No no, you got it right. The current owners of Facebook are trying to get as much money out of future shareholders as they can. After the IPO is over they might start thinking about making money for them, but at the moment it's all about inflating the percieved value of the company.
So you see nothing wrong with people going to an action movie and shooting people? Since in your world there is no difference between a movie and 'live action'.
Aren't politics morally harmful? They teach children that it's not just OK to lie, It's mandatory if you want to do well in life. And what about religions? Just about every religion teaches that the followers of all OTHER religions will be sent to some form of hell, often with pictures to illustrate what they can look forward too. How is that somehow OK for children too see while sex is not?
It probably wouldn't generate as much controversy as porn. You see, people can quite easily turn away from something they DON'T want too see. It becomes much harder to ignore something they want to see, but are still trying to convince themselves is 'wrong'.
What makes porn so much different from other subjects? You can find people that 'don't wish too see' material about just about anything.
evolution - check global warming - check any religion they don't follow - check other sexual orientations - check other races - check history - check other political parties - check,.....
If people don't wish to see something, there is nothing keeping them from turning away. They shouldn't demand that the library ban something just because they lack the willpower to ignore something they are clearly interested in.
There is a better analogy. Right now, people are proud of their expensive sports cars because they are rare. What if everyone could have a Ferrari? The original owners don't loose anything tangible. Their car isn't damaged like when it's keyed, and they aren't deprived of it's use for a period of time like in the case of a joyride. All they lose is the feeling of exclusivity.
I wonder if the FBI will start an investigation. This seems to be quite a public case of copyright infringement. It could even be called a conspiracy!
Then they could freeze all his assets, as well as those of his campaign. Just until the trial is over of course. I'm sure keeping him in jail for a few months won't cause any permanent damage to his career.
You're driving up the hill in your car, which you use to deliver parcels. The police drag you out and confiscate a parcel that they say proves you are involved in drug trafficing. They then leave the car alone without using the parking brake. The car rolls downhill, crashes into a tree and bursts into flame, destroying the parcels left inside.
Can megaupload claim that FBI let evidence get destroyed?
Also why is this permitted? Why can people be punished without being found guilty first? And why is this happening in just this case? Why isn't every corporation that comes under investigation shut down?
Suspected of insider trading? All your assets are frozen. You can't honor either shot-sells or repay loans, so your company is destroyed before a trial even begins. It does not matter if you're found innocent, all you can do is file for bankrupcy.
It's kind of like the police busting into you apartment and finding a body. They remove the body, but don't look at anything else. Then arrest you and prevent you from paying your rent.
As a result, your landlord throws everything out, cleans the apartment and re-rents it.
The only problem with that is there could have been tracks that the real murderer left there, a suicide note or a confession written by someone else.
What about a game is not physical? It's just a collection of bumps and pits on a CD/DVD. Just like a car is just a collection atoms arranged in a certain way. Both are purely physical (there is no 'spiritual' component. It's just that one is easily visible to the naked eye, while the other requires a special device to read.
On the other hand pirate games don't automatically download broken patches, save games don't randomly disappear and they sometimes get patched sooner and better then the 'official' versions.
Why not turn to your friendly neighborhood swashbucklers? I'm sure they've already figured out a way to transfer the DLC without also needing to sell the EA account.
When was the last time you had to agree to 'terms' when purchasing your game? You don't get to learn about them until you get home and open the box, or even until you finish installing it.
Why should those terms be enforced? Why should their violation be considered copyright infringement? You bought a copy, now you should be able to do with it whatever you want. Including reselling it.
Not really. With cash (gold) you can only buy tanks that you CAN'T get with regular credits. But at the same time, having a lot of gold won't enable you to buy your way to the top tier. You'll still have to grind your way there, it will just be easier since you'll be getting better rewards from your battles.
Slashdot Mirror
No no, you got it right. The current owners of Facebook are trying to get as much money out of future shareholders as they can. After the IPO is over they might start thinking about making money for them, but at the moment it's all about inflating the percieved value of the company.
If it's a library then they probably don't have any speakers. Perhaps headphones.
So you see nothing wrong with people going to an action movie and shooting people? Since in your world there is no difference between a movie and 'live action'.
Aren't politics morally harmful? They teach children that it's not just OK to lie, It's mandatory if you want to do well in life. And what about religions? Just about every religion teaches that the followers of all OTHER religions will be sent to some form of hell, often with pictures to illustrate what they can look forward too. How is that somehow OK for children too see while sex is not?
Set up a nativity scene? Who said anything about setting anything up? I don't support people having public sex in the library.
And as you said, things seen can't be unseen. Won't someone think of the children, making them watch statues of a man being tortured to death?
Unlike a picture, sound can bounce around quite well. So turning away from the source won't suddenly make you unable to hear it.
It probably wouldn't generate as much controversy as porn. You see, people can quite easily turn away from something they DON'T want too see. It becomes much harder to ignore something they want to see, but are still trying to convince themselves is 'wrong'.
What makes porn so much different from other subjects? You can find people that 'don't wish too see' material about just about anything.
evolution - check ,.....
global warming - check
any religion they don't follow - check
other sexual orientations - check
other races - check
history - check
other political parties - check
If people don't wish to see something, there is nothing keeping them from turning away. They shouldn't demand that the library ban something just because they lack the willpower to ignore something they are clearly interested in.
I've always found religion to be offensive. Can we ban all religion from public buildings?
It's easier to ignore porn (just don't look at the screen), then it is to ignore a person yelling 1m away from you.
If I was selling another person's software without permission then I think they would have every right to sue me for every penny I owned.
There is a better analogy. Right now, people are proud of their expensive sports cars because they are rare. What if everyone could have a Ferrari? The original owners don't loose anything tangible. Their car isn't damaged like when it's keyed, and they aren't deprived of it's use for a period of time like in the case of a joyride. All they lose is the feeling of exclusivity.
They sell the shares after a week, before the average sucker notices what's going on.
Isn't that the normal way to earn money from the stock market? Dividends are unlikely to even cover inflation.
I wonder if the FBI will start an investigation. This seems to be quite a public case of copyright infringement. It could even be called a conspiracy!
Then they could freeze all his assets, as well as those of his campaign. Just until the trial is over of course. I'm sure keeping him in jail for a few months won't cause any permanent damage to his career.
You're driving up the hill in your car, which you use to deliver parcels. The police drag you out and confiscate a parcel that they say proves you are involved in drug trafficing. They then leave the car alone without using the parking brake. The car rolls downhill, crashes into a tree and bursts into flame, destroying the parcels left inside.
Can megaupload claim that FBI let evidence get destroyed?
Also why is this permitted? Why can people be punished without being found guilty first? And why is this happening in just this case? Why isn't every corporation that comes under investigation shut down?
Suspected of insider trading? All your assets are frozen. You can't honor either shot-sells or repay loans, so your company is destroyed before a trial even begins. It does not matter if you're found innocent, all you can do is file for bankrupcy.
Innocent until PROVEN guilty? Why can the money (and the lawyers it could buy) be taken away before the trial even begins?
It's kind of like the police busting into you apartment and finding a body. They remove the body, but don't look at anything else. Then arrest you and prevent you from paying your rent.
As a result, your landlord throws everything out, cleans the apartment and re-rents it.
The only problem with that is there could have been tracks that the real murderer left there, a suicide note or a confession written by someone else.
But do other corporations get treated in the same way? When they are sued, do they get shut down before the verdict?
When did the customer agree that he can't resell it? Did they have to sign a contract in the store?
What about a game is not physical? It's just a collection of bumps and pits on a CD/DVD. Just like a car is just a collection atoms arranged in a certain way. Both are purely physical (there is no 'spiritual' component. It's just that one is easily visible to the naked eye, while the other requires a special device to read.
On the other hand pirate games don't automatically download broken patches, save games don't randomly disappear and they sometimes get patched sooner and better then the 'official' versions.
Why not turn to your friendly neighborhood swashbucklers? I'm sure they've already figured out a way to transfer the DLC without also needing to sell the EA account.
When was the last time you had to agree to 'terms' when purchasing your game? You don't get to learn about them until you get home and open the box, or even until you finish installing it.
Why should those terms be enforced? Why should their violation be considered copyright infringement? You bought a copy, now you should be able to do with it whatever you want. Including reselling it.
Not really. With cash (gold) you can only buy tanks that you CAN'T get with regular credits. But at the same time, having a lot of gold won't enable you to buy your way to the top tier.
You'll still have to grind your way there, it will just be easier since you'll be getting better rewards from your battles.