Yes, but now imagine that anyone can get paper from the minor suppliers for free, faster and easier than getting it from the major supplier, not to mention that the paper is higher quality. What kind of idiot would go and buy low-grade, expensive paper from the major supplier?
Oh, and if you're going to go to the trouble to boldface a word, you might want to spell it correctly.
But I guess the hackneyed old tradition of U.S. bashing is still in vogue. Will it ever go out of style?
It's the price one pays for being on top.
Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first.
on
A Sound Server For X
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Your problem is that you're trying to use a program that relies on eye-candy over the network. (At least, I think that's the idea. I can't imagine any other reason for the incredibly bizarre interface of XMMS.) Of course it's going to be slow without a fast link. How is a "new protocol" going to help?
This will essentially be the same as streaming audio from the network. (You might be able to cache some sounds locally, for improvement, but for playing music or whatever that's probably not much of an option.) No, the modem users probably won't find this useful. But those of us with a fast connection to the other computer can benefit greatly.
I think that you're right about the potential profit... however, it's really difficult to convince people to take on an enormous investment that probably won't pay off for decade or more. At least for the time being, I can't see private space flight going beyond shoving communications satellites into orbit.
Well, at 900 comments, probably nobody's going to see this, but if you do: this has the potential to destroy the space program. We live in a time when nobody considers space flight to be particularly important. The loss of the shuttle would be a perfect excuse to put NASA more on the back burner than it was before.
So talk to your friends, tell them why space flight is important, and even more importantly, tell your congressmen what you think. They are the ones that control the money going into the space program. If nobody lets them know that we want space flight to continue, we might lose it entirely.
Somebody compared it to censoring the Venus de Milo. Good enough comparison. If I got a cheap poster of the painting, hung it on my wall, and covered the "obscene" parts with construction paper, would you (1) Send the FBI after me, (2) Send the FBI after the manufacturer of the construction paper, or (3)Call me a prude and get on with your life? If you said (1) or (2), then you'll get along just fine with these directors. If not, then maybe you ought to rethink your position.
Telling people that the air is badly polluted in some places, or that we're using more oil than we should, etc. are just fine. However, when so-called environmentalists tell us that we're going to run out of oil by the year 2000 (Which was what they were claiming when I was in school), or that continents are going to sink under the ocean if we don't go back to horses and buggies, or whatever, they deserve to be ridiculed.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to them if they would tell the truth rather than spreading unfounded propaganda around.
I know it's hard to believe, but at some point, people will stop swallowing that enviro-claptrap if none of it ever comes true.
There's always going to be another generation of kids at the schools for them to feed that nonsense to. "Environmentalist" scare tactics aren't ever going to end.
I've read most of the Otherland series -- however, mostly because there are just enough good ideas to keep my attention. They're not good books by a long shot. My biggest complaint is that I haven't read about a more boring set of characters since Jane and Spot. If you want to find something interesting to read, I'd recommend you look elsewhere.
...they are just another alternative/rock station that plays 5-10 minutes of commercials every hour.
Either your estimate is low, or stations in your area don't play many commercials. I'd love to have a decent station in my area that was playing music 5/6 of the time.
At one point there was a jazz station here that played a good 50 minutes of music an hour. They didn't last too long, though -- I believe they've been replaced by yet another country station (of which we already had four or five.) I've pretty much given up on the radio by this point.
Having an opinion is enough to make anyone a critic. The effectiveness and value of a piece of fiction largely depends on the emotional response of the readers. Thus, in this case, a chorus of "it sucked" is a valid criticism of the work -- no particular justification is needed for one person's perception of the work. Now, more reasons than the emotional response are always nice, but not necessary.
You're assuming "big business" is the only entity that benefits from copyright. You're wrong there. Inividuals can, and do, own copyrights to their work. The fight against copyright is the fight against ALL artists and creators, not just "big business".
Well, they can't very well blame all the world's problems on Big Danny's Home Video and Big Cindy and her SUV...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but now imagine that anyone can get paper from the minor suppliers for free, faster and easier than getting it from the major supplier, not to mention that the paper is higher quality. What kind of idiot would go and buy low-grade, expensive paper from the major supplier?
Oh, and if you're going to go to the trouble to boldface a word, you might want to spell it correctly.
But I guess the hackneyed old tradition of U.S. bashing is still in vogue. Will it ever go out of style?
It's the price one pays for being on top.
Your problem is that you're trying to use a program that relies on eye-candy over the network. (At least, I think that's the idea. I can't imagine any other reason for the incredibly bizarre interface of XMMS.) Of course it's going to be slow without a fast link. How is a "new protocol" going to help?
This will essentially be the same as streaming audio from the network. (You might be able to cache some sounds locally, for improvement, but for playing music or whatever that's probably not much of an option.) No, the modem users probably won't find this useful. But those of us with a fast connection to the other computer can benefit greatly.
The ACs in this thread are correct. 40 bit encryption isn't going to keep anyone but a casual snooper out of your data.
I think that you're right about the potential profit ... however, it's really difficult to convince people to take on an enormous investment that probably won't pay off for decade or more. At least for the time being, I can't see private space flight going beyond shoving communications satellites into orbit.
Well, at 900 comments, probably nobody's going to see this, but if you do: this has the potential to destroy the space program. We live in a time when nobody considers space flight to be particularly important. The loss of the shuttle would be a perfect excuse to put NASA more on the back burner than it was before.
So talk to your friends, tell them why space flight is important, and even more importantly, tell your congressmen what you think. They are the ones that control the money going into the space program. If nobody lets them know that we want space flight to continue, we might lose it entirely.
Somebody compared it to censoring the Venus de Milo. Good enough comparison. If I got a cheap poster of the painting, hung it on my wall, and covered the "obscene" parts with construction paper, would you (1) Send the FBI after me, (2) Send the FBI after the manufacturer of the construction paper, or (3)Call me a prude and get on with your life? If you said (1) or (2), then you'll get along just fine with these directors. If not, then maybe you ought to rethink your position.
That's a public performance -- very different than viewing it privately in their own homes, and treated differently by copyright law.
Actually, if you are a good example of one, I would be led to believe that creationists utterly lack a sense of humor.
...is /. non-profit?
Non-profit, no. No-profit, you bet.
Telling people that the air is badly polluted in some places, or that we're using more oil than we should, etc. are just fine. However, when so-called environmentalists tell us that we're going to run out of oil by the year 2000 (Which was what they were claiming when I was in school), or that continents are going to sink under the ocean if we don't go back to horses and buggies, or whatever, they deserve to be ridiculed.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to them if they would tell the truth rather than spreading unfounded propaganda around.
What does that have to do with running out of oil in five years?
Last I checked, we do ban cars from the sidewalk.
I know it's hard to believe, but at some point, people will stop swallowing that enviro-claptrap if none of it ever comes true.
There's always going to be another generation of kids at the schools for them to feed that nonsense to. "Environmentalist" scare tactics aren't ever going to end.
What would you expect, coming from Canada?
Riding bikes on the sidewalk is already illegal. Of course, everyone ignores that. Presumably they would ignore the Segway ban as well.
I've read most of the Otherland series -- however, mostly because there are just enough good ideas to keep my attention. They're not good books by a long shot. My biggest complaint is that I haven't read about a more boring set of characters since Jane and Spot. If you want to find something interesting to read, I'd recommend you look elsewhere.
...they are just another alternative/rock station that plays 5-10 minutes of commercials every hour.
Either your estimate is low, or stations in your area don't play many commercials. I'd love to have a decent station in my area that was playing music 5/6 of the time.
At one point there was a jazz station here that played a good 50 minutes of music an hour. They didn't last too long, though -- I believe they've been replaced by yet another country station (of which we already had four or five.) I've pretty much given up on the radio by this point.
Oh wait, I'm not a pirate, because I've never illegally sold someone elses art ...
You're redefining the law there. Violations of copyright law are hardly restricted to the sale of someone else's work.
And I don't know why an agreement with the record companies would be relevant. You don't sign a paper that says, "I promise to follow ___ law."
real 1m49.162s
user 1m35.010s
sys 0m6.030s
Hah!
Having an opinion is enough to make anyone a critic. The effectiveness and value of a piece of fiction largely depends on the emotional response of the readers. Thus, in this case, a chorus of "it sucked" is a valid criticism of the work -- no particular justification is needed for one person's perception of the work. Now, more reasons than the emotional response are always nice, but not necessary.
Because anyone of any writing skill is entitled to an opinion?
...perhaps you are more interested in getting free stuff than in freedom.
Well, that would come as a shock.
Translation, in short words that even you can understand:
"You are a moron."
You're assuming "big business" is the only entity that benefits from copyright. You're wrong there. Inividuals can, and do, own copyrights to their work. The fight against copyright is the fight against ALL artists and creators, not just "big business".
Well, they can't very well blame all the world's problems on Big Danny's Home Video and Big Cindy and her SUV...