Programmers that type quickly are more prone to write one off disposable programs, and hence are just more practiced.
Sounds more like an issue with dedication than anything else. Being able to type at a reasonable pace should be all you need. I don't know about anyone else (though other people did mention it), but when I'm programming, I tend to stop and think about the most efficient way to implement something. Most of my time isn't wasted on typing, but on that. Being able to type slightly faster likely won't make much of a difference.
No... ban it because it's being used exactly as it was designed to
Apparently you're not understand that you can upload legal files. If they only allowed illegal content, your claim would stand more ground, but they don't. I've even heard (but I'm not sure if it's true) that they conform to DMCA requests.
no such tool is actually required to find a significant number of non-infringing works anyways.
To know the number of infringing material versus non-infringing material, yes, it is required.
Glide isn't installed on their computer, is it? It's not malware.
Some people may not want other players camping, or spamming with powerful weapons just like others don't want people to use bots. In reality, a bot is just playing the game like everyone else, just far more efficiently. I don't see a problem with this.
If the 'tool' is overwhelmingly used to facilitate crime, then it's time to ban the tool.
Ban the tool and any legitimate uses it may have simply because a lot of people abuse it? Wow. Lots of people abuse guns for pointless wars and crime. Why aren't they banned? Going by this, I'll just assume that they only have illegitimate uses and should be banned.
Now, in addition to this, not only do we not have any accurate measurements about the amount of pirated content versus non-pirated content on their servers, but we'd be banning the 'tool' because some people use it to commit crimes of which there are no victims. If 'loss' of potential future gain could be equated to harm, then that means that you would be 'hurting' someone merely by not giving them all of your money and property.
End of discussion.
Nice argument!
I suggest you get over it and re-focus your efforts on making sure that you're in compliance with the the law, in thought and deed.
Yes, because the law is always 'right', correct? If something is illegal, that means that it's wrong. No, I believe that you should look at the law, decide if it is there for a good reason, and then if it isn't, work to change it.
You apparently failed to understand that I was speaking about something in general. Besides that, I said that something shouldn't be banned because a lot of people use it for something other than its original intended purpose (and it definitely shouldn't be banned because people use it to commit victimless crimes).
Where did I say it did? Obviously I was talking about the fact that just because some things are used in a different way than they were intended, that doesn't mean that it's the fault of the person who made it or the tool itself.
some websites are made for copyright infringement
You can upload anything you want. Does something suddenly become bad and must be ruined for everyone just because someone thinks a lot of people are abusing it?
In this case, it's more like a knife that thousands use to kill people, and one token person standing there with a loaf of bread in their other hand.
It wasn't made for that purpose. While that would be unfortunate, it really isn't the fault of the tool. Also, there's no accurate way to measure exactly how often that it's used for piracy. At least, I'm fairly certain of that. There's no magical way to be aware of every single file on the website and be able to tell if it's illegal or not.
"it's not our fault if people misuse it"
It isn't their fault.
do you *honestly* believe the reality is other than Megaupload being overwhelmingly used for piracy?
Did you read what he said? He said it was only used for piracy.
I've seen quite a few people (but not everyone, of course) that basically stated that they'd be willing to give up their freedoms for a false sense of security. They support things such as the Patriot Act, and also what is happening at airports. I find it truly frightening how many people aren't afraid of a police state and will willingly give up their freedoms to the government in exchange for such petty things.
When I was a kid, I was taught that the Government existed, in America, as a reflection of the people, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights were a reflection of those goals.
They want to make the people feel somewhat in control so that they keep wasting their votes on the same two parties over and over and act like nothing is wrong. It's such a shame that the government was given so much power, and that many people don't see a problem with this. The government, for the most part, doesn't even have to listen to them.
And everyone else is fully in their right to tell them to post something constructive or be quiet, and are right-as-in-correct to do so.
That's true.
When did "pointless praising" enter the picture other than when you dragged it in by talking about "positive criticism" which apparently means "praise" even though praise is not criticism?
It didn't. I was just saying that all of the people who constantly dish out constant praise are idiots. Too many people think that this is okay while unconstructive criticism isn't.
Unconstructive criticism is bad
To you, maybe. Everyone has their own opinion.
Comparing it to something else that is useless doesn't change anything.
No, and it wasn't meant to.
I'd say that simply by virtue of raising up instead of tearing down, praise is better even if still not productive.
Neither accomplish anything. The author is free to do as they will.
ergo pointless bitching should be tolerated is not a reasonable stance, it's wrong.
That'd be me, and while he's no John Carmack or Michael Abrash, he's a solid enough programmer that I'm going to call it a "don't care".
Is he, now? I'm not sure of his coding ability. I only made that as a general statement. I have heard that his code is a mess and that it's inefficient in many aspects, however. Not sure how true that is.
The terms you're looking for are constructive and unconstructive criticism.
Yes. Pointless praising and insults can be considered unconstructive. While 'bitching' may not help, someone is fully in their right to do so. I look down on them no more than I do someone who is just sucking up to the person.
Telling people who can't engage in constructive criticism to shut up until they can is a valid argument.
It really isn't. They have their own opinion, and their insults are just as valid as anyone's pointless praising. Neither really contribute anything.
It's not pointless, and I've already explained why. That said, positive criticism is almost entirely useless. It's just praise that ultimately accomplishes nothing.
People who play the game, perhaps? If his code is of poor quality, is bug ridden, and is terribly inefficient, then I would say that it is important. Not only that, but it might also make it harder for him and anyone else to maintain it.
If the quality of the game matters so much to you, then stop fucking playing it and leave us alone with your nerd-bitching equivalent of Miley Cyrus hate regarding personal tampon choice and hygiene.
Negative criticism is just as valid as positive criticism. Perhaps even more so. It helps people grow (if they agree with it, that is). Telling people who weren't completely satisfied to get out isn't really a valid argument.
What are you, insane? Purposefully keeping them ignorant will clearly fix all of our problems! Think about it. Children don't have any knowledge about these subjects, and they always fail to realize that obvious works of fiction aren't real (until they turn 18, of course). This effectively means that they'll get an unrealistic idea about sex (and they might also begin to believe that you earn points by killing people) and will go on murdering rampages because they viewed media that they didn't understand (because they're not 18 yet).
Not to mention that education won't fix every problem in existence. Some people would still persist with bad behavior. Therefore, it's a bad route to take since it's not absolutely perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
Programmers that type quickly are more prone to write one off disposable programs, and hence are just more practiced.
Sounds more like an issue with dedication than anything else. Being able to type at a reasonable pace should be all you need. I don't know about anyone else (though other people did mention it), but when I'm programming, I tend to stop and think about the most efficient way to implement something. Most of my time isn't wasted on typing, but on that. Being able to type slightly faster likely won't make much of a difference.
No... ban it because it's being used exactly as it was designed to
Apparently you're not understand that you can upload legal files. If they only allowed illegal content, your claim would stand more ground, but they don't. I've even heard (but I'm not sure if it's true) that they conform to DMCA requests.
no such tool is actually required to find a significant number of non-infringing works anyways.
To know the number of infringing material versus non-infringing material, yes, it is required.
lame casual games with "infinite" replayability are solid gold.
"Lame" is subjective. You can play games that you like for a long, long time. I don't think he meant every game.
No law enacted by congress nor action of the Federal or State Governments can overrule the Constitution.
It can if the courts 'interpret' it away. Some people somehow got the idea that to 'interpret' something means to "change the meaning of."
you don't see Adobe making it impossible to pirate their stuff, which they are more than capable of doing.
So many people tried and failed to do this. The pirates usually always crack it, especially if the thing is popular.
Glide isn't installed on their computer, is it? It's not malware.
Some people may not want other players camping, or spamming with powerful weapons just like others don't want people to use bots. In reality, a bot is just playing the game like everyone else, just far more efficiently. I don't see a problem with this.
Also, do you know the exact amount of pirated software on their servers? The exact amount of non-pirated software?
I believe it would be quite difficult to get these numbers. If not, then how do you know?
If the 'tool' is overwhelmingly used to facilitate crime, then it's time to ban the tool.
Ban the tool and any legitimate uses it may have simply because a lot of people abuse it? Wow. Lots of people abuse guns for pointless wars and crime. Why aren't they banned? Going by this, I'll just assume that they only have illegitimate uses and should be banned.
Now, in addition to this, not only do we not have any accurate measurements about the amount of pirated content versus non-pirated content on their servers, but we'd be banning the 'tool' because some people use it to commit crimes of which there are no victims. If 'loss' of potential future gain could be equated to harm, then that means that you would be 'hurting' someone merely by not giving them all of your money and property.
End of discussion.
Nice argument!
I suggest you get over it and re-focus your efforts on making sure that you're in compliance with the the law, in thought and deed.
Yes, because the law is always 'right', correct? If something is illegal, that means that it's wrong. No, I believe that you should look at the law, decide if it is there for a good reason, and then if it isn't, work to change it.
You apparently failed to understand that I was speaking about something in general. Besides that, I said that something shouldn't be banned because a lot of people use it for something other than its original intended purpose (and it definitely shouldn't be banned because people use it to commit victimless crimes).
If you don't like it, write your congressperson explaining that this is why this is a bad law.
Please do note, however, that this will only work if you have vast amounts of money, or if not listening to the people would have major consequences.
and also those who wish to get around DRM.
Sadly, sometimes these people are just angry customers. They're the ones being hurt.
Repeating a thing doesn't make it true.
Where did I say it did? Obviously I was talking about the fact that just because some things are used in a different way than they were intended, that doesn't mean that it's the fault of the person who made it or the tool itself.
some websites are made for copyright infringement
You can upload anything you want. Does something suddenly become bad and must be ruined for everyone just because someone thinks a lot of people are abusing it?
In this case, it's more like a knife that thousands use to kill people, and one token person standing there with a loaf of bread in their other hand.
It wasn't made for that purpose. While that would be unfortunate, it really isn't the fault of the tool. Also, there's no accurate way to measure exactly how often that it's used for piracy. At least, I'm fairly certain of that. There's no magical way to be aware of every single file on the website and be able to tell if it's illegal or not.
"it's not our fault if people misuse it"
It isn't their fault.
do you *honestly* believe the reality is other than Megaupload being overwhelmingly used for piracy?
Did you read what he said? He said it was only used for piracy.
at what point does an organization become so large and powerful that it's detrimental to society?
Probably big enough so that it's able to cut off a major source of funding for someone or something or effortlessly censor vast amounts of speech.
We are not 'all terrified of everything now'
I've seen quite a few people (but not everyone, of course) that basically stated that they'd be willing to give up their freedoms for a false sense of security. They support things such as the Patriot Act, and also what is happening at airports. I find it truly frightening how many people aren't afraid of a police state and will willingly give up their freedoms to the government in exchange for such petty things.
When I was a kid, I was taught that the Government existed, in America, as a reflection of the people, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights were a reflection of those goals.
They want to make the people feel somewhat in control so that they keep wasting their votes on the same two parties over and over and act like nothing is wrong. It's such a shame that the government was given so much power, and that many people don't see a problem with this. The government, for the most part, doesn't even have to listen to them.
Megauploads is for one thing: piracy.
Odd. I thought it was for uploading files. I guess the only purpose of a knife is too kill people, then.
I thought everyone wanted these big corporations to start acting ethically.
You act like everyone believes that copyright infringement is 'wrong'. This is not so.
I just smashed out my local corner store's windows and robbed them blind. I'm such a naughty little copyright infringer...
No, no. They only make them up as they go along if people with money wish them to do so or it's in their best interest.
And everyone else is fully in their right to tell them to post something constructive or be quiet, and are right-as-in-correct to do so.
That's true.
When did "pointless praising" enter the picture other than when you dragged it in by talking about "positive criticism" which apparently means "praise" even though praise is not criticism?
It didn't. I was just saying that all of the people who constantly dish out constant praise are idiots. Too many people think that this is okay while unconstructive criticism isn't.
Unconstructive criticism is bad
To you, maybe. Everyone has their own opinion.
Comparing it to something else that is useless doesn't change anything.
No, and it wasn't meant to.
I'd say that simply by virtue of raising up instead of tearing down, praise is better even if still not productive.
Neither accomplish anything. The author is free to do as they will.
ergo pointless bitching should be tolerated is not a reasonable stance, it's wrong.
'Wrong'? How very subjective.
whiny people to pretend they aren't just being tools.
Someone isn't a tool for doing either.
Pointing out a bug is helpful, whining isn't. grow up
Growing up has nothing to do with anything. Furthermore, why would I do that when that's what I was stating in the first place?
That'd be me, and while he's no John Carmack or Michael Abrash, he's a solid enough programmer that I'm going to call it a "don't care".
Is he, now? I'm not sure of his coding ability. I only made that as a general statement. I have heard that his code is a mess and that it's inefficient in many aspects, however. Not sure how true that is.
The terms you're looking for are constructive and unconstructive criticism.
Yes. Pointless praising and insults can be considered unconstructive. While 'bitching' may not help, someone is fully in their right to do so. I look down on them no more than I do someone who is just sucking up to the person.
Telling people who can't engage in constructive criticism to shut up until they can is a valid argument.
It really isn't. They have their own opinion, and their insults are just as valid as anyone's pointless praising. Neither really contribute anything.
It's not pointless, and I've already explained why. That said, positive criticism is almost entirely useless. It's just praise that ultimately accomplishes nothing.
who the fuck cares about his programming skills?
People who play the game, perhaps? If his code is of poor quality, is bug ridden, and is terribly inefficient, then I would say that it is important. Not only that, but it might also make it harder for him and anyone else to maintain it.
If the quality of the game matters so much to you, then stop fucking playing it and leave us alone with your nerd-bitching equivalent of Miley Cyrus hate regarding personal tampon choice and hygiene.
Negative criticism is just as valid as positive criticism. Perhaps even more so. It helps people grow (if they agree with it, that is). Telling people who weren't completely satisfied to get out isn't really a valid argument.
What are you, insane? Purposefully keeping them ignorant will clearly fix all of our problems! Think about it. Children don't have any knowledge about these subjects, and they always fail to realize that obvious works of fiction aren't real (until they turn 18, of course). This effectively means that they'll get an unrealistic idea about sex (and they might also begin to believe that you earn points by killing people) and will go on murdering rampages because they viewed media that they didn't understand (because they're not 18 yet).
Not to mention that education won't fix every problem in existence. Some people would still persist with bad behavior. Therefore, it's a bad route to take since it's not absolutely perfect.