You read too much firingsquad.:) This discussion is totally off topic, but what the heck. Here goes: FSAA enabled, Voodoo 5 is a better implementation, and generally faster. No question. FSAA disabled, GeForce 2 is quite a bit faster than Voodoo 5 5500, no question. Voodoo 5 6000 hasn't been sufficiently tested. Not interesting to me, though, since I'm not going to drop 600 bucks on a vid card.
Startlingly enough, a lot of Americans disagree with the position of their government. And the stance of the government isn't about fairness, like you imply in your comparison above.
China is a large and important trade partner. Clinton wants to open up trade with China for economic reasons. Some people say it'll help human rights, some people say it'll hurt 'em. No one really knows. But there certainly is a danger of isolating ourselves too much from China, and a bad military situation between the U.S. and China is a larger scale than we really want.
Cuba? Who the heck cares about Cuba? If you measure the impact of a lack of free trade with Cuba on our economy, it's practically insignificant.
This is gonna be off-topic, so mod me down to -1,000,000 for all I care. But I'm just fucking sick of people saying ".000000002 percent of people use Napster for legal purposes".
Sure, they're in the minority, but saying no one users Napster legally is ridiculous. You can get a lot of taped Dave Matthews Band shows, for example (and they permit, even encourage this). Grateful Dead is similar. I get a lot of great live sessions from DJ's, most of them don't care because they weren't recording it for a CD anyways, and they just want you to come see 'em spin when they're in town.
That being said, this "news item" is hardly worth noticing. It's not even as controversial as Napster. Penthouse.com makes their money from people paying to download images. This guy is making it free for people to download the exact same images, at the same rate, at the same quality. I haven't seen a single post saying this should be fine.
Does this mean we can stop getting hundreds of top-level posts by people who think they're the only open-source advocates who don't support piracy?
Or will it return to battle of the links? "Supreme Court ruling in Virgina vs. Snoop Dogg declared that anonymity is okay." "Yeah, but in this story, there are quotes from Linus saying it's bad. Ya gotta make a choice: Linus or the Supreme Court?"
1) Have you ever used a pay phone? Digital analog: library computer. Does this mean if someone uses a libary computer to pirate a file, the library's connection is shut down?
Everything is say is accurate (large corporations have sold products we want, WalMart is perfectly within its rights to overpower smaller companies, JonKatz's article had much less substance than one would expect), but misses the point.
This isn't capitalism, it's corporatism, and the menacing thing is that these corporations have power over our lives through many more means than simply the products they market. They exert a disproportionate influence over the political and legal systems. Should WalMart decide zoning laws? Should the RIAA be able to sue me into oblivion, burying me under lawyers?
You're blind if you don't see the massive control these corporations have over our government, culture, and society. And something else needs to be done-- because what's happening right now isn't working.
New Metallica: "Grr! Napster! No electronic distrubution of our music!"
Old Metallica: "Do you see what I see? Truth is an offence You silence for your confidence Do you hear what I hear? Doors are slamming shut Limit your imagination, Keep you where they must Do you feel what I feel? Bittering distress Who decides what you express? Do you take what I take? Endurance is the word Moving back instead of forward seems to me absurd."
New Metallica: "Let's exploit the legal system by burying people who can't afford it in endless lawsuits!"
Old Metallica: "Lady justice has been raped Truth assassin Rolls of red tape seal your lips Now you're done in."
New Metallica: "Hey, where'd you get those copyrighted lyrics? Thief!"
Did you say you wanted that? Probably not. But are you part of the "slashdot community"? By your own criteria, most probably.
But go ahead, make another login name, go bitch about how you're not a white linux-using male, then troll about how hypocritical the slashdot community is, because some of its members have different views from the others.
Free Software != Free Music, of course. However, what you don't seem to have noticed is that the two practices share a lot of the same philosophy. Supporters of open source feel that the movement will help content producers and users both, and will result in better software for everyone. Likewise, supporters of freely distributable music do not feel it will lead to an anarchistic state where good music is no longer worth producing; they do not even think that pirating Metallica songs will hurt Metallica.
"But how could this be?" Have you ever bought concert tickets? How about band merchandise? Or even purchased a CD even though you already had the one or two singles off the album? My guess is yes. And do you realize that most bands do not make most of their money off of CD sales (the giant recording industry takes most of it), but rather by touring? Don't you think freely distributable music could increase concert ticket and merchandise sales? Of course!
Finally, I take issue with your stipulation that just because something is a law, people should be made to pay for breaking it. First of all, the idea that a content seller has nothing to do with piracy of its products was, in fact, even attacked by Judge Jackson, who mentioned that piracy of Microsoft products would not be so widespread if their prices were more reasonable. Interesting-- piracy as a market regulating mechanism? It's true-- Napster use would be much lower if people could log on to e-Music and actually find the songs they wanted to hear at a reasonable price, instead of its current paltry selection (thanks to the recording industry's refusal to grant rights at a reasonable price, of course). Second, people break many laws on a widespread basis all the time. Traffic laws, for instance-- there would be a huge outcry if everyone who went 1mph over the speed limit was thrown in jail; in fact, they don't even ticket people until they're more than significantly over the limit! There are also laws against cohabitation, most sexual practices (oral sex, sodomy, etc.), and so on and so forth-- we break those all the time. Yes, these laws should be repealed, and so on and so forth, but the second people start changing their behavior to perfectly fit the laws, we will be an utterly submissive society. I think you need to rethink your die hard law and order stance a bit.
Re:Not that I am particularly happy about this, bu
on
MP3.com Loses In Court
·
· Score: 2
But here's the interesting point. The RIAA is suing not only for an injunction, but also damages. So they'd like to put mp3.com out of business by asking for $150,000 PER SONG streamed. But if the user has to demonstrate ownership of the CD first, how is the RIAA going to claim a single penny in damages? Anyone have any info on what basis they were claiming damages?
(Picks up the dead horse, dusts it off, flogs it a bit.)
Rapists can't write books about their crimes and sell them.
John Smith, convicted rapist, said of the order: "I'm no longer permitted to speak about sex or violence issues."
Criminals still have free speech rights. Talking about computers != selling a book about his crimes. I should stop here, but I just can't resist a few of these arguments, so for the sake of getting modded down, here goes.
It's not about free speech. Mitinick would not be well known at all if he lacked a criminal record. He wouldn't have the enclaves of fervent followers proclaiming "Free Kevin", and nobody would give a damn what some drop out loser said about security.
Loser dropouts don't get free speech? Or people who "shouldn't" be famous don't get free speech?
This is just another example of the government using its power to trample the rights of people they don't like. What? He's making money? But we thought we'd handled that! Anyways, this has all been said better in the Criminals Shouldn't Be Lauded thread, so go check it out.
"All it does is lets you see the REAL numbers behind the game that Verant tries to hide with handwaving and frantic knees-bent running about behavior." It DOES allow the user of ShowEQ to cheat, although its users have come up with a surprising number of rationalizations to say otherwise. For example, if a rare monsters spawns across the map, you'll be the first to know. And is that tough mob holding a great piece of rare loot, or just a couple copper? It'll tell you that too. As a matter of fact, Verant has had some success banning ShowEQ users based solely on observing for their behavior. A guy who was just standing around suddenly heads off in a beeline for that newly spawned will-o-wisp that just happens to have great loot. It IS cheating-- keep that in mind, and we can attempt to have a rational discussion.
Some links are down, broken, etc. Is there a place to list more mirrors? For example, this mirror has all the cp documents, plus the decss stuff. http://decss.homestead.com/ Anyone know how to add these sorts of sites to the mirrors list?
I have trouble seeing how this era is worse than any others for America. I have even more trouble seeing how the academy's decisions about anything say a thing about America at large.
The academy has always been stupid. This year, it's overlooking nominations for Talented Mr. Ripley except in supporting actor, because-- uh, oh-- Matt Damon plays a gay character. Wouldn't want that making an impression on anyone. Or blatantly ignoring things like Boys Don't Cry or All About My Mother for far inferior movies like Cider House Rules in the Best Picture category.
Looking at years past, we see that Citizen Kane was bested in the Best Picture category by How Green Was My Valley. And Blade Runner, of course, didn't get a Best Picture nomination, since it's a dreaded sci-fi movie for adults (E.T. fared better). Oh, and recently Forrest Gump beat Shawshank Redemption and Pulp Fiction.
As far as the South Park nomination, it's a rather pathetic attempt to seem relevant, don't you think? They try to give all the popular movies some nod. For example, all popular sci fi movies are given nominations for best Visual Effects. South Park obviously couldn't get that, so it gets a token best song nomination, although it's the most neutered tune of the bunch.
Somewhere, deep inside, we all know that people who use emacs are, well, wusses. It's not a real man's (or woman's) editor. So c'mon, vote for a real editor, will ya?
Slashdot Mirror
You read too much firingsquad. :) This discussion is totally off topic, but what the heck. Here goes: FSAA enabled, Voodoo 5 is a better implementation, and generally faster. No question. FSAA disabled, GeForce 2 is quite a bit faster than Voodoo 5 5500, no question. Voodoo 5 6000 hasn't been sufficiently tested. Not interesting to me, though, since I'm not going to drop 600 bucks on a vid card.
No kidding. Bad moderator. Take away all his points.
Startlingly enough, a lot of Americans disagree with the position of their government. And the stance of the government isn't about fairness, like you imply in your comparison above.
China is a large and important trade partner. Clinton wants to open up trade with China for economic reasons. Some people say it'll help human rights, some people say it'll hurt 'em. No one really knows. But there certainly is a danger of isolating ourselves too much from China, and a bad military situation between the U.S. and China is a larger scale than we really want.
Cuba? Who the heck cares about Cuba? If you measure the impact of a lack of free trade with Cuba on our economy, it's practically insignificant.
This is gonna be off-topic, so mod me down to -1,000,000 for all I care. But I'm just fucking sick of people saying ".000000002 percent of people use Napster for legal purposes".
Sure, they're in the minority, but saying no one users Napster legally is ridiculous. You can get a lot of taped Dave Matthews Band shows, for example (and they permit, even encourage this). Grateful Dead is similar. I get a lot of great live sessions from DJ's, most of them don't care because they weren't recording it for a CD anyways, and they just want you to come see 'em spin when they're in town.
That being said, this "news item" is hardly worth noticing. It's not even as controversial as Napster. Penthouse.com makes their money from people paying to download images. This guy is making it free for people to download the exact same images, at the same rate, at the same quality. I haven't seen a single post saying this should be fine.
Does this mean we can stop getting hundreds of top-level posts by people who think they're the only open-source advocates who don't support piracy?
Or will it return to battle of the links? "Supreme Court ruling in Virgina vs. Snoop Dogg declared that anonymity is okay." "Yeah, but in this story, there are quotes from Linus saying it's bad. Ya gotta make a choice: Linus or the Supreme Court?"
1) Have you ever used a pay phone? Digital analog: library computer. Does this mean if someone uses a libary computer to pirate a file, the library's connection is shut down?
Everything is say is accurate (large corporations have sold products we want, WalMart is perfectly within its rights to overpower smaller companies, JonKatz's article had much less substance than one would expect), but misses the point.
This isn't capitalism, it's corporatism, and the menacing thing is that these corporations have power over our lives through many more means than simply the products they market. They exert a disproportionate influence over the political and legal systems. Should WalMart decide zoning laws? Should the RIAA be able to sue me into oblivion, burying me under lawyers?
You're blind if you don't see the massive control these corporations have over our government, culture, and society. And something else needs to be done-- because what's happening right now isn't working.
New Metallica: "Grr! Napster! No electronic distrubution of our music!"
Old Metallica:
"Do you see what I see?
Truth is an offence
You silence for your confidence
Do you hear what I hear?
Doors are slamming shut
Limit your imagination,
Keep you where they must
Do you feel what I feel?
Bittering distress
Who decides what you express?
Do you take what I take?
Endurance is the word
Moving back instead of forward seems to me absurd."
New Metallica: "Let's exploit the legal system by burying people who can't afford it in endless lawsuits!"
Old Metallica:
"Lady justice has been raped
Truth assassin
Rolls of red tape seal your lips
Now you're done in."
New Metallica: "Hey, where'd you get those copyrighted lyrics? Thief!"
Did you say you wanted that? Probably not. But are you part of the "slashdot community"? By your own criteria, most probably.
But go ahead, make another login name, go bitch about how you're not a white linux-using male, then troll about how hypocritical the slashdot community is, because some of its members have different views from the others.
Free Software != Free Music, of course. However, what you don't seem to have noticed is that the two practices share a lot of the same philosophy. Supporters of open source feel that the movement will help content producers and users both, and will result in better software for everyone. Likewise, supporters of freely distributable music do not feel it will lead to an anarchistic state where good music is no longer worth producing; they do not even think that pirating Metallica songs will hurt Metallica.
"But how could this be?" Have you ever bought concert tickets? How about band merchandise? Or even purchased a CD even though you already had the one or two singles off the album? My guess is yes. And do you realize that most bands do not make most of their money off of CD sales (the giant recording industry takes most of it), but rather by touring? Don't you think freely distributable music could increase concert ticket and merchandise sales? Of course!
Finally, I take issue with your stipulation that just because something is a law, people should be made to pay for breaking it. First of all, the idea that a content seller has nothing to do with piracy of its products was, in fact, even attacked by Judge Jackson, who mentioned that piracy of Microsoft products would not be so widespread if their prices were more reasonable. Interesting-- piracy as a market regulating mechanism? It's true-- Napster use would be much lower if people could log on to e-Music and actually find the songs they wanted to hear at a reasonable price, instead of its current paltry selection (thanks to the recording industry's refusal to grant rights at a reasonable price, of course). Second, people break many laws on a widespread basis all the time. Traffic laws, for instance-- there would be a huge outcry if everyone who went 1mph over the speed limit was thrown in jail; in fact, they don't even ticket people until they're more than significantly over the limit! There are also laws against cohabitation, most sexual practices (oral sex, sodomy, etc.), and so on and so forth-- we break those all the time. Yes, these laws should be repealed, and so on and so forth, but the second people start changing their behavior to perfectly fit the laws, we will be an utterly submissive society. I think you need to rethink your die hard law and order stance a bit.
But here's the interesting point. The RIAA is suing not only for an injunction, but also damages. So they'd like to put mp3.com out of business by asking for $150,000 PER SONG streamed. But if the user has to demonstrate ownership of the CD first, how is the RIAA going to claim a single penny in damages? Anyone have any info on what basis they were claiming damages?
(Picks up the dead horse, dusts it off, flogs it a bit.)
Rapists can't write books about their crimes and sell them.
John Smith, convicted rapist, said of the order: "I'm no longer permitted to speak about sex or violence issues."
Criminals still have free speech rights. Talking about computers != selling a book about his crimes. I should stop here, but I just can't resist a few of these arguments, so for the sake of getting modded down, here goes.
It's not about free speech. Mitinick would not be well known at all if he lacked a criminal record. He wouldn't have the enclaves of fervent followers proclaiming "Free Kevin", and nobody would give a damn what some drop out loser said about security.
Loser dropouts don't get free speech? Or people who "shouldn't" be famous don't get free speech?
This is just another example of the government using its power to trample the rights of people they don't like. What? He's making money? But we thought we'd handled that! Anyways, this has all been said better in the Criminals Shouldn't Be Lauded thread, so go check it out.
"All it does is lets you see the REAL numbers behind the game that Verant tries to hide with handwaving and frantic knees-bent running about behavior." It DOES allow the user of ShowEQ to cheat, although its users have come up with a surprising number of rationalizations to say otherwise. For example, if a rare monsters spawns across the map, you'll be the first to know. And is that tough mob holding a great piece of rare loot, or just a couple copper? It'll tell you that too. As a matter of fact, Verant has had some success banning ShowEQ users based solely on observing for their behavior. A guy who was just standing around suddenly heads off in a beeline for that newly spawned will-o-wisp that just happens to have great loot. It IS cheating-- keep that in mind, and we can attempt to have a rational discussion.
(Slashdot collective attempts to pull foot from mouth.)
Some links are down, broken, etc. Is there a place to list more mirrors? For example, this mirror has all the cp documents, plus the decss stuff. http://decss.homestead.com/ Anyone know how to add these sorts of sites to the mirrors list?
I have trouble seeing how this era is worse than any others for America. I have even more trouble seeing how the academy's decisions about anything say a thing about America at large.
The academy has always been stupid. This year, it's overlooking nominations for Talented Mr. Ripley except in supporting actor, because-- uh, oh-- Matt Damon plays a gay character. Wouldn't want that making an impression on anyone. Or blatantly ignoring things like Boys Don't Cry or All About My Mother for far inferior movies like Cider House Rules in the Best Picture category.
Looking at years past, we see that Citizen Kane was bested in the Best Picture category by How Green Was My Valley. And Blade Runner, of course, didn't get a Best Picture nomination, since it's a dreaded sci-fi movie for adults (E.T. fared better). Oh, and recently Forrest Gump beat Shawshank Redemption and Pulp Fiction.
As far as the South Park nomination, it's a rather pathetic attempt to seem relevant, don't you think? They try to give all the popular movies some nod. For example, all popular sci fi movies are given nominations for best Visual Effects. South Park obviously couldn't get that, so it gets a token best song nomination, although it's the most neutered tune of the bunch.
Somewhere, deep inside, we all know that people who use emacs are, well, wusses. It's not a real man's (or woman's) editor. So c'mon, vote for a real editor, will ya?