1) So, you use a service to allow you to violate your contract with PayPal? Doesn't sound legal, moral, or ethical to me. 2) And, your community might not, and hasn't, so this argument goes on the pile of all the other arguments from fear. 3) And this requires a VPN connection to Pirate Bay why and how? 4) And this requires a VPN connection to Pirate Bay why and how? 5) And this requires a VPN connection to Pirate Bay why and how?
But, no one is showing the law is unjust. They are just breaking the law and claiming the law is unjust because they don't like the law, and they don't like the law because the law says they can't make copies of copyrighted works even if it is cheap and easy to do so. They trample on the rights of the copyright holders and then claim it should be their right to do so.
The only problem with using Thoreau is that his argument was in regards to an unjust state, which is not the case here.
In fact, I wonder how he would feel about this issue considering he would be a content creator and copyright holder whose copy rights would be violated by the supporters of this system.
This is not shutting one's blinds or password protecting one's computer. If you wish to use an analogy, use an appropriate one.
This is building a sound-proof room in a bunker behind a 20ft, steel-reinforced, cinder block wall topped with barbed wire and watched by security cameras, and a gate guard that is specifically instructed to sound a silent alarm if the police show up and then to delay the police as long as possible before letting the police in.
This is using a piece of software that requires a 64 character password, which will write 1s and 0s directly to the drive if there are two consecutive password failures, on a computer kept in a room with a security system which will hit the drive with a magnet pulse and fry the electronics if the room is breached, and turns the only entryway into an electromagnet to erase the drives if someone tries to remove the boxes.
There is already privacy available through pirate bay, so why is this extreme protection necessary? Please point out any legitimate reason one would need this on Pirate Bay, a service that already offers privacy.
I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not.
First, define drug paraphernalia. Second, rolling paper, water bongs, etc. can be used with tobacco. By selling such items for use with tobacco, said items are not considered "drug paraphernalia" until they are used with marijuana. Thus, there is, in fact, a legal, logical use for such items.
A chef's knife is not a deadly weapon until it is used as such. Until it is used as such it is a kitchen tool. A screwdriver or pry bar are not burglary tools until they are used to commit a burglary. Until they are, they are just tools.
The dead phytoplankton were then expected to sink to the ocean bed, dragging carbon along with them. Instead they experiment turned into an example of how the food chain works as the bloom was eaten by a swarm of hungry copepods. The huge swarm of copepods were in turn eaten by larger crustaceans called amphipods, which are often eaten by squid and whales.
OK, so squid and whales eat the amphipods and turn the carbon into whale and squid shit and then either the whales and squid are caught and eaten or die and sink to the bottom and are eaten down there.
Where is the failure in the carbon storage strategy?
The number of people who could get a copy of the tape you bought was limited to your friends, the number of blank cassettes people were willing buy, and how long the source tape would last. There was a decent amount of time involved in duping a tape as well. Now, you can provide an almost perfect copy to anyone and everyone in the world who wants one, with little cost, no degradation of the original, no duplicating costs, almost instantly.
No longer are people hearing something from a friend and buying the album. Instead, if they hear something like, they are downloading the whole album. And, the reason is because they feel they are entitled to do so because the album has been put on line by someone else. They do not feel it is wrong to make an illegal copy because it is convenient and easy.
The present book review is not the place to engage in this particular debate (see Ben Rothke's illuminating review of Greg Conti's recent book, Googling Security) -- suffice it to say that Google Apps Deciphered pays no attention whatsoever to the issues of data security, privacy, and ownership.
I noticed the blogger doesn't mention anything about the case itself. I wonder how knowing the particulars of the case might effect the response of slashdot posters.
What about legacy stuff like custom DBaseIV apps, or FoxPro apps? I know of small business still using apps written in the early and mid 1990s. What about QuickBooks, Quicken, PeachTree? I have tried the Linux equivalents and they are no where near as good. What about PageMaker, DreamWeaver, Quark, PhotoShop, etc? Don't even think of mention GIMP for this, it is not even close to being equivalent.
Some new business tools are web based. Most are not, and that does not address the fact that most business will not have the latest and greatest. Business are not on the bleeding edge of adoption and are often the slowest adopters because of the expense involved.
The number of DEs and window managers may be irrelevant to you, but what about a developer? Should he develop using QT or GTK or something else?
You say you use Opera for web and mail, why not use KMail and Konqueror? And, the effect is the same because you have the Opera libraries loaded which duplicate functionality in the KDE libraries that are already loaded.
Why would you use Evolution? Because you need to connect to the Exchange server where you work.
Why would you use a KDE app in GNOME or vice versa? Because the app in the other DE works better, has better features, or is just your preference.
Interestingly, you seem to have hamstrung this part of your previous post:
The thing I really like about Linux is that it allows me alternatives... there are SO MANY ways to rip a movie, play a movie etc. Yes, sometimes I almost drown in choices... but when I need an alternate way to do something, the choice is there.
because you claim you only use the KDE apps with KDE and the GNOME apps with GNOME. You limit your choices by using only the apps that are native to the DE you are currently using.
Even when there are slight differences in appearance, big deal, they didn't stop me from using the MAC, they are not going to stop me from playing with Linux now.
Did you forget what your original question was?
That being said, how exactly do you claim the Mac experience is better?
The Mac experience is better because of the reasons I posted. It is better because it is MORE consistent, uses few resources, etc.
This is not about stopping you playing with an OS or even desktop environment. It is about what is holding Linux back from being a viable desktop operating system for the masses.
First, if you think this is a case of sour grapes, then you don't understand the fable.
Second, the write up is misleading:
Red Hat's CEO Jim Whitehurst pointed out several issues with running Linux on the desktop, including financial concerns the company has as a Linux vendor.
"First of all, I don't know how to make money on it," Whitehurst said. "Very few people are running a desktop that's mission-critical," so they do not want to pay the company for a desktop OS, he said.
There is some money in the Linux desktop, but not much, Whitehurst said. "We do have a desktop [version of Linux], but we typically sell it to big server customers who want some desktops." Red Hat offers its Red Hat Enterprise Desktop product, but Whitehurst added he was uncertain how relevant the desktop itself will be in five years, with the advent of concepts such as cloud-based and smartphone computing and VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure).
"The concept of a desktop is kind of ridiculous in this day and age," said Whitehurst. "I'd rather think about skating to where the puck is gong to be than where it is now," he said, using a hockey analogy.
I think Whitehurst and his cohorts are thinking beyond desktops and laptops to a future where computing is ubiquitous and people surf and email through their cell phones, game consoles, and TVs and the "desktop" is really a webtop.
O RLY? Answer the following questions for both Mac OSX and Linux:
How many window managers are there? How many different window manager STYLES are there? How many desktop environments are there? How many applications are there that use their own UI widgets (think Xine)?
Here is a little experiment for you: run FireFox, Evolution, Xine, XMMS, a GNOME app, and a KDE app on a Linux box and see how many different libraries with duplicated functionality are loaded.
Slashdot Mirror
1) So, you use a service to allow you to violate your contract with PayPal? Doesn't sound legal, moral, or ethical to me.
2) And, your community might not, and hasn't, so this argument goes on the pile of all the other arguments from fear.
3) And this requires a VPN connection to Pirate Bay why and how?
4) And this requires a VPN connection to Pirate Bay why and how?
5) And this requires a VPN connection to Pirate Bay why and how?
But, no one is showing the law is unjust. They are just breaking the law and claiming the law is unjust because they don't like the law, and they don't like the law because the law says they can't make copies of copyrighted works even if it is cheap and easy to do so. They trample on the rights of the copyright holders and then claim it should be their right to do so.
Name some legal, logical uses for a VPN connection to Pirate Bay, with current, valid examples.
The only problem with using Thoreau is that his argument was in regards to an unjust state, which is not the case here.
In fact, I wonder how he would feel about this issue considering he would be a content creator and copyright holder whose copy rights would be violated by the supporters of this system.
This is not shutting one's blinds or password protecting one's computer. If you wish to use an analogy, use an appropriate one.
This is building a sound-proof room in a bunker behind a 20ft, steel-reinforced, cinder block wall topped with barbed wire and watched by security cameras, and a gate guard that is specifically instructed to sound a silent alarm if the police show up and then to delay the police as long as possible before letting the police in.
This is using a piece of software that requires a 64 character password, which will write 1s and 0s directly to the drive if there are two consecutive password failures, on a computer kept in a room with a security system which will hit the drive with a magnet pulse and fry the electronics if the room is breached, and turns the only entryway into an electromagnet to erase the drives if someone tries to remove the boxes.
There is already privacy available through pirate bay, so why is this extreme protection necessary? Please point out any legitimate reason one would need this on Pirate Bay, a service that already offers privacy.
Then you change the laws, not break them. It is not civil disobedience. It is simple criminality.
Because the sun still shines in winter.
Because it is cold, or they burn easily, or they need protection from the elements, or simply because of social mores and laws.
Would you care to use an analogy which is not completely false and has a modicum of reality and relevance?
First, define drug paraphernalia.
Second, rolling paper, water bongs, etc. can be used with tobacco. By selling such items for use with tobacco, said items are not considered "drug paraphernalia" until they are used with marijuana. Thus, there is, in fact, a legal, logical use for such items.
A chef's knife is not a deadly weapon until it is used as such. Until it is used as such it is a kitchen tool.
A screwdriver or pry bar are not burglary tools until they are used to commit a burglary. Until they are, they are just tools.
Why would anyone need to "cover their tracks when torrenting" unless he was doing something illegal?
Awww, look, my modstalker is back.
If what you say is true, then how was this going to work as carbon storage to begin with?
It seems to me that the results show carbon would be stored longer because it is in the life cycle longer.
Blog about it in your slashdot journal then submit it as a story, duh!
OK, so squid and whales eat the amphipods and turn the carbon into whale and squid shit and then either the whales and squid are caught and eaten or die and sink to the bottom and are eaten down there.
Where is the failure in the carbon storage strategy?
Your argument is specious.
The number of people who could get a copy of the tape you bought was limited to your friends, the number of blank cassettes people were willing buy, and how long the source tape would last. There was a decent amount of time involved in duping a tape as well. Now, you can provide an almost perfect copy to anyone and everyone in the world who wants one, with little cost, no degradation of the original, no duplicating costs, almost instantly.
No longer are people hearing something from a friend and buying the album. Instead, if they hear something like, they are downloading the whole album. And, the reason is because they feel they are entitled to do so because the album has been put on line by someone else. They do not feel it is wrong to make an illegal copy because it is convenient and easy.
You know, reading comprehension makes the world a better place. Maybe you should try taking a class or two in it, dumbass.
So, it is only ok for people you like to use hammers to commit murder, eh?
Damn, you are an idiot.
I beg to differ. Slashdot response is highly dependent on whether the particulars are something they agree with or not.
Ex: Copyright enforcement is good when used to protect GNU and Linux, but is bad when applied to movies and music.
Really, then why are you doing it?
I noticed the blogger doesn't mention anything about the case itself. I wonder how knowing the particulars of the case might effect the response of slashdot posters.
What about legacy stuff like custom DBaseIV apps, or FoxPro apps? I know of small business still using apps written in the early and mid 1990s.
What about QuickBooks, Quicken, PeachTree? I have tried the Linux equivalents and they are no where near as good.
What about PageMaker, DreamWeaver, Quark, PhotoShop, etc? Don't even think of mention GIMP for this, it is not even close to being equivalent.
Some new business tools are web based. Most are not, and that does not address the fact that most business will not have the latest and greatest. Business are not on the bleeding edge of adoption and are often the slowest adopters because of the expense involved.
The number of DEs and window managers may be irrelevant to you, but what about a developer? Should he develop using QT or GTK or something else?
You say you use Opera for web and mail, why not use KMail and Konqueror? And, the effect is the same because you have the Opera libraries loaded which duplicate functionality in the KDE libraries that are already loaded.
Why would you use Evolution? Because you need to connect to the Exchange server where you work.
Why would you use a KDE app in GNOME or vice versa? Because the app in the other DE works better, has better features, or is just your preference.
Interestingly, you seem to have hamstrung this part of your previous post:
because you claim you only use the KDE apps with KDE and the GNOME apps with GNOME. You limit your choices by using only the apps that are native to the DE you are currently using.
Did you forget what your original question was?
The Mac experience is better because of the reasons I posted. It is better because it is MORE consistent, uses few resources, etc.
This is not about stopping you playing with an OS or even desktop environment. It is about what is holding Linux back from being a viable desktop operating system for the masses.
First, if you think this is a case of sour grapes, then you don't understand the fable.
Second, the write up is misleading:
I think Whitehurst and his cohorts are thinking beyond desktops and laptops to a future where computing is ubiquitous and people surf and email through their cell phones, game consoles, and TVs and the "desktop" is really a webtop.
O RLY?
Answer the following questions for both Mac OSX and Linux:
How many window managers are there?
How many different window manager STYLES are there?
How many desktop environments are there?
How many applications are there that use their own UI widgets (think Xine)?
Here is a little experiment for you: run FireFox, Evolution, Xine, XMMS, a GNOME app, and a KDE app on a Linux box and see how many different libraries with duplicated functionality are loaded.