yo try Tomato Torrent. it's very plan and basic and small. i tried Azureus and went back to Tomato, which is less capable, but i don't need more capability.
the one feature i've heard of that i wish Tomato had is the ability to download specific parts of a torrent. that would be nice. but if all you want to do is download torrents, Tomato will do that very well.
First, let me say that it makes me angry that I can't drag music from my hard drive right into a folder on my iPod and have it be available.
But, let me ask you what kind of iTunes do you use anyway? When I have a music file on my hard drive and want it on my iPod, I drag it onto the iPod icon in iTunes, and it is copies there. I don't use any playlists for that, and the file never has to be in the iTunes Library at all. That is about a half a degree more difficult than dragging it to the iPod icon on the desktop. It's still an icon which represents my iPod, it's just in a different place. You couldn't figure that out?
Social issues are not tax related. American social policy is contrary to my wishes. But, it is in line with the wishes of the majority, and since I believe in democracy, I tolerate the stupidity of the majority.
But as for government-provided services, yes, it's true that people are expected to pay for their own mistakes and preferences. Actually, that's only partially true, but should be totally true. Jaywalking in front of trucks? Well then yes, we expect you to pay for your own ride to the hospital. Make bad decisions about family planning? Well then yes, we expect you to pay for your own medical care. Do you really find that weird? You really find it weird that people should do for themselves? I mean shit, we have welfare here, we provide medicine for the poor and elderly, we publicly fund education, infrastructure, and defense. How much does someone else really have to do for me? Do you want a government agent to wipe your ass and spoon-feed you? Maybe, but over here we think that would be crazy.
If Denmark has a magical government which perfectly represents all of its people and makes no mistakes and functions with greater efficiency than the free market, then damn that's really great, and I totally see why Denmark would want to nationalize everything under the sun. But over here in America we have a backwater government full of hypocritical assholes who couldn't balance a budget if it were put on a scale, so we prefer to give them as little of our hard-earned money as possible. It's pretty simple, really.
Anyway, to my original point: economic freedom is second only to freedom of conscience; so a sufficiently high tax rate is a barrier to freedom.
agreed. they are all bastards. the medical system in America is a clusterfuck of mythic proportions, and one of the only things I can imagine which would be worse than our system, would be our system but run by the government. kudos if it works out in Denmark, though, maybe their government is less dumb than ours. bummer they don't even get to spend a majority of their money, though.
I guess so. I dunno. I'm not so interested in government-provided services (I'll pay for my own retirement, thanks very much), but I would sure be interested in a government that served my interests. Do they really have that in Denmark?
You mean, buy our products and services in the open market instead of from the government? The idea is you get to keep the money for any services you don't use, so, no, it isn't true that Americans pay the same amount to companies. Many of us enjoy considerable savings. Not to say my taxes aren't sky high. I hate give one out of every four of my hard-earned dollars to the wasteful bastards running this country.
true. on the other hand, in order for companies to consciously hire responsible workers, there must be an incentive to do so. if you only blame the employee, then the companies will just hire minimum wage workers to handle all that stuff.
gmail is an impressive attempt to implement email using a web browser. nevertheless, it is nowhere near as good as a real email program. that same thing is true for all webapps. none of them are as good as they would be implemented in a more robust gui toolkit.
Hah, man, you just got caught not reading the article. The article specifically cites this law:
2921.29 (C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.
I've hardly used VS so I can't compare, but in Eclipse I like how when the 'intellisense' thing comes up to tell me what members are available, it tries to guess the right one. Yeah, it doesn't go to the last member used, but it will go to one with the same return type as the object I'm setting. I'm not sure if it does this, but I wish it would also try to match variable names, like variableName = object.getVariableName().
The only other IDE I've spent a lot of time with was Xcode. Xcode for Java dev was mediocre at best, and now having used Eclipse, I would absolutely never ever go back to Xcode.
Apple has attempted to monopolize every market is possibly could, to equal or greater extent than Microsoft, except that the opportunity was greater for Microsoft. Specifically, Apple has controlled the three markets it historically ever controlled: the Apple II market, the Mac OS market, and the iPod market. Apple ruthlessly excluded all possible competition in those three arenas.
Anyway, Apple has always excluded as much competition as it possibly could in every way, and my original point was about how bad Apple would be if they had the opportunity, which they haven't.
Well, I've been using Macs since my LC III in 7th grade, so I've been watching Apple for a while. My current complaint is how Apple went out of its way to make my iPod way way less useful than it could be. Specifically, the way they hide the music in hidden randomly-named folders with randly-named filenames in random order. Seriously. All the other MP3 players on the market have a simple copy-into-a-folder storage mechanism for their filesystems. Apple certainly hasn't allowed interoperability with iTMS and other players, or iPods with other music services, which it could. They have mercilessly excluded competition within their Mac OS platform.
Oh, wait, no I forgot, this is my beef with Apple recently. I bought this $350 video iPod and I basically love it. It's a bit limited, but it's not bad, and the video implementation is very good. I like how I can just plug a wire into the audio jack and export video straight out to a standard RGB composite cable. Only... it's not QUITE a standard composite cable, they actually switched around two of the colors, so if you already owned that cable and it worked with all your other devices, then it won't work with your iPod unless you know to switch around the two colors. No, you have to buy the special Apple cable that has the colors switched for you. (Or a competitor's cable.) Still, you know, that's bullshit, they're just fucking with their customers. They did the same thing with the S-VIDEO out on their TiBooks, which I have -- their special cable works but a standard one doesn't.
seriously? awesome. i am actually talking about watching movies on my computer, which is indeed rather old. i think the problem is in the software, though, which probably won't've changed, but maybe i just need better software.
Point of order: Apple has good products but terrible ethics, and always has. Given the opportunity, they would be ethically far worse than Microsoft ever was. I use and love my Mac because it's a great computer, not because it was sold to me by angels.
Um, mods, that post isn't funny, it's insightful. I own exactly zero DVDs, because of exactly that reason. On the flipside, I own maybe two or three hundred CDs, lovingly archived in my closet, because that is an open, free, high-quality format. I have furthermore never paid for crippled content from iTMS, but happily download the podcasts (bonus that they're free).
Look, if I pay for something, I expect to own it and I expect that it will do whatever I tell it to do within its functionality range. Any product which is artificially limited only draws my ire. Why the fuck can't I fast-forward a DVD the same way I could a VHS? That's bullshit. Well, fuck 'em. Here's the equation:
Replace "entertainment" with "culture" and your argument suddenly sounds pigheaded. We have copyrights to assist cultural inducement, not for some overarching moral right of the artists.
Moreover, it's blindingly retarded to refuse to sell your culture to other people who want to pay for it.
Me, though, I'm comfortable downloading Heroes for free, and shed no tear for the MPAA.
Look, if you provide the facilities for someone to copy copywritten material, you should be liable. There is no other way for copyright to work.
Sure there are. There are at least a few other ways for copyright to work. Specifically, the way I thought it worked was that to violate copyright (emphasis *COPY*right) you had to actually copy the work. Seriously, that might sound naive to lawyers, but I thought to violate copyright a copy had to be made. Like, say I walk down the street wearing a tshirt bearing a copyrighted work legally licensed for that tshirt. In fact, this of course happens millions of times every day. I would have naively thought that wearing that shirt was legal, since it is so common, and since my common sense tells me that I'm not making any copies, so I can't possibly be held liable. There is a potential liability if a person takes a photograph, but I would have thought that person would be liable, not me.
Anyway, copyright *could* work that way, where only actual copying is a violation, and where only the actual copier is liable, so your statement about copyright only working that other way is false. And thank you very much if I just sit around wishing it did in fact work the way I described.
Old people should pay more into social security because they use it more. young people should get discounts because they're a long way away from taking it.
More like, young people shouldn't pay anything, since there's zero chance they'll ever draw a single penny from it. I think about that every month when I see the social security deduction on my paycheck (I'm 27).
That sounds like a pitch for any new media. If I don't have a MegaDisc player, I wouldn't expect to be able to play MegaDiscs, so I wouldn't buy it. I only have a CD player.
Slashdot Mirror
$245-$465 per hour, according to the article
yo try Tomato Torrent. it's very plan and basic and small. i tried Azureus and went back to Tomato, which is less capable, but i don't need more capability.
the one feature i've heard of that i wish Tomato had is the ability to download specific parts of a torrent. that would be nice. but if all you want to do is download torrents, Tomato will do that very well.
First, let me say that it makes me angry that I can't drag music from my hard drive right into a folder on my iPod and have it be available.
But, let me ask you what kind of iTunes do you use anyway? When I have a music file on my hard drive and want it on my iPod, I drag it onto the iPod icon in iTunes, and it is copies there. I don't use any playlists for that, and the file never has to be in the iTunes Library at all. That is about a half a degree more difficult than dragging it to the iPod icon on the desktop. It's still an icon which represents my iPod, it's just in a different place. You couldn't figure that out?
Social issues are not tax related. American social policy is contrary to my wishes. But, it is in line with the wishes of the majority, and since I believe in democracy, I tolerate the stupidity of the majority.
But as for government-provided services, yes, it's true that people are expected to pay for their own mistakes and preferences. Actually, that's only partially true, but should be totally true. Jaywalking in front of trucks? Well then yes, we expect you to pay for your own ride to the hospital. Make bad decisions about family planning? Well then yes, we expect you to pay for your own medical care. Do you really find that weird? You really find it weird that people should do for themselves? I mean shit, we have welfare here, we provide medicine for the poor and elderly, we publicly fund education, infrastructure, and defense. How much does someone else really have to do for me? Do you want a government agent to wipe your ass and spoon-feed you? Maybe, but over here we think that would be crazy.
If Denmark has a magical government which perfectly represents all of its people and makes no mistakes and functions with greater efficiency than the free market, then damn that's really great, and I totally see why Denmark would want to nationalize everything under the sun. But over here in America we have a backwater government full of hypocritical assholes who couldn't balance a budget if it were put on a scale, so we prefer to give them as little of our hard-earned money as possible. It's pretty simple, really.
Anyway, to my original point: economic freedom is second only to freedom of conscience; so a sufficiently high tax rate is a barrier to freedom.
agreed. they are all bastards. the medical system in America is a clusterfuck of mythic proportions, and one of the only things I can imagine which would be worse than our system, would be our system but run by the government. kudos if it works out in Denmark, though, maybe their government is less dumb than ours. bummer they don't even get to spend a majority of their money, though.
I guess so. I dunno. I'm not so interested in government-provided services (I'll pay for my own retirement, thanks very much), but I would sure be interested in a government that served my interests. Do they really have that in Denmark?
You mean, buy our products and services in the open market instead of from the government? The idea is you get to keep the money for any services you don't use, so, no, it isn't true that Americans pay the same amount to companies. Many of us enjoy considerable savings. Not to say my taxes aren't sky high. I hate give one out of every four of my hard-earned dollars to the wasteful bastards running this country.
true. on the other hand, in order for companies to consciously hire responsible workers, there must be an incentive to do so. if you only blame the employee, then the companies will just hire minimum wage workers to handle all that stuff.
Freedom can be a pain in the ass.
Is it true that your income tax is 42%-68%?
gmail is an impressive attempt to implement email using a web browser. nevertheless, it is nowhere near as good as a real email program. that same thing is true for all webapps. none of them are as good as they would be implemented in a more robust gui toolkit.
Hah, man, you just got caught not reading the article. The article specifically cites this law:
2921.29 (C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.
I've hardly used VS so I can't compare, but in Eclipse I like how when the 'intellisense' thing comes up to tell me what members are available, it tries to guess the right one. Yeah, it doesn't go to the last member used, but it will go to one with the same return type as the object I'm setting. I'm not sure if it does this, but I wish it would also try to match variable names, like variableName = object.getVariableName().
The only other IDE I've spent a lot of time with was Xcode. Xcode for Java dev was mediocre at best, and now having used Eclipse, I would absolutely never ever go back to Xcode.
Apple has attempted to monopolize every market is possibly could, to equal or greater extent than Microsoft, except that the opportunity was greater for Microsoft. Specifically, Apple has controlled the three markets it historically ever controlled: the Apple II market, the Mac OS market, and the iPod market. Apple ruthlessly excluded all possible competition in those three arenas.
Anyway, Apple has always excluded as much competition as it possibly could in every way, and my original point was about how bad Apple would be if they had the opportunity, which they haven't.
Well, I've been using Macs since my LC III in 7th grade, so I've been watching Apple for a while. My current complaint is how Apple went out of its way to make my iPod way way less useful than it could be. Specifically, the way they hide the music in hidden randomly-named folders with randly-named filenames in random order. Seriously. All the other MP3 players on the market have a simple copy-into-a-folder storage mechanism for their filesystems. Apple certainly hasn't allowed interoperability with iTMS and other players, or iPods with other music services, which it could. They have mercilessly excluded competition within their Mac OS platform.
Oh, wait, no I forgot, this is my beef with Apple recently. I bought this $350 video iPod and I basically love it. It's a bit limited, but it's not bad, and the video implementation is very good. I like how I can just plug a wire into the audio jack and export video straight out to a standard RGB composite cable. Only... it's not QUITE a standard composite cable, they actually switched around two of the colors, so if you already owned that cable and it worked with all your other devices, then it won't work with your iPod unless you know to switch around the two colors. No, you have to buy the special Apple cable that has the colors switched for you. (Or a competitor's cable.) Still, you know, that's bullshit, they're just fucking with their customers. They did the same thing with the S-VIDEO out on their TiBooks, which I have -- their special cable works but a standard one doesn't.
seriously? awesome. i am actually talking about watching movies on my computer, which is indeed rather old. i think the problem is in the software, though, which probably won't've changed, but maybe i just need better software.
Point of order: Apple has good products but terrible ethics, and always has. Given the opportunity, they would be ethically far worse than Microsoft ever was. I use and love my Mac because it's a great computer, not because it was sold to me by angels.
Um, mods, that post isn't funny, it's insightful. I own exactly zero DVDs, because of exactly that reason. On the flipside, I own maybe two or three hundred CDs, lovingly archived in my closet, because that is an open, free, high-quality format. I have furthermore never paid for crippled content from iTMS, but happily download the podcasts (bonus that they're free).
Look, if I pay for something, I expect to own it and I expect that it will do whatever I tell it to do within its functionality range. Any product which is artificially limited only draws my ire. Why the fuck can't I fast-forward a DVD the same way I could a VHS? That's bullshit. Well, fuck 'em. Here's the equation:
free+anytime+anywhere+howiwant+immoral > $$$+whentheysay+wheretheysay+howtheysay+moral
They can't just fall back on saying
immoral < moral
and expect me to give up the other four criteria, which are the four dominant criteria.
Replace "entertainment" with "culture" and your argument suddenly sounds pigheaded. We have copyrights to assist cultural inducement, not for some overarching moral right of the artists.
Moreover, it's blindingly retarded to refuse to sell your culture to other people who want to pay for it.
Me, though, I'm comfortable downloading Heroes for free, and shed no tear for the MPAA.
good luck with that, brother
Look, if you provide the facilities for someone to copy copywritten material, you should be liable. There is no other way for copyright to work.
Sure there are. There are at least a few other ways for copyright to work. Specifically, the way I thought it worked was that to violate copyright (emphasis *COPY*right) you had to actually copy the work. Seriously, that might sound naive to lawyers, but I thought to violate copyright a copy had to be made. Like, say I walk down the street wearing a tshirt bearing a copyrighted work legally licensed for that tshirt. In fact, this of course happens millions of times every day. I would have naively thought that wearing that shirt was legal, since it is so common, and since my common sense tells me that I'm not making any copies, so I can't possibly be held liable. There is a potential liability if a person takes a photograph, but I would have thought that person would be liable, not me.
Anyway, copyright *could* work that way, where only actual copying is a violation, and where only the actual copier is liable, so your statement about copyright only working that other way is false. And thank you very much if I just sit around wishing it did in fact work the way I described.
So you don't believe suckers should be free to make bad financial decisions?
Well, really, I don't either.
Old people should pay more into social security because they use it more. young people should get discounts because they're a long way away from taking it.
More like, young people shouldn't pay anything, since there's zero chance they'll ever draw a single penny from it. I think about that every month when I see the social security deduction on my paycheck (I'm 27).
In CS class I learned how "infinite" data structures are possible in lazy languages -- not infinite in memory, but infinite in theory.
Still, you're right that the author didn't use the word right.
Are you aware of the tax on blank media?
That sounds like a pitch for any new media. If I don't have a MegaDisc player, I wouldn't expect to be able to play MegaDiscs, so I wouldn't buy it. I only have a CD player.