The article asks this question fairly often and this is important. While testing is key and we need to make sure the systems are working properly (and will hopefully not break) the team at LHC needs to step it up a notch. Waiting this long to get to this test, and waiting another year to get to the 7.5TEVL and none of these are to do science. It's very disappointing to the science community (who at least understand the reasoning) but extremely disappointing to the rest of the world who can't fathom why something so expensive, with such a long development time...still has not provided any research.
Ps3 is a rather efficient system and works well together on a network. They also want the high-res output and this thing has built-in blu ray. Couple that with the fact that Sony sells these systems below production cost and it becomes cheaper to buy these WORKING systems then to build your own.
Controversial? The only controversy is people who want to fly planes but are losing their jobs to video game nerds. Really...nuclear weapons is controversial....these things are just plain awesome for military personnel safety.
In the eyes of the law, and some others - getting a speeding ticket = being a bad driver. Though I challenge that since Nascar drivers are some of the best in the world - and drive the fastest too. Making a u-turn does not make you a bad driver. Making a u-turn into oncoming traffic and getting into a wreck makes you a bad driver. Insurance companies jsut want extra money.
NASA is a very small portion of the budget. According to this link, americans 19 times the money on fast food in 1997 then the gov't spent on NASA that same year. Link
As of 2007 Nasa was.58% (that is.0058) of the US budget. Link 2
And if, god-forbid, the ship goes boom while flying up we have a really really bad radioactive situation. They better hope their ships are ridiculously safe. The reason we haven't done this in the past, and done things like put nuclear waste on a rocket headed for the sun is because of the hazards of getting the stuff up.
Wait, meteors that hit the ground are cold to the touch? That doesn't make sense - they enter the atmosphere, and as we know objects entering the atmosphere travel so fast that they get hot...real hot...so hot that our space ships need to have heat shields to keep the folks inside from getting burnt to a crisp...which makes it not cold to the touch. So when the rock hits the ground why would it become cold all of a sudden? Maybe if it sat around in cold climate for a while but after touch-down it should be very hot.
It doesn't take a large object to create that kind of hole, in fact, it would have to be small. If you are looking for a rock the size of a car then the impact crater would be MUCH bigger. Also depending on the substance it could have melted, or disintigrated upon impact. The thing that makes it weird is there is a perfect circle, not angular in the least...the chances of that happening are very small (though anything is possible so it could have been). Another thing the scatter of dirt does not follow the correct patterns...hell i am not a meteor expert, or a geologist but from watching all of those Discovery channel shows (and I've seen a ton about meteors) this doesn't look right. Obviously soil samples will tell the true story.
Do I really need to debunk this stupid argument again? For real? If I were to steal a CD from a store, I am physically taking something from the store -- there was a CD on the shelf before I got there, there wasn't a CD when I left. Now that CD cannot be sold to anyone. Got it? No such thing happens when a song is pirated online. User A makes a copy of a song, and User B downloads it. User B never took anything away from anyone, and User B was not necessarily going to ever buy the CD anyway. Nothing is stopping User B from going to buy the CD later, and there is certainly nothing stopping User C from downloading it.
You are putting value on physical objects and saying non-physical objects have no value. I disagree. By taking information, without paying for it, you are depriving someone of money to recoup their losses and make a profit. The CD is a copy, many copies can be made...hence the "leave $1 for the cost of the cd/case". Stealing a CD, which is a highly mass-produced physical product will not deny someone of the other CDs of the same album. We are not talking the hope diamond - a unique product. So go on, go to best buy - leave them a dollar for a CD and walk out of the store with the CD. Let's see how far you go. Better yet - go download a ton of songs, and then call the cops letting them know this.
No. It is a literary device. Get over it.
A literary device which diminishes the value of some other meaning. Eventually someone will equate what the nazi's did to piracy of music - yea there are people who are dumb like that, unfortunately there are a lot of them.
Again, no. I still buy a great many CDs, and have recently begun collecting vinyl. I go to shows, and I buy the artists' merchandise. 'Free' has nothing to do with it -- indie labels simply tend to turn out higher quality music for a great many reasons.
Indie producing better quality is a matter of opinion - so let's leave that there. Someone produced X, if they want you to have X for free it is their choice, not yours. Get over it.
Again, you fail miserably at trying to make a coherent point by going back to the straw man you created with you last statement. Major labels are more concerned with profit margins than creating art. If you have not figured this out, and why this is bad for music, then there is not much I can do for you. None of this is to say that musicians should be doing it "for free" -- I want artists to be compensated generously for the works they provide. The art, however, needs to come before the dollar sign if you are going to make a great album. If it is good and people want to hear it, it will sell.
Ohh you used a logical falacy - I love that. First - Artists, are not major labels. Second - you again are making blanket statements about an industry - except now you are focusing on the labels. But I find it interesting you want artists to be compesnated generously for the work they provide but are not willing to pay for it unless it meets some arbitrary standard that you setup. As for the "art, however, needs to come before teh dollar sign" - it does. It may be out there, but I can't recall seeing "pre-order XYZ cd, it hasn't been made yet, the songs haven't been written yet, but you can pay for it now". Also - as time has shown - good or bad, if people want to listen to it then can do so by buying it or getting it for free and lots of people will opt for getting it for free, and as in your case, have no moral objections to it.
This has EVERYTHING to do with the thread I am commenting on! It's about copyright laws run amok and how to deal with the issue! I even addressed this at the beginning of my comment! Are you even trying?
Downloading CDs on p2p sites has nothing to do with the article. The article was how copyright ran amok by threatening to sue someone who was singing which was preceeded by a store playing the radio on the loudspeaker... btw since I have to spell it out - these two actions have been around long before the intarweb.
P.S. For the person(s) who marked me troll because I gave an unpopular opinion. I surf Karma Excellente - so bite me
(I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm, but I don't want to get sued either)
I take it you have no moral objection to stealing CDs from a store because it probably causes them no harm? Hell leave them a $1 and take the CD...as we know CDs and CD cases cost less then $1 - so you are being more then fair.
but I also decided that they don't need any of my money anymore (I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before, go figure),
I hear this a lot, and while I am sure someone, out there, buys 104 to 260 cds per year, I feel confident on calling you out on this.
Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis,
Nazi's? It's people like you who diminish what happend during the holocaust and WWII
I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better!
Ah-hah - now we get it. Indie music is better because it is sometimes free? So free makes music sound better. Maybe you are onto something. Let those artists starve.
You get music that is created by artists who care about their music, rather than their profit margins.
Nice of you to make blanket statements about all artists. Because someone can't possibly enjoy making good music and making a profit. Better that they spend their time doing it for free - because as we know, free music sounds better then paid music.
Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves. That is the only way to stop this insanity.
What happend in the article, in the thread you are commenting on, has nothing to do with your rant. Now run along and go download the latest Mily CD - you know want to put your hands up in the air like yea.
Bah silly slashdot. After the Y example (which y is half of x) I said - guess who sells their medicine and make money? Guess who doesn't sell their medicine and lose money? Guess who stops doing R&D? Guess who invents the next cure?
This is a natural outcome of applying the concept of private property to information
No it is not a natural outcome, it is a dumb outcome. There are lots of information out there that is proprietary. Some company spent time/money creating it and giving it away will make the company lose profits they could be made. A prime example is the drug industry. They spent billions in R&D - and a lot of that stuff goes nowhere (think AIDs cures/immunization research). Now imagine if there was no protection on information. Said drug company, who spent billions on research comes out with the wonder drug. They go to sell it and need to sell each pill at $X to not only recoup their money but make a profit (they are a business after all) - except joeschmoe drug company that does not research takes the free information (hey in your world information is free, but other stuff is not free) and creates the medicine. They didn't spend billions in R&D so they can sell the pill at $Y where Y
Yes there are horrible extremes, and this case with the music is one of them, but no it is incorrect to say one should not protect what they have invested time/money into - and there is no doubt that music artists, production companies, etc spend a lot of time/money into getting their music out there, getting it famous, and getting it to the point where it makes profits. This case, however, is insane. Stores have been playing radio/cd(tape) music since long before the intarweb
I think you'll find that has been the music industry M.O. for as long as there has been a recording industry. MS is the relative newb when it comes to such behavior.
Your statement is proven since MS get's sued by gov'ts for it's practices while the music industry not only gets defended by gov'ts but also sues people on their behalf.
Wow. Gov't has failed big time when this happens. Not having the radio on in a store? Not being able to sing a tune while, you know, living - without paying?
Given that the companies who release music want the radio's to play it so it becomes better known so people will want to buy the cds, go to concerts, etc....why would they not want a supermarket to have their music on---- from the radio?
Wow someone defending a windows product and not getting modded as a troll. If i didn't use my 15 mod points earlier it would be used on your post.
I have been using win 7 all summer, and so have many people here. It never gave me a single issue on my laptop. Ran smooth and did what I wanted. As soon as I get it (pending USPS delivery) I plan on installing it (hopefully tonight).
While I hate reinstalling my OS (just takes so much freaking time) it is very useful to do to cleanup the hard drive. I end up not reinstalling software that has low use to me. I am sure other people have these kinds of items installed...something they thought would be useful but really never was.
So assuming windows will be left on my doorstep (meaning i dont have to go to the post office to grab it). I will be backing up my files, and installing Windows. Then, ugh, I have to redownload and install some of my games, and install productivity software (office 2007, adobe cs3, blah blah and more blah). Man the only part of the process I hate is this part.
Slashdot Mirror
The article asks this question fairly often and this is important. While testing is key and we need to make sure the systems are working properly (and will hopefully not break) the team at LHC needs to step it up a notch. Waiting this long to get to this test, and waiting another year to get to the 7.5TEVL and none of these are to do science. It's very disappointing to the science community (who at least understand the reasoning) but extremely disappointing to the rest of the world who can't fathom why something so expensive, with such a long development time...still has not provided any research.
Ps3 is a rather efficient system and works well together on a network. They also want the high-res output and this thing has built-in blu ray. Couple that with the fact that Sony sells these systems below production cost and it becomes cheaper to buy these WORKING systems then to build your own.
So what? Just cause it ain't linux doesn't mean it won't do well.
Controversial? The only controversy is people who want to fly planes but are losing their jobs to video game nerds. Really...nuclear weapons is controversial....these things are just plain awesome for military personnel safety.
In the eyes of the law, and some others - getting a speeding ticket = being a bad driver. Though I challenge that since Nascar drivers are some of the best in the world - and drive the fastest too. Making a u-turn does not make you a bad driver. Making a u-turn into oncoming traffic and getting into a wreck makes you a bad driver. Insurance companies jsut want extra money.
Inbreeding.
Yahoo Serious split the beer atom back in 1988, in "Young Einstien".
Oh I know - i was just trying to be funny - failed attempt on my part :)
And I was impressed when that Australian split the beer atom.
Who?
Big correction, my above post said US budget...that is false...the numbers are of the federal budget, which dose not include state/local.
NASA is a very small portion of the budget. According to this link, americans 19 times the money on fast food in 1997 then the gov't spent on NASA that same year. Link
.58% (that is .0058) of the US budget. Link 2
As of 2007 Nasa was
And if, god-forbid, the ship goes boom while flying up we have a really really bad radioactive situation. They better hope their ships are ridiculously safe. The reason we haven't done this in the past, and done things like put nuclear waste on a rocket headed for the sun is because of the hazards of getting the stuff up.
Wait, meteors that hit the ground are cold to the touch? That doesn't make sense - they enter the atmosphere, and as we know objects entering the atmosphere travel so fast that they get hot...real hot...so hot that our space ships need to have heat shields to keep the folks inside from getting burnt to a crisp...which makes it not cold to the touch. So when the rock hits the ground why would it become cold all of a sudden? Maybe if it sat around in cold climate for a while but after touch-down it should be very hot.
It doesn't take a large object to create that kind of hole, in fact, it would have to be small. If you are looking for a rock the size of a car then the impact crater would be MUCH bigger. Also depending on the substance it could have melted, or disintigrated upon impact. The thing that makes it weird is there is a perfect circle, not angular in the least...the chances of that happening are very small (though anything is possible so it could have been). Another thing the scatter of dirt does not follow the correct patterns...hell i am not a meteor expert, or a geologist but from watching all of those Discovery channel shows (and I've seen a ton about meteors) this doesn't look right. Obviously soil samples will tell the true story.
Do I really need to debunk this stupid argument again? For real? If I were to steal a CD from a store, I am physically taking something from the store -- there was a CD on the shelf before I got there, there wasn't a CD when I left. Now that CD cannot be sold to anyone. Got it? No such thing happens when a song is pirated online. User A makes a copy of a song, and User B downloads it. User B never took anything away from anyone, and User B was not necessarily going to ever buy the CD anyway. Nothing is stopping User B from going to buy the CD later, and there is certainly nothing stopping User C from downloading it.
You are putting value on physical objects and saying non-physical objects have no value. I disagree. By taking information, without paying for it, you are depriving someone of money to recoup their losses and make a profit. The CD is a copy, many copies can be made...hence the "leave $1 for the cost of the cd/case". Stealing a CD, which is a highly mass-produced physical product will not deny someone of the other CDs of the same album. We are not talking the hope diamond - a unique product. So go on, go to best buy - leave them a dollar for a CD and walk out of the store with the CD. Let's see how far you go. Better yet - go download a ton of songs, and then call the cops letting them know this.
No. It is a literary device. Get over it.
A literary device which diminishes the value of some other meaning. Eventually someone will equate what the nazi's did to piracy of music - yea there are people who are dumb like that, unfortunately there are a lot of them.
Again, no. I still buy a great many CDs, and have recently begun collecting vinyl. I go to shows, and I buy the artists' merchandise. 'Free' has nothing to do with it -- indie labels simply tend to turn out higher quality music for a great many reasons.
Indie producing better quality is a matter of opinion - so let's leave that there. Someone produced X, if they want you to have X for free it is their choice, not yours. Get over it.
Again, you fail miserably at trying to make a coherent point by going back to the straw man you created with you last statement. Major labels are more concerned with profit margins than creating art. If you have not figured this out, and why this is bad for music, then there is not much I can do for you. None of this is to say that musicians should be doing it "for free" -- I want artists to be compensated generously for the works they provide. The art, however, needs to come before the dollar sign if you are going to make a great album. If it is good and people want to hear it, it will sell.
Ohh you used a logical falacy - I love that. First - Artists, are not major labels. Second - you again are making blanket statements about an industry - except now you are focusing on the labels. But I find it interesting you want artists to be compesnated generously for the work they provide but are not willing to pay for it unless it meets some arbitrary standard that you setup. As for the "art, however, needs to come before teh dollar sign" - it does. It may be out there, but I can't recall seeing "pre-order XYZ cd, it hasn't been made yet, the songs haven't been written yet, but you can pay for it now". Also - as time has shown - good or bad, if people want to listen to it then can do so by buying it or getting it for free and lots of people will opt for getting it for free, and as in your case, have no moral objections to it.
This has EVERYTHING to do with the thread I am commenting on! It's about copyright laws run amok and how to deal with the issue! I even addressed this at the beginning of my comment! Are you even trying?
Downloading CDs on p2p sites has nothing to do with the article. The article was how copyright ran amok by threatening to sue someone who was singing which was preceeded by a store playing the radio on the loudspeaker... btw since I have to spell it out - these two actions have been around long before the intarweb.
P.S. For the person(s) who marked me troll because I gave an unpopular opinion. I surf Karma Excellente - so bite me
(I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm, but I don't want to get sued either)
I take it you have no moral objection to stealing CDs from a store because it probably causes them no harm? Hell leave them a $1 and take the CD...as we know CDs and CD cases cost less then $1 - so you are being more then fair.
but I also decided that they don't need any of my money anymore (I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before, go figure),
I hear this a lot, and while I am sure someone, out there, buys 104 to 260 cds per year, I feel confident on calling you out on this.
Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis,
Nazi's? It's people like you who diminish what happend during the holocaust and WWII
I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better!
Ah-hah - now we get it. Indie music is better because it is sometimes free? So free makes music sound better. Maybe you are onto something. Let those artists starve.
You get music that is created by artists who care about their music, rather than their profit margins.
Nice of you to make blanket statements about all artists. Because someone can't possibly enjoy making good music and making a profit. Better that they spend their time doing it for free - because as we know, free music sounds better then paid music.
Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves. That is the only way to stop this insanity.
What happend in the article, in the thread you are commenting on, has nothing to do with your rant. Now run along and go download the latest Mily CD - you know want to put your hands up in the air like yea.
Bah silly slashdot. After the Y example (which y is half of x) I said - guess who sells their medicine and make money? Guess who doesn't sell their medicine and lose money? Guess who stops doing R&D? Guess who invents the next cure?
This is a natural outcome of applying the concept of private property to information
No it is not a natural outcome, it is a dumb outcome. There are lots of information out there that is proprietary. Some company spent time/money creating it and giving it away will make the company lose profits they could be made. A prime example is the drug industry. They spent billions in R&D - and a lot of that stuff goes nowhere (think AIDs cures/immunization research). Now imagine if there was no protection on information. Said drug company, who spent billions on research comes out with the wonder drug. They go to sell it and need to sell each pill at $X to not only recoup their money but make a profit (they are a business after all) - except joeschmoe drug company that does not research takes the free information (hey in your world information is free, but other stuff is not free) and creates the medicine. They didn't spend billions in R&D so they can sell the pill at $Y where Y
Yes there are horrible extremes, and this case with the music is one of them, but no it is incorrect to say one should not protect what they have invested time/money into - and there is no doubt that music artists, production companies, etc spend a lot of time/money into getting their music out there, getting it famous, and getting it to the point where it makes profits. This case, however, is insane. Stores have been playing radio/cd(tape) music since long before the intarweb
I think you'll find that has been the music industry M.O. for as long as there has been a recording industry. MS is the relative newb when it comes to such behavior.
Your statement is proven since MS get's sued by gov'ts for it's practices while the music industry not only gets defended by gov'ts but also sues people on their behalf.
Wow. Gov't has failed big time when this happens. Not having the radio on in a store? Not being able to sing a tune while, you know, living - without paying?
Given that the companies who release music want the radio's to play it so it becomes better known so people will want to buy the cds, go to concerts, etc....why would they not want a supermarket to have their music on---- from the radio?
My desktop is 64 bit, my laptop is 32 bit.
I ordered Windows 7 Home Premium. I didn't see a 64 bit vs a 32 bit version. Does the one Windows 7 Home Premium support 64 bit and 32 bit?
Wow someone defending a windows product and not getting modded as a troll. If i didn't use my 15 mod points earlier it would be used on your post.
I have been using win 7 all summer, and so have many people here. It never gave me a single issue on my laptop. Ran smooth and did what I wanted. As soon as I get it (pending USPS delivery) I plan on installing it (hopefully tonight).
While I hate reinstalling my OS (just takes so much freaking time) it is very useful to do to cleanup the hard drive. I end up not reinstalling software that has low use to me. I am sure other people have these kinds of items installed...something they thought would be useful but really never was.
So assuming windows will be left on my doorstep (meaning i dont have to go to the post office to grab it). I will be backing up my files, and installing Windows. Then, ugh, I have to redownload and install some of my games, and install productivity software (office 2007, adobe cs3, blah blah and more blah). Man the only part of the process I hate is this part.
She'll come and clean it? WTH you doing talking to my mommy?
Darl called. He wants to thank you for this verbiage will be utilized in his resume'.
Once he puts it down on his resume' he is going to sue you for copyright infringement.
You cannot fire that which does not work.
That's not what your boss will say when he finds out you were on /. instead of working.