, also not original. All restricted by copyright. In fact, you cannot violate copyright without first creating a copy or derivative work. So yes, copyright restricts creation.
Music is far more impacted by this than video. Composers have been building on each others tricks for hundreds of years. You can find a base line from Bach in a Beyonce song. Shutting off the spigot and saying all songs henceforth may not build upon others without first consulting a lawyer is just something a lawyer would come up with.
Copyrights are supposed to expire, mouse or no. Instead, they are extended ad infinitum to provide an economic moat to industries that would otherwise have none. Again, it is legal and quite common to rent congress-critters in order to bolster a failing (or failed) business model.
This is a typical bait and switch argument I often see on this forum. The file sharing advocacy crowd does not respect copyright, period, even for a movie that hasn't been released yet, so the question of whether the period should be 50 years vs. 70 or 90 becomes irrelevant.
The ones who post here make an interesting exception for works released under the GPL, however. Bravo when the FSF sic's its lawyers against anyone who dares incorporate GPL'd software into a product without strictly complying with the terms of the license. But hey, aren't we just talking bits that people should be able to freely copy and use however they want? I guess not. Suddenly, copyright law needs to be respected, and courts and lawyers are needed to back it up. Heh heh, what did someone once say about a foolish consistency being the hobgoblin of a weak mind?
So, they promise 50 years, them change it to 75 + life and you say I bait and switch? The quote you are looking for is: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." It is Emerson, and I believe he was bemoaning that too much consistency cuts off the flow of new ideas and new directions in society. The GPL is actually consistent with people who think copyright law needs to be reigned in, it uses fire to fight fire. It uses the unbounded constraints of copyright to force people who use it to share it with everyone. It is referred to as Copyleft because its purpose is as far from copyright as one can get. So you haven't read either Emerson or Stallman, fine.
When the MPAA members make movies, the budgets are in the hundreds of millions just to one up the last blockbuster with more fluff. Who pays for all this? You do.
Don't agree with their business model? The solution is simple.. DON'T CONSUME THEIR PRODUCTS. Don't buy it, don't steal it, don't copy it, don't share it. Walk away and the issue goes away. Patronize the indie filmmakers whose work you claim to respect.
I don't agree with the business model of the coal factory spewing sulfurous fumes into the atmosphere causing acid rain which kills all of my crops. Explain to me how my not using electricity would undo the damage? Those not affected by the rain would continue to purchase the power, and my land would be destroyed by the output of the coal plant. This is a classic tragedy of the commons example. I could walk away from my land, which I purchased and I would "go away". I could also walk away from the DVD I purchased (but cannot copy for my own use) and I would "go away". The issue still remains, people who bought land that had coal plants built next to them after the purchase have a right to address the damage being done. When someone sells me a DVD full of information, their ability to dictate the devices I employ upon that information stops at my doorway. Booksellers do not sell books that can only be read in light produced by GE lightbulbs.
The state legislature of Indiana once passed a law that said "3 times the diameter of a circle is the circumference".
What does that have to do with this issue? Absolutely nothing. Some state legislature passed a stupid law about mathematics a hundred years ago, therefore copyright law must be stupid!?
I'm starting to think that one of the unintended consequences of file-sharing is that it is degrading the ability of college students and young college graduates to think logically. They start with a gut-level position, then tend to throw the kitchen sink at it (see examples above) to defend it. If you have 30 posters r
The amendment I envisioned that says something like "an act of congress can exempt a sitting president from the 2 term limit". In states with primary elections, each presidential candidate designates a slate of electors (perhaps consisting of members of congress who just let him run again) who then appear on the November ballot. Collusion by the two parties (like the big record labels colluding to fix prices) would easily leave congress in control of the executive branch and by extension the judicial as well.
Dystopian, but possible.
Seriously. We're talking about your "right" to download movies without paying for them.
To equate this with the end of democracy just makes you look ridiculous.
The comparison is quite apt actually, if a tad shrill. Say congress extends presidential term limits every 4 years and the House of Represenatives chose to re-elect him/her every 4 years regardless of the outcome of the "popular vote", you might cry foul. Technically, this would be legal but very unwise.
Copyrights are supposed to expire, mouse or no. Instead, they are extended ad infinitum to provide an economic moat to industries that would otherwise have none. Again, it is legal and quite common to rent congress-critters in order to bolster a failing (or failed) business model.
We were to be accorded limited/fair use of purchased copyrighted works. Instead we are only allowed to view, never transfer, transform, or reproduce these works in any way. Another bait and switch, I bought a product but now, somehow, I have no ownership rights to it.
There is a very good reason why unpopular but powerful governments shut down internet services (facebook, twitter, yahoo email, google, etc). The effortless transmission of information threatens them in exactly the same way it threatens the executives of Disney, Time Warner, Fox, and other large content creators. If you cannot control the flow of information, you cannot control the population or the consumer.
Don't you wonder why AOL could carpet the landscape with CDs/DVDs for pennies, yet when the same medium is produced by RIAA or MPAA members they cost $15.99 or $24.99? Independent filmmakers seem able to produce top quality films for only a few million, even using unionized labor throughout. When the MPAA members make movies, the budgets are in the hundreds of millions just to one up the last blockbuster with more fluff. Who pays for all this? You do. They just moved the decimal place once place to the right and rented congress to make sure that you have to pay it.
The state legislature of Indiana once passed a law that said "3 times the diameter of a circle is the circumference". So everyone who calculated the true circumference of a circle using Pi was in violation of the law. There was no Circumference Calculators Association of America at that time, so today we are able to determine for ourselves just how much runaround we get from congress on some issues.
If Comcast is going to muck with forwarding my packets, they should reroute requests for espn.com to cbssports.com. Hopefully Comcast and Disney both go nuclear, then Canada takes over the world.
I sent the following:
"I recently noticed that your sites performance had degraded substantially. Unable to enjoy my usual offerings from ESPN, I went looking for alternatives on the internet. To my surprise, I found a much better source for my sporting news needs. I just wanted to wish ESPN the best of luck and fond wishes, it was a wonderful 30 years."
The email address I provided was "aoltriedthis@history.com", I wonder if they will even notice.
Slashdot Mirror
PBS very carefully censors what they reveal, in order to continue supporting their "we need more government" viewpoint. Case in point - this morning they interviewed a guy for 10 minutes about why everyone should be pro-government-run healthcare. Never once did they cover the other side.
Slanted. Biased.
The other side of the debate is Miss McCaughey & Co. Since the republicans currently employ the "monty python parrot sketch denial" method for debate, PBS could safely leave them with zero air time on this subject. If you can provide to me one well written thoughtful opinion piece to the contrary that I cannot trivial dismantle by exposing fallacies and factual errors, we can have a debate. The opposition right now is in attack mode, they have no alternative.
FYI, since you play with commodore 64s, you might be getting ready for Medicare. I expect you to decline Medicare coverage when you reach 65. Eat your own dog food IMO.
I guess you have never heard of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing right?
[secretM$handshake] Wink wink nudge nudge know what I mean? [secretM$handshake]
I am not working hard enough for the first post, yet no Slashdot hate :)
There is no claim that organic foods are more nutritious.
Technically incorrect. I direct you to the Nutritional Considerations page of the Organic Trade Association.
http://www.ota.com/organic/benefits/nutrition.html
There are many claims that organic food is nutritionally superior to conventional alternatives.
The UK FSA study is narrow in scope, and it's purpose was to provide a counterpoint to statements like "Research by visiting chemistry professor Theo Clark and undergraduate students at Truman State University in Missouri found organically grown oranges contained up to 30 percent more vitamin C than those grown conventionally."
Have you ever stopped to think that if you have fantastic technical skills and nobody will hire you, perhaps it isn't your technical skills that need work?
^^^there isn't enough bolt font in the world to give this quote it's due attention
Dear Mr Z,
My boss knows exactly what software we use in our product. So does our legal department. So does IT, because they make all the source code in it available. Investors know what powers the company as well, in fact the CEO probably brags to them about the companies extensive use of open source (like Oracle, IBM, and Google).
Mathematicians are plagiarists. We copy theories and proofs all the time. Welcome to the universe.
And I used to think that all open source developers were selfless. BOY WAS I A MORON.
Your quote from NASDAQ.com talks about NASDAQ trading services uptime, not about MDDS uptime. MDDS != NASDAQ trading service no matter how much you wish it to be. Let me quote from the NASDAQ article:
"Avergage daily matched volume in all U.S. securities was 2.2 billion shares, a 13% increase over May 2008."
The 4 node installation of MDDS can process 100,000 transactions per day, so where are the other two billion one hundred and ninety nine million nine hundred thousand transactions coming from?
Now that your pathetic attempt to conflate NASDAQ trading system uptime with MDDS uptime has been dispelled, that leaves you with 3 microsoft articles saying how great windows is. Congratulations, you have passed your M$ marketing shill certification program.
NASDAQ does not mention MDDS anywhere on their website that I could find. Please find a page served by nasdaq.com that mentions they even sell MDDS to anyone, I could find no mention of anyone who buys or receives the MDDS service anywhere.
The NASDAQ exchange has 99.999% uptime. It is running SuperMontage (proprietary RTOS developed by NASDAQ) and TIBCO (proprietary OS & Middlewary developed by TIBCO).
MDDS is not the exchange, it is a reporting system tacked onto a reporting system.
"MDDS receives direct feeds from NASDAQÃ(TM)s trade reporting system, and collects the data, storing it in SQL Server 2005."
Some tiny 4 node SQL server installation running 100K transactions per day is not the same as the NASDAQ stock exchange system running 3-5 billiion trades per day.
Again, I am sorry your bosses at Microsoft assigned you the task of spinning the crash & burn of the LSE system. Hope the rest of your 4th of July weekend is better.
Anonymous Coward posting rabid pro-MS bold font on Slashdot. How is the weather in Redmond? /.
Sorry you got stuck with this crap job of FUDing on
The system you described probably does in fact exist inside of NASDAQ, although you can't be certain because they make no mention of MDDS whatsoever on their website. Go ahead and search for it at www.nasdaq.com. In fact, search for it on Google as well, you get citations only from microsoft.com, msn.com, and windowsfs.com. Now try searching for SuperMontage, or TIBCO and NASDAQ, you will get the phone book.
You honestly think NASDAQs quote matching system's back-end is a SQL server???
As for your "99.999% uptime" claim, that claim is made by NASDAQ for NASDAQ trading, not for MDDS which they do not even mention or market. So there is no proof that the SQL server cluster trumpeted only by MS, MSN.com, and windowsfs.com has 99.999% uptime. Try again.
Your sources are Microsoft, MSN, and a website/magazine about windows funded by Microsoft. The Iranian national news service couldn't be more biased than that.
Like I said, it is clever marketing. Even after I pointed the fail to you, you still missed it. :)
You think MDDS is their trading system? It is not
Supermontage is what is executing NASDAQ trades (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/supermontage.asp)
The citations I posted were older because that was when Supermontage was rolled out.
Your FUD rolls off me like water on lotus leaves
Here is what actually does the work you claim MDDS does (http://www.tibco.com/resources/customers/successstory_nasdaq.pdf )
If more people actually checked facts before choosing Windows...
I was just going to post this, but you beat me to it. The NASDAQ Supermontage trading trading system ran on HP Nonstop hardware (which is where the Tandem/MIPS technology ended up) and I believe is now using Itanium. The system is was home grown by NASDAQ and they have a good in house software division. http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=101738 I don't know if that switch actually happened, but claiming NASDAQ trades on Windows is certainly not correct. The marketing was clever enough to fool anyone who would believe Windows can have that sort of performance and uptime ;)
BD+ is the same old "distribute the key/hide the algorithm" style of DRM. The key is the VM or "fingerprint" of the player, the algorithm is the execution code on the blu-ray disc. The disc asks the player questions, and checks the answers against a scorecard. If the Blu-Ray player can play the disc, a computer program that emulates the player can play it as well. Then the next release of Blu-Ray discs disallow that player's fingerprint or VM. So you either update the fingerprint, or pick a new VM (preferably the best selling Sony Blu-Ray player) to emulate. Rinse, repeat.
The only difference I see between this scheme and the one for games on the commodore 64 is the size and complexity of the key.
a.) Listening to the video would not get you in trouble, but uploading it might.
b.) Relying on the ISP to not divulge the connection between your name and your IP address is obfuscation, not to be confused with actual security. One should use an anonymous proxy to post things you do not want traced back to you.
c.) You should destroy all your porn after viewing and fapping.
d.) Relying on the authorities not having the inclination to prosecute you is also a bad idea.
The ars article talks about MediaSentry needing a Minnesota license, fair use defense, expectation of privacy, and wiretapping laws. This summary talks about rules of evidence;
402 Irrelevance
403 Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time
602 Lack of Personal Knowledge
702 "Testimony by experts" (fact testimony or opinion testimony based upon "scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge" must be based on sufficient facts or data, must be product of reliable principles and methods, and principles and methods must have been applied reliably to the facts of the case")
802 Hearsay
IANAL, but those seem quite different.
Movies: Alternate sources of revenue involve product placement, advertising, streaming, and enhanced theater like IMAX. They must adapt to the new distribution channels, or die. Slowly on the life support from congress or no. Charging an exorbitant fee for what now costs almost nothing just so Tom Cruise can donate millions to the church of L Ron Hubbard does not strike a chord of sympathy in me.
TV shows: I don't see Bloomberg news or reality TV having profit issues. Bad sitcoms spoon fed through government mandated monopolies are having a rough time of it.
Books: Anyone can write anything anywhere that everyone everywhere can read all instantly, why should anyone be paid for doing what anyone can do from the smallest child to the oldest altzheimers victim. A timely analysis of a situation is another thing altogether, I would pay for information before others have received it.
... Did he invent the math system behind it? The algebra, the calculus?...
I call bullshit on you, mr grasshopper.
Of course there isn't any way we can pay back Newton and/or Leibniz for inventing calculus. We are the first to give credit where due--the book has several hundred references to related work, which appeared in the interval between my father's first papers (1950's) and our (C) date. But we can pay forward by helping the next generation (of engineers that are interested in our field) get a real head start on their careers. We do this all the time, our volunteer work includes free lectures and design reviews (for just a couple of examples).
As far as the publishing technology goes, we did pay what the creators asked, we didn't steal any of that.
Let me tell you, I was pissed when some a**hole scanned the book and posted it.
Hurry up and die, I can wait 75 years to build on your work, I don't think I can wait the duration of your life on top of that. Before you shuffle off this mortal coil, please forward your profits and penalties to the heirs of the people named in your bibliography. I would hate to sit on the shoulders of a thief.
P.S. I just sent the great great great great great great grandson of Billy Shakes 50 cents for his timely turn of phrase from Hamlet.
I still fail to see how it is keeping anyone from creating anything. This part of the logic just doesn't add up! It does seem to be keeping a bunch of people without an original thought in their heads from mashing together a bunch of other peoples work and calling it original.
So the people who invented gene therapy did not have an original though in their heads because they mashed together a bunch of stuff about DNA and genes and diseases that other scientists discovered. The nerve of some people.
Creating an exact duplicate of a work is still an act of creation, just an unoriginal one. Taking a photograph of a photograph is also an act of creation, only slightly more original than the last example. Scanning a photograph, and emailing it to your friend is also an act of creation, also not original. All restricted by copyright. In fact, you cannot violate copyright without first creating a copy or derivative work. So yes, copyright restricts creation.
Music is far more impacted by this than video. Composers have been building on each others tricks for hundreds of years. You can find a base line from Bach in a Beyonce song. Shutting off the spigot and saying all songs henceforth may not build upon others without first consulting a lawyer is just something a lawyer would come up with.
Copyrights are supposed to expire, mouse or no. Instead, they are extended ad infinitum to provide an economic moat to industries that would otherwise have none. Again, it is legal and quite common to rent congress-critters in order to bolster a failing (or failed) business model.
This is a typical bait and switch argument I often see on this forum. The file sharing advocacy crowd does not respect copyright, period, even for a movie that hasn't been released yet, so the question of whether the period should be 50 years vs. 70 or 90 becomes irrelevant.
The ones who post here make an interesting exception for works released under the GPL, however. Bravo when the FSF sic's its lawyers against anyone who dares incorporate GPL'd software into a product without strictly complying with the terms of the license. But hey, aren't we just talking bits that people should be able to freely copy and use however they want? I guess not. Suddenly, copyright law needs to be respected, and courts and lawyers are needed to back it up. Heh heh, what did someone once say about a foolish consistency being the hobgoblin of a weak mind?
So, they promise 50 years, them change it to 75 + life and you say I bait and switch? The quote you are looking for is: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." It is Emerson, and I believe he was bemoaning that too much consistency cuts off the flow of new ideas and new directions in society. The GPL is actually consistent with people who think copyright law needs to be reigned in, it uses fire to fight fire. It uses the unbounded constraints of copyright to force people who use it to share it with everyone. It is referred to as Copyleft because its purpose is as far from copyright as one can get. So you haven't read either Emerson or Stallman, fine.
When the MPAA members make movies, the budgets are in the hundreds of millions just to one up the last blockbuster with more fluff. Who pays for all this? You do.
Don't agree with their business model? The solution is simple.. DON'T CONSUME THEIR PRODUCTS. Don't buy it, don't steal it, don't copy it, don't share it. Walk away and the issue goes away. Patronize the indie filmmakers whose work you claim to respect.
I don't agree with the business model of the coal factory spewing sulfurous fumes into the atmosphere causing acid rain which kills all of my crops. Explain to me how my not using electricity would undo the damage? Those not affected by the rain would continue to purchase the power, and my land would be destroyed by the output of the coal plant. This is a classic tragedy of the commons example. I could walk away from my land, which I purchased and I would "go away". I could also walk away from the DVD I purchased (but cannot copy for my own use) and I would "go away". The issue still remains, people who bought land that had coal plants built next to them after the purchase have a right to address the damage being done. When someone sells me a DVD full of information, their ability to dictate the devices I employ upon that information stops at my doorway. Booksellers do not sell books that can only be read in light produced by GE lightbulbs.
The state legislature of Indiana once passed a law that said "3 times the diameter of a circle is the circumference".
What does that have to do with this issue? Absolutely nothing. Some state legislature passed a stupid law about mathematics a hundred years ago, therefore copyright law must be stupid!?
I'm starting to think that one of the unintended consequences of file-sharing is that it is degrading the ability of college students and young college graduates to think logically. They start with a gut-level position, then tend to throw the kitchen sink at it (see examples above) to defend it. If you have 30 posters r
I point out that any system that requires that the poor die from cancer for 13 years so that one guy can make money is also deranged.
Your point still stands however.
Well done sir!
Ah, I mistook the phrase "passed by the legislature" for enacted into law. I stand corrected. Thank you all.
I knew I should have used a car analogy!!!
The amendment I envisioned that says something like "an act of congress can exempt a sitting president from the 2 term limit". In states with primary elections, each presidential candidate designates a slate of electors (perhaps consisting of members of congress who just let him run again) who then appear on the November ballot. Collusion by the two parties (like the big record labels colluding to fix prices) would easily leave congress in control of the executive branch and by extension the judicial as well. Dystopian, but possible.
Drama queen much?
Seriously. We're talking about your "right" to download movies without paying for them.
To equate this with the end of democracy just makes you look ridiculous.
The comparison is quite apt actually, if a tad shrill. Say congress extends presidential term limits every 4 years and the House of Represenatives chose to re-elect him/her every 4 years regardless of the outcome of the "popular vote", you might cry foul. Technically, this would be legal but very unwise.
Copyrights are supposed to expire, mouse or no. Instead, they are extended ad infinitum to provide an economic moat to industries that would otherwise have none. Again, it is legal and quite common to rent congress-critters in order to bolster a failing (or failed) business model.
We were to be accorded limited/fair use of purchased copyrighted works. Instead we are only allowed to view, never transfer, transform, or reproduce these works in any way. Another bait and switch, I bought a product but now, somehow, I have no ownership rights to it.
There is a very good reason why unpopular but powerful governments shut down internet services (facebook, twitter, yahoo email, google, etc). The effortless transmission of information threatens them in exactly the same way it threatens the executives of Disney, Time Warner, Fox, and other large content creators. If you cannot control the flow of information, you cannot control the population or the consumer.
Don't you wonder why AOL could carpet the landscape with CDs/DVDs for pennies, yet when the same medium is produced by RIAA or MPAA members they cost $15.99 or $24.99? Independent filmmakers seem able to produce top quality films for only a few million, even using unionized labor throughout. When the MPAA members make movies, the budgets are in the hundreds of millions just to one up the last blockbuster with more fluff. Who pays for all this? You do. They just moved the decimal place once place to the right and rented congress to make sure that you have to pay it.
The state legislature of Indiana once passed a law that said "3 times the diameter of a circle is the circumference". So everyone who calculated the true circumference of a circle using Pi was in violation of the law. There was no Circumference Calculators Association of America at that time, so today we are able to determine for ourselves just how much runaround we get from congress on some issues.
If Comcast is going to muck with forwarding my packets, they should reroute requests for espn.com to cbssports.com. Hopefully Comcast and Disney both go nuclear, then Canada takes over the world.
I sent the following:
"I recently noticed that your sites performance had degraded substantially. Unable to enjoy my usual offerings from ESPN, I went looking for alternatives on the internet. To my surprise, I found a much better source for my sporting news needs. I just wanted to wish ESPN the best of luck and fond wishes, it was a wonderful 30 years."
The email address I provided was "aoltriedthis@history.com", I wonder if they will even notice.