>If music is copyrighted, then you have no right to have it for free.
Close, but not exactly.
Copyrights are not intended to prevent copying, they are intended to guarantee your right to free use of the material after a reasonable amount of time.
Under the only Copyright agreement agreed to virtually worldwide (the Berne Convention), a surprising amount of hit music would be availiable freely on various services, including groups such as the Beatles (one of the RIAAs favourite examples for some reason).
Unfortunately a slow perversion of copyrights over the past few decades has led people to feel compelled to disobey them. Its like going from jaywalking being walking across unmarked areas of highway to becoming walking anywhere at all except between 9 am - 5 pm.
The nature of people is often to either completely disregard a law (such as speeding, for example) or to support it fully (such as seatbelts). I'm not suggesting the laws shouldn't be in place, I'm simply suggesting that the governments and the RIAA take a look at the will of the people.
The people have spoken. They think music is overpriced and too difficult to access with the current model. The only question is whether attempts will be made to regulate people into doing what's right by the RIAAs perspective or whether the government will do what's right by the people's perspective -- tell the RIAA to screw off and tell people to buy music online when the RIAA wises up.
>Oh, and in any other arena, I think everyone would agree that protecting your property (physical or intellectual) *is* the right response.
Ideas aren't your property (by definition -- property implies ownership, which you don't completely have on public ideas, only the right to tell others you authored them) unless you keep them to yourself. Copyright ensures that if you want to share your thoughts, you have to share them with everyone at some point. Them's the breaks.
The deal is, if you want to live in a free socity, you need to be willing to share. That's what copyright is all about.
Much of this debate is caused by various anti-Copyright groups (which the RIAA are considering how they abuse the intent of the laws) who want to convince people that ideas are actually intellectual property -- closely guarded secrets to be used as weapons against the less intelligent, or less wealthy. And, isn't classism - if anything, just as wrong as racism, if not more so?
>The world is not an innocent place. You must accept that.
I do, and that is (partly) why one must slowly introduce children to it.
The other reason why young children need a slow introduction to the world is because their brains are only developing and young children (such as a 6 year old) have difficulty with the concept of right and wrong, not to mention difficulty with the concept of self, and especially the concept of valuing other people.
Part of this slow introduction is to make something taboo. This way the child will (normally) only explore that part of the world when they are ready.
To lift the taboo is to prematurely expose children to ideas which they aren't prepared to handle.
To bring it into perspective, why is it that kids expose themselves to a beer later in life than pornography? Having a beer when dad's not home wouldn't be very hard for a 6 year old, I mean they're usually just sitting in the fridge.
Its because the child doesn't feel prepared to have one.
The same with pornography. The reason why young prepubescent children aren't exposed to it is because they aren't ready. Of course, once they reach the age at which they are interested in it (puberty) they will access it.
And, IMHO, goatse.cx should have a warning page. I think its funny, but it certainly would be wrong to have a 6 year old go there. They probably aren't being sued because the server is probably not in a country that cares for young children.
I'm just so very surpised that anyone would consider it proper to force exposure of pornography to children before puberty. It should be so obvious that exposure should wait _at least_ until the child's body matures.
Next thing you know 6 year old kids will be running free on downtown streets at night because "they'll be exposed to it one day". The idea is to expose children to things when they are ready to handle it, not when it can damage them mentally, emotionally, or physically!
>Should they then supplant their old business model with one wherein they make NO money
That's their decision. What they decide to do is not only beyond my control, but I could care less.
No one has a right to make money. It sounds like you think the RIAA has a right to make money. They don't. They only have the right to try to sell their music. If their business model is so flawed then they won't sell any, and that's the way a capitalist society works.
The way society responds to not having their wishes met is beyond the control of the RIAA, and if society's wishes aren't inline with the RIAA making money then the RIAA would be best to stop producing music and should move onto other things.
This is no different than amphibious car manufacturers moving onto other ventures when they figured out no-one wanted to drive that way. The RIAA needs to learn the capitalist way that no-one wants to listen to music their way, and that people will simply choose to listen to music as they wish to regardless of the flounderings of the RIAA, just as people continued to drive regarless of what amphibious car manufacturers thought of the situation.
Just because someone doesn't need something doesn't stop them from wanting (or getting it).
It isn't civil disobedience. Its the will of the people that they want to listen to low/no cost downloadable music. And, as even the most fascist countries have found out, when the people decide they want to do something, they, quite simply, will. The job of an intelligent person, or company, is to adapt or leave.
Lawmaker's laws that violate natural, obvious, real laws, such as the above, above breed stupidity and lethargy.
If the RIAA were to stop creating new music that would be an intelligent response. By doing this people could rethink wether they want to pay for music or not. If the people decide they want to pay for it then the RIAA will be back in business and better than ever. If the people decide they don't want to pay for music then all the RIAA is doing currently is trying to stop the inevitable -- their own demise.
Cable companies are cracking down on people using too much bandwidth.
Guess what the majority of that bandwidth was used for?
You guessed it, piracy.
So, knowing that, should all high-speed to home datalinks be shut down because they are mostly used for piracy?
Or how about the network at most universities and colleges? Past slashdot stories have shown the majority of the bandwidth on these networks is used to carry pirated material. Why not shut them down too?
Why not CD Burners that allow full DAO mode copying for consumer models? The only reason you need to twiddle every bit on a CD is so you can copy the copyright protection itself. Copyright protection that would serve no purpose being used on CDs burned by a home computer other than to prevent illicit copying.
IRC should, for certain, be shut down. Most all DCC traffic is for illegal software AFAIK.
Heck, lets ban computers. According to the BSA's own studies most computers are used to pirate materials.
>if they see viewing porn as an unsafe activity for children, which I don't
Well, that's pretty sick if you ask me. No 6 year old should be exposed to that kind of content uncessarialy.
Anways, now that's out of my system, the job of controlling access to pornography falls on the provider of it.
Playboy, for example, is only responsible for children viewing its content if they knowingly subscribe a minor to their service. They would not be liable if a child phoned DirecTV (for example) and the channel was turned on.
The same with these people running smut domains. It isn't their fault for the children running into the advertisements unless they are purposely targetting minors. If a DNS stealing sleazebag forwards children to pornography popups without permission from the porn sites then he is at fault.
However, should the porn sites be explicitly providing the porn ads in an attempt to attract minors (in their country) then they are also at fault as an accomplis.
Just as the TV can be unsuitable for minors most stations in civilised countries are required to warn the viewer of anything that would be illegal for minors to view. By doing this they shift their responsibility to the parent who should be supervising the child.
Since the porn ads did not warn of impending pornography, either the DNS artist or porn companies (or both) are at fault.
Or, to make it more clear, if a video store opens the doors to their pornography section wide open and has no one watching people going in and out whatsoever, they are as much (if not more) at fault as the parents allowing their children into the store.
Again, this depends on the country, but most civilised countries make it a crime to knowingly provide access, by a minor, to pornography.
Why is this? Because, quite simply, there are freaks out there who would purposely design a site for children that would (at some point) subject kids to extreme pornography. And, as with so many other things, a parent won't get to the power switch quick enough to turn off the pornography to return the child's innocence.
All I can say is I really hope you aren't serious that you consider it perfectly fine to destroy a child's innocence in such a strong manner.
There's a reason why it costs more to fix a new car than an old one -- a new car is a bigger investment and the parts shop knows it can charge top dollar for parts. The shop knows that getting another $2000 out of someone for a car valued at $1000 will be like getting blood from a stone.
MS should have a special "old technology" license for sub-300 Mhz machines.
>In short, I want the Simcity people to exercise some imagination.
Realisticly, though, Sim City 2000 (for example) was designed to be played starting in the past (something like the year 1900, IIRC). As the city developed it went though phases, and one, very long (and still ongoing phase) is the necessity of cars.
Since simcity's designers realised roads would eventually be outmoded, they provided for Acropolises in the far flung future.
Being that SimCity is mostly meant to be a fun a simulator of real life, they did a bang up job in keeping the game to the facts and only threw in imagination where it wouldn't ruin the idea of the game.
Considering the differences in how people with supposedly "perfect" hearing hear are far, far, far greater than 99.9%, 99.9% is, for all effective purposes, transparent to human ears, which is normally the entire idea of audio anyways.
Fortunately, our head doesn't work by comparing binary bits to each other (or at least I don't think mine does...):)
While technically, as with any analogue medium, an absolutely perfect copy could be made with vynil and played with a laser, but at $20k you can get pro audio gear that far outpaces anything vynil can do more than once (maybe less if the mocules making up the very high end of the spectrum [which some people seem to think they can hear, but scientifically can't] are rubbed off by the paper cover given to so many records).
96 kHz/24-bit pro audio gear outpaces anything anyone really thinks vynil can do more than once, and, more importantly, can even reproduce much of the non-listenable-to-humans-but-my-dog-hears-it part of the audio spectrum. I only mention this because I was once flamed by a few vynil boosters because I suggested that hard science disproves the fact that noise outside of our hearing range has any effect on us.
Either way, CD has it in the bag in terms of a pleasing mix of quality, price, and reproducibility, and for anyone wanting that ethereal listening experience, there's SACD which outpaces any and all reproducible vynil results I can think of.
The only reason to use vynil today is because you either have the record on it already, or you're a real DJ and want to mix the "proper" way (not that there isn't great software out there for that as-is, like PCDJ and Traktor).
Oh, and just to note, all the vynil you bought will sound worse than a CD in the future. Sure it beats most any other analogue medium in longetivity, and even beats a CDR for the length of time it can sit on a shelf, but just as with all analogue mediums, any wear whatsoever degrades sound quality and the inability to make successive copies without degrading the sound means vynil is effectively dead for pro audio.
Next on the chopping block: Why CCDs beat Film, and how people argue that seeing silver nitrate molecules is better on the eyes.:-)
Just my 2 cents on why vynil is unaffordable and uncessary...
Netscape browsers always include the whole kit and caboodle of everything you need (assuming you downoad the.sea version).
I don't want to have to download java, flash, realplayer (not that I really want that so much any more), etc, etc, everytime I install a web browser for someone.
Sometimes its nice to have an easy install that gives you too much than a quick, lean install that requires extra configuration for what's missing later. This usually comes into play when you have to install for someone else...:-)
>Would you want a doctor posting questions like "how do I calcualte someones blood presure?"?
He didn't say that. I learned how to do that in Grade 9 Phys. Ed.
It is quite obvious he far surpasses a high-school knowledge of computing, and it appears he has as much knowledge as your average computer technician (if not more), so there's no reason why he doesn't have the necessary knowledge to have a handle on the situation.
Also, you should know, very, very, very few businesses know how to attack a new problem (and every single client is a new problem unless you only do a single thing) right away.
Your job as a general computer solutions consultant isn't to go there knowing how to do it and telling the client that it will be done that way. Your job is to talk with the client and come up with a reasonable solution. A good client (and a good job) will leave you with enough flexibility that "anything goes" as long as it works reliably, and at a reasonable cost.
And, with that flexibility comes the fact that you can't know everything, and consulting other people who may or may not know more about the topic (such as slashdot) is a very good idea.
In short, you were modded a troll because if you followed your advice you would never land a job unless you and the client think exactly alike (once in a blue moon).
And, BTW, he was asked by the client to do this job. He didn't ask them. When someone offers you money and you think you can do the job (and it seems he thinks he can) you don't say no (unless someone's life is at stake. I doubt that in this case).
The whole "professional" thing is a chicken and egg problem that shouldn't require any explaining.
The professional thing to do, anyways, in all circumstances (except where lives are at stake, which doesn't count in this case), is to leave the client happy. If you can do that, you've beat out a lot of accredited professionals I know by miles.
It wasn't free and didn't come with source code so Borland C cannot be ported to Linux by Linus. (Linus was willing to use proprietary products to make the kernel, however it seems that from day one he wasn't willing to spend, spend, spend to make it happen).
A general purpose kernel (like Linux is meant to be) is far less useful when you can't compile your code under it.
Borland C was for DOS so Linus would have had no choice but to make Linux run DOS programs so he could develop inside the kernel.
That was a huge amount of added complexity and a serious downgrade is performance and utility that it seems he wasn't willing to undertake.
Of course, he could have simply opened up a hex editor and written everything in machine code...:-)
Either make the headphones digital, eliminating all of the static, or use headphones like mine, which don't use RF at all and instead modulate the sound over IR.
My experience with wireless headphones has been quite good, and there's absolutely no reason why decent quality sound can't be transmitted a short distance. Just look at 802.11b, for example. More than enough bandwidth for full CD-Audio quality. If it comes down to it, why not integrate this into your home theater?
If so, would they compile the Linux kernel properly at the time?
I think not. GCC was irreplaceable in compiling linux because Linus had said, from the outset, he wanted a cheap Unix-alike. Cheap means little to no cost. This means a free compiler. Ergo gcc.
>At some point it's going to snowball, and most of us are going to find ourselves NATted away, with only those paying premium prices for real IP addresses getting the priviledge of having their uplink monopolized by strangers.
Close, but no cigar.
There's no reason why a NATed box can't "upload" a file. The client simply needs to send a push-type request to the NATed server, rather than trying to pull the file from it.
This, of course, requires the client to have a real, non-NATed IP address. And this means the client will have access to more software in exchange for a higher fee per month.
Sure, you could be nice and use some of that bandwidth for sharing with the people who chose not to pay for the higher service level, but you would still benefit largely from it.
>I have never gone above the speed limit in my life -- go suck three cocks.
Have you ever jaywalked? Have you ever timeshifted programming (such as NFL broadcasts) that specifically limit your right to do so? Have you forgotten to count your change and noticed that you're a penny richer at the end of the day? Have you ever broken something borrowed from a friend and told them you'd lost it? Have you ever written on your desk at school? Have you ever paid a bill a day late and not included late fees in the hopes that the company won't notice? Have you ever been infected by a virus? Do you drive your bike without a helmet? Do you walk your dogs without a leash? If not, have you ever forgotten to poop-n-scoop? Have you ever scratched a rental DVD or creased a rental tape without telling the manager? Or, are you Mother Theresa?
Now go rim an asshole. Just cause you don't drive doesn't mean you've never broken the law.
>I don't require a Viper RT/10, but I just want to have one, so I stole mine.
Interesting how you confuse piracy with larceny.
When you pirate a movie, or music you deprive no one of that movie or music; whereas when you commit GTA you deprive someone of their vehicle.
Since a replicator is to matter as a CD-Burner is to data, would you still consider it theft if you replicated a Viper RT/10 using your own equipment and materials?
If so I would humbly suggest you are a tiny minority of people, and that's the reason why both the dictionary and the law disagree with you.
My search turns up nothing for "theft", "steal", or "larceny" in the Berne Convention. Methinks you are just plain confused on the issue. Hope this clears it up for you!
>So, kindly eat a dick.
Not that I'd want to; But its pretty hard when its shoved so far up your ass.
>People who attempt to justify their theft in any way are fucktards.
Agreed, to a certain degree (Les Miserables come to mind as a particular exemption). That's why Copyright Violation is a violation of copyright law, not (AFAIK) theft.
Or at least that wasn't the intention of the people who created our modern day copyright system.
I remember hearing about a leaked study from a long time ago done by a virus detection company.
The results seemed to (at the time) finger purchased software and hardware as the prime infection point for many machines.
Why?
At the time, BBSes autochecked files for viruses, and most people ran their disks through CPAV/F-Prot before giving them to others (since people "smart" enough to copy a disk were, at the time, able to run simple virus detection software). However, at the same time, major brand name companies didn't bother as much.
I can even remember a friend buying formatted floppies that came with a virus dropper on the disks...
If 100 people download infected software from one illegitimate site before the infection is pointed out and cleaned, that's just 100 people. Imagine the destruction that happens when you go gold and don't find out until a few weeks later that your CDs (or computers, or floppies, whatever) include a virus.
If anyone can find a link to that study, I'd really appreciate it.:-)
A lot of governments and government agencies (such as schools) provide documents to the public electronically only in.doc format. Perhaps you can read a half assed version scrambled through a non-compliant reader, but to properly read the document you'll need to purchase an MS product (either windows to run the MS-Word Document Viewer, or Microsoft Word to run inside Linux with the codeweavers plugin).
If participating in your own government, and therefore your own future, isn't forcing you to buy an M$ product, I'd like to know someone with an interest in their own future that puts a gun to their head.
Just because they don't put a gun to your head doesn't mean they can't force you to buy their product. Take telephone service for example. Where I live, for many, many decades you could only buy a phone line from Bell. Sure, you could use CB radio to chat with friends, but then you can't use government services (some of which were telephone exclusive) or many other private services.
The same goes for other monopolies, like your gas company, your cable company, your power company and your garbage disposal company.
So, you see, there's many other ways to be forced into buying a product than you've picked up on. Some of them include the right to participate in a regular life without abnormal impediments to it.
For me, it includes the purchase of an MS XP "enabled" laptop so I can complete college studies and lead a "normal" life in the world of computer programming. I know of no recognized Universities or Colleges within the reach of my pocketbook that offer MS free courses, and I'm sure if you looked about your city you'd find the same thing.
Don't we all deserve the right to an education and the right to participate in government without being forced to support a monopoly some of us would rather disappear?
Disney, IBM and McDonalds are just as successful as Microsoft at marketing (perhaps IBM a little less so). And just like MicroSoft, their products neverkillpeople.
Just because you're not bothered by a MegaCompany that uses the most underhanded tactics they can get away with to take what they want doesn't mean the rest of the world will pull the wool over their eyes and see the world through your rose coloured glasses.
If a game sways you from using linux, just wait until you have to wait a month or two to use the latest, hottest, PCMCIA card because the Linux drivers take a little longer to release.
If you can't hold out because of a game, Linux is definately not for you. Linux requires some patience and a certain temperament to get it to do everything you'll probably want.
Should you find yourself having difficulty when the change rests on holding out on a game, you just aren't ready for the switch, or maybe Linux isn't ready for you.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
>If music is copyrighted, then you have no right to have it for free.
Close, but not exactly.
Copyrights are not intended to prevent copying, they are intended to guarantee your right to free use of the material after a reasonable amount of time.
Under the only Copyright agreement agreed to virtually worldwide (the Berne Convention), a surprising amount of hit music would be availiable freely on various services, including groups such as the Beatles (one of the RIAAs favourite examples for some reason).
Unfortunately a slow perversion of copyrights over the past few decades has led people to feel compelled to disobey them. Its like going from jaywalking being walking across unmarked areas of highway to becoming walking anywhere at all except between 9 am - 5 pm.
The nature of people is often to either completely disregard a law (such as speeding, for example) or to support it fully (such as seatbelts). I'm not suggesting the laws shouldn't be in place, I'm simply suggesting that the governments and the RIAA take a look at the will of the people.
The people have spoken. They think music is overpriced and too difficult to access with the current model. The only question is whether attempts will be made to regulate people into doing what's right by the RIAAs perspective or whether the government will do what's right by the people's perspective -- tell the RIAA to screw off and tell people to buy music online when the RIAA wises up.
>Oh, and in any other arena, I think everyone would agree that protecting your property (physical or intellectual) *is* the right response.
Ideas aren't your property (by definition -- property implies ownership, which you don't completely have on public ideas, only the right to tell others you authored them) unless you keep them to yourself. Copyright ensures that if you want to share your thoughts, you have to share them with everyone at some point. Them's the breaks.
The deal is, if you want to live in a free socity, you need to be willing to share. That's what copyright is all about.
Much of this debate is caused by various anti-Copyright groups (which the RIAA are considering how they abuse the intent of the laws) who want to convince people that ideas are actually intellectual property -- closely guarded secrets to be used as weapons against the less intelligent, or less wealthy. And, isn't classism - if anything, just as wrong as racism, if not more so?
>The world is not an innocent place. You must accept that.
I do, and that is (partly) why one must slowly introduce children to it.
The other reason why young children need a slow introduction to the world is because their brains are only developing and young children (such as a 6 year old) have difficulty with the concept of right and wrong, not to mention difficulty with the concept of self, and especially the concept of valuing other people.
Part of this slow introduction is to make something taboo. This way the child will (normally) only explore that part of the world when they are ready.
To lift the taboo is to prematurely expose children to ideas which they aren't prepared to handle.
To bring it into perspective, why is it that kids expose themselves to a beer later in life than pornography? Having a beer when dad's not home wouldn't be very hard for a 6 year old, I mean they're usually just sitting in the fridge.
Its because the child doesn't feel prepared to have one.
The same with pornography. The reason why young prepubescent children aren't exposed to it is because they aren't ready. Of course, once they reach the age at which they are interested in it (puberty) they will access it.
And, IMHO, goatse.cx should have a warning page. I think its funny, but it certainly would be wrong to have a 6 year old go there. They probably aren't being sued because the server is probably not in a country that cares for young children.
I'm just so very surpised that anyone would consider it proper to force exposure of pornography to children before puberty. It should be so obvious that exposure should wait _at least_ until the child's body matures.
Next thing you know 6 year old kids will be running free on downtown streets at night because "they'll be exposed to it one day". The idea is to expose children to things when they are ready to handle it, not when it can damage them mentally, emotionally, or physically!
>Good thing wireless can't be monopolized...
:-)
You don't live in Canada, do you? The CRTC would like a little chat with you...
>Should they then supplant their old business model with one wherein they make NO money
That's their decision. What they decide to do is not only beyond my control, but I could care less.
No one has a right to make money. It sounds like you think the RIAA has a right to make money. They don't. They only have the right to try to sell their music. If their business model is so flawed then they won't sell any, and that's the way a capitalist society works.
The way society responds to not having their wishes met is beyond the control of the RIAA, and if society's wishes aren't inline with the RIAA making money then the RIAA would be best to stop producing music and should move onto other things.
This is no different than amphibious car manufacturers moving onto other ventures when they figured out no-one wanted to drive that way. The RIAA needs to learn the capitalist way that no-one wants to listen to music their way, and that people will simply choose to listen to music as they wish to regardless of the flounderings of the RIAA, just as people continued to drive regarless of what amphibious car manufacturers thought of the situation.
Just because someone doesn't need something doesn't stop them from wanting (or getting it).
It isn't civil disobedience. Its the will of the people that they want to listen to low/no cost downloadable music. And, as even the most fascist countries have found out, when the people decide they want to do something, they, quite simply, will. The job of an intelligent person, or company, is to adapt or leave.
Lawmaker's laws that violate natural, obvious, real laws, such as the above, above breed stupidity and lethargy.
If the RIAA were to stop creating new music that would be an intelligent response. By doing this people could rethink wether they want to pay for music or not. If the people decide they want to pay for it then the RIAA will be back in business and better than ever. If the people decide they don't want to pay for music then all the RIAA is doing currently is trying to stop the inevitable -- their own demise.
How about this one then?
Cable companies are cracking down on people using too much bandwidth.
Guess what the majority of that bandwidth was used for?
You guessed it, piracy.
So, knowing that, should all high-speed to home datalinks be shut down because they are mostly used for piracy?
Or how about the network at most universities and colleges? Past slashdot stories have shown the majority of the bandwidth on these networks is used to carry pirated material. Why not shut them down too?
Why not CD Burners that allow full DAO mode copying for consumer models? The only reason you need to twiddle every bit on a CD is so you can copy the copyright protection itself. Copyright protection that would serve no purpose being used on CDs burned by a home computer other than to prevent illicit copying.
IRC should, for certain, be shut down. Most all DCC traffic is for illegal software AFAIK.
Heck, lets ban computers. According to the BSA's own studies most computers are used to pirate materials.
>if they see viewing porn as an unsafe activity for children, which I don't
Well, that's pretty sick if you ask me. No 6 year old should be exposed to that kind of content uncessarialy.
Anways, now that's out of my system, the job of controlling access to pornography falls on the provider of it.
Playboy, for example, is only responsible for children viewing its content if they knowingly subscribe a minor to their service. They would not be liable if a child phoned DirecTV (for example) and the channel was turned on.
The same with these people running smut domains. It isn't their fault for the children running into the advertisements unless they are purposely targetting minors. If a DNS stealing sleazebag forwards children to pornography popups without permission from the porn sites then he is at fault.
However, should the porn sites be explicitly providing the porn ads in an attempt to attract minors (in their country) then they are also at fault as an accomplis.
Just as the TV can be unsuitable for minors most stations in civilised countries are required to warn the viewer of anything that would be illegal for minors to view. By doing this they shift their responsibility to the parent who should be supervising the child.
Since the porn ads did not warn of impending pornography, either the DNS artist or porn companies (or both) are at fault.
Or, to make it more clear, if a video store opens the doors to their pornography section wide open and has no one watching people going in and out whatsoever, they are as much (if not more) at fault as the parents allowing their children into the store.
Again, this depends on the country, but most civilised countries make it a crime to knowingly provide access, by a minor, to pornography.
Why is this? Because, quite simply, there are freaks out there who would purposely design a site for children that would (at some point) subject kids to extreme pornography. And, as with so many other things, a parent won't get to the power switch quick enough to turn off the pornography to return the child's innocence.
All I can say is I really hope you aren't serious that you consider it perfectly fine to destroy a child's innocence in such a strong manner.
>so buy another goddamned copy
Spend another $150 on a machine worth $50?
You have no clue about economics, do you?
There's a reason why it costs more to fix a new car than an old one -- a new car is a bigger investment and the parts shop knows it can charge top dollar for parts. The shop knows that getting another $2000 out of someone for a car valued at $1000 will be like getting blood from a stone.
MS should have a special "old technology" license for sub-300 Mhz machines.
>I think you mean arcologies
:-)
Yup. Its been so long since playing the game I'd forgotten...
>In short, I want the Simcity people to exercise some imagination.
Realisticly, though, Sim City 2000 (for example) was designed to be played starting in the past (something like the year 1900, IIRC). As the city developed it went though phases, and one, very long (and still ongoing phase) is the necessity of cars.
Since simcity's designers realised roads would eventually be outmoded, they provided for Acropolises in the far flung future.
Being that SimCity is mostly meant to be a fun a simulator of real life, they did a bang up job in keeping the game to the facts and only threw in imagination where it wouldn't ruin the idea of the game.
>Matador's entire catalog is posted
Sorry dude, it isn't.
I just search for Jega, and their albums aren't there. Just one measly song...
However, surprisingly, Boards of Canada is there.
Maybe I just picked the unlucky "group"?
>99.9 percent, sure.
:)
Considering the differences in how people with supposedly "perfect" hearing hear are far, far, far greater than 99.9%, 99.9% is, for all effective purposes, transparent to human ears, which is normally the entire idea of audio anyways.
Fortunately, our head doesn't work by comparing binary bits to each other (or at least I don't think mine does...)
>Vinyl provided better "sampling rates"
:-)
Snap, crackle, and pop aren't just the names of Rice Krispies, they're also the names of just some of the problems of vinyl.
And lets not forget warp and warble, these aren't Mork and Mindy's sidekicks.
Read this.
While technically, as with any analogue medium, an absolutely perfect copy could be made with vynil and played with a laser, but at $20k you can get pro audio gear that far outpaces anything vynil can do more than once (maybe less if the mocules making up the very high end of the spectrum [which some people seem to think they can hear, but scientifically can't] are rubbed off by the paper cover given to so many records).
96 kHz/24-bit pro audio gear outpaces anything anyone really thinks vynil can do more than once, and, more importantly, can even reproduce much of the non-listenable-to-humans-but-my-dog-hears-it part of the audio spectrum. I only mention this because I was once flamed by a few vynil boosters because I suggested that hard science disproves the fact that noise outside of our hearing range has any effect on us.
Either way, CD has it in the bag in terms of a pleasing mix of quality, price, and reproducibility, and for anyone wanting that ethereal listening experience, there's SACD which outpaces any and all reproducible vynil results I can think of.
The only reason to use vynil today is because you either have the record on it already, or you're a real DJ and want to mix the "proper" way (not that there isn't great software out there for that as-is, like PCDJ and Traktor).
Oh, and just to note, all the vynil you bought will sound worse than a CD in the future. Sure it beats most any other analogue medium in longetivity, and even beats a CDR for the length of time it can sit on a shelf, but just as with all analogue mediums, any wear whatsoever degrades sound quality and the inability to make successive copies without degrading the sound means vynil is effectively dead for pro audio.
Next on the chopping block: Why CCDs beat Film, and how people argue that seeing silver nitrate molecules is better on the eyes.
Just my 2 cents on why vynil is unaffordable and uncessary...
Here's why:
.sea version).
:-)
Netscape browsers always include the whole kit and caboodle of everything you need (assuming you downoad the
I don't want to have to download java, flash, realplayer (not that I really want that so much any more), etc, etc, everytime I install a web browser for someone.
Sometimes its nice to have an easy install that gives you too much than a quick, lean install that requires extra configuration for what's missing later. This usually comes into play when you have to install for someone else...
>Would you want a doctor posting questions like "how do I calcualte someones blood presure?"?
He didn't say that. I learned how to do that in Grade 9 Phys. Ed.
It is quite obvious he far surpasses a high-school knowledge of computing, and it appears he has as much knowledge as your average computer technician (if not more), so there's no reason why he doesn't have the necessary knowledge to have a handle on the situation.
Also, you should know, very, very, very few businesses know how to attack a new problem (and every single client is a new problem unless you only do a single thing) right away.
Your job as a general computer solutions consultant isn't to go there knowing how to do it and telling the client that it will be done that way. Your job is to talk with the client and come up with a reasonable solution. A good client (and a good job) will leave you with enough flexibility that "anything goes" as long as it works reliably, and at a reasonable cost.
And, with that flexibility comes the fact that you can't know everything, and consulting other people who may or may not know more about the topic (such as slashdot) is a very good idea.
In short, you were modded a troll because if you followed your advice you would never land a job unless you and the client think exactly alike (once in a blue moon).
And, BTW, he was asked by the client to do this job. He didn't ask them. When someone offers you money and you think you can do the job (and it seems he thinks he can) you don't say no (unless someone's life is at stake. I doubt that in this case).
The whole "professional" thing is a chicken and egg problem that shouldn't require any explaining.
The professional thing to do, anyways, in all circumstances (except where lives are at stake, which doesn't count in this case), is to leave the client happy. If you can do that, you've beat out a lot of accredited professionals I know by miles.
>Borland C compiler was for about 50 US dollars.
:-)
It wasn't free and didn't come with source code so Borland C cannot be ported to Linux by Linus. (Linus was willing to use proprietary products to make the kernel, however it seems that from day one he wasn't willing to spend, spend, spend to make it happen).
A general purpose kernel (like Linux is meant to be) is far less useful when you can't compile your code under it.
Borland C was for DOS so Linus would have had no choice but to make Linux run DOS programs so he could develop inside the kernel.
That was a huge amount of added complexity and a serious downgrade is performance and utility that it seems he wasn't willing to undertake.
Of course, he could have simply opened up a hex editor and written everything in machine code...
Either make the headphones digital, eliminating all of the static, or use headphones like mine, which don't use RF at all and instead modulate the sound over IR.
My experience with wireless headphones has been quite good, and there's absolutely no reason why decent quality sound can't be transmitted a short distance. Just look at 802.11b, for example. More than enough bandwidth for full CD-Audio quality. If it comes down to it, why not integrate this into your home theater?
>There were other C compilers for the 386.
Were they free as well at the time?
If so, would they compile the Linux kernel properly at the time?
I think not. GCC was irreplaceable in compiling linux because Linus had said, from the outset, he wanted a cheap Unix-alike. Cheap means little to no cost. This means a free compiler. Ergo gcc.
>At some point it's going to snowball, and most of us are going to find ourselves NATted away, with only those paying premium prices for real IP addresses getting the priviledge of having their uplink monopolized by strangers.
Close, but no cigar.
There's no reason why a NATed box can't "upload" a file. The client simply needs to send a push-type request to the NATed server, rather than trying to pull the file from it.
This, of course, requires the client to have a real, non-NATed IP address. And this means the client will have access to more software in exchange for a higher fee per month.
Sure, you could be nice and use some of that bandwidth for sharing with the people who chose not to pay for the higher service level, but you would still benefit largely from it.
>I have never gone above the speed limit in my life -- go suck three cocks.
Have you ever jaywalked?
Have you ever timeshifted programming (such as NFL broadcasts) that specifically limit your right to do so?
Have you forgotten to count your change and noticed that you're a penny richer at the end of the day?
Have you ever broken something borrowed from a friend and told them you'd lost it?
Have you ever written on your desk at school?
Have you ever paid a bill a day late and not included late fees in the hopes that the company won't notice?
Have you ever been infected by a virus?
Do you drive your bike without a helmet?
Do you walk your dogs without a leash?
If not, have you ever forgotten to poop-n-scoop?
Have you ever scratched a rental DVD or creased a rental tape without telling the manager?
Or, are you Mother Theresa?
Now go rim an asshole. Just cause you don't drive doesn't mean you've never broken the law.
>I don't require a Viper RT/10, but I just want to have one, so I stole mine.
Interesting how you confuse piracy with larceny.
When you pirate a movie, or music you deprive no one of that movie or music; whereas when you commit GTA you deprive someone of their vehicle.
Since a replicator is to matter as a CD-Burner is to data, would you still consider it theft if you replicated a Viper RT/10 using your own equipment and materials?
If so I would humbly suggest you are a tiny minority of people, and that's the reason why both the dictionary and the law disagree with you.
My search turns up nothing for "theft", "steal", or "larceny" in the Berne Convention. Methinks you are just plain confused on the issue. Hope this clears it up for you!
>So, kindly eat a dick.
Not that I'd want to; But its pretty hard when its shoved so far up your ass.
>People who attempt to justify their theft in any way are fucktards.
Agreed, to a certain degree (Les Miserables come to mind as a particular exemption). That's why Copyright Violation is a violation of copyright law, not (AFAIK) theft.
Or at least that wasn't the intention of the people who created our modern day copyright system.
I remember hearing about a leaked study from a long time ago done by a virus detection company.
:-)
The results seemed to (at the time) finger purchased software and hardware as the prime infection point for many machines.
Why?
At the time, BBSes autochecked files for viruses, and most people ran their disks through CPAV/F-Prot before giving them to others (since people "smart" enough to copy a disk were, at the time, able to run simple virus detection software). However, at the same time, major brand name companies didn't bother as much.
I can even remember a friend buying formatted floppies that came with a virus dropper on the disks...
If 100 people download infected software from one illegitimate site before the infection is pointed out and cleaned, that's just 100 people. Imagine the destruction that happens when you go gold and don't find out until a few weeks later that your CDs (or computers, or floppies, whatever) include a virus.
If anyone can find a link to that study, I'd really appreciate it.
Sometimes you get more than you pay for.
Your PC is now stoned !!!
A lot of governments and government agencies (such as schools) provide documents to the public electronically only in .doc format. Perhaps you can read a half assed version scrambled through a non-compliant reader, but to properly read the document you'll need to purchase an MS product (either windows to run the MS-Word Document Viewer, or Microsoft Word to run inside Linux with the codeweavers plugin).
If participating in your own government, and therefore your own future, isn't forcing you to buy an M$ product, I'd like to know someone with an interest in their own future that puts a gun to their head.
Just because they don't put a gun to your head doesn't mean they can't force you to buy their product. Take telephone service for example. Where I live, for many, many decades you could only buy a phone line from Bell. Sure, you could use CB radio to chat with friends, but then you can't use government services (some of which were telephone exclusive) or many other private services.
The same goes for other monopolies, like your gas company, your cable company, your power company and your garbage disposal company.
So, you see, there's many other ways to be forced into buying a product than you've picked up on. Some of them include the right to participate in a regular life without abnormal impediments to it.
For me, it includes the purchase of an MS XP "enabled" laptop so I can complete college studies and lead a "normal" life in the world of computer programming. I know of no recognized Universities or Colleges within the reach of my pocketbook that offer MS free courses, and I'm sure if you looked about your city you'd find the same thing.
Don't we all deserve the right to an education and the right to participate in government without being forced to support a monopoly some of us would rather disappear?
Disney, IBM and McDonalds are just as successful as Microsoft at marketing (perhaps IBM a little less so). And just like MicroSoft, their products never kill people.
Just because you're not bothered by a MegaCompany that uses the most underhanded tactics they can get away with to take what they want doesn't mean the rest of the world will pull the wool over their eyes and see the world through your rose coloured glasses.
I think hurling shit at someone's yard would cause physical damage, pain, and suffering.
If bits wandering through a network cause these then you either need to fix your security or you should stop wearing shock pads!
If a game sways you from using linux, just wait until you have to wait a month or two to use the latest, hottest, PCMCIA card because the Linux drivers take a little longer to release.
:-)
If you can't hold out because of a game, Linux is definately not for you. Linux requires some patience and a certain temperament to get it to do everything you'll probably want.
Should you find yourself having difficulty when the change rests on holding out on a game, you just aren't ready for the switch, or maybe Linux isn't ready for you.
We'll be happy to see you when you are though!