Aside from the insult, you're right: it's not socialsim, it's fascism. Heck, it's worse: it's socialism (forced sharing) and fascism (forced ownership) working together to squeeze out freedom.
The (c) symbol indicated that something non-standard was occuring: the author was taking distinct steps to claim governmental protection if IP. This is based on the assumption that a given work is public domain unless otherwise noted. Even though most material today is copyrighted, it still is marked based on the social assumption that the default state for IP is public domain.
The (o) symbol dangerously changes this: suddenly the default assumption is that material is not free/public-domain unless clearly marked as such. If you copy something without the (o) mark, assumption will be that you are committing an illegal act unless you can prove public-domain status, instead of assuming free unless proven otherwise.
This is one more big step toward socialism: you can't do anything unless permission is given. No (o), no copy. So much for the freedom to copy (unless the (c) is present).
The EFF and "information wants to be free" folk have just broken their own backs.
if we only would learn to leave nature as clean, as we leave our flat.
If that's the standard, I'm packing my bags tomorrow and moving off-planet quick.
At best, one's flat is a near-sterile surface nearly devoid of life and populated wholly by artificial stuff.
At worst, one's flat is little different from a landfill.
Because the first post-Napster P2P program the mainstream press mentions is Gnutella. When people discuss the limitation/demise of Napster, they say "so we'll just use Gnutella." It's a PR decision: even if other P2P programs are actually more popular and better performing, Gnutella has the biggest profile and thus is the next thing to kill.
A more M$ solution would be to just include an encoder with the OS and make it really suck.
That's exactly what they're doing! You can encode MP3s with XP, you just can't encode them at more than 56kbps. They're giving you all the tools, just making one suck and one shine to persuade you to switch.
M$ is just doing what Real has already done with RealJukebox: limit the bit rate. RealJukebox won't record above 96kbps; M$ is just lowering that some more. (Anyone know how to increase RJ's recording rate to 128kbps?)
They're NOT trying to drive USB2 out. The problem is that USB2 isn't here yet. I'm working on a USB2 device, and am finding out the hard way that there is only one manufacurer delivering useful USB2 chips - if there isn't even reasonable parts availability and thus few products available, MS can't support it properly because there really isn't anything to support.
USB 2 is coming to the standard PC motherboard, and will be supported. This process will happen, though it will take at least a year to do.
One problem with instant-turnaround news services like/. is that readers get in the mindset that everything should and does happen instantly. USB2 PCI host cards just started mass production - so far, there's essentially nothing for MS to support, and it's going to take more than a few minutes for products to appear and MS to evaluate & test them.
The phrasing of the "not supported" announcement is a bit misleading.
USB 2.0 controllers & devices will be supported, just via third-party drivers. This is NOT the same as WinNT4's non-support, which prevented even the possibility of third-party support.
MS simply doesn't have time to fully include well-developed OS-level support for USB 2.0. (I work at a large company researching USB 2.0, and we're just barely getting started.) There's maybe a half-dozen devices to evaluate and test OS-level support with.
Contrast this with FireWire, which does have a reasonalby large number of 400Mb/s devices available for testing & development.
USB 2.0 host cards are available. USB 2.0 devices are coming soon. Intel will be including USB 2.0 on the motherboard starting next year.
USB 2.0 support WILL happen; it IS happening. It's just going to take a little longer than MicroSoft has to put full-blown thoroughly-tested support in XP, and we'll have to use third-party drivers until it does. FireWire's advantage, from MicroSoft's point of view (they don't care about peer-to-peer), is only that it has been around a bit longer. USB 2.0 will be inherently built into Intel-based motherboards soon; it WILL arrive, cheaply, and will be supported.
If the only record of your speeding ticket is an entry in a database, what happens when a glitch makes
you a drunken sloth who doesn't pay child support.
That problem is the core premise of the movie "Brazil": a bug falls into a printer pounding out the names of criminals, and causes a mis-typing of a name...result is a life-destroying bureaucratic nightmare.
There's more to historical documents than just the raw bitwise content.
I've heard of one researcher studying the history of diseases. He'd go into the rare-book rooms of libraries, open each book, stick his nose in and take a big sniff. Apparently during one particular epidemic period, people used a lot of vinegar to sterilize things - including books. By smelling each book, he could work out where & when the disease was passing through via the lingering odors of disinfectants (even after a few centuries). [Don't recall all the details, but that's the gist of it.]
Every time source media is lost, we lose more information than just the alphanumerics on the page.
Ted Turner is still an individual - it's just that he has so many other _individuals_ voluntarily working for him, assisting his goals, that most people just see a big blur abstractly labeled Turner Broadcasting Corp.
You wonder why no counter-article? Because the article is so pervasively mis-guided that there's no point in a comprehensive response; when you have to argue first principles with a fool (in this case, one who questions basic reality, facts, and rights), you'd have to re-educate him from the ground up, which is a pointless act here in a comment forum.
Also because the article pushes communism, which has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere.
It's like trying to give someone a degree in political science while casually chatting on a streetcorner.
Standard socialistic crap: all large organizations are out to hurt you, so let's give all power to an even larger organization that will do even worse...and to justify all this, claim that black is white, good is evil, and agree that we love Big Brother.
A core flaw with this article, and others, is that it fails to notice that corporations are just groups of people working together, not evil dieties. Failing to recognize this, the author (and likeminded folk) blindly and gleefully act to revoke the rights of others - made easier by questioning and redefining "rights" and "facts".
Re:What an incoherent posting. Don't waste your ti
on
Why Community Matters
·
· Score: 1
Well, we COULD have just rejected the idea out-of-hand, but instead it was carefully read, analayzed, discussed, and we have with great intellectual certainty concluded that the idea is, in fact, crud.
I imagine that the defendant must have gone well beyond the pale for a court to grant such a motion.
If you'd bothered to read the case, you'd see that the defendant went to extraordinary lengths to harass FR - including the creation of ~150 aliases, and extensive spamming of forum participants.
However, it is ironic that these folks couldn't themselves find more credible ways to monitor
and moderate their own property.
From time to time FR disruptors are asked to leave, and most of them stay gone when their ID is deleted. Plenty of credible ways to monitor and moderate FR property are used. They DO believe that freedom includes rights to free speech - as long as it is not excessively abused (and yes, liberal boards do the same).
It would appear that it is the FreeRepublic, however, that has deviated from avowedly libertarian views by seeking court-ordered censorship of speech which they disdain,
First, there's a difference between not liking what someone says and not liking a disruptor. FreeRepublic's beef with the defendant isn't the content of his speech per se, it's that he's speaking in a highly disruptive manner for the sole purpose of annoying and interfering with the speech of others.
Second, FreeRepublic (and Slashdot as well) is a PRIVATE forum. They have the right to be inconsistent.
Lawsuits are needed to address the first situation; "enlightened, reasoned argument" is needed to address the second.
No, trolling/flaimbait is when you post something just to upset people for your own amusement, whether or not you believe what you said. The issue isn't the belief, the issue is doing something just to annoy people.
It is free - you are free to join the discussion and converse on any topic. The problem is when someone gets downright disruptive and refuses to be polite or leave, at which point it's perfectly reasonable to have the disruptor removed from the privately-owned premises. It's akin to someone standing in front of your home screaming libel & obscenitites 24/7 - they do have freedom of speech, yet it's reasonable to have the cops drag him away for disturbing the peace, and have a judge issue a restraining order.
You're close, but not quite there. Despite free speech being an inalienable right, governments regularly try to squelch that right, and people fight (sometimes to the death) to maintain that right. You have the right to spew your hate-filled utter nonsense, but you won't be able to unless someone fights to maintain that right.
"Technology adds nothing to art. Two thousand years ago, I could tell you a story, and at any point during the story I could stop, and ask, Now do you want the hero to be kidnapped, or
not? But that would, of course, have ruined the story. Part of the experience of being entertained is sitting back and plugging into someone else's vision. The fact of the matter is, since the
beginning of time, you could buy a Picasso and change the colors. That's trivial. But you don't because you're buying a piece of Picasso's $&#**^% soul. That's the definition of art: Art is
one person's ego trip."
- Penn Jillette
Slashdot Mirror
Heck, it's worse: it's socialism (forced sharing) and fascism (forced ownership) working together to squeeze out freedom.
The (o) symbol dangerously changes this: suddenly the default assumption is that material is not free/public-domain unless clearly marked as such. If you copy something without the (o) mark, assumption will be that you are committing an illegal act unless you can prove public-domain status, instead of assuming free unless proven otherwise.
This is one more big step toward socialism: you can't do anything unless permission is given. No (o), no copy. So much for the freedom to copy (unless the (c) is present).
The EFF and "information wants to be free" folk have just broken their own backs.
If that's the standard, I'm packing my bags tomorrow and moving off-planet quick.
At best, one's flat is a near-sterile surface nearly devoid of life and populated wholly by artificial stuff.
At worst, one's flat is little different from a landfill.
Because the first post-Napster P2P program the mainstream press mentions is Gnutella. When people discuss the limitation/demise of Napster, they say "so we'll just use Gnutella." It's a PR decision: even if other P2P programs are actually more popular and better performing, Gnutella has the biggest profile and thus is the next thing to kill.
That's exactly what they're doing! You can encode MP3s with XP, you just can't encode them at more than 56kbps. They're giving you all the tools, just making one suck and one shine to persuade you to switch.
NOT TRUE. When you plug a 1.1 device into a 2.0 hub, 2.0 buffers the packets and re-transmits them at high speed.
USB 2 is coming to the standard PC motherboard, and will be supported. This process will happen, though it will take at least a year to do.
One problem with instant-turnaround news services like /. is that readers get in the mindset that everything should and does happen instantly. USB2 PCI host cards just started mass production - so far, there's essentially nothing for MS to support, and it's going to take more than a few minutes for products to appear and MS to evaluate & test them.
USB 2.0 controllers & devices will be supported, just via third-party drivers. This is NOT the same as WinNT4's non-support, which prevented even the possibility of third-party support.
MS simply doesn't have time to fully include well-developed OS-level support for USB 2.0. (I work at a large company researching USB 2.0, and we're just barely getting started.) There's maybe a half-dozen devices to evaluate and test OS-level support with.
Contrast this with FireWire, which does have a reasonalby large number of 400Mb/s devices available for testing & development.
USB 2.0 host cards are available. USB 2.0 devices are coming soon. Intel will be including USB 2.0 on the motherboard starting next year.
USB 2.0 support WILL happen; it IS happening. It's just going to take a little longer than MicroSoft has to put full-blown thoroughly-tested support in XP, and we'll have to use third-party drivers until it does. FireWire's advantage, from MicroSoft's point of view (they don't care about peer-to-peer), is only that it has been around a bit longer. USB 2.0 will be inherently built into Intel-based motherboards soon; it WILL arrive, cheaply, and will be supported.
That problem is the core premise of the movie "Brazil": a bug falls into a printer pounding out the names of criminals, and causes a mis-typing of a name...result is a life-destroying bureaucratic nightmare.
I've heard of one researcher studying the history of diseases. He'd go into the rare-book rooms of libraries, open each book, stick his nose in and take a big sniff. Apparently during one particular epidemic period, people used a lot of vinegar to sterilize things - including books. By smelling each book, he could work out where & when the disease was passing through via the lingering odors of disinfectants (even after a few centuries). [Don't recall all the details, but that's the gist of it.]
Every time source media is lost, we lose more information than just the alphanumerics on the page.
Ted Turner is still an individual - it's just that he has so many other _individuals_ voluntarily working for him, assisting his goals, that most people just see a big blur abstractly labeled Turner Broadcasting Corp.
Also because the article pushes communism, which has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere.
It's like trying to give someone a degree in political science while casually chatting on a streetcorner.
Laurie Anderson (experimental pop musician) said that "talking about music is like dancing about architecture."
A core flaw with this article, and others, is that it fails to notice that corporations are just groups of people working together, not evil dieties. Failing to recognize this, the author (and likeminded folk) blindly and gleefully act to revoke the rights of others - made easier by questioning and redefining "rights" and "facts".
If you'd bothered to read the case, you'd see that the defendant went to extraordinary lengths to harass FR - including the creation of ~150 aliases, and extensive spamming of forum participants.
However, it is ironic that these folks couldn't themselves find more credible ways to monitor and moderate their own property.
From time to time FR disruptors are asked to leave, and most of them stay gone when their ID is deleted. Plenty of credible ways to monitor and moderate FR property are used. They DO believe that freedom includes rights to free speech - as long as it is not excessively abused (and yes, liberal boards do the same).
First, there's a difference between not liking what someone says and not liking a disruptor. FreeRepublic's beef with the defendant isn't the content of his speech per se, it's that he's speaking in a highly disruptive manner for the sole purpose of annoying and interfering with the speech of others.
Second, FreeRepublic (and Slashdot as well) is a PRIVATE forum. They have the right to be inconsistent.
Lawsuits are needed to address the first situation; "enlightened, reasoned argument" is needed to address the second.
No, trolling/flaimbait is when you post something just to upset people for your own amusement, whether or not you believe what you said. The issue isn't the belief, the issue is doing something just to annoy people.
Anonymity ends when someone figures out who you are anyway.
It is free - you are free to join the discussion and converse on any topic. The problem is when someone gets downright disruptive and refuses to be polite or leave, at which point it's perfectly reasonable to have the disruptor removed from the privately-owned premises. It's akin to someone standing in front of your home screaming libel & obscenitites 24/7 - they do have freedom of speech, yet it's reasonable to have the cops drag him away for disturbing the peace, and have a judge issue a restraining order.
"Technology adds nothing to art. Two thousand years ago, I could tell you a story, and at any point during the story I could stop, and ask, Now do you want the hero to be kidnapped, or not? But that would, of course, have ruined the story. Part of the experience of being entertained is sitting back and plugging into someone else's vision. The fact of the matter is, since the beginning of time, you could buy a Picasso and change the colors. That's trivial. But you don't because you're buying a piece of Picasso's $&#**^% soul. That's the definition of art: Art is one person's ego trip."
- Penn Jillette