I'm curious what will happen when our society invents the replicator, and starts cloning things like bread and corn.
Will the bakers and farmers claim they have a copyright to food, and you "stole" their bread and corn? I'd have to say no; theft is only theft when the original owner loses his bread or corn. Making a duplicate is merely copying (and possible infringement on a government-granted monopoly) but not theft.
Not even the author of the work. It is a government-created *privilege* not a right, and it is revocable and limited in scope.
Someone who copies your work has not stolen anything..... they've merely infringed upon your government-granted monopoly. That's life and part of the cost of doing business (like when 80s-era Microsoft, Commodore, and others copied Apple OS's look-and-feel).
Does ATT sell any devices that are specifically for use with PCs? Like the link below? If so then they can't use that "no tethering" clause to escape false advertising charges ("unlimited") that future customers might bring:
>>>Of course the whole idea of limiting our bandwidth is fucking ridiculous to me
I don't know why? The wireless spectrum only has a limited amount of space, so a single tower can only stream a maximum amount of data in a month (deviced by thousands of customers).
It's the same as my dialup connection which is also limited (~12 gigabytes/month max) because of technical constraints. Wireless/cellular internet is not different.
Probably none of ATT's lawyers showed-up, so the judge never learned the customer was using tethering, and so he issued a judgement based on lack of knowledge. In a real court this guy would probably be torn to shreds by ATT's lawyers.
For those that don't RTA: "Spaccarelli's victory in small-claims court is similar to that of Heather Peters, a California woman who won $9,867 from Honda last month because her Civic Hybrid did not live up to the promised gas mileage. She, too, is helping others bring similar cases."
I'm surprised she won. Perhaps it was because Honda *reprogrammed* the car after purchase, and that immediately made the MPG drop by ~10. I own a Honda Insight and am happy with the results (90mpg at 50 mph; 70mpg at 60 mph). Nice little car.
"We don't care what some judge said. You either do it our way, via arbitration, or we ban you forever."
Damn corporations. Sound similar to how Paypal operated in the previous decade, until a class action lawsuit was brought against them by the States. Well at least corporations don't have power to throw me in jail forever, or draft me to serve in some foreign war (like government can).
Ahhh. In that case maybe I'd be better-off with Amazon Prime's rental service (view as much as you want for $80/year). Probably cheaper than paying $5 per DVD to upgrade to Walmart Vudu's HD service.
But being able to buy a computer for only $250 plus other lowcost items helps the people save their money for other purposes (college for the kids, or retirement for the parents). Would you prefer that Mac or IBM PC-compatible computers cost $4000* like they did in the 80s, and few can afford them?
I have a copy of Star Wars on 70s-era videorecord (RCA CED). Then I bought VHS. Then rented the Laserdisc and copied it over to Super VHS.
And finally DVD (the original non-altered version). I decided to stop there because buying the same movie over-and-over sucked, and frankly I got bored with the story, plus making Lucas richer.
I can bring in my Star Trek TOS, Stargate SG1, and Gattaca discs to walmart, get the upgrade to high-def versions online, and then sell the DVDs on ebay for cash.
Free market == win.
Aside - On the other hand some things don't really look good in HD. I imagine seeing Spock throwing foam spears and plastic rocks really takes away from the entertainment. Maybe TOS is best viewed in blurry SD quality.
>>>The problem is that Dr. No is also against laws that protect freedom or gives individuals rights that corporations don't have.
No he isn't. If you're referring to the Civil Rights Act of the 1870s and 1960s, he said he would have voted for them even though he disagreed with one section (forcing store owners to serve white racists & other groups they don't like), because overall it was a positive good. Same way he voted to extend the Bush Tax Cuts even though he disagreed with raising tax rates on capital gains. .
>>>At the same time he doesn't have a problem with states restricting a woman's freedom to not have an unwanted child or a homosexual's freedom to marry.
He's a Constitutionalist and that's what the Constitution says (Amendment 10). The power to legalize these things - abortion, samesex marriage, marijuana - lies with the People and their State legislature. It's right there in black ink.
I guess you don't think we should obey the Constitution or its Bill of Rights or amendments??? That's the kind of thinking that has led us to incrementally lose the 1st, 4th, and 6th amendments (I'm referring to ACTA, SOPA, TSA, DHS, and the NDAA jail time without right to trial). You have to enforce ALL the amendments as written, not just ignore them because you don't like them.
A "modem" is what I call a device to connect to online service. It doesn't matter if it's a dialup modem or DSL modem or cable modem or wifi modem.
My laptop is a Pentium 3 but I'm not using it. The Wifi connection I purchased for use with my Pentium 4 desktop that I brought along with me. Looks like this but with a 3 foot USB cord so I can move it around
I see the religious nuts (opensource fans) have struck again. Or maybe it's just slashdot "groupthink". If you don't fall into line and love Apple, or Google, or WebM, then you're attacked and modded into invisibility (censored).
I'm sorry but I think WebM video looks like ass, just like MPEG1 and 2 videos look like ass, and I'm not going to stand behind ass codecs. They are old and inferior. I want to choose the best most-advanced technology not inferior junk.
If open-source had a codec that looked or sounded as good as h.264 or AACplus (MPEG4) then I'd support that OSS codec, but they do not, so I will not.
Repeating myself (since you obviously didn't read to the end of my post)
Stop committing first-order thinking (advertising == waste of money == bad). Look to secondary and tertiary effects, and it's obvious that advertising increases awareness among sick customers, which is a positive good (it encourages them to visit the doctor to get the new cure/pill) .
I guess I have to spell it out. You develop a new pill called BreastCancerCure (not the best name but whatever). It costs $1000 a pill but you don't advertise it, so very few people buy it and the cost remains $1000 a pill.
Then you decide to advertise it on TV, radio, and the net and within a year you're selling to over 10 million customers. Thanks to economy of scale, the price per pill drops to $1. Therefore advertising actually saved money (rather than waste money as the great-grandparent post claimed).
Exactly. WebM quality is like MPEG3 (if such a thing existed). Besides the h.264/MPG4 patent fees will expire soon. I don't see any reason to avoid H.264 (MPEG4) and standardize on an inferior-quality open source codec that is little better than MPEG2.
That would be like voluntarily choosing inferior NTSC-video instead of HD-video (and then being stuck with that choice for years and years). In just a few years the royalty fees will expire and H.264 will be just as open as any other codec.
Plus it's not as if Mozilla is supporting some evil corporation, but instead a standards organization. I say pick the Best even if that means a few years of payments.
>>> over the course of the last 230+ years we've managed to pay off our debt several times.
Several times?
Try once. Way back in the 1820s under the Madison and Jeffersonian-Democrats. Hardly something to brag about in the modern age. We have a candidate now (Paul) who is promising to pay off the debt starting in year 2 of his presidency, but the voters don't want him. They want the other guys who continue to put forward budgets that will add close to 1 trillion year-after-year.
The political will to completely pay off the U.S. debt is not there, and has not been there since the age of the Founders.
Funny? I thought we are supposed to protect the environment. I guess they mean OUR environment, not China's.
For 200+ years China was bullied by western powers. Now they have the upperhand with the resources AND the money. LOL. It's like watching the second collapse of Rome unfold (We're probably at year 400 in the timeline). Strong enough to raise an army but not strong enough for a real war. EU/US influence is shrinking.
Yes even in the booming 90s companies kept demanding more Visas so they could hire outside help, rather use existing unemployed U.S. engineers.
I've been a contractor 10+ years now because they'd rather hire temps than permanents. Also there's an age bias towards younger workers (under 40) who have no family and don't mind working unpaid overtime.
Prior to the Fed there were 50 State banks. The spreading of the power made it very difficult for corporations to bribe and control. More importantly: These banks did not have the power to print money (and thereby destroy our savings). There's a reason why the dollar lost 97% of its value since the Fed's creation, but lost none prior to its existence. We were better-off before the Fed existed with its loose and irresponsible fiscal policies.
>>>I can't throw my vote away on some guy who believes in what I believe because then the "other party" will get in, and they don't agree with some diversive issue!
I'm facing that now with the U.S. election. I've told people I refuse to vote for Romney, and getting a lot of flack for it "because we can't let the Democrat Obama back in". Really? But Romney is barely any different than Obama.
I'll vote for the best guy (Paul), and if he fails to get the R nomination, then I'll just stay home cause I honestly don't give a frak if either Obama or Romney wins. It's not really a change, is it?
When I first heard of WebM I went-off and watched tons of videos, and to my eyes it looks like MPEG3 (if such a thing existed). I see no reason to choose an inferior standard that is blurry and filled with mosquitos (lossy artifacts). Choosing WebM would be as illogical as choosing MPEG2 or 1 to standardize upon. Those are old tech/low quality.
I don't see any reason to avoid H.264 (MPEG4) and standardize on an inferior-quality open source codec that is little better than MPEG2. That would be like voluntarily choosing inferior NTSC-video instead of HD-video (and then being stuck with that choice for years and years).
In just a few years the royalty fees will expire and H.264 will be just as open as any other codec. Plus it's not as if Mozilla is supporting some evil corporation, but instead a standards organization. I say pick the Best even if that means a few years of payments.
>>>Do you not understand the ineffable majesty of the free market?
Funny. But not true. Private profits and socialized losses (taxpayer bailouts of failing companies) is NOT in any way a free market. In fact it's a centralized economy with the private cartel known as the Federal Reserve Banks pulling the strings for the corporations it serves (not the american people). And Presidents Bush/Obama/Romney and the Secretary of Treasury were/are/will be happily cooperating with the transfer of wealth from our wallets to the Fed's gang of corporates.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm curious what will happen when our society invents the replicator, and starts cloning things like bread and corn.
Will the bakers and farmers claim they have a copyright to food, and you "stole" their bread and corn? I'd have to say no; theft is only theft when the original owner loses his bread or corn. Making a duplicate is merely copying (and possible infringement on a government-granted monopoly) but not theft.
Not even the author of the work. It is a government-created *privilege* not a right, and it is revocable and limited in scope.
Someone who copies your work has not stolen anything..... they've merely infringed upon your government-granted monopoly. That's life and part of the cost of doing business (like when 80s-era Microsoft, Commodore, and others copied Apple OS's look-and-feel).
Does ATT sell any devices that are specifically for use with PCs? Like the link below? If so then they can't use that "no tethering" clause to escape false advertising charges ("unlimited") that future customers might bring:
http://www.virginmobileusa.com/mobile-broadband/broadband2go.html
>>>Of course the whole idea of limiting our bandwidth is fucking ridiculous to me
I don't know why? The wireless spectrum only has a limited amount of space, so a single tower can only stream a maximum amount of data in a month (deviced by thousands of customers).
It's the same as my dialup connection which is also limited (~12 gigabytes/month max) because of technical constraints. Wireless/cellular internet is not different.
It's small claims court.
Probably none of ATT's lawyers showed-up, so the judge never learned the customer was using tethering, and so he issued a judgement based on lack of knowledge. In a real court this guy would probably be torn to shreds by ATT's lawyers.
For those that don't RTA: "Spaccarelli's victory in small-claims court is similar to that of Heather Peters, a California woman who won $9,867 from Honda last month because her Civic Hybrid did not live up to the promised gas mileage. She, too, is helping others bring similar cases."
I'm surprised she won. Perhaps it was because Honda *reprogrammed* the car after purchase, and that immediately made the MPG drop by ~10. I own a Honda Insight and am happy with the results (90mpg at 50 mph; 70mpg at 60 mph). Nice little car.
"We don't care what some judge said. You either do it our way, via arbitration, or we ban you forever."
Damn corporations. Sound similar to how Paypal operated in the previous decade, until a class action lawsuit was brought against them by the States. Well at least corporations don't have power to throw me in jail forever, or draft me to serve in some foreign war (like government can).
Ahhh. In that case maybe I'd be better-off with Amazon Prime's rental service (view as much as you want for $80/year). Probably cheaper than paying $5 per DVD to upgrade to Walmart Vudu's HD service.
But being able to buy a computer for only $250 plus other lowcost items helps the people save their money for other purposes (college for the kids, or retirement for the parents). Would you prefer that Mac or IBM PC-compatible computers cost $4000* like they did in the 80s, and few can afford them?
*
* inflation adjusted
I have a copy of Star Wars on 70s-era videorecord (RCA CED). Then I bought VHS. Then rented the Laserdisc and copied it over to Super VHS.
And finally DVD (the original non-altered version). I decided to stop there because buying the same movie over-and-over sucked, and frankly I got bored with the story, plus making Lucas richer.
I can bring in my Star Trek TOS, Stargate SG1, and Gattaca discs to walmart, get the upgrade to high-def versions online, and then sell the DVDs on ebay for cash.
Free market == win.
Aside - On the other hand some things don't really look good in HD. I imagine seeing Spock throwing foam spears and plastic rocks really takes away from the entertainment. Maybe TOS is best viewed in blurry SD quality.
>>>The problem is that Dr. No is also against laws that protect freedom or gives individuals rights that corporations don't have.
No he isn't. If you're referring to the Civil Rights Act of the 1870s and 1960s, he said he would have voted for them even though he disagreed with one section (forcing store owners to serve white racists & other groups they don't like), because overall it was a positive good. Same way he voted to extend the Bush Tax Cuts even though he disagreed with raising tax rates on capital gains.
.
>>>At the same time he doesn't have a problem with states restricting a woman's freedom to not have an unwanted child or a homosexual's freedom to marry.
He's a Constitutionalist and that's what the Constitution says (Amendment 10). The power to legalize these things - abortion, samesex marriage, marijuana - lies with the People and their State legislature. It's right there in black ink.
I guess you don't think we should obey the Constitution or its Bill of Rights or amendments??? That's the kind of thinking that has led us to incrementally lose the 1st, 4th, and 6th amendments (I'm referring to ACTA, SOPA, TSA, DHS, and the NDAA jail time without right to trial). You have to enforce ALL the amendments as written, not just ignore them because you don't like them.
A "modem" is what I call a device to connect to online service. It doesn't matter if it's a dialup modem or DSL modem or cable modem or wifi modem.
My laptop is a Pentium 3 but I'm not using it. The Wifi connection I purchased for use with my Pentium 4 desktop that I brought along with me. Looks like this but with a 3 foot USB cord so I can move it around
http://www.bing.com/shopping/zoom-4411-ieee-802-11n-draft-usb-wi-fi-adapter/p/98795B354F5512A5A5CF
>>>(Score:0, Flamebait)
I see the religious nuts (opensource fans) have struck again. Or maybe it's just slashdot "groupthink". If you don't fall into line and love Apple, or Google, or WebM, then you're attacked and modded into invisibility (censored).
I'm sorry but I think WebM video looks like ass, just like MPEG1 and 2 videos look like ass, and I'm not going to stand behind ass codecs. They are old and inferior. I want to choose the best most-advanced technology not inferior junk.
If open-source had a codec that looked or sounded as good as h.264 or AACplus (MPEG4) then I'd support that OSS codec, but they do not, so I will not.
Repeating myself (since you obviously didn't read to the end of my post)
Stop committing first-order thinking (advertising == waste of money == bad). Look to secondary and tertiary effects, and it's obvious that advertising increases awareness among sick customers, which is a positive good (it encourages them to visit the doctor to get the new cure/pill)
.
I guess I have to spell it out. You develop a new pill called BreastCancerCure (not the best name but whatever). It costs $1000 a pill but you don't advertise it, so very few people buy it and the cost remains $1000 a pill.
Then you decide to advertise it on TV, radio, and the net and within a year you're selling to over 10 million customers. Thanks to economy of scale, the price per pill drops to $1. Therefore advertising actually saved money (rather than waste money as the great-grandparent post claimed).
>>>WebM is objectively worse than h.264.
Exactly. WebM quality is like MPEG3 (if such a thing existed). Besides the h.264/MPG4 patent fees will expire soon. I don't see any reason to avoid H.264 (MPEG4) and standardize on an inferior-quality open source codec that is little better than MPEG2.
That would be like voluntarily choosing inferior NTSC-video instead of HD-video (and then being stuck with that choice for years and years). In just a few years the royalty fees will expire and H.264 will be just as open as any other codec.
Plus it's not as if Mozilla is supporting some evil corporation, but instead a standards organization. I say pick the Best even if that means a few years of payments.
>>> over the course of the last 230+ years we've managed to pay off our debt several times.
Several times?
Try once. Way back in the 1820s under the Madison and Jeffersonian-Democrats. Hardly something to brag about in the modern age. We have a candidate now (Paul) who is promising to pay off the debt starting in year 2 of his presidency, but the voters don't want him. They want the other guys who continue to put forward budgets that will add close to 1 trillion year-after-year.
The political will to completely pay off the U.S. debt is not there, and has not been there since the age of the Founders.
Funny? I thought we are supposed to protect the environment. I guess they mean OUR environment, not China's.
For 200+ years China was bullied by western powers. Now they have the upperhand with the resources AND the money. LOL. It's like watching the second collapse of Rome unfold (We're probably at year 400 in the timeline). Strong enough to raise an army but not strong enough for a real war. EU/US influence is shrinking.
Yes even in the booming 90s companies kept demanding more Visas so they could hire outside help, rather use existing unemployed U.S. engineers.
I've been a contractor 10+ years now because they'd rather hire temps than permanents. Also there's an age bias towards younger workers (under 40) who have no family and don't mind working unpaid overtime.
Prior to the Fed there were 50 State banks. The spreading of the power made it very difficult for corporations to bribe and control. More importantly: These banks did not have the power to print money (and thereby destroy our savings). There's a reason why the dollar lost 97% of its value since the Fed's creation, but lost none prior to its existence. We were better-off before the Fed existed with its loose and irresponsible fiscal policies.
>>>I can't throw my vote away on some guy who believes in what I believe because then the "other party" will get in, and they don't agree with some diversive issue!
I'm facing that now with the U.S. election. I've told people I refuse to vote for Romney, and getting a lot of flack for it "because we can't let the Democrat Obama back in". Really? But Romney is barely any different than Obama.
I'll vote for the best guy (Paul), and if he fails to get the R nomination, then I'll just stay home cause I honestly don't give a frak if either Obama or Romney wins. It's not really a change, is it?
When I first heard of WebM I went-off and watched tons of videos, and to my eyes it looks like MPEG3 (if such a thing existed). I see no reason to choose an inferior standard that is blurry and filled with mosquitos (lossy artifacts). Choosing WebM would be as illogical as choosing MPEG2 or 1 to standardize upon. Those are old tech/low quality.
IMHO.
I don't see any reason to avoid H.264 (MPEG4) and standardize on an inferior-quality open source codec that is little better than MPEG2. That would be like voluntarily choosing inferior NTSC-video instead of HD-video (and then being stuck with that choice for years and years).
In just a few years the royalty fees will expire and H.264 will be just as open as any other codec. Plus it's not as if Mozilla is supporting some evil corporation, but instead a standards organization. I say pick the Best even if that means a few years of payments.
>>>Do you not understand the ineffable majesty of the free market?
Funny. But not true. Private profits and socialized losses (taxpayer bailouts of failing companies) is NOT in any way a free market. In fact it's a centralized economy with the private cartel known as the Federal Reserve Banks pulling the strings for the corporations it serves (not the american people). And Presidents Bush/Obama/Romney and the Secretary of Treasury were/are/will be happily cooperating with the transfer of wealth from our wallets to the Fed's gang of corporates.
NOT a free market. Not even close
.