"...choose not to accept scientific data because it conflicts with their predefined beliefs: economic, political, religious, or otherwise."
I find it interesting that most of the comments are centered around religion. It seems that economic, political, or other reasons are overlooked. The main point of the article is that people want to filter whatever fact or theory being placed before them though their own belief system. It is my opinion that is to maintain one's ego. "I believe this and nothing can disprove that... your science is junk... etc." What you may think is a science may be what you have turned into your own religion.
That is like arguing that someone committed libel and not slander.
You may not be stealing the "property" but you are using it unauthorised and therefore stealing its use; that is the same as someone using your lawnmower without your permission.
Remember, the musicians, engineers, and writers sell it to make a living. They use distributers and stores to get it out, they also need to make a living. Using it without paying for it, (as paying for a copy is their only means for recovery of cost and the profit they make, which is the reason for doing it at all) is stealing the product from them without paying for it.
They could use more direct means to save money and cut middlemen, but they don't have to. That would be dictating who they could sell it to. Saying that I will get a bootleg MP3 instead of buying it because too many people make too much money on it is like going to Wal-Mart and shoplifting an apple because the apple growers are artifically raising prices and making a killing.
The spirit of what is going on is true, stealing is stealing.
Side note: Consider this, if you remove the incentives for the distributers, you may as well say that no musician should make more than this much money, heck, let's say they have to work for free. Let's ensalve them for our listening pleasure. Sure, that's the American way.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean their SOCKS went through the roof.
See, the Muppets worked for THE MAN!
The Muppets are bring me DOWN!
"...choose not to accept scientific data because it conflicts with their predefined beliefs: economic, political, religious, or otherwise."
I find it interesting that most of the comments are centered around religion. It seems that economic, political, or other reasons are overlooked. The main point of the article is that people want to filter whatever fact or theory being placed before them though their own belief system. It is my opinion that is to maintain one's ego. "I believe this and nothing can disprove that ... your science is junk ... etc." What you may think is a science may be what you have turned into your own religion.
But it will be *over nine thousand!!!*
In America, You get Adobe Icon. In Soviet Adobe, Icon gets you!
But will they stop placing that stupid icon on our desktop during every single update?!
I see your Point, but your point is moot.
That is like arguing that someone committed libel
and not slander.
You may not be stealing the "property" but you are using it unauthorised and therefore stealing its use; that is the same as someone using your lawnmower without your permission.
Remember, the musicians, engineers, and writers sell it to make a living. They use distributers and stores to get it out, they also need to make a living. Using it without paying for it, (as paying for a copy is their only means for recovery of cost and the profit they make, which is the reason for doing it at all) is stealing the product from them without paying for it.
They could use more direct means to save money and cut middlemen, but they don't have to. That would be dictating who they could sell it to. Saying that I will get a bootleg MP3 instead of buying it because too many people make too much money on it is like going to Wal-Mart and shoplifting an apple because the apple growers are artifically raising prices and making a killing.
The spirit of what is going on is true, stealing
is stealing.
Side note: Consider this, if you remove the incentives for the distributers, you may as well say that no musician should make more than this much money, heck, let's say they have to work for free. Let's ensalve them for our listening pleasure. Sure, that's the American way.