Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
So...band with me to help eliminate (for starters): The Patriot Act McCain-Feingold Social Security Medicare Medicaid Medical licensing Drivers licensing
"Major American companies get most of their business from the WORLD. It was convenient for Americans to enjoy record growth and prosperity when the world sent their huge investment dollars to the U.S., purchased tickets to watch Hollywood movies, and purchased American products. During these very same boom years, 99.9% of Americans completely ignored the plight of poor workers in the Third World who complained of illegal farm subsidies and globalization issues. Now, some of these same Third World countries have opened up their markets (India/China), educated themselves, adopted American-style marketing and are competing on a more level playing field. American workers...have to show why they should be paid more for a job that can be done equally well for a lower cost in India/China. If they can't show this, they will have to develop new industries and skills to adjust for their lack of advantage."
To: slashdot development crew From: more readers than you realize Re: expanded comment threshold settings
I sincerely propose that Slashdot implement a threshold setting so that readers could view comments in a more dynamic way. The proposal: let the reader chose the minimum and MAXIMUM settings for comments that they wish to see. For example, view all comments from +1 to +3.
The benefit I see in this is that while still eliminating the 'first posts' and goatse.cx posts that hover around 0 and -1, this will also spare readers the homogenous groupthink ('Microsoft sucks!') that is seen at the +5 posts.
Since when did it become 'ego' for a person to make a film the way he wants to make it?
But just so I understand, if the MPAA threatens an 'NC-17' rating for a film, that is covert censorship resulting in a movie being changed from the director's vision...but because YOU don't like something the director should cave in to whatever you want??
You know, it WAS a bummer that the Titanic sank and all those people died...kinda killed the romance; how about a re-write Mr. Cameron?
Which does not belong? Apple, Pear, Banana, Sledgehammer
Let's play again:
Which does not belong? Sun, IBM, Cisco, RED-freaking-HAT??
To your point: FREE SPEECH!! FREES SPEECH!! Stop trying to squash the perspective of a citizen of these United States who can speak his mind on any topic!! You oppressor! Maybe the guy should have encoded his idea-that-no-one-within-Microsoft-paid-any-attenti on-to as an mp3 and then you would be ok with its distribution.
I hate to say it, but there is going to be a huge hole in a lot of the Slashdot communities lives when the MS trial is over and these 'huge' conspiratorial headlines screaming across the news.
Hey Jon, terrible piece quite frankly but just FYI:
Maybe Marvel should keep from alienating millions of fans by NOT having the main character (Peter Parker, no less) wind up being a clone of the main character. Lucas has the right idea when it comes to clones: don't have a clone of your hero running around AS the hero for decades.
If you consider the Spiderman mythos simplistic and the Star Wars mythos complex, you are not comparing apples to apples....the story of Star Wars is far LESS complex than the 40 year comic book/multiverse/tv show/etc/ history of Spiderman. The concept may be relatively simple, so is Star Wars...you might even argue they are very similar in fact: with great power comes great responsibility. Peter Parker is the good side of that equation, while Anikin/Darth Vader (the main character of the 6 movies) is the other.
I love your massivley simplistic logic Jon, here is an idea for your next article: The sky is blue. My car is blue. My car is the sky.
Granted you are very upset over not getting a reliable hard drive, but that is a textbook example of how NOT to write a letter to a business looking for satisfaction.
I don't think that IBM is going to be driven to action by your threats to lawsuits (they will crush you should you ever attempt), your threats to disparage them (since you have just done it in front of a much more massive audience than you could ever speak to in person) and your unprofessional approach to the letter ('The 75GXP Series is garbage').
Publicizing the problem is definitely a good thing, but don't look for a speedy response to your complaint. If I had a pile of letters asking for compensation due to the drive, yours would definitely be moved to the bottom.
1. Artists producing songs for the express purpose of giving those songs to who pay for them, only to have those songs shared without permission with the rest of the world via Napster.
2. YOU, providing information to a company that you think will be kept in confidence only to have that company share said info with many other companies without permission.
actually, it's more like business taking a cool toy and pouring ungodly amounts of money into it making it even cooler. THEN, they pour so much money into it that they start to control it and hence the position we are heading towards now.
The internet hasn't become the ubiquitous force it has today by impressive technical innovation alone; more like companies stepping all over themselves to innovate and improve it...so they will have the upper hand in controlling it.
you would actually stop using Ebay over this, I would probably just ask "How long before you crawl under your bed with your laptop, writing to Slashdot to save you from the next eeeeeeeeeeeeevil marketing scheme that some corporation has come up with to *gasp* send you an e-mail!"
I can see that some people witin this community have already taken to the idea that the benefits of the internet are a god-given right to them now (along with the right to not only free speech but to have that speech heard, health-care and recreational drugs) and they should not be bothered with those things that keep the good deals and web sites like ebay flowing (advertising, customer targeting, etc.)
Wake up from your Star Trek view of reality; you just don't say "Brewski" and have one materialize in your hand with no other consequences; commerce drives the internet and when you get a good deal those people that gave you said deal will always have a way of extracting something valuable to them from you.
This guy isn't the same one who wanted to know if he could get the same salary for a much easier college degree, is it?
So let me list the groups of posters that have responded to this inane question:
1. Nationalistic posers with an inferiority complex
2. Yokels that have screwed their lives up beyond repair and are now mad at the US gov for not fixing it for them.
3. Napster users
4. Drug users
5. Very few intelligent and honest people
6. Me
You know, I hear a LOT of people where I live talk about how the US cannot compare to their original country of birth. Canada is better, England is better and yet they cannot answer me the simple question of why they currently reside in the US and not their homeland. They don't want to tell me that it is because they stand a better chance of making a successful life for themselves here then wherever they did come from.
These posts make me laugh, all of these people are saying "move here and this is what the government will give you or this is what you can do that is illegal in the US!" All except the opportunity to make yourself into the most successful person you can be.
And lastly, if you are even considering leaving the US for such a ridiculous reason as "Wah! My freedoms are being taken away!"...go. Go now and never look back. We are better off witout you.
ps. Props to Bill Clinton for making the United States even more hated and vilified by the world at large than before.
the whole point of this question is whether or not you can get the same job with a much easier degree?
Maybe you can, but I guarantee you won't be able to do as much with the opportunity if you go CIS. But in the larger scope of things I don't think you will ever amount to anything with that kind of attitude...
Still, his blatant campaign to give a few trillion dollars to those who need it least bothers me deeply.
You know what bothers me deeply? The thought that someone mandates who needs what. More than that, someone mandating that I shouldn't be able to keep something that I have earned just because someone else decides that I don't need it.
How is that diamond shape looking now, when we have one person determine "You need that, you can keep it. You don't need that, so hand it over."
I think we can all take from this is Mr. Brin is a democrat and is going to vote for Al Gore; his diatribe just some manifesto attempting to scare people into voting for Gore. If he really put any thought into this, can he explain to me how (in his opinion)rich people keeping their money and thereby elevating themselves above everyone else(a rather ridiculous assumption) any different than a group of people deciding what I can keep and what I cannot keep? Even worse, that I cannot inherit money because I have not earned it? Is it written anywhere that I have any sort of obligation to society above upholding and obeying the laws of this land? If my parents work hard and earn enough money to ensure me never having to work a day in my life I think that I am entitled to that just as you are entitled to write books for a living.
But in the spirit of his jibberish, I shall wield supreme executive power as he has and decree that he should be flogged for allowing that horrible Kevin Costner movie to be made. And you take other people to task for not being useful to society....
moderate wellspring's post up..most concise and accurate explanation I have seen.
This uy was not there to protest or assemble peacefully...he was there to get himself arrested and scream 'civil rights violation' to any camera in the vicinity even if there was none.
The only thing this guy accomplishes by being a whiny camera whore is to get all of the other protesters that are peaceful lumped into the same belligerent, to-be-ignored category. And he doesn't even get it. Not that I think that he is there to sincerely discuss the topics, he accomplished his mission.
But I didn't see anything from Katz suggesting that there was any collusion between record labels. But who is getting less than 10%? The super mega stars are getting more than that because they are established hitmakers who can get a contract anywhere. It would seem to me that the labels would be actively competing for upcoming talent that they can get for 10% or less so if/when they hit HUGE the labels get most of that money. Signing Metallica/Elton John/N'Sync would return less of a percentage to record companies b/c of labels offering sweeter deals to these bands to sign. Until there is any proof of anti-trust violations/collusion then I have to believe that the amount labels pay is market value.
But frankly I don't hear that many musicians complaining about their small cut, but it is a point of view I would be much more ready to embrace than that of people who think that they have a right to pirate music.
And not that I am saying that they don't deserve more
It took you that long to make the point: "music companies are attempting to protect their 'exorbitant' corporate profits and that's just wrong!"
Firstly, you calling it 'exorbidant' proves that you obviously don't understand the capitalistic society that has given you the ability to write books and articles for a living. They charge what they can get people to pay for music and accusing them of making 'too much' profit is one person's judgement call which is worthless. If everyone was as upset at high prices then they would organize a boycott of the RIAA just as they are for the shutdown of Napster. And don't tell me that they are using Napster as a form of boycott against buying music...you just said that half of Napster users are more likely to buy music didn't you?
Just write an article next time saying what you really mean: Music companies make too much money, and everyone should be able to pirate the music they want because music costs too much.
And I am still waiting for the free, web version of your new book...you know, the version I don't have to pay 15 dollars for b/c let's face it, that is just too much!
I think maybe what he was trying to say is code is not in and of itself a form of expression to be protected by a law. I can communicate an idea in French or English or Perl and it's the TRANSMISSION OF THE IDEA that is protected not the medium in which I transmit. Not that I am saying that the medium isn't protected, but the medium used is trivial. However to say that code is a form of expression that should be protected is diverting the issue from where it should be, which is that even though information COULD be used to break the law that doesn't mean I can't communicate it.
Firstly, I would like you to name a country MORE equipped than the US to handle the HGP: >The U.S., the world capital of technological >hubris and arrogance as well as the center of >global technological development... "Center of global technological development" seems to be a pretty important factor that you glossed over with one sentence. And what drives technological advancement may I ask? Capitalism maybe? These companies that intend to profit on this kind of research attempt to profit on every type of research that they undertake. The internet (and consequently your paycheck) is what it is because something developed was taken and launched into the stratosphere by people with dollar signs in their eyes. And who benefits? Humankind. For your rather typical anti-US stance, let me ask you: who cares what the rest of the world thinks of the US leading the charge in this project? We have the money, we have the scientists...and you said it yourself we lead the globe in technological advancement. Sometimes advancement takes us places we aren't ready to go...but your know what? To say "We aren't ready for that" is plain cowardly and goes against the inventive spirit that created our entire planet! I say thank God that the US is at the controls...
I prefer to take your theme and apply it to more of a societal perspective. You mention parents that use fertility drugs to bring 5,6,7+ children into this world and insinuate their irresponsibility for doing this. Well I am more interested in hearing your take on abortion. You thesis of "it [is] a sin to create things one doesn't take any responsibility for" is far more relevant when discussing a woman terminating a life she doesn't want instead of bringing them into the world and raising them even though some scientist says "that's too many'. "How dare you sport thus with life?" indeed.
Are you ignoring the Presidential totalitarian powers on display now from Billy Boy by him having his DoJ prosecute and attempt to break up the company largely responsible for the state of technological affairs we enjoy now at the behest of nothing but Microsoft COMPETITORS and the desire to get the government into every little corner of American life?
"Supreme Court will agree and call for an ammendment to the Constitution placing Big Business outside the American Judicial system entirely..." You really believe that or are you trying to add to the Slashdot hyperbole?
The Ferrari analogy was merely to point out that just because you can't afford something that it NOT a valid excuse for stealing it. Your point is saying that stealing music is not the same because a Ferrari is a single object while an mp3 is infinitely reproducible. Granted, but that was not my point. I was expressing disbelief at the assertion that the inability to afford something was being used to defend stealing.
But just to follow a train of thought...pretty dumb actually, but what if you COULD replicate a Ferrari? Would Joe Ferrari have a problem with you coming down to the dealership, scanning in the latest model, saying "computer, replicate" and driving away? Kinda makes the value of one drop, doesn't it?
Stealing bread because you can't afford it I will debate you on, but that argument cannot be used for music.
Did I just read someone say that a proper defense of Napster is you are POOR and can't afford cd's? Furthermore, when you buy cd's they are crappy?
There is a reason that doesn't get moderated up...what kind of explanation for theft is 'I can't afford to legally buy them'. Most people can't afford a Ferrari either...you don't see people heisting them. The reason you will find more often is that 'I just DON'T want to pay for them'; At least those people are being honest. Napster's (and gnutella's) primary purpose is to distribute copyrighted material between people who just don't want to pay for it. Sure some people say that they just want a preview before they buy a cd, or that they want rare stuff they can't find anywhere else. I don't think that those reasons represent the vast majority of the users.
Ultimately Napster will lose, shut down and that will be that OR they will win a long battle while other similar products (like gnutella) sneak past radars and become awesomely powerful. There are lots of baseless lawsuits in this country but this is not one of them...the artists have a legitimate claim. But it doesn't matter...the entire country is in such a rush to extend the web into everything that these type of programs will not be stopped. Plus you can't underestimate the desire for people to get free stuff.
Bottom line: Metallica et al are correct in their opinion but they can't stop the oncoming landslide of similar programs. They just have to deal with it.
I wonder if Jon really believes this stuff he writes, or if he does it just to ingratiate himself with the readers of Slashdot. Seriously, was there ANYTHING of any significance in that?
The Microsoft world is over, but why Jon? You seen afraid to come to the conclusion because it goes against the anti-Microsoft sentiment; the answer is that competition has ended the Microsoft world, for the betterment of Microsoft and everyone else. It wasn't this lawsuit, it wasn't the finding of fact and it wasn't this ruling...it was the same people out there who in the spirit of capitalism and free enterprise decided they wanted a piece of what Microsoft had and they went out and got it. Did they wait for this ruling? No, they went out and did something about it; they took pieces of what Microsoft had, making it better, making Microsoft reach to become better to keep up. You and the Naboo^H^H^H Microsoft form a symbiant circle: you push each other to do more, to do better. Whether the motivating factor is seething hatred or fear of losing marketplace dominance it doesn't matter.
If you think that the government and states are in this to stick up for the little people (5 billion dollar Netscape?) that Microsoft supposedly squashed think again. The government wants the $$$$; they go after tobacco, they go after guns, they go after Microsoft...unpopular companies with deep pockets.
So I guess just keep using your feelings for Microsoft to your advantage: work to knock every leg out from under Microsoft..that way everyone wins no matter if you are successful or not. And to those of you who just whine and ride the bandwagon here, ha ha!
From Roblimo:...sometimes (sigh) you just have to make do with hand-me-downs because they're all you're going to get for a while.
What kind of advocacy is THAT? Up until now the Slashdot group has been illicitly hypocritical (Amazon links and Amazon boycotts, Windows problems are bugs to laugh at while Linux problems are 'problems to be solved', information is free but buy Katz's information for $19.95) but coming right out saying the above?? "Well, we here at Slashdot love advocating free this and Open Source that, deriding all attempts at software companies to close source this or patent that...but when it comes to a comfort such as listening to streaming audio: "Well, what can you do...I guess we have to support RealAudio because we just HAVE to listen to live radio feeds! We like everything free, but listening to WLNX 96.1FM is more important?"
and stop preaching to us. I don't see you screaming about the 10 Commandments being 'filtered' out of schools by the government, what is the difference between that and this?
It's not the library's job to provide unlimited, unfiltered access to every bit of information that could possibly reside in the world. If "The Onion" gets blocked alongside hardcore porn sites there is no big loss...I am sure there are lots of others computers that can get the Onion.
If I go to city hall and start shouting the lyrics to the latest Eminem song, they will probably remove me from the premises. Have my contitional rights for free speech been violated? No, they just have the right to not allow me to exercise them there.
Slashdot Mirror
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
So...band with me to help eliminate (for starters):
The Patriot Act
McCain-Feingold
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Medical licensing
Drivers licensing
Wait...what do you mean it's not the same thing?
"Major American companies get most of their business from the WORLD. It was convenient for Americans to enjoy record growth and prosperity when the world sent their huge investment dollars to the U.S., purchased tickets to watch Hollywood movies, and purchased American products. During these very same boom years, 99.9% of Americans completely ignored the plight of poor workers in the Third World who complained of illegal farm subsidies and globalization issues. Now, some of these same Third World countries have opened up their markets (India/China), educated themselves, adopted American-style marketing and are competing on a more level playing field. American workers...have to show why they should be paid more for a job that can be done equally well for a lower cost in India/China. If they can't show this, they will have to develop new industries and skills to adjust for their lack of advantage."
To: slashdot development crew
From: more readers than you realize
Re: expanded comment threshold settings
I sincerely propose that Slashdot implement a threshold setting so that readers could view comments in a more dynamic way. The proposal: let the reader chose the minimum and MAXIMUM settings for comments that they wish to see. For example, view all comments from +1 to +3.
The benefit I see in this is that while still eliminating the 'first posts' and goatse.cx posts that hover around 0 and -1, this will also spare readers the homogenous groupthink ('Microsoft sucks!') that is seen at the +5 posts.
Please take this post will all sincerity.
Thank you.
Since when did it become 'ego' for a person to make a film the way he wants to make it?
But just so I understand, if the MPAA threatens an 'NC-17' rating for a film, that is covert censorship resulting in a movie being changed from the director's vision...but because YOU don't like something the director should cave in to whatever you want??
You know, it WAS a bummer that the Titanic sank and all those people died...kinda killed the romance; how about a re-write Mr. Cameron?
Which does not belong?
i on-to as an mp3 and then you would be ok with its distribution.
Apple, Pear, Banana, Sledgehammer
Let's play again:
Which does not belong?
Sun, IBM, Cisco, RED-freaking-HAT??
To your point: FREE SPEECH!! FREES SPEECH!! Stop trying to squash the perspective of a citizen of these United States who can speak his mind on any topic!! You oppressor! Maybe the guy should have encoded his idea-that-no-one-within-Microsoft-paid-any-attent
I hate to say it, but there is going to be a huge hole in a lot of the Slashdot communities lives when the MS trial is over and these 'huge' conspiratorial headlines screaming across the news.
Hey Jon, terrible piece quite frankly but just FYI:
Maybe Marvel should keep from alienating millions of fans by NOT having the main character (Peter Parker, no less) wind up being a clone of the main character. Lucas has the right idea when it comes to clones: don't have a clone of your hero running around AS the hero for decades.
If you consider the Spiderman mythos simplistic and the Star Wars mythos complex, you are not comparing apples to apples....the story of Star Wars is far LESS complex than the 40 year comic book/multiverse/tv show/etc/ history of Spiderman. The concept may be relatively simple, so is Star Wars...you might even argue they are very similar in fact: with great power comes great responsibility. Peter Parker is the good side of that equation, while Anikin/Darth Vader (the main character of the 6 movies) is the other.
I love your massivley simplistic logic Jon, here is an idea for your next article:
The sky is blue.
My car is blue.
My car is the sky.
Run with it.
Granted you are very upset over not getting a reliable hard drive, but that is a textbook example of how NOT to write a letter to a business looking for satisfaction.
I don't think that IBM is going to be driven to action by your threats to lawsuits (they will crush you should you ever attempt), your threats to disparage them (since you have just done it in front of a much more massive audience than you could ever speak to in person) and your unprofessional approach to the letter ('The 75GXP Series is garbage').
Publicizing the problem is definitely a good thing, but don't look for a speedy response to your complaint. If I had a pile of letters asking for compensation due to the drive, yours would definitely be moved to the bottom.
1. Artists producing songs for the express purpose of giving those songs to who pay for them, only to have those songs shared without permission with the rest of the world via Napster.
2. YOU, providing information to a company that you think will be kept in confidence only to have that company share said info with many other companies without permission.
actually, it's more like business taking a cool toy and pouring ungodly amounts of money into it making it even cooler. THEN, they pour so much money into it that they start to control it and hence the position we are heading towards now.
The internet hasn't become the ubiquitous force it has today by impressive technical innovation alone; more like companies stepping all over themselves to innovate and improve it...so they will have the upper hand in controlling it.
you would actually stop using Ebay over this, I would probably just ask "How long before you crawl under your bed with your laptop, writing to Slashdot to save you from the next eeeeeeeeeeeeevil marketing scheme that some corporation has come up with to *gasp* send you an e-mail!"
I can see that some people witin this community have already taken to the idea that the benefits of the internet are a god-given right to them now (along with the right to not only free speech but to have that speech heard, health-care and recreational drugs) and they should not be bothered with those things that keep the good deals and web sites like ebay flowing (advertising, customer targeting, etc.)
Wake up from your Star Trek view of reality; you just don't say "Brewski" and have one materialize in your hand with no other consequences; commerce drives the internet and when you get a good deal those people that gave you said deal will always have a way of extracting something valuable to them from you.
This guy isn't the same one who wanted to know if he could get the same salary for a much easier college degree, is it?
So let me list the groups of posters that have responded to this inane question:
1. Nationalistic posers with an inferiority complex
2. Yokels that have screwed their lives up beyond repair and are now mad at the US gov for not fixing it for them.
3. Napster users
4. Drug users
5. Very few intelligent and honest people
6. Me
You know, I hear a LOT of people where I live talk about how the US cannot compare to their original country of birth. Canada is better, England is better and yet they cannot answer me the simple question of why they currently reside in the US and not their homeland. They don't want to tell me that it is because they stand a better chance of making a successful life for themselves here then wherever they did come from.
These posts make me laugh, all of these people are saying "move here and this is what the government will give you or this is what you can do that is illegal in the US!" All except the opportunity to make yourself into the most successful person you can be.
And lastly, if you are even considering leaving the US for such a ridiculous reason as "Wah! My freedoms are being taken away!"...go. Go now and never look back. We are better off witout you.
ps. Props to Bill Clinton for making the United States even more hated and vilified by the world at large than before.
the whole point of this question is whether or not you can get the same job with a much easier degree?
Maybe you can, but I guarantee you won't be able to do as much with the opportunity if you go CIS. But in the larger scope of things I don't think you will ever amount to anything with that kind of attitude...
Still, his blatant campaign to give a few trillion dollars to those who need it least bothers me deeply.
You know what bothers me deeply? The thought that someone mandates who needs what. More than that, someone mandating that I shouldn't be able to keep something that I have earned just because someone else decides that I don't need it.
How is that diamond shape looking now, when we have one person determine "You need that, you can keep it. You don't need that, so hand it over."
I think we can all take from this is Mr. Brin is a democrat and is going to vote for Al Gore; his diatribe just some manifesto attempting to scare people into voting for Gore. If he really put any thought into this, can he explain to me how (in his opinion)rich people keeping their money and thereby elevating themselves above everyone else(a rather ridiculous assumption) any different than a group of people deciding what I can keep and what I cannot keep? Even worse, that I cannot inherit money because I have not earned it? Is it written anywhere that I have any sort of obligation to society above upholding and obeying the laws of this land? If my parents work hard and earn enough money to ensure me never having to work a day in my life I think that I am entitled to that just as you are entitled to write books for a living.
But in the spirit of his jibberish, I shall wield supreme executive power as he has and decree that he should be flogged for allowing that horrible Kevin Costner movie to be made. And you take other people to task for not being useful to society....
moderate wellspring's post up..most concise and accurate explanation I have seen.
This uy was not there to protest or assemble peacefully...he was there to get himself arrested and scream 'civil rights violation' to any camera in the vicinity even if there was none.
The only thing this guy accomplishes by being a whiny camera whore is to get all of the other protesters that are peaceful lumped into the same belligerent, to-be-ignored category. And he doesn't even get it. Not that I think that he is there to sincerely discuss the topics, he accomplished his mission.
But I didn't see anything from Katz suggesting that there was any collusion between record labels. But who is getting less than 10%? The super mega stars are getting more than that because they are established hitmakers who can get a contract anywhere. It would seem to me that the labels would be actively competing for upcoming talent that they can get for 10% or less so if/when they hit HUGE the labels get most of that money. Signing Metallica/Elton John/N'Sync would return less of a percentage to record companies b/c of labels offering sweeter deals to these bands to sign. Until there is any proof of anti-trust violations/collusion then I have to believe that the amount labels pay is market value.
But frankly I don't hear that many musicians complaining about their small cut, but it is a point of view I would be much more ready to embrace than that of people who think that they have a right to pirate music.
And not that I am saying that they don't deserve more
It took you that long to make the point: "music companies are attempting to protect their 'exorbitant' corporate profits and that's just wrong!"
Firstly, you calling it 'exorbidant' proves that you obviously don't understand the capitalistic society that has given you the ability to write books and articles for a living. They charge what they can get people to pay for music and accusing them of making 'too much' profit is one person's judgement call which is worthless. If everyone was as upset at high prices then they would organize a boycott of the RIAA just as they are for the shutdown of Napster. And don't tell me that they are using Napster as a form of boycott against buying music...you just said that half of Napster users are more likely to buy music didn't you?
Just write an article next time saying what you really mean: Music companies make too much money, and everyone should be able to pirate the music they want because music costs too much.
And I am still waiting for the free, web version of your new book...you know, the version I don't have to pay 15 dollars for b/c let's face it, that is just too much!
I think maybe what he was trying to say is code is not in and of itself a form of expression to be protected by a law. I can communicate an idea in French or English or Perl and it's the TRANSMISSION OF THE IDEA that is protected not the medium in which I transmit. Not that I am saying that the medium isn't protected, but the medium used is trivial. However to say that code is a form of expression that should be protected is diverting the issue from where it should be, which is that even though information COULD be used to break the law that doesn't mean I can't communicate it.
Firstly, I would like you to name a country MORE equipped than the US to handle the HGP:
>The U.S., the world capital of technological >hubris and arrogance as well as the center of >global technological development...
"Center of global technological development" seems to be a pretty important factor that you glossed over with one sentence. And what drives technological advancement may I ask? Capitalism maybe? These companies that intend to profit on this kind of research attempt to profit on every type of research that they undertake. The internet (and consequently your paycheck) is what it is because something developed was taken and launched into the stratosphere by people with dollar signs in their eyes. And who benefits? Humankind. For your rather typical anti-US stance, let me ask you: who cares what the rest of the world thinks of the US leading the charge in this project? We have the money, we have the scientists...and you said it yourself we lead the globe in technological advancement. Sometimes advancement takes us places we aren't ready to go...but your know what? To say "We aren't ready for that" is plain cowardly and goes against the inventive spirit that created our entire planet! I say thank God that the US is at the controls...
I prefer to take your theme and apply it to more of a societal perspective. You mention parents that use fertility drugs to bring 5,6,7+ children into this world and insinuate their irresponsibility for doing this. Well I am more interested in hearing your take on abortion. You thesis of "it [is] a sin to create things one doesn't take any responsibility for" is far more relevant when discussing a woman terminating a life she doesn't want instead of bringing them into the world and raising them even though some scientist says "that's too many'. "How dare you sport thus with life?" indeed.
ok ok, i get it. zealotry in action, so what chance do i have making a reasoned argument?
maim kill and destroy. and i can see you saying that with a straight face.
Are you ignoring the Presidential totalitarian powers on display now from Billy Boy by him having his DoJ prosecute and attempt to break up the company largely responsible for the state of technological affairs we enjoy now at the behest of nothing but Microsoft COMPETITORS and the desire to get the government into every little corner of American life?
Ditto cigarette companies.
Ditto gun makers.
Ditto pharmaceutical companies.
"Supreme Court will agree and call for an ammendment to the Constitution placing Big Business outside the American Judicial system entirely..."
You really believe that or are you trying to add to the Slashdot hyperbole?
You forgot BUPKUS:)
The Ferrari analogy was merely to point out that just because you can't afford something that it NOT a valid excuse for stealing it. Your point is saying that stealing music is not the same because a Ferrari is a single object while an mp3 is infinitely reproducible. Granted, but that was not my point. I was expressing disbelief at the assertion that the inability to afford something was being used to defend stealing.
But just to follow a train of thought...pretty dumb actually, but what if you COULD replicate a Ferrari? Would Joe Ferrari have a problem with you coming down to the dealership, scanning in the latest model, saying "computer, replicate" and driving away? Kinda makes the value of one drop, doesn't it?
Stealing bread because you can't afford it I will debate you on, but that argument cannot be used for music.
(PS: read the user bio:))
Did I just read someone say that a proper defense of Napster is you are POOR and can't afford cd's? Furthermore, when you buy cd's they are crappy?
There is a reason that doesn't get moderated up...what kind of explanation for theft is 'I can't afford to legally buy them'. Most people can't afford a Ferrari either...you don't see people heisting them. The reason you will find more often is that 'I just DON'T want to pay for them'; At least those people are being honest. Napster's (and gnutella's) primary purpose is to distribute copyrighted material between people who just don't want to pay for it. Sure some people say that they just want a preview before they buy a cd, or that they want rare stuff they can't find anywhere else. I don't think that those reasons represent the vast majority of the users.
Ultimately Napster will lose, shut down and that will be that OR they will win a long battle while other similar products (like gnutella) sneak past radars and become awesomely powerful. There are lots of baseless lawsuits in this country but this is not one of them...the artists have a legitimate claim. But it doesn't matter...the entire country is in such a rush to extend the web into everything that these type of programs will not be stopped. Plus you can't underestimate the desire for people to get free stuff.
Bottom line: Metallica et al are correct in their opinion but they can't stop the oncoming landslide of similar programs. They just have to deal with it.
I wonder if Jon really believes this stuff he writes, or if he does it just to ingratiate himself with the readers of Slashdot. Seriously, was there ANYTHING of any significance in that?
The Microsoft world is over, but why Jon? You seen afraid to come to the conclusion because it goes against the anti-Microsoft sentiment; the answer is that competition has ended the Microsoft world, for the betterment of Microsoft and everyone else. It wasn't this lawsuit, it wasn't the finding of fact and it wasn't this ruling...it was the same people out there who in the spirit of capitalism and free enterprise decided they wanted a piece of what Microsoft had and they went out and got it. Did they wait for this ruling? No, they went out and did something about it; they took pieces of what Microsoft had, making it better, making Microsoft reach to become better to keep up. You and the Naboo^H^H^H Microsoft form a symbiant circle: you push each other to do more, to do better. Whether the motivating factor is seething hatred or fear of losing marketplace dominance it doesn't matter.
If you think that the government and states are in this to stick up for the little people (5 billion dollar Netscape?) that Microsoft supposedly squashed think again. The government wants the $$$$; they go after tobacco, they go after guns, they go after Microsoft...unpopular companies with deep pockets.
So I guess just keep using your feelings for Microsoft to your advantage: work to knock every leg out from under Microsoft..that way everyone wins no matter if you are successful or not. And to those of you who just whine and ride the bandwagon here, ha ha!
From Roblimo: ...sometimes (sigh) you just have to make do with hand-me-downs because they're all you're going to get for a while.
What kind of advocacy is THAT? Up until now the Slashdot group has been illicitly hypocritical (Amazon links and Amazon boycotts, Windows problems are bugs to laugh at while Linux problems are 'problems to be solved', information is free but buy Katz's information for $19.95) but coming right out saying the above?? "Well, we here at Slashdot love advocating free this and Open Source that, deriding all attempts at software companies to close source this or patent that...but when it comes to a comfort such as listening to streaming audio: "Well, what can you do...I guess we have to support RealAudio because we just HAVE to listen to live radio feeds! We like everything free, but listening to WLNX 96.1FM is more important?"
Nice to see the conviction, guys...
and stop preaching to us. I don't see you screaming about the 10 Commandments being 'filtered' out of schools by the government, what is the difference between that and this?
It's not the library's job to provide unlimited, unfiltered access to every bit of information that could possibly reside in the world. If "The Onion" gets blocked alongside hardcore porn sites there is no big loss...I am sure there are lots of others computers that can get the Onion.
If I go to city hall and start shouting the lyrics to the latest Eminem song, they will probably remove me from the premises. Have my contitional rights for free speech been violated? No, they just have the right to not allow me to exercise them there.