How do you pronounce "o rly"? I occasionally find myself saying "oh really", while thinking "o rly"... but the "rly" doesn't come off my toungue so well. Is it something like "o arrrlee"?
None of the "tools" or "interactivity" matter to consumers.
To be fair, there are consumers whos preferences vary from yours. I for one find sites like miniclip.com a decent occasional pass-time. Try doing that without Flash.
2013 will be the year of Linux on the desktop. After the majority of humanity being wiped off the face of the planet in 2012, you will only have a handful of people to persuade, and existing market penetration of Windows will be a non-issue.
Ever heard of "malicious intent"?
Or are you sugesting that he brought a camera into an Apple store, recording his every move, commenting on how he was gonna jailbreak a phone, and then unknowingly happened to stumble on a website that did JUST that, and quickly cover his surprise with a "And there we go, have fun"?
Well, the right to BREATH is as undeniable as the right to access INFORMATION.
Obviously, the right to breah is undeniable. Let's turn it around so we can even begin to talk:
The right to access INFORMATION is as undeniable as the right to BREATH
And now, I disagree. Or we at the very least need a clear definition of "information". Movies, music and games are both *more* and *less* than information.
They are refining of ideas. They are specific representations of information. They are the results of the skills and dedication of the artists. They are simple entertainment.
I can agree that the patenting of ideas is bad. If you're able to re-create Star Craft 2 *from scratch*, you should be allowed to. However, I don't think you have any undeniable right to know it's inner workings. You're not automatically entitled to know the exact chords played in your favourite piece of music. You're not entitled to know how Tolkien thought the Lord of the Rings should end, and you're not entitled to see Peter Jacksons attempt at turning these books into a movie.
lol. Just lol.
Try to be a little pragmatic for a second. Economy is a fact of modern society. People need money to survive. Artists are people. Artists need money. Make art non-profit, and artists won't be able to dedicate time to their art. Result: quality of art degrades.
In terms of your right to think, I'll agree that patenting ideas is bad. However, games like Star Craft 2 are much more than ideas. It's coding, gameplay tuning, modelling, animation, etc. etc.. Your right to think grants you the right to imagine what playing the game would be like. It doesn't give you the right to actually play it, much less redistribute it.
Also, that is not the real question. Information is FREE. Period. Any laws trying to control information are ARTIFICIAL, UNNATURAL and UNETHICAL.
How do you figure? I'm guessing you've decided this to be an ultimate truth, and since a limited number of people agrees with you, you now consider it fact?
While OP is clearly clueless, you should've sticked to explaining penetration percentages. The 20% mentioned is *not* the chinese total, but only the total of the two largest ISP's within China.
Like OP said: Interesting theory, but citation needed.
You argument is by no means unreasonable. If no statistics exist on the topic, I think we can agree it may be worth investigating.
I just don't understand why this -- even if the intent is evil -- ranks high among the other privacy concerns in modern life.
I too am hard pressed to figure out exactly *how* this data should aid Google. That being said, if there are no plans what-so-ever to do anything with this data, why was it collected?
More importantly though, I find it scary that Google has earned so much trust that the supposedly reasonably educated crowd of slashdot is going "Oh, it's just Google. Those are the good guys, so can't be anything to see here".
Honestly, if this had been Microsoft or Apple, more creative readers than myself would already have come up with the first 20 potentially evil usecases, and demanded a public apology from either Steve.
Rather than assuming these "indiscriminate buyers" grab the first thing they see, assume they grab the most expensive with what appears the highest number (GeForce 8600 must be better than GeForce 220... right?). Still seems entirely unlikely?
When death occurs from bacterial or viral infections, it is from events similar to the moon crashing into the fucking earth.
Uhm no, not by a long shot. Having the moon crashing into the earth would be similar to having your head bashed in with a sledge hammer. Indeed, the existance of lethal bacteria is a quite valid example that the comparatively microscopic biological entities can have a devastating impact on something gigantic.
Claiming that the blunt force of the moon crashing into the earth in any way resembles anything remotely similar to a disease, however lethal, is downright retarded.
Oh my! How lucky we all are that we don't need to purchase our oil from, say, MUSLIMS, or worse! USA to the rescue for the benefit of mankind! /sarcasm off
There's two approaches to the discussion:
1: Point out that chickens were not the first animal to lay eggs, and as such, the egg predates the chicken by millions of years.
2: Assume that the discussion is about chicken eggs - NOT eggs in general. In this case, the answer depends on the definition of a chicken egg:
A: A chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken = the chicken came first
B: A chicken egg is an egg containing a chicken = the egg came first
Aight, so the ultimate answer comes down to definition:
A: a chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken, in which case the chicken came first
OR
B: a chicken egg is an egg containing a chicken, in which case the egg came first.
While it's easy to work around and create versions that can legally be redistributed, it will still be slightly altered versions. They might be practically identical by all means and standards, or they might include malware. Anyone looking to get the product for free (gratis), legally, will get "something slightly different". That fact alone might be enough to make some people prefer the real, authorized, payed-for deal, thus giving the potential license restrictions SOME degree of actual purpose
Despite your attempt at petty insulting, you're kinda making a good case why it may be worth paying money for the original, and why there's practical differences between allowing redistributions of unmodified versus repackaged versions of the product.
While some might consider pictures of dicks being sucked an added bonus, increasing the value of the package, others might prefer just the basic package.
By the time every open source zealot has had their hands on this work, and made their own repackaging, who's to know how many of these have even worse sorts of malware included.
All of a sudden, paying for the real deal doesn't seem like such a bad option. Requiring repackaging disallows the indescriminate copying, thereby potentially creating a jungle of less trustworhty versions for those looking to get the product gratis.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you pronounce "o rly"? I occasionally find myself saying "oh really", while thinking "o rly"... but the "rly" doesn't come off my toungue so well. Is it something like "o arrrlee"?
None of the "tools" or "interactivity" matter to consumers.
To be fair, there are consumers whos preferences vary from yours. I for one find sites like miniclip.com a decent occasional pass-time. Try doing that without Flash.
2013 will be the year of Linux on the desktop. After the majority of humanity being wiped off the face of the planet in 2012, you will only have a handful of people to persuade, and existing market penetration of Windows will be a non-issue.
A control method that requires you to look away from the screen. The possibilities are endless indeed.
Ever heard of "malicious intent"?
Or are you sugesting that he brought a camera into an Apple store, recording his every move, commenting on how he was gonna jailbreak a phone, and then unknowingly happened to stumble on a website that did JUST that, and quickly cover his surprise with a "And there we go, have fun"?
Riiight... cause tpb is definitely closely affiliated with the content industry.
Ethics are a construction we make as a society [...] the only rules I follow because I want to are my own Ethics
See what you did here? You made "ethics" a construction of society... that... is... unique to you?
Ethics are important, Morals and Laws are not. [...] I don't give a fuck about the law [...] There is NOTHING wrong about sharing information.
ANARCHY! FUCK YOU ALL! My ethics are my own, but universal, and they're right, and you're wrong if you disagree!
Well, the right to BREATH is as undeniable as the right to access INFORMATION.
Obviously, the right to breah is undeniable. Let's turn it around so we can even begin to talk:
The right to access INFORMATION is as undeniable as the right to BREATH
And now, I disagree. Or we at the very least need a clear definition of "information". Movies, music and games are both *more* and *less* than information.
They are refining of ideas. They are specific representations of information. They are the results of the skills and dedication of the artists. They are simple entertainment.
I can agree that the patenting of ideas is bad. If you're able to re-create Star Craft 2 *from scratch*, you should be allowed to. However, I don't think you have any undeniable right to know it's inner workings. You're not automatically entitled to know the exact chords played in your favourite piece of music. You're not entitled to know how Tolkien thought the Lord of the Rings should end, and you're not entitled to see Peter Jacksons attempt at turning these books into a movie.
lol. Just lol.
Try to be a little pragmatic for a second. Economy is a fact of modern society. People need money to survive. Artists are people. Artists need money. Make art non-profit, and artists won't be able to dedicate time to their art. Result: quality of art degrades.
In terms of your right to think, I'll agree that patenting ideas is bad. However, games like Star Craft 2 are much more than ideas. It's coding, gameplay tuning, modelling, animation, etc. etc.. Your right to think grants you the right to imagine what playing the game would be like. It doesn't give you the right to actually play it, much less redistribute it.
Also, that is not the real question. Information is FREE. Period. Any laws trying to control information are ARTIFICIAL, UNNATURAL and UNETHICAL.
How do you figure? I'm guessing you've decided this to be an ultimate truth, and since a limited number of people agrees with you, you now consider it fact?
While OP is clearly clueless, you should've sticked to explaining penetration percentages. The 20% mentioned is *not* the chinese total, but only the total of the two largest ISP's within China.
Right, because there actually exists people who can make a service "incapable of errors"
/sarcasm off
Like OP said: Interesting theory, but citation needed.
You argument is by no means unreasonable. If no statistics exist on the topic, I think we can agree it may be worth investigating.
And you all think religious people are crazy...
It's a dangerous business, commenting on peoples comments to comments, without reading the comment originally being commented on.
We're supposedly talking about a PC you didn't pay money for.
I just don't understand why this -- even if the intent is evil -- ranks high among the other privacy concerns in modern life.
I too am hard pressed to figure out exactly *how* this data should aid Google. That being said, if there are no plans what-so-ever to do anything with this data, why was it collected?
More importantly though, I find it scary that Google has earned so much trust that the supposedly reasonably educated crowd of slashdot is going "Oh, it's just Google. Those are the good guys, so can't be anything to see here".
Honestly, if this had been Microsoft or Apple, more creative readers than myself would already have come up with the first 20 potentially evil usecases, and demanded a public apology from either Steve.
You realize that if living on the northern hemisphere, and you're facing east, the sun will always be south of you, ie. your right hand side?
Rather than assuming these "indiscriminate buyers" grab the first thing they see, assume they grab the most expensive with what appears the highest number (GeForce 8600 must be better than GeForce 220... right?). Still seems entirely unlikely?
When death occurs from bacterial or viral infections, it is from events similar to the moon crashing into the fucking earth.
Uhm no, not by a long shot. Having the moon crashing into the earth would be similar to having your head bashed in with a sledge hammer. Indeed, the existance of lethal bacteria is a quite valid example that the comparatively microscopic biological entities can have a devastating impact on something gigantic.
Claiming that the blunt force of the moon crashing into the earth in any way resembles anything remotely similar to a disease, however lethal, is downright retarded.
Oh my! How lucky we all are that we don't need to purchase our oil from, say, MUSLIMS, or worse! USA to the rescue for the benefit of mankind!
/sarcasm off
There's two approaches to the discussion:
1: Point out that chickens were not the first animal to lay eggs, and as such, the egg predates the chicken by millions of years.
2: Assume that the discussion is about chicken eggs - NOT eggs in general. In this case, the answer depends on the definition of a chicken egg:
A: A chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken = the chicken came first
B: A chicken egg is an egg containing a chicken = the egg came first
Case closed.
Aight, so the ultimate answer comes down to definition:
A: a chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken, in which case the chicken came first
OR
B: a chicken egg is an egg containing a chicken, in which case the egg came first.
While it's easy to work around and create versions that can legally be redistributed, it will still be slightly altered versions. They might be practically identical by all means and standards, or they might include malware. Anyone looking to get the product for free (gratis), legally, will get "something slightly different". That fact alone might be enough to make some people prefer the real, authorized, payed-for deal, thus giving the potential license restrictions SOME degree of actual purpose
Despite your attempt at petty insulting, you're kinda making a good case why it may be worth paying money for the original, and why there's practical differences between allowing redistributions of unmodified versus repackaged versions of the product.
While some might consider pictures of dicks being sucked an added bonus, increasing the value of the package, others might prefer just the basic package.
By the time every open source zealot has had their hands on this work, and made their own repackaging, who's to know how many of these have even worse sorts of malware included.
All of a sudden, paying for the real deal doesn't seem like such a bad option. Requiring repackaging disallows the indescriminate copying, thereby potentially creating a jungle of less trustworhty versions for those looking to get the product gratis.