Nothing in this article indicates any sort of traffic monitoring on the part of the ISPs. It only sounds like a standardized way to keep track of the C&D letters they've been sending out for years.
Don't get me wrong, this is bad too as there's no accountability for sending faulty C&D letters, and I doubt there's going to be much of an appeals process. But it's bad in a different way than deep packet inspection is.
RIAA, MPAA, etc, will connect to bittorrent trackers that share files they have copyright on. They will see who is seeding, note their IP, contact their ISP, and begin this process.
You're missing the point. You can connect all the peripherals you want, when you want them
But you're still hobbled by a toy UI. Real work requires crossreferencing data, literature, documentation, and your own notes. This isn't feasible on a tablet.
That seems to be the model people want.
I'm not surprised that people want tablets. They're toys. People like toys.
Thesis writing is a fair example of doing real work on a PC. You might be correct in that doing real work with a PC is a niche. But that doesn't help anyone argue that tablets are anything but toys.
Somehow I don't think you'd be quite as appalled if he wore an American flag. Can you at least admit that if the principle wasn't asking people to invert tacky patriotic clothing he shouldn't have been asking people to invert tacky expressions of dissent?
Police State refers to the centralized tracking of every UK citizens refueling behavior in order to inconvenience a few scofflaws. Uninsured driving is bad. Big Brother watching your every move is worse.
If anyone in the government actually cared about the welfare of these women, they'd be pushing for legalized and regulated prostitution. This is nothing but a bunch of boys feeling big by playing with guns Both sides are reprehensible.
I've already said this - and maybe even to you - but I'll repeat. Nobody cares what you do with your own property.
That's funny, because lots of people have been sued, and some even jailed for simply using their own property.
However, when you're copying and *redistributing* you become a competitor to the original author and diluting the value of his works
So? None of this has any bearing on copies made in the privacy of my own home, and freely shared between consenting individuals.
If you wish to assert some sort of authors right, you're going to have to violate my property rights, my privacy rights, and my right to free speech. And what do I get out of it, some shiny baubles? No deal.
You make a decent game and sell it for ten bucks a copy. Somebody else takes it, copies it, and redistributes it for free. Who exactly is going to spend that ten bucks on it anymore?
Lots of people spend money on free. Have you not been paying attention?
How exactly are you going to afford to write games for a living? Can you show me a way for games to be given away for free and still enable the people who work on them to eat?
Why is this my problem? If your business model depends on me not exercising my property rights, it's a bad business model.
The only ability (definitely not rights) that are restricted by the GPL is the ability to remove the rights of your end users. That's like saying laws against assault remove your right to punch people in the face. Technically true, but most people value the right to be free from face punching more.
The GPL grants rights to everyone. Copyright takes rights away from everyone. That's the difference. The GPL currently relies on copyright as a legal hack to ensure those rights, but really those rights should be part of consumer protection laws, and copyright should be done away with entirely.
I'm entitled to do whatever I want with my property. Burn it, chop it up, or copy it and give it away, whatever. The ones who are rationalizing are the ones who think that their imaginary property rights are more important than my physical property rights.
The argument seems to boil down to, "I want it, so I should be able to have it at whatever price I'm willing to pay. If they won't give it to me at that price, that's their problem, not mine."
That's not it at all. It's more like, "I want it, and this nice guy over here is willing to give it to me for free. Thank you."
The real question is what entitles a third party to interfere with that free consensual exchange of information. That is the complete non-sequitur.
That's not a sustainable attitude. It ends with people deciding that they really shouldn't have to pay at all (look around Slashdot, the attitude's already common here), at which point the top quality, expensive-to-produce content just...stops
Which reality shows doesn't happen at all. The piracy rate has no impact on peoples entertainment budget. And even if it did, so what? If people aren't willing to pay for something voluntarily, then they must not value it that much. This is a self limiting problem.
Oh no not at all. But they should take lessons annually from people who are researchers constantly going through the myriad of pharmacological data coming out every year. And definitely not industry reps!
You are fairly stupid. Are you unaware that half of drug R&D is publically funded? Do you think the industry doesn't publish it's research? There's no reason a continuing education program couldn't access the same data the FDA uses and provide objective information to MDs.
As for the continuing medical education that exists, it's laughable. If you want proof, try this. Next time you're prescribed a drug, any drug, ask your doctor how it works.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing in this article indicates any sort of traffic monitoring on the part of the ISPs. It only sounds like a standardized way to keep track of the C&D letters they've been sending out for years.
Don't get me wrong, this is bad too as there's no accountability for sending faulty C&D letters, and I doubt there's going to be much of an appeals process. But it's bad in a different way than deep packet inspection is.
RIAA, MPAA, etc, will connect to bittorrent trackers that share files they have copyright on. They will see who is seeding, note their IP, contact their ISP, and begin this process.
How are those two things at all similar?
They are not at all similar. Just like copying and theft are not at all similar.
They absolutely are not legal under the 4th amendment. This is just further proof of the illegitimacy of the US government.
You're missing the point. You can connect all the peripherals you want, when you want them
But you're still hobbled by a toy UI. Real work requires crossreferencing data, literature, documentation, and your own notes. This isn't feasible on a tablet.
That seems to be the model people want.
I'm not surprised that people want tablets. They're toys. People like toys.
Thesis writing is a fair example of doing real work on a PC. You might be correct in that doing real work with a PC is a niche. But that doesn't help anyone argue that tablets are anything but toys.
Somehow I don't think you'd be quite as appalled if he wore an American flag. Can you at least admit that if the principle wasn't asking people to invert tacky patriotic clothing he shouldn't have been asking people to invert tacky expressions of dissent?
Eventually the processor, the display, and everything else will be "good enough" for anything anybody wants to use a tablet for.
You're forgetting input devices and UI. Go ahead, try and write a thesis on your iPad. You'll see why PCs will always be superior pretty quickly.
But oh, you'll make me turn my marijuana-legalization-themed shirt inside out at my sister's public high school graduation under threat of arrest.
Seriously? You did that? Rights are like muscles, they get weak if they're not exercised. You need to flex your rights more.
Police State refers to the centralized tracking of every UK citizens refueling behavior in order to inconvenience a few scofflaws. Uninsured driving is bad. Big Brother watching your every move is worse.
If anyone in the government actually cared about the welfare of these women, they'd be pushing for legalized and regulated prostitution. This is nothing but a bunch of boys feeling big by playing with guns Both sides are reprehensible.
What if you want to electrocute an elephant?
Maybe he found pi^2 ways to do it, and rounded up.
I've already said this - and maybe even to you - but I'll repeat. Nobody cares what you do with your own property.
That's funny, because lots of people have been sued, and some even jailed for simply using their own property.
However, when you're copying and *redistributing* you become a competitor to the original author and diluting the value of his works
So? None of this has any bearing on copies made in the privacy of my own home, and freely shared between consenting individuals.
If you wish to assert some sort of authors right, you're going to have to violate my property rights, my privacy rights, and my right to free speech. And what do I get out of it, some shiny baubles? No deal.
You make a decent game and sell it for ten bucks a copy. Somebody else takes it, copies it, and redistributes it for free. Who exactly is going to spend that ten bucks on it anymore?
Lots of people spend money on free. Have you not been paying attention?
How exactly are you going to afford to write games for a living? Can you show me a way for games to be given away for free and still enable the people who work on them to eat?
Why is this my problem? If your business model depends on me not exercising my property rights, it's a bad business model.
The only ability (definitely not rights) that are restricted by the GPL is the ability to remove the rights of your end users. That's like saying laws against assault remove your right to punch people in the face. Technically true, but most people value the right to be free from face punching more.
The GPL grants rights to everyone. Copyright takes rights away from everyone. That's the difference. The GPL currently relies on copyright as a legal hack to ensure those rights, but really those rights should be part of consumer protection laws, and copyright should be done away with entirely.
Meth is actually a far more efficiacious decongestant than pseudoephedrine ever was.
The idea that you can sell your product and retain control over what people do with it. That's BS.
There's another Scott Adams who just about invented the text adventure.
I'm entitled to do whatever I want with my property. Burn it, chop it up, or copy it and give it away, whatever. The ones who are rationalizing are the ones who think that their imaginary property rights are more important than my physical property rights.
The argument seems to boil down to, "I want it, so I should be able to have it at whatever price I'm willing to pay. If they won't give it to me at that price, that's their problem, not mine."
That's not it at all. It's more like, "I want it, and this nice guy over here is willing to give it to me for free. Thank you."
The real question is what entitles a third party to interfere with that free consensual exchange of information. That is the complete non-sequitur.
That's not a sustainable attitude. It ends with people deciding that they really shouldn't have to pay at all (look around Slashdot, the attitude's already common here), at which point the top quality, expensive-to-produce content just ...stops
Which reality shows doesn't happen at all. The piracy rate has no impact on peoples entertainment budget. And even if it did, so what? If people aren't willing to pay for something voluntarily, then they must not value it that much. This is a self limiting problem.
Which side had 6 years of uncontested control?
There is only one side, and it has has uncontested control for at least 30 years now.
The "no true email client" fallacy I see. Whatever it is that Exchange does, I don't want it.
Oh no not at all. But they should take lessons annually from people who are researchers constantly going through the myriad of pharmacological data coming out every year. And definitely not industry reps!
You are fairly stupid. Are you unaware that half of drug R&D is publically funded? Do you think the industry doesn't publish it's research? There's no reason a continuing education program couldn't access the same data the FDA uses and provide objective information to MDs.
As for the continuing medical education that exists, it's laughable. If you want proof, try this. Next time you're prescribed a drug, any drug, ask your doctor how it works.
Why shouldn't Firefox support every codec supported by the system? It shouldn't be much code.