"That shows that the government can track individuals, not that they do so for people they don't suspect of terrorism or crimes."
It doesn't show any such thing, that's just what one of those "justice" people claim.
After all, all people are criminals to a certain degree, right? If we track EVERYBODY just think about how many extra criminals we could catch!
People who drive too fast, you'd get them all.
People who park illegally.
People who have been just a little to close to areas with hookers or where drugs are sold are probably there for a reason.
People who drive to motels a little to often are probably cheating on their wife and while that may not be illegal its certainly amoral and we should make sure all know what they are doing for the good of God.
People can't be trusted - and that's exactly why this shouldn't be easy.
Actually the problem is people like you. You are getting desensitized. So when the government wants to track everybody, you and your ilk will just think "well, we've been doing it for years and its quite harmless, really!"
"It's a rule. Whenever a change in the status quo is suggested people immediately jump to the most negative conclusions."
Based on historic knowledge. Humans are generally twits and will abuse anything.
"I remember, many years ago, my all knowing government banned "reverse lookup" electronic phone books, unless they had some restrictions in the code. Later, the products fells off the market as they were no longer useful. Before then, one could lookup the telephone number of their neighbor and give them a call if the "music" spewing out of their place at 3am was a bit loud. Now you just call the police or, gulp, go over there."
Wow, guess the countries with internet phonebooks must seem very alien and advanced to you.
"If Google has something, and you want to use it, you're gonna have to play by the rules they set for it, or not use their shit. That's just the way it works."
Or we force them to change it - that's also the way it works. As long as they have that laughable motto "do no evil" its time they lived up to it.
" What would you do if Google said "Well, we're just not going to release Google Earth at all."?"
"If you don't like Google's policy and they won't change it....vote with your feet"
Which is just a stupid comment. 99% of the idiots who download google bloatware have no idea what is going on (they are happily clicking exe links in emails from strangers as well most likely) - that the few the bright try to avoid this - well they are howling in isolation.
You get their damn bloatware updated which installs a service on the computer.
However you can install a version of the program in say VirtualPC and copy the Google Earth folder back to your real PC and get rid of the installer that way. For now at least.
But yes, they crossed a line a long time ago - now they are getting close to being Microsoft Light
Those are old numbers, from when they still believed in the illusion of their fantasy economics. In reality the US owes so much money that they are technically bankrupt. Nobody is interested in bankrupting them, so they will probably get the time to dig them out of the whole - but don't kid yourself the US owes China a TON of money.
"One could (and I would) argue the ethics of allowing someone else to decide whether an immoral or illegal act should continue. "Passing the buck" is for cowards,"
And one could argue that it should follow "and there is nothing wrong with being a coward - all humans are born inequall"
"That's a good way to make sure you never have to feel responsible for anything."
Its a factual description.
"Just keep telling yourself that there is nothing you can do."
I don't have the health to be neither terrorist or try to run for anything (of course even the president suffers failures as the news just has shown)
"Lucky for you those of us that actually understand the system are doing out best to make sure checks and balance are kept."
Delusional.
"You analogy makes no sense what so ever"
Only because you aren't clever enough to understand that either. He essentially said "People who are against this system aren't using it" - No - of course not.
I agree that most advertising gives a misleading impression of the deal - but they probably feel it would scare people away to phrase it differently.
I wonder if anyone actually could win such a lawsuit. They would probably need to have a lot of money to start with - and thus are not likely to wish to sue.
"The 'failed' status is propaganda spread by those industries so that they don't have to change with the times. We shouldn't be reinforcing their marketing."
How is this rated insightful? That's utter rubbish. There is not a company in the world who is going to market them selves as failed.
"I suggest those people get out and vote for representatives that support their point of view. "
There would be no point, the current so called democracy doesn't really allow any kind of detailed control - there is too munch money in not changing it, so it won't.
"My guess is that those "lot" of people are not a majority..."
Ah yes, we can always guess. One of the amusing stats when Bush was elected was there were more people downloading at the time that who actually voted for him.
"... and most likely not those people that actually spent the time and effort to produce works that happen to be easily copyable."
That's like saying people who are against capital punishment doesn't go around killing people.
Slashdot Mirror
" Which means that Trekkies can now watch all three seasons of Star Trek: The Original Series online at the expense of a few commercials"
and a trip to the United States.
"That shows that the government can track individuals, not that they do so for people they don't suspect of terrorism or crimes."
It doesn't show any such thing, that's just what one of those "justice" people claim.
After all, all people are criminals to a certain degree, right?
If we track EVERYBODY just think about how many extra criminals we could catch!
People who drive too fast, you'd get them all.
People who park illegally.
People who have been just a little to close to areas with hookers or where drugs are sold are probably there for a reason.
People who drive to motels a little to often are probably cheating on their wife and while that may not be illegal its certainly amoral and we should make sure all know what they are doing for the good of God.
People can't be trusted - and that's exactly why this shouldn't be easy.
Don't just post a link. That's lazy, add a paragraph about the link.
Actually the problem is people like you. You are getting desensitized. So when the government wants to track everybody, you and your ilk will just think "well, we've been doing it for years and its quite harmless, really!"
"It's a rule. Whenever a change in the status quo is suggested people immediately jump to the most negative conclusions."
Based on historic knowledge. Humans are generally twits and will abuse anything.
"I remember, many years ago, my all knowing government banned "reverse lookup" electronic phone books, unless they had some restrictions in the code. Later, the products fells off the market as they were no longer useful. Before then, one could lookup the telephone number of their neighbor and give them a call if the "music" spewing out of their place at 3am was a bit loud. Now you just call the police or, gulp, go over there."
Wow, guess the countries with internet phonebooks must seem very alien and advanced to you.
"If Google has something, and you want to use it, you're gonna have to play by the rules they set for it, or not use their shit. That's just the way it works."
Or we force them to change it - that's also the way it works. As long as they have that laughable motto "do no evil" its time they lived up to it.
" What would you do if Google said "Well, we're just not going to release Google Earth at all."?"
Say: Wow Microsoft won against Google.
"It's modded funny, but it is accurate."
Its neither.
"If you don't like Google's policy and they won't change it....vote with your feet"
Which is just a stupid comment. 99% of the idiots who download google bloatware have no idea what is going on (they are happily clicking exe links in emails from strangers as well most likely) - that the few the bright try to avoid this - well they are howling in isolation.
"then let people look at it for free."
No so free, they encroach more and more on our systems, installing bloatware against our wishes, running stealth services and other evil shit.
You get their damn bloatware updated which installs a service on the computer.
However you can install a version of the program in say VirtualPC and copy the Google Earth folder back to your real PC and get rid of the installer that way. For now at least.
But yes, they crossed a line a long time ago - now they are getting close to being Microsoft Light
"Does anyone actually believe that click-through licenses are valid?"
Yes. The courts.
Of course we have heard the opposite of this: If you are blocking our advertisements you are stealing our content.
Its intrusive because its breaks 99% of all sites. At least the sites I see. If you are only browsing sites from 1980 that's great for you.
"True. So what? The discussion was not balance of payments but standard of living."
No, it was who was rich or not.
Indeed,
According to the index the price of a big mac in the US: 3.57$
The price of a big mac in china: 1.83$
"Clear enough?"
Those are old numbers, from when they still believed in the illusion of their fantasy economics. In reality the US owes so much money that they are technically bankrupt. Nobody is interested in bankrupting them, so they will probably get the time to dig them out of the whole - but don't kid yourself the US owes China a TON of money.
"One could (and I would) argue the ethics of allowing someone else to decide whether an immoral or illegal act should continue. "Passing the buck" is for cowards,"
And one could argue that it should follow "and there is nothing wrong with being a coward - all humans are born inequall"
"That's a good way to make sure you never have to feel responsible for anything."
Its a factual description.
"Just keep telling yourself that there is nothing you can do."
I don't have the health to be neither terrorist or try to run for anything (of course even the president suffers failures as the news just has shown)
"Lucky for you those of us that actually understand the system are doing out best to make sure checks and balance are kept."
Delusional.
"You analogy makes no sense what so ever"
Only because you aren't clever enough to understand that either. He essentially said "People who are against this system aren't using it" - No - of course not.
I forgive both of you ;)
Don't worry, I thought you meant it sarcastic :)
"Frankly, I could care less what those guys do with their personal computers,"
Means: I care about this.
It is: "I COULDN'T care less"
I agree that most advertising gives a misleading impression of the deal - but they probably feel it would scare people away to phrase it differently.
I wonder if anyone actually could win such a lawsuit. They would probably need to have a lot of money to start with - and thus are not likely to wish to sue.
"The 'failed' status is propaganda spread by those industries so that they don't have to change with the times. We shouldn't be reinforcing their marketing."
How is this rated insightful? That's utter rubbish. There is not a company in the world who is going to market them selves as failed.
They look like they were in a slow motion while you wait for the combatants drift close enough to hit each other again.
"I suggest those people get out and vote for representatives that support their point of view. "
There would be no point, the current so called democracy doesn't really allow any kind of detailed control - there is too munch money in not changing it, so it won't.
"My guess is that those "lot" of people are not a majority ..."
Ah yes, we can always guess. One of the amusing stats when Bush was elected was there were more people downloading at the time that who actually voted for him.
"... and most likely not those people that actually spent the time and effort to produce works that happen to be easily copyable."
That's like saying people who are against capital punishment doesn't go around killing people.
Oh excuse me.
I haven't read this new ruling, but I read the last one - and he clearly understood everything perfectly well.