Not really. Once you login to your linux computer, the environment variables USER and HOME get set to your username and home directory respectively. If Skype can't find a config file with your skype username/password (which is probably why it needs to know your home directory) then it can always ASK you for that info. Finally, even if this was a valid reason to look in/etc/passwd, it still doesn't explain the need to rifle through all the other files. If you read through the list in the article, it's quite impressive. Some of them I can cobble together an excuse in my head (it needs to check/dev/snd so that it knows how to deal with your sound card). Others make no sense to me at all (why does it need to sift through my firefox pluggins? What does it need with my.Xauthority file?). And some, like/etc/passwd just seem like a poor choice for how to get info that is already available through other means.
As for/etc/passwd itself, things like ls need it since you may use ls to look at stuff that isn't always yours (try ls -l/dev). If you run skype, you're making a phone call, not listing the/dev tree. If it wants to find out who you are, there are other ways that aren't going to seem so fishy.
We don't know exactly what Skype is doing with these files except that the program (or its calls) does open them. As far as USER and HOME go, they aren't guaranteed to be anything like correct, and it would be a bad practice to rely on them, especially when there already exist proper system calls for determining the UID of the user. As covered in other posts, mapping that UID to a username would require/etc/passwd, and that is what it is for.
Any program that creates sound is going to either have to open a sound device file or send signals to your mixer of choice (esd/alsasound/etc) so it's not unusual that this program opens those files. Skype uses a Firefox plugin, which would explain why it needs to access those. Your.Xauthority file is potentially opened every time you use an X11 application. And like we said before listing files will probably call the same stuff as ls which will result in opening the/etc/passwd file.
It's not necessarily that the program needs information from all of these files, but rather that opening these files is part of how an application like this works on Linux.
"Third: There's nothing wrong with reading/etc/passwd. POSIX even has an API for accessing it in user code. See the man pages for getpwuid, getpwnam, getpwent, setpwent and endpwent. For example, everytime you do "ls -l", it uses information from/etc/passwd." There are legitimate reasons for a command like ls to want to connect a bunch of UID's and usernames. Making the same argument for a program like skype that should only ever have to read one (or possibly two) config files is a bit more of a stretch. When you consider the fact that ls generally doesn't broadcast stuff allover an internal p2p network at unknown machines, the difference is even more important (especially if you're slightly paranoid about security).
Skype needs to find the username of the user it is bieng installed for and the location of that user's home directory. Both of those are contained in/etc/passwd. Further, it probably checks the contents of directories, so presumably the side-effects of using ls are not out of order here, either.
Wow. I don't know which is scarier - the possibility that you missed the joke because it was over your head, or the possibility that such a load of drivel sounded reasonable enough to you for you to debate the issue.
Either way, I'm scared.
David Bowie, dude... American... History... Geography..
"yeah, can't say I'm anything other than a rogue, nethack, moria, umoria fan. the modern games with their "animation" and "pictures" and "sound" are just too easy."
Funny you should say that -- unlike adventure, Nethack has all those features (ASCII animations, ASCII graphics and -- in at least the Amiga port -- sound).
And that's just the console version. Nethack comes with the option of using X11 graphics in the canonical download, and a number of ports with other graphics options, as well as sound, are about. Still, I prefer the ascii version above all others. It's just not Nethack for me, otherwise.
The only ones that really bug me are the "hardcore" gamers.... who play either madden, counterstrike, Wow, star craft... or any game exclusively. Then there are the ones who spend more time bitching about what game is better or how all the new games suck, then they actually spend enjoying the games they hold so highly. Actually I just hate all the asshats who claim to be hardcore gamers then act like it makes them an authority any game.
When ever someone say "I'm a hardcore gamer", I have the urge to kick them in the teeth.
Nothing says King of the Mountain like being [churchlady voice]"A Little Bit Superior"[/churchlady voice] to l33t types.
But seriously, dude, since when do twitch gamers play Roguelikes? And since when do Rogue fans forget how to even spell the word.. (hint, the game is not about makeup.. this particular misspelling is one of my pet peeves, too:P )
The RIAA is like the mob, in that they are a criminal syndicate. Unlike the mob however, they are bad at what they do and are losing money.
Actually according to what's been in the press the last couple of decades this is becoming true of the american mob as well. Never fear, though, because Eastern European, Russian, and Nigerian gangs are there to fill the gap. Apparently the Russians offer outsourcing services as well. India and China can't get all the jobs, after all...
I was kind of annoyed at the way the original Linux program went. I was pleasantly surprised to see they were doing this again, and it looks like the price is not bad this time. They also sell systems with Freedos if you want. I think just knowing that the wireless stuff is going to work is a major reason to go this way.
I don't get the previous poster's claim that linux friendly wifi hardware is plentiful and cheap. It seems to me that any wireless card requires wrappers, animal sacrifices, and a fair amount of divine intervention to work. It's probably easier than that, but I haven't seen that there is any manufacturer that is "linux friendly" as some video card and wired network card manufacturers are. You see that various chips have driver solutions of some sorts, certain individual models, etc, but like one of the other posters said you'd have to be able to see the chip to be sure since some manufacturers change chips without changing model numbers, and most shops will send you "equivalent" models anyway when you order a bunch of them.
I think it's great that so much progress has been made in this area given the challenge that such development must present. But it's still far from easy for someone to find out whether their wireless card will work ahead of time. It does seem to me that your best bet would be to go with a laptop with integrated wifi that is favourably reported on the net (like on the linux-laptops site). But as for a central repository for pcmcia wifi or wifi in general, I've found that there doesn't seem to be one. There are a lot of sites on the net which talk about various cards, but they usually only cover a few cards on very specific versions of the linux kernel. Nothing like the linux usb site, for example.
The appropriate professional experience for a President - or any politician - is as a liar, con-artist or conjurer. I can't think of any political types - in America or Europe - who failed to meet these requirements other than the former BBC war correspondent Martin Bell (who later revealed that British parliament was far more hazardous to human health than any war zone).
I think the OP was referring to the President's practice of hiring and promoting the least qualified people for the position as a direct result of all personnel decisions being made on the basis of ideological purity. This even went so far as to become an issue in the firing of CIA agents and most recently federal prosecutors. It's no surprise that he'd be responsible for screwing up the USPTO, since his legacy has basically been one of proving that despite our incredulity at the very idea, things really can be made even worse.
Terrorists are well known to avoid most CCTV cameras, but brazenly flout congestion charge rules.
I guess that is why, even though all these cameras (except the ones for traffic) were put in place to catch terrorists, not one single terrorist has ever been caught by them. I seem to recall hearing of ordinary criminals being caught by them, however.
The idea is so great we're soon to receive the same treatment here in the US, where the cameras in London were lampooned and even the traffic cameras vehemently opposed.
I think it's funny that someone mentioned these things happen "as soon as 'they' can get away with it." In my experience the government does whatever the hell they want, because it is unlikely that anyone who is allowed to run for office will ever even try to disrupt the power structure and these sorts of abuses of power, and even then they will be a minority.
Until the current establishment media are replaced with one who no longer perpetuates the two party system (two parties who are united when it comes to increased government/corporate power and intrusion) and trumpets the proposed winners as the only legitimate choices it is unlikely that this will change, because no amount of public outcry can influence a government which knows the public won't be able to vote for someone who addresses that concern.
Yep. And they weren't to be used for National Security purposes when installed.
This is why you don't give a mouse a cookie...
The same exact thing happened here in the US. We were told the cameras would not be used by law enforcement at all. Not that anyone really believed it.
Likewise the anti-terrorism laws (including the infamous PATRIOT act) were supposed to be "only for terrorists" but the reality is that they are much more often applied to ordinary crimes.
Bottom line, if there is data available people will use it, as long as they are clueful enough to do so.
That's what it comes down to. It's not a debate; it's you needing people to shut up, because anything that challenges how you live traumatises you.
It looks to me like the shoe is on the other foot here. If anyone is being traumatized it's you.
If you feel like being a vegetarian/vegan/fruitatarian or whatever contributes to making the world better, more power to you. Go ahead and just do what you think is right. But don't be surprised that some people have a different point of view and may actually have thought it out. I think you missed the point that the hunter way up in the thread suggested, quite rationally, that eating the wild pheasant potentially meant reducing the number of tortured chickens. You choose to do it by not eating the birds at all, and that's fine. But everyone has to find their own path.
It does sound like the idea that even your lifestyle results in animal deaths is traumatizing, which does not surprise me given your stated goal. By the way we're not just talking about worms here, rodents, birds, reptiles, and other animals are directly killed during the course of producing agricultural products; we're just talking about the planting and harvesting here. Not to mention the pesticides, etc unless you go organic, which still destroys habitat. Then you have the global warming contribution of the heavy farm equipment, and the wars fought to get the fuel for said equipment, the support for global megacorporations that destroy people's lives, etc etc etc...
Like someone else said, if you really want to approach zero we're talking about getting some land, growing your own stuff organically while sharing with your animal bretheren, and either going without electricity or generating it yourself in a more environmentally friendly manner than is currently feasible. Then you're just contributing to overcrowding by hogging land.
Everyone and everything makes an impact on the world in some way. It's good to try to make that impact as minimal and/or positive as possible. But it is ridiculous to get self-righteous about it and start talking in absolutist non sequitors which defy even the simplist reason.
And, yeah, I'd have to say most of the meat eaters in this thread are just making fun of/ antagonizing you. They aren't shaken in the least by your arguments. You're the only one that seems challenged here, because you're the one that cares the most about this subject. Speaking of which.. it's time for lunch here. Bon appetit!
Yes, I would watch Judge Judy to see that sort of commercial!
It'd be even more awesome to see an RIAA case in Judge Judy's court.
"Let me get this straight. You have no proof the defendant actually violated your copyrights, you don't even own the copyrights, and you want astronomical damages for this? What kind of moron do you think I am?"
Judge Judy does not go for nonsense. Sounds like the judge in TFA is of a similar temperament.
When they put the ad in the middle of the text that screams BLOCK ME NOW.
I usually don't care enough to block the ads. But the ads in the middle of the text really suck, especially the flash ones. For some reason they have an annoying tendency to block the article itself so I can't read it. Between seeing whole paragraphs blocked by bleeding ads and having to click through 5 ad-filled pages to read an article which, in text, would not be half a page and isn't that informative anyway is a waste of my time, so I go on to something else.
I think the key words are right there. The big computer mags, especially the ones owned by media giants like Ziff Davis, jumped the shark long ago. They became nothing but advertisements interspersed with advertisements; that is, their "articles" and "reviews" are just advertisements rather than legitimate reviews that give the true pros and cons of a given product. Meanwhile online tech sites grew like wildfire, covering even more products than the giants and doing real, hard-hitting journalism and reviews. It's honestly a wonder that people bother with these "old media" guys anymore, even online.
You listen to web radio basically when you couldn't be bothered turning on a regular radio or you want to listen to a range of music that is no available via regular radio and mots importantly you are really interested in listen to any specific music your just after a musical background.
A major pull for web radio for me is the opportunity to be exposed to different kinds of music. If all I wanted was radio on the computer, the local stations have that and you can tune in to any regular radio station online. If you buy a CD or go to P2P you have to already know what you are looking for. But by listening to web radio you hear songs no other station will dare to play, exposing you to different genres and artists which are kept off of the regular radio by the mafiaa. Then you could buy those guys' cds instead.
I bet there is a lot more of that going on now. That and people buying CDs from local groups. Those sales don't show up in the mafiaa reports because they only report on sales from their cartel.
The station may just be playing what sells, it is simple as that.
The station plays what they are paid to play, pure and simple. The record company is hoping that this will generate "hits," therefore that song will sell. It seems to have worked for them in the past, but that was before people had alternatives. This is why they are so hell-bent on ending all our alternatives.
If it does, how come that the RIAA's lawyers bringing meritless suits based on an almost total absence of evidence against a sizeable proportion of the young population has not yet irked any judge, and sent their lawyers packing?
All I'm saying is if you write a howto about this AND it gets posted to slashdot AND ends up on the fronpage, you better be damn good because people will follow this blindly and who knows what he forgot this time around...
While I'd agree that ideally you want something really good if you are being published on slashdot, if anything because of the scrutiny of the audience, I don't think many would agree with your suggestion about people who follow the instructions blindly. Beside the fact that no instructions should be followed blindly, especially if you are supposed to know what you are doing, we must consider the source. The fact it's slashdot should be a red flag, and there are probably more than a few people here who would say that anyone who follows advice from slashdot blindly deserves what they get; probably more than the number who would say that of any set of instructions.
Of course you realize this has to extend internationally. So, *who* will you be paying for protection? The UN?
We just have to reform the US law. Then we'll strongarm everyone into adopting the same law. How do you think we got into this mess in the first place?:D
Amen. Nicotine does not equal cigarettes. Nicotine is only one of hundreds of substances found in cigarettes. Giving a patient a drug derived from nicotine will not "magically" turn them into a smoker. I fail to see how this research would benefit the cigarette industry.
It will benefit them firstly from the fact that people will hear "nicotine is good for you" and be more likely to smoke. Secondly, there are now "smokeless" cigarettes, which are considered "healthier" because they are basically a nicotine delivery system with less of the secondary nasties which come from smoking regular cigarettes. It's reasonable to assume this will be another reason sales of these things might increase just as vendors of alcoholic beverages must have benefitted from the reports which said that drinking wine and beer provided certain health benefits (at least 1-2 glasses a day of each) and Bayer benefits from the reports that said that taking their product every day reduces the risk of heart attack. (The wine and beer companies have not advertised the health benefits of their products, though the news media regurgitates these reports periodically, but Bayer does directly advertise the 1-2 aspirin a day recommendation).
"And that's precisely our problem. The people running this country have no clue when it comes to technology, which puts us in a bad situation when you consider that they are charged with regulating and stimulating the growth of this technology."
Expecting our politicians to care about whether their websites use ASP or PHP is like expecting Eisenhower to care about whether his car engine is based on the Otto cycle or the Atkinson cycle. These are exactly the technical details that, while accessible to laypeople, aren't significant at the upper policy levels. What is needed is an upper-level appreciation that these things are important--Eisenhower was smart enough to figure out we needed interstate freeways, but I doubt he knew or cared what a SPUI was.
Right, but that's what we're missing here. The information superhighway is the highway of today, and the politicians have no clue when it comes to that, so their efforts are mismanaged. Universal broadband, true net neutrality (not the fake Orwell version being pushed now), etc. And again there is the problem with our education system which is not only losing ground on its already sorry state with respect to math and science, but the politicians are trying to pull us even further behind by throwing out even what advances were wrought in the 19th century.
We don't need politicians to understand PHP. We do need them to understand what the hell is going on in the world of science and technology, and make the right decisions.
"As long as politicians are mired in old thinking and do not understand current technology we will continue to have problems with the way technology is regulated and how it is being incentivised (or not)."
Side note: This will ALWAYS be a problem because politicians don't really start getting into senior positions to affect things until they're in their 40's or later. Most of the cutting edge of technology is driven by people in their 20's. This generation gap does not look like it's going to change any time in the future.
Maybe, but the way our politicians run things is mired in the 19th century. The generation gap is not enough to explain that. 20 years ago the personal computer revolution was going strong, but even the youngest politicians we have seem to have no clue what computers have done for society. I'd like to see some candidates that at least try to grok the 21st century, since it's their job to lead us there.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. Once you login to your linux computer, the environment variables USER and HOME get set to your username and home directory respectively. If Skype can't find a config file with your skype username/password (which is probably why it needs to know your home directory) then it can always ASK you for that info. Finally, even if this was a valid reason to look in /etc/passwd, it still doesn't explain the need to rifle through all the other files. If you read through the list in the article, it's quite impressive. Some of them I can cobble together an excuse in my head (it needs to check /dev/snd so that it knows how to deal with your sound card). Others make no sense to me at all (why does it need to sift through my firefox pluggins? What does it need with my .Xauthority file?). And some, like /etc/passwd just seem like a poor choice for how to get info that is already available through other means.
As for /etc/passwd itself, things like ls need it since you may use ls to look at stuff that isn't always yours (try ls -l /dev). If you run skype, you're making a phone call, not listing the /dev tree. If it wants to find out who you are, there are other ways that aren't going to seem so fishy.
We don't know exactly what Skype is doing with these files except that the program (or its calls) does open them. As far as USER and HOME go, they aren't guaranteed to be anything like correct, and it would be a bad practice to rely on them, especially when there already exist proper system calls for determining the UID of the user. As covered in other posts, mapping that UID to a username would require /etc/passwd, and that is what it is for.
Any program that creates sound is going to either have to open a sound device file or send signals to your mixer of choice (esd/alsasound/etc) so it's not unusual that this program opens those files. Skype uses a Firefox plugin, which would explain why it needs to access those. Your .Xauthority file is potentially opened every time you use an X11 application. And like we said before listing files will probably call the same stuff as ls which will result in opening the /etc/passwd file.
It's not necessarily that the program needs information from all of these files, but rather that opening these files is part of how an application like this works on Linux.
"Third: There's nothing wrong with reading /etc/passwd. POSIX even has an API for accessing it in user code. See the man pages for getpwuid, getpwnam, getpwent, setpwent and endpwent. For example, everytime you do "ls -l", it uses information from /etc/passwd." There are legitimate reasons for a command like ls to want to connect a bunch of UID's and usernames. Making the same argument for a program like skype that should only ever have to read one (or possibly two) config files is a bit more of a stretch. When you consider the fact that ls generally doesn't broadcast stuff allover an internal p2p network at unknown machines, the difference is even more important (especially if you're slightly paranoid about security).
Skype needs to find the username of the user it is bieng installed for and the location of that user's home directory. Both of those are contained in /etc/passwd. Further, it probably checks the contents of directories, so presumably the side-effects of using ls are not out of order here, either.
Wow. I don't know which is scarier - the possibility that you missed the joke because it was over your head, or the possibility that such a load of drivel sounded reasonable enough to you for you to debate the issue.
Either way, I'm scared.
David Bowie, dude... American... History... Geography..
Head Asplode! :D
The worst part for y'all is, someone set us up the bomb and we are not afraid of using it. Be afraid, be very very afraid :D.
We're more like an interstellar infection. I'm hoping there's no Galactic Center for Disease Control, if ya get my drift.
If there is, maybe we can destroy it with a paradox. :D
"yeah, can't say I'm anything other than a rogue, nethack, moria, umoria fan. the modern games with their "animation" and "pictures" and "sound" are just too easy."
Funny you should say that -- unlike adventure, Nethack has all those features (ASCII animations, ASCII graphics and -- in at least the Amiga port -- sound).
And that's just the console version. Nethack comes with the option of using X11 graphics in the canonical download, and a number of ports with other graphics options, as well as sound, are about. Still, I prefer the ascii version above all others. It's just not Nethack for me, otherwise.
I was fascinated by the CIA's edits... mostly adding details... and this:
"One CIA entry deals with the details of lyrics sung in a Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode."
Nerds.
Well, that's not much different from the FBI investigation into the lyrics for "Louie Louie."
The only ones that really bug me are the "hardcore" gamers.... who play either madden, counterstrike, Wow, star craft... or any game exclusively. Then there are the ones who spend more time bitching about what game is better or how all the new games suck, then they actually spend enjoying the games they hold so highly. Actually I just hate all the asshats who claim to be hardcore gamers then act like it makes them an authority any game.
When ever someone say "I'm a hardcore gamer", I have the urge to kick them in the teeth.
Nothing says King of the Mountain like being [churchlady voice]"A Little Bit Superior"[/churchlady voice] to l33t types.
But seriously, dude, since when do twitch gamers play Roguelikes? And since when do Rogue fans forget how to even spell the word .. (hint, the game is not about makeup .. this particular misspelling is one of my pet peeves, too :P )
"they don't have to prove nothing."
Hmm, a great grasp of the English language you have there!
It's not English, it's a related dialect known as "Joisey" :D the poster is talking of family business after all.
The RIAA is like the mob, in that they are a criminal syndicate. Unlike the mob however, they are bad at what they do and are losing money.
Actually according to what's been in the press the last couple of decades this is becoming true of the american mob as well. Never fear, though, because Eastern European, Russian, and Nigerian gangs are there to fill the gap. Apparently the Russians offer outsourcing services as well. India and China can't get all the jobs, after all...
They sell laptops with Ubuntu Linux on them, too.
I was kind of annoyed at the way the original Linux program went. I was pleasantly surprised to see they were doing this again, and it looks like the price is not bad this time. They also sell systems with Freedos if you want. I think just knowing that the wireless stuff is going to work is a major reason to go this way.
I don't get the previous poster's claim that linux friendly wifi hardware is plentiful and cheap. It seems to me that any wireless card requires wrappers, animal sacrifices, and a fair amount of divine intervention to work. It's probably easier than that, but I haven't seen that there is any manufacturer that is "linux friendly" as some video card and wired network card manufacturers are. You see that various chips have driver solutions of some sorts, certain individual models, etc, but like one of the other posters said you'd have to be able to see the chip to be sure since some manufacturers change chips without changing model numbers, and most shops will send you "equivalent" models anyway when you order a bunch of them.
I think it's great that so much progress has been made in this area given the challenge that such development must present. But it's still far from easy for someone to find out whether their wireless card will work ahead of time. It does seem to me that your best bet would be to go with a laptop with integrated wifi that is favourably reported on the net (like on the linux-laptops site). But as for a central repository for pcmcia wifi or wifi in general, I've found that there doesn't seem to be one. There are a lot of sites on the net which talk about various cards, but they usually only cover a few cards on very specific versions of the linux kernel. Nothing like the linux usb site, for example.
The appropriate professional experience for a President - or any politician - is as a liar, con-artist or conjurer. I can't think of any political types - in America or Europe - who failed to meet these requirements other than the former BBC war correspondent Martin Bell (who later revealed that British parliament was far more hazardous to human health than any war zone).
I think the OP was referring to the President's practice of hiring and promoting the least qualified people for the position as a direct result of all personnel decisions being made on the basis of ideological purity. This even went so far as to become an issue in the firing of CIA agents and most recently federal prosecutors. It's no surprise that he'd be responsible for screwing up the USPTO, since his legacy has basically been one of proving that despite our incredulity at the very idea, things really can be made even worse.
Terrorists are well known to avoid most CCTV cameras, but brazenly flout congestion charge rules.
I guess that is why, even though all these cameras (except the ones for traffic) were put in place to catch terrorists, not one single terrorist has ever been caught by them. I seem to recall hearing of ordinary criminals being caught by them, however.
The idea is so great we're soon to receive the same treatment here in the US, where the cameras in London were lampooned and even the traffic cameras vehemently opposed.
I think it's funny that someone mentioned these things happen "as soon as 'they' can get away with it." In my experience the government does whatever the hell they want, because it is unlikely that anyone who is allowed to run for office will ever even try to disrupt the power structure and these sorts of abuses of power, and even then they will be a minority.
Until the current establishment media are replaced with one who no longer perpetuates the two party system (two parties who are united when it comes to increased government/corporate power and intrusion) and trumpets the proposed winners as the only legitimate choices it is unlikely that this will change, because no amount of public outcry can influence a government which knows the public won't be able to vote for someone who addresses that concern.
Yep. And they weren't to be used for National Security purposes when installed.
This is why you don't give a mouse a cookie...
The same exact thing happened here in the US. We were told the cameras would not be used by law enforcement at all. Not that anyone really believed it.
Likewise the anti-terrorism laws (including the infamous PATRIOT act) were supposed to be "only for terrorists" but the reality is that they are much more often applied to ordinary crimes.
Bottom line, if there is data available people will use it, as long as they are clueful enough to do so.
That's what it comes down to. It's not a debate; it's you needing people to shut up, because anything that challenges how you live traumatises you.
It looks to me like the shoe is on the other foot here. If anyone is being traumatized it's you.
If you feel like being a vegetarian/vegan/fruitatarian or whatever contributes to making the world better, more power to you. Go ahead and just do what you think is right. But don't be surprised that some people have a different point of view and may actually have thought it out. I think you missed the point that the hunter way up in the thread suggested, quite rationally, that eating the wild pheasant potentially meant reducing the number of tortured chickens. You choose to do it by not eating the birds at all, and that's fine. But everyone has to find their own path.
It does sound like the idea that even your lifestyle results in animal deaths is traumatizing, which does not surprise me given your stated goal. By the way we're not just talking about worms here, rodents, birds, reptiles, and other animals are directly killed during the course of producing agricultural products; we're just talking about the planting and harvesting here. Not to mention the pesticides, etc unless you go organic, which still destroys habitat. Then you have the global warming contribution of the heavy farm equipment, and the wars fought to get the fuel for said equipment, the support for global megacorporations that destroy people's lives, etc etc etc...
Like someone else said, if you really want to approach zero we're talking about getting some land, growing your own stuff organically while sharing with your animal bretheren, and either going without electricity or generating it yourself in a more environmentally friendly manner than is currently feasible. Then you're just contributing to overcrowding by hogging land.
Everyone and everything makes an impact on the world in some way. It's good to try to make that impact as minimal and/or positive as possible. But it is ridiculous to get self-righteous about it and start talking in absolutist non sequitors which defy even the simplist reason.
And, yeah, I'd have to say most of the meat eaters in this thread are just making fun of/ antagonizing you. They aren't shaken in the least by your arguments. You're the only one that seems challenged here, because you're the one that cares the most about this subject. Speaking of which.. it's time for lunch here. Bon appetit!
Yes, I would watch Judge Judy to see that sort of commercial!
It'd be even more awesome to see an RIAA case in Judge Judy's court.
"Let me get this straight. You have no proof the defendant actually violated your copyrights, you don't even own the copyrights, and you want astronomical damages for this? What kind of moron do you think I am?"
Judge Judy does not go for nonsense. Sounds like the judge in TFA is of a similar temperament.
When they put the ad in the middle of the text that screams BLOCK ME NOW.
I usually don't care enough to block the ads. But the ads in the middle of the text really suck, especially the flash ones. For some reason they have an annoying tendency to block the article itself so I can't read it. Between seeing whole paragraphs blocked by bleeding ads and having to click through 5 ad-filled pages to read an article which, in text, would not be half a page and isn't that informative anyway is a waste of my time, so I go on to something else.
and had legitimate content
I think the key words are right there. The big computer mags, especially the ones owned by media giants like Ziff Davis, jumped the shark long ago. They became nothing but advertisements interspersed with advertisements; that is, their "articles" and "reviews" are just advertisements rather than legitimate reviews that give the true pros and cons of a given product. Meanwhile online tech sites grew like wildfire, covering even more products than the giants and doing real, hard-hitting journalism and reviews. It's honestly a wonder that people bother with these "old media" guys anymore, even online.
You listen to web radio basically when you couldn't be bothered turning on a regular radio or you want to listen to a range of music that is no available via regular radio and mots importantly you are really interested in listen to any specific music your just after a musical background.
A major pull for web radio for me is the opportunity to be exposed to different kinds of music. If all I wanted was radio on the computer, the local stations have that and you can tune in to any regular radio station online. If you buy a CD or go to P2P you have to already know what you are looking for. But by listening to web radio you hear songs no other station will dare to play, exposing you to different genres and artists which are kept off of the regular radio by the mafiaa. Then you could buy those guys' cds instead.
I bet there is a lot more of that going on now. That and people buying CDs from local groups. Those sales don't show up in the mafiaa reports because they only report on sales from their cartel.
The station may just be playing what sells, it is simple as that.
The station plays what they are paid to play, pure and simple. The record company is hoping that this will generate "hits," therefore that song will sell. It seems to have worked for them in the past, but that was before people had alternatives. This is why they are so hell-bent on ending all our alternatives.
If it does, how come that the RIAA's lawyers bringing meritless suits based on an almost total absence of evidence against a sizeable proportion of the young population has not yet irked any judge, and sent their lawyers packing?
Because they never make it to a courtroom.
All I'm saying is if you write a howto about this AND it gets posted to slashdot AND ends up on the fronpage, you better be damn good because people will follow this blindly and who knows what he forgot this time around...
While I'd agree that ideally you want something really good if you are being published on slashdot, if anything because of the scrutiny of the audience, I don't think many would agree with your suggestion about people who follow the instructions blindly. Beside the fact that no instructions should be followed blindly, especially if you are supposed to know what you are doing, we must consider the source. The fact it's slashdot should be a red flag, and there are probably more than a few people here who would say that anyone who follows advice from slashdot blindly deserves what they get; probably more than the number who would say that of any set of instructions.
Of course you realize this has to extend internationally. So, *who* will you be paying for protection? The UN?
We just have to reform the US law. Then we'll strongarm everyone into adopting the same law. How do you think we got into this mess in the first place? :D
Amen. Nicotine does not equal cigarettes. Nicotine is only one of hundreds of substances found in cigarettes. Giving a patient a drug derived from nicotine will not "magically" turn them into a smoker. I fail to see how this research would benefit the cigarette industry.
It will benefit them firstly from the fact that people will hear "nicotine is good for you" and be more likely to smoke. Secondly, there are now "smokeless" cigarettes, which are considered "healthier" because they are basically a nicotine delivery system with less of the secondary nasties which come from smoking regular cigarettes. It's reasonable to assume this will be another reason sales of these things might increase just as vendors of alcoholic beverages must have benefitted from the reports which said that drinking wine and beer provided certain health benefits (at least 1-2 glasses a day of each) and Bayer benefits from the reports that said that taking their product every day reduces the risk of heart attack. (The wine and beer companies have not advertised the health benefits of their products, though the news media regurgitates these reports periodically, but Bayer does directly advertise the 1-2 aspirin a day recommendation).
"And that's precisely our problem. The people running this country have no clue when it comes to technology, which puts us in a bad situation when you consider that they are charged with regulating and stimulating the growth of this technology."
Expecting our politicians to care about whether their websites use ASP or PHP is like expecting Eisenhower to care about whether his car engine is based on the Otto cycle or the Atkinson cycle. These are exactly the technical details that, while accessible to laypeople, aren't significant at the upper policy levels. What is needed is an upper-level appreciation that these things are important--Eisenhower was smart enough to figure out we needed interstate freeways, but I doubt he knew or cared what a SPUI was.
Right, but that's what we're missing here. The information superhighway is the highway of today, and the politicians have no clue when it comes to that, so their efforts are mismanaged. Universal broadband, true net neutrality (not the fake Orwell version being pushed now), etc. And again there is the problem with our education system which is not only losing ground on its already sorry state with respect to math and science, but the politicians are trying to pull us even further behind by throwing out even what advances were wrought in the 19th century.
We don't need politicians to understand PHP. We do need them to understand what the hell is going on in the world of science and technology, and make the right decisions.
"As long as politicians are mired in old thinking and do not understand current technology we will continue to have problems with the way technology is regulated and how it is being incentivised (or not)."
Side note: This will ALWAYS be a problem because politicians don't really start getting into senior positions to affect things until they're in their 40's or later. Most of the cutting edge of technology is driven by people in their 20's. This generation gap does not look like it's going to change any time in the future.
Maybe, but the way our politicians run things is mired in the 19th century. The generation gap is not enough to explain that. 20 years ago the personal computer revolution was going strong, but even the youngest politicians we have seem to have no clue what computers have done for society. I'd like to see some candidates that at least try to grok the 21st century, since it's their job to lead us there.