"What, you need to be connected to the network to play games you purchased?"
With other people? Uh, yeah. To buy and download the games weeks before they come out so that all I have to do is grab the encryption key on launch day? Of course you need the internet. You make it sound like the internet's the fucking devil. Now, stupid shit like GTA4 requiring you to make an account to SAVE -- yeah, that's bullshit, but it's hardly widespread and not really indicative of a horrid society gone wrong.
"What, the operating system limits the number of hardware changes you can make?"
Yeah, make too many hardware changes and your hard drive will self destruct. Or it just tells you to click one button to reactivate. It's one of those horrible things, but I can't remember which. Must be the first with the way you're reacting.
"What, you TV and speakers have DRM built-in?"
Not mine. Nice try though.
"What, operating systems won't load kernel-mode code unless it's been approved by the OS vendor?"
Really wish I knew what the hell you were talking about, but if the rest of your comment serves as a guide then what you're referring to is probably easily sidestepped, requiring at most a reboot. Oh wait were you talking about cell phones? Or rather that one cell phone? That you can STILL jailbreak? Scary stuff.
"Our books can be deleted out from under us?"
If you're dumb enough to keep them on that one device I guess... Most normal people just don't buy shit like that though. You make it sound like government agents are going door to door scanning our hard drives for illegal text.
"Will you finally stop thinking those of us who decry DRM are just crying wolf?"
Probably not. Will you ever finally stop pissing your pants every time you see a puppy? Err, 'wolf', sorry.
Yeah, good idea. I mean without a direct neural interface, evil people would never be able to write things like an image of a man with a gaping anus into your brain right?
He didn't say 'not technically possible'. He said 'not allowed'. Your solution is like telling the teacher 'but I DIDN'T touch the cake' when you simply used a fork to shove it in your face.
If Apple's terms say that apps aren't allowed to communicate (which AFAIK they don't; I'm just going on what he said -- 'not allowed'), then how can you be sure that your clever system of URL handling isn't going to be rejected anyways?
So what you're saying is that people who are too fucking dumb to pick up on their conversational partners degree of emotional response via context need us to refrain from using certain four letter words in order to prevent them from becoming confused?
Fuck that.
There are people who consider those who use profanity to be less educated or less intelligent; they argue that the profane ones use such words in lieu of more 'proper' words because they do not know any 'higher' words. This is plainly bullshit, and I argue the opposite: those who protest the use of profanity are less intelligent because their inability to cope with certain words impedes their communications with anyone who does not hold their own prejudices.
I find 3-4 grammatical errors on CNN's website per WEEK. The sad part is that they're all on the front page (I never even click the stories... just like to laugh at the headlines and what's 'big news'). I honestly don't think they even have an editor any more.
Can't someone just take them out back and shoot them already? It pains me to watch them limp around...
You're very close to getting the point, but you're still as retarded as those at the top of the music industry.
"Making a great product i utterly worthless if no one even knows it exists or that you can buy it."
I'm sure he would appreciate you telling him his music is worthless. If you enjoy it, then his music is worth at least as much as any of Miley Cyrus' crap. You're buying in to the lie that music is only 'worth' anything if it's been over-hyped, over-produced, and shoved down the throats of millions of Americans via radio.
The industry itself is based on this lie. The industry is dying because today's youth realizes that the best musical experience they'll get is the one at their local ex-bowling alley turned musical venue, not the one was that vetted by the suits in LA to have the biggest market.
You're completely missing what I expect. You did get the producer part correct; that stuff is dead simple and if you can't get your own tracks sounding right then I don't really consider you an artist. Everything else is cruft: unnecessary bullshit made to inflate the price of the product. None of it actually effects the music. The death of an industry based around such things is only going to harm the greedy ones that try to hijack music for profit. Artists will still make music. It will still sound the same. People will find music even without you telling them what to listen to, trust me.
Tl;dr Music that didn't cost millions to promote still sounds good to me... are your tastes simply too expensive to be sated by someone practicing their craft for fun?
Grats! The whole article was a lie, and you were the FIRST ONE to figure it out! Here's a million internet-dollars! YAAAY!
P.S. He has just as many commas as he needs, though one is off by a few words and he left out a word. Protip: "if you're about to post something that is along the lines of, 'this couldn't possibly work because...' without (a) having read the article, and (b) being an expert in the field" is a parenthetical; the main clause is "Generally [it's] best to think twice" (there's that missing word).
I've actually solved several computer issues via that site's google results. You do know that you can just scroll all the way down to see the answers, right?
I just might even give them my money some day. Maybe.
They don't 'find, nurture, and promote'. The bands come to them, they pay bored kids to get a feel for what sound is most palatable, and then they start them recording. Like I said, the ONLY thing the music industry does is promote.
Are you suggesting that there is no other teen in the world as talented as Miley? That getting that talented actually requires such a bloated industry? Bull. Shit.
So I did some careful calculations, and I've determined that I'm worth about $12 billion USD. Seeing as my current worth as judged by other people is several billions below that, I've decided to start accepting payments from my fellow citizens in order to bring my worldly worth up to the value I've determined. Seeing as you have so valiantly defended my determinations, I am sure that you will be the first to donate.
Right?
"The value of the fetus is determined by the value the human decides to give itself throughout its life once it becomes self-aware."
Whew, thankfully that means that an aborted fetus makes no decision and was therefore worthless the whole time! Or no wait, that means that we can simply assume that the fetus would have been suicidal!
He was simply suggesting that/. automatically do what most of its readers already do. Hell, I had to read his comment twice; the first time I read it I saw: Slashdot should wordfilter any occurrences of "I am an enormous flaming douchebag" to "I am an enormous flaming douchebag".
Now the question is, what crack-smoking mod thought that your defense of this crap was insightful? Nobody's arguing against dissent, they're arguing against making yourself look like a twat while dissenting. If anything we're trying to help your dissent get heard.
What we ARE arguing against is the implication that is made when using, specifically, his whole name when it was neither necessary or called for; that implication being that you shouldn't trust those with 'Hussein' in their name.
"He should only be allowed to use the positive connotations, and anyone else who uses it for any other reason should be 'an enormous flaming douchebag'?"
I love how you wrote 'any other reason' there instead of 'racist bigotry', which is the reason GP used it. Almost makes your point seem valid. You also attacked the straw man argument that people should be allowed to use it for positive connotations, which I'm sure the parent would agree is racist bigotry as well. Really anyone who says 'Barack Hussein Obama' that isn't, say, performing his wedding, or an actor in a scene where his mother is angry with him, is using it wrongly.
If you want to attack the man's positions, fine, but don't expect people to take you seriously when your first move is an attempt to discredit the man by appealing to your audiences prejudices.
Your post is as abso-fucking-lutely stupid as saying 'I dislike like your post because you used no innovative new words, you flockenshnarpet'.
If I like the beat from a song but loathe the vocals, and if I find a song that samples that beat in a way I find pleasant, then has that product not been improved?
If at one time in the past the new song did not exist and I had no way to hear it, yet at current moment it does exist to bring me pleasure when the first could not, then hasn't something original been created?
How deep do I have to bury my head in the sand until I'm convinced that the artist who created the version I actually like didn't perform me any valuable service?
How big of a boner do I need to get upon hearing the word 'original' in order to drive me to defend something's originality as fiercely as you?
"The cost goes into marketing the band, producing music videos, large international tours, studio engineers. You've got to make millions of CDs and distribute them internationally. A graphic artist has to make the cover. Photography of the band."
Most of that crap is unnecessary and is simply there to fuel the fattened industry. The way I see it, most of the marketing is only there to recoup the cost from, well, most of their marketing. Do you honestly think that fans would know or care if the pictures on their favorite bands website weren't the result of a $10,000 photo shoot, but were instead taken by fans at a concert and uploaded to Myspace?
I just find it really hard to believe that if Miley Cyrus were to record a track on her own, upload it to her blog, and sell an unencumbered version of it for $1, she would make no profit. That cuts out graphic artists, distributors, agents, CEOs, secretaries, RIAA lawyers, brick and mortar stores, promotion companies, and marketers, and yet the product is the same.
So all you've proven is that there is lots of money in the industry. You haven't defended it being there, and you haven't even really argued against the parent's point which was that this money isn't being used to improve the product. Well, actually, I suppose that only holds true if you assume that the product of the music industry is music.
So in a way I guess you HAVE argued your point, but only by pointing out that the point of the music industry isn't to produce music. And that in turn kind of proves the parent's overall point, which was that this money (and really this industry) doesn't deserve to be there.
tl;dr Right now the RIAA doesn't serve to produce better music, more music, or even insightful, innovative, and interesting music; it simply uses its resources to convince stupid people to buy their crap. The 'greed' part comes when they pretend that they're necessary.
To the overpaid marketer in the corner going 'But that's my JOB you're talking about!': I don't give a shit; get a real job you manipulative parasite.
"Imagine Street View rendered in the direction you are holding your phone, from your position."
Congratulations, you've invented AR, which has been an app on my phone for about a year now. It's called using the input from the goddamn camera stuck on the front.
Slashdot Mirror
"What, you need to be connected to the network to play games you purchased?"
With other people? Uh, yeah. To buy and download the games weeks before they come out so that all I have to do is grab the encryption key on launch day? Of course you need the internet. You make it sound like the internet's the fucking devil. Now, stupid shit like GTA4 requiring you to make an account to SAVE -- yeah, that's bullshit, but it's hardly widespread and not really indicative of a horrid society gone wrong.
"What, the operating system limits the number of hardware changes you can make?"
Yeah, make too many hardware changes and your hard drive will self destruct. Or it just tells you to click one button to reactivate. It's one of those horrible things, but I can't remember which. Must be the first with the way you're reacting.
"What, you TV and speakers have DRM built-in?"
Not mine. Nice try though.
"What, operating systems won't load kernel-mode code unless it's been approved by the OS vendor?"
Really wish I knew what the hell you were talking about, but if the rest of your comment serves as a guide then what you're referring to is probably easily sidestepped, requiring at most a reboot. Oh wait were you talking about cell phones? Or rather that one cell phone? That you can STILL jailbreak? Scary stuff.
"Our books can be deleted out from under us?"
If you're dumb enough to keep them on that one device I guess... Most normal people just don't buy shit like that though. You make it sound like government agents are going door to door scanning our hard drives for illegal text.
"Will you finally stop thinking those of us who decry DRM are just crying wolf?"
Probably not. Will you ever finally stop pissing your pants every time you see a puppy? Err, 'wolf', sorry.
Haha check it out, this nerd thinks he's fulfilling a purpose by posting on slashdot. Way to prove how cool you are bropal.
Yeah, good idea. I mean without a direct neural interface, evil people would never be able to write things like an image of a man with a gaping anus into your brain right?
By the way, have you met my friend goatse?
He didn't say 'not technically possible'. He said 'not allowed'. Your solution is like telling the teacher 'but I DIDN'T touch the cake' when you simply used a fork to shove it in your face.
If Apple's terms say that apps aren't allowed to communicate (which AFAIK they don't; I'm just going on what he said -- 'not allowed'), then how can you be sure that your clever system of URL handling isn't going to be rejected anyways?
Do you know what 'troll' means? I await you informing me of your informative information, informant.
Info.
So what you're saying is that people who are too fucking dumb to pick up on their conversational partners degree of emotional response via context need us to refrain from using certain four letter words in order to prevent them from becoming confused?
Fuck that.
There are people who consider those who use profanity to be less educated or less intelligent; they argue that the profane ones use such words in lieu of more 'proper' words because they do not know any 'higher' words. This is plainly bullshit, and I argue the opposite: those who protest the use of profanity are less intelligent because their inability to cope with certain words impedes their communications with anyone who does not hold their own prejudices.
So we can safely say that Obama does not make a habit out of smoking cigarettes? For reference, I've found one (1) picture of him not smoking.
Cause little things like, ohhhh, the INTERNET haven't changed the human condition since those deep and ancient texts were written, right?
Facts? You are aware of the topic right... religion?
This guy appears to be straight up schizophrenic. Please stop responding to him next time he trolls you. We don't want to make him worse.
You seriously think you thought up using RAM to fight disk I/O bottlenecks before anyone else? If anyone's 'mental boy' here it's you.
I mean, online stalking? Really? You're probably just mad 'cause you know pills won't fix the special kind of stupid you've come down with.
Keep going with the impotent nerd rage though. It's what keeps me comin' back to this internet place.
Hilarious.
I find 3-4 grammatical errors on CNN's website per WEEK. The sad part is that they're all on the front page (I never even click the stories... just like to laugh at the headlines and what's 'big news'). I honestly don't think they even have an editor any more.
Can't someone just take them out back and shoot them already? It pains me to watch them limp around...
You're very close to getting the point, but you're still as retarded as those at the top of the music industry.
"Making a great product i utterly worthless if no one even knows it exists or that you can buy it."
I'm sure he would appreciate you telling him his music is worthless. If you enjoy it, then his music is worth at least as much as any of Miley Cyrus' crap. You're buying in to the lie that music is only 'worth' anything if it's been over-hyped, over-produced, and shoved down the throats of millions of Americans via radio.
The industry itself is based on this lie. The industry is dying because today's youth realizes that the best musical experience they'll get is the one at their local ex-bowling alley turned musical venue, not the one was that vetted by the suits in LA to have the biggest market.
You're completely missing what I expect. You did get the producer part correct; that stuff is dead simple and if you can't get your own tracks sounding right then I don't really consider you an artist. Everything else is cruft: unnecessary bullshit made to inflate the price of the product. None of it actually effects the music. The death of an industry based around such things is only going to harm the greedy ones that try to hijack music for profit. Artists will still make music. It will still sound the same. People will find music even without you telling them what to listen to, trust me.
Tl;dr
Music that didn't cost millions to promote still sounds good to me... are your tastes simply too expensive to be sated by someone practicing their craft for fun?
Grats! The whole article was a lie, and you were the FIRST ONE to figure it out! Here's a million internet-dollars! YAAAY!
P.S. ...' without (a) having read the article, and (b) being an expert in the field" is a parenthetical; the main clause is "Generally [it's] best to think twice" (there's that missing word).
He has just as many commas as he needs, though one is off by a few words and he left out a word. Protip: "if you're about to post something that is along the lines of, 'this couldn't possibly work because
Sodium and chlorine.
I've actually solved several computer issues via that site's google results. You do know that you can just scroll all the way down to see the answers, right?
I just might even give them my money some day. Maybe.
You forget scores.
"But hey your just a stupid fat american so you wouldn't understand that."
So I take it your home country is about to invade America then? If your invasions are as quality as your posts I'm not too worried...
How about a game where you assassinate the president?
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/jfkreloaded/index.html
Not as recent, but there it is.
They don't 'find, nurture, and promote'. The bands come to them, they pay bored kids to get a feel for what sound is most palatable, and then they start them recording. Like I said, the ONLY thing the music industry does is promote.
Are you suggesting that there is no other teen in the world as talented as Miley? That getting that talented actually requires such a bloated industry? Bull. Shit.
So I did some careful calculations, and I've determined that I'm worth about $12 billion USD. Seeing as my current worth as judged by other people is several billions below that, I've decided to start accepting payments from my fellow citizens in order to bring my worldly worth up to the value I've determined. Seeing as you have so valiantly defended my determinations, I am sure that you will be the first to donate.
Right?
"The value of the fetus is determined by the value the human decides to give itself throughout its life once it becomes self-aware."
Whew, thankfully that means that an aborted fetus makes no decision and was therefore worthless the whole time! Or no wait, that means that we can simply assume that the fetus would have been suicidal!
OR NO WAIT, that argument makes no sense at all!
Yes, definitely that.
He was simply suggesting that /. automatically do what most of its readers already do. Hell, I had to read his comment twice; the first time I read it I saw: Slashdot should wordfilter any occurrences of "I am an enormous flaming douchebag" to "I am an enormous flaming douchebag".
Now the question is, what crack-smoking mod thought that your defense of this crap was insightful? Nobody's arguing against dissent, they're arguing against making yourself look like a twat while dissenting. If anything we're trying to help your dissent get heard.
What we ARE arguing against is the implication that is made when using, specifically, his whole name when it was neither necessary or called for; that implication being that you shouldn't trust those with 'Hussein' in their name.
"He should only be allowed to use the positive connotations, and anyone else who uses it for any other reason should be 'an enormous flaming douchebag'?"
I love how you wrote 'any other reason' there instead of 'racist bigotry', which is the reason GP used it. Almost makes your point seem valid. You also attacked the straw man argument that people should be allowed to use it for positive connotations, which I'm sure the parent would agree is racist bigotry as well. Really anyone who says 'Barack Hussein Obama' that isn't, say, performing his wedding, or an actor in a scene where his mother is angry with him, is using it wrongly.
If you want to attack the man's positions, fine, but don't expect people to take you seriously when your first move is an attempt to discredit the man by appealing to your audiences prejudices.
Your post is as abso-fucking-lutely stupid as saying 'I dislike like your post because you used no innovative new words, you flockenshnarpet'.
If I like the beat from a song but loathe the vocals, and if I find a song that samples that beat in a way I find pleasant, then has that product not been improved?
If at one time in the past the new song did not exist and I had no way to hear it, yet at current moment it does exist to bring me pleasure when the first could not, then hasn't something original been created?
How deep do I have to bury my head in the sand until I'm convinced that the artist who created the version I actually like didn't perform me any valuable service?
How big of a boner do I need to get upon hearing the word 'original' in order to drive me to defend something's originality as fiercely as you?
"The cost goes into marketing the band, producing music videos, large international tours, studio engineers. You've got to make millions of CDs and distribute them internationally. A graphic artist has to make the cover. Photography of the band."
Most of that crap is unnecessary and is simply there to fuel the fattened industry. The way I see it, most of the marketing is only there to recoup the cost from, well, most of their marketing. Do you honestly think that fans would know or care if the pictures on their favorite bands website weren't the result of a $10,000 photo shoot, but were instead taken by fans at a concert and uploaded to Myspace?
I just find it really hard to believe that if Miley Cyrus were to record a track on her own, upload it to her blog, and sell an unencumbered version of it for $1, she would make no profit. That cuts out graphic artists, distributors, agents, CEOs, secretaries, RIAA lawyers, brick and mortar stores, promotion companies, and marketers, and yet the product is the same.
So all you've proven is that there is lots of money in the industry. You haven't defended it being there, and you haven't even really argued against the parent's point which was that this money isn't being used to improve the product. Well, actually, I suppose that only holds true if you assume that the product of the music industry is music.
So in a way I guess you HAVE argued your point, but only by pointing out that the point of the music industry isn't to produce music. And that in turn kind of proves the parent's overall point, which was that this money (and really this industry) doesn't deserve to be there.
tl;dr Right now the RIAA doesn't serve to produce better music, more music, or even insightful, innovative, and interesting music; it simply uses its resources to convince stupid people to buy their crap. The 'greed' part comes when they pretend that they're necessary.
To the overpaid marketer in the corner going 'But that's my JOB you're talking about!': I don't give a shit; get a real job you manipulative parasite.
"Imagine Street View rendered in the direction you are holding your phone, from your position."
Congratulations, you've invented AR, which has been an app on my phone for about a year now. It's called using the input from the goddamn camera stuck on the front.