Being an English Major myself, I take offence to this. There is no "correct" way to interpret a piece, but there are "more incorrect" ways to interpret a piece.
e.g. Making the assumption that J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is a religious allegory without proper research into the author's opinions (Tolkien in his Preface to LOTR stated that he hates allegory). Such an assumption is obviously incorrect unless you can prove that Tolkien was lying, but it would have to be a very convincing argument.
There are many criticism courses offered by universities and in upper years much work is done on criticism since it is an integral part of the English discipline. The "modern" way of thinking you refer to can be more attributed to high school English programs where most of the students are not interested enough in English to want to learn other ways of thinking. Of course, a good english teacher would encourage his/her keen students to explore other criticism methods outside of class time.
Right on! Dr. Who is the greatest sci-fi show ever, and had the longest run. The B&W episodes were really campy, but they're fun. The later ones were just amazing. The Fox tv movie was pretty good, but I'm not sure if a series by Fox of the Doctor would have been a good thing or a bad thing. I just can't wait for the new episode written by Douglas Adams.
I'm pretty sure Tolkien liked his book better as a full volume, and it was the editors that told him to split it up. I think there was a story on slashdot about this a couple of months back.
The 10% not only applies to teachers, but to students as well. The photocopies do not necessarily come out of the special edition, it's called "Fair Use", and it applies to ANY book.
You mean like putting locks on their doors and selling safes?
It would be more akin to a housing company selling houses with locked doors that the owner does not have keys to and threatening persecution if it's ever opened.
For educational purposes one is allowed to photocopy up to 10% of a given work, so copying music for educational purposes up to 10% of the given work would then be acceptable, but impossible under a DRM system.
And no, I don't believe the terabytes of MP3s are used for educational purposes, not by any stretch of the imagination. I do believe, however, that the general public should be trusted to do the right thing, whether they do or not. Allowing corporations to restrict the free will of the real people in society is irresponsible. Taking from Karl Marx's ideologies the ruling class will always be able to dictate policies in society unless the people get together and say no. Make no mistake, I believe in the rights of people to hold copyrights, but the DRM will ultimately benefit corporations at the expense of the real people in society. Corporations are not real people, but they get treated as people and have more resources to exercise their rights and crush the little guy.
Do banks settle with low grade security in their vaults just because it's illegal to break in? No. Do banks lobby for the outlawing of guns just because they're used in many bank robberies? No, because there are many fair, if not distasteful, uses for guns other than holding up banks, much as there are many uses for copies of music that are not illegal. Take, for example, educational purposes. Many of my university lecture halls do not have CD drives on their desktop computers, but they have access to the internet, so if a professor ever wanted to play a piece of music stored somewhere on the internet for educational purposes (which I do believe is permissable) he or she would not be able to under a DRM system.
I bought the CD, and as far as the law extended before the DMCA I can make personal copies providing I do not distribute it. That is fair use. Whether I listen to it on CD or in digital format should not matter; I paid for the music, and I should be able to listen to it wherever I wish.
So I guess I'll have to buy 3 copies of an artist's work to satisfy the RIAA if I would like to have a copy on CD, one on MD, and one on my computer, hmmm... That doesn't seem right. I'd like to see a copying ring that would bite into the RIAA profits. The decline of profits for the RIAA is IMHO because the new acts suck.
I'm very glad you believe each and every one of us is a thief. The fact is DRM will curtail a lot of fair-use applications for technology. In the 80s we were allowed to make copies of media for personal use, so why not now? Because the technology has improved and the Industries are losing their ability to peddle their overrated drivel to the masses at a bloated price. If anything DRM will oppress innovation as each new technological advancement that interferes with the profits of the Industries is proclaimed illegal. Instead of spending their money on lobbying for laws against piracy why not make a better, more reasonably priced product that people will buy to save the inconvenience of piracy. I know I'm more likely to buy many $10 CDs that any $20 CD.
At the high school I used to attend, the board techies once blocked all common incoming ports (ie. ftp, sendmail, telnet) except 80 out of spite because we had a linux server serving webpages that students and staff created as well as the official school website. They even denied doing this until we asked them why nobody could remote ftp to upload webpages. They quickly fixed that port, and whenever we needed a service opened we would have to petition them to get it opened. We won an outstanding new project award from the school board as a whole, but all we received from the board techies was strife over the linux machine. Unfortunately a lot of techies tend to hate what they can't understand, but in the case of p2p I can understand the predicament.
Ok, well I apolagise for misinterpreting your comment, but I still contest the opinion that Slashdot is any different from CNN. How many times do you think a headline from CNN concerning topics such as the war in Afghanistan has been exaggerated or presented misleading facts because it makes the American government sound better? Slashdot is to Microsoft as CNN is to Afghanistan. Microsoft is the enemy to many of us, and our biased headlines about it are just as excusable as CNN's headlines about Afghanistan.
Well apparently you don't think news sites provide opinons... That's interesting... I guess all these sites are compiled by completely impartial robots with no bias whatsoever. Dream on! It's impossible to convey a story without bias. At any rate, most of those sites have an opinions section, and slashdot just features theirs more.
We, as starving Canadian university students were wondering if you could give us any tips on how to make a successful, but relatively low-budget movie. Seeing as both yourself and Sam Raimi made your start in university film, we thought you would have some brilliant advice for us. Incidentally, we were wondering if you could also make a guest appearance, but we can only pay you in chainsaws and fake blood. Just kidding, we can't pay you at all!
P.S. you are our hero. We all got chin implants and "Groovy!" tattooed on our nether regions.
Are you pissed that hack-job horror film directors are ripping off the original Evil Dead ideas? e.g. Blair Witch Project: the unseen dead and shaky camera shots.
A lot of basics of war have been thrown out the window in the past to achieve certain goals. Napoleon violated protocol during his campaigns in Europe by attacking at night, but now it is a commonplace event. Just because our Western conception of warfare doesn't agree with what Khomeini did does not mean it was wrong. To him, these diplomats were representatives of the American Machine and he needed at least some leverage with the United States to secure his country's future. You cannot apply our rules of war to desperate people, because they don't have the resources to play fair. They need to get something done, and they do it. I'm not saying taking hostages or flying planes into buildings is at all justified, but in their minds desperate times call for desperate measures. The Iranians were not animals for taking hostages, but they were treated as such. We have to keep perspective in these situations, and remember that most of our countries have done far worse than 911 or the Iran hostage crisis.
Re:Actually...
on
Globalization
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Oh of course it has to be the Israeli conflict that is the cause of all this hatred. That makes an awful lot of sense; the US never switched sides during the Iran-Iraqi war, or screwed the Arab countries for the sake of oil or other profitable endeavors. The fact of the matter is that the US has done very terrible things over there. The Ayatollah Khomeini had his reasons for taking hostages two decades ago, and he became a hated man then for protecting the freedoms of his own people.
Drop Israel, and everything will be fine. Or will it?
Everything will not be fine if Israel is dropped because Bin Laden will only want more. Israel is not the root of the problem, American business practices and wartime actions are the roots of this conflict. Bin Laden blew up the Pentagon and the WTC for a reason, it was not an act of random violence like most would like to think.
This bill passed by the American Government seems to extend even beyond the borders of the US and into other countries. If the internet, being an international entity, is to be monitored, should it not be monitored by an international entity as opposed to a single, albeit powerful country? Much internet traffic routes itself through the US out of and into other countries. The abuses made possible by such monitoring is frighteningly obvious. The FBI could easily be gathering information on citizens of other countries who they do not feel any sort of duty to remain professional about. Each country has the right to protect its own citizens, and suddenly the American government decides that it is an international entity and can do whatever it wants. Shouldn't the W3 Consortium or some other omnipotent Internet organization step in and at least monitor such mass information gathering? Of course that will never happen, since all of these organizations are owned by American Business anyways *shudder*. All that power in the hands of a few select people sends chills down my spine.
Slashdot Mirror
Being an English Major myself, I take offence to this. There is no "correct" way to interpret a piece, but there are "more incorrect" ways to interpret a piece.
e.g. Making the assumption that J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is a religious allegory without proper research into the author's opinions (Tolkien in his Preface to LOTR stated that he hates allegory). Such an assumption is obviously incorrect unless you can prove that Tolkien was lying, but it would have to be a very convincing argument.
There are many criticism courses offered by universities and in upper years much work is done on criticism since it is an integral part of the English discipline. The "modern" way of thinking you refer to can be more attributed to high school English programs where most of the students are not interested enough in English to want to learn other ways of thinking. Of course, a good english teacher would encourage his/her keen students to explore other criticism methods outside of class time.
Fawkes...a phoenix? Guy Fawkes tried to blow up British Parliament, and now his effigy gets burned on bonfires, coincidence?
Right on! Dr. Who is the greatest sci-fi show ever, and had the longest run. The B&W episodes were really campy, but they're fun. The later ones were just amazing. The Fox tv movie was pretty good, but I'm not sure if a series by Fox of the Doctor would have been a good thing or a bad thing. I just can't wait for the new episode written by Douglas Adams.
EXTERMINATE!
I believe the word he was looking for was probably oeuvre, but even that's not quite right ;)
I'm pretty sure Tolkien liked his book better as a full volume, and it was the editors that told him to split it up. I think there was a story on slashdot about this a couple of months back.
And that's the reason why I didn't buy the first DVD... I knew the other one was coming out and that it would be better.
The 10% not only applies to teachers, but to students as well. The photocopies do not necessarily come out of the special edition, it's called "Fair Use", and it applies to ANY book.
You mean like putting locks on their doors and selling safes?
It would be more akin to a housing company selling houses with locked doors that the owner does not have keys to and threatening persecution if it's ever opened.
For educational purposes one is allowed to photocopy up to 10% of a given work, so copying music for educational purposes up to 10% of the given work would then be acceptable, but impossible under a DRM system.
And no, I don't believe the terabytes of MP3s are used for educational purposes, not by any stretch of the imagination. I do believe, however, that the general public should be trusted to do the right thing, whether they do or not. Allowing corporations to restrict the free will of the real people in society is irresponsible. Taking from Karl Marx's ideologies the ruling class will always be able to dictate policies in society unless the people get together and say no. Make no mistake, I believe in the rights of people to hold copyrights, but the DRM will ultimately benefit corporations at the expense of the real people in society. Corporations are not real people, but they get treated as people and have more resources to exercise their rights and crush the little guy.
Do banks settle with low grade security in their vaults just because it's illegal to break in? No. Do banks lobby for the outlawing of guns just because they're used in many bank robberies? No, because there are many fair, if not distasteful, uses for guns other than holding up banks, much as there are many uses for copies of music that are not illegal. Take, for example, educational purposes. Many of my university lecture halls do not have CD drives on their desktop computers, but they have access to the internet, so if a professor ever wanted to play a piece of music stored somewhere on the internet for educational purposes (which I do believe is permissable) he or she would not be able to under a DRM system.
If he is indeed a troll, he is a coherent troll so I don't mind responding.
I bought the CD, and as far as the law extended before the DMCA I can make personal copies providing I do not distribute it. That is fair use. Whether I listen to it on CD or in digital format should not matter; I paid for the music, and I should be able to listen to it wherever I wish.
So I guess I'll have to buy 3 copies of an artist's work to satisfy the RIAA if I would like to have a copy on CD, one on MD, and one on my computer, hmmm... That doesn't seem right. I'd like to see a copying ring that would bite into the RIAA profits. The decline of profits for the RIAA is IMHO because the new acts suck.
I'm very glad you believe each and every one of us is a thief. The fact is DRM will curtail a lot of fair-use applications for technology. In the 80s we were allowed to make copies of media for personal use, so why not now? Because the technology has improved and the Industries are losing their ability to peddle their overrated drivel to the masses at a bloated price. If anything DRM will oppress innovation as each new technological advancement that interferes with the profits of the Industries is proclaimed illegal. Instead of spending their money on lobbying for laws against piracy why not make a better, more reasonably priced product that people will buy to save the inconvenience of piracy. I know I'm more likely to buy many $10 CDs that any $20 CD.
At the high school I used to attend, the board techies once blocked all common incoming ports (ie. ftp, sendmail, telnet) except 80 out of spite because we had a linux server serving webpages that students and staff created as well as the official school website. They even denied doing this until we asked them why nobody could remote ftp to upload webpages. They quickly fixed that port, and whenever we needed a service opened we would have to petition them to get it opened. We won an outstanding new project award from the school board as a whole, but all we received from the board techies was strife over the linux machine. Unfortunately a lot of techies tend to hate what they can't understand, but in the case of p2p I can understand the predicament.
Ok, well I apolagise for misinterpreting your comment, but I still contest the opinion that Slashdot is any different from CNN. How many times do you think a headline from CNN concerning topics such as the war in Afghanistan has been exaggerated or presented misleading facts because it makes the American government sound better? Slashdot is to Microsoft as CNN is to Afghanistan. Microsoft is the enemy to many of us, and our biased headlines about it are just as excusable as CNN's headlines about Afghanistan.
Well apparently you don't think news sites provide opinons... That's interesting... I guess all these sites are compiled by completely impartial robots with no bias whatsoever. Dream on! It's impossible to convey a story without bias. At any rate, most of those sites have an opinions section, and slashdot just features theirs more.
We, as starving Canadian university students were wondering if you could give us any tips on how to make a successful, but relatively low-budget movie. Seeing as both yourself and Sam Raimi made your start in university film, we thought you would have some brilliant advice for us. Incidentally, we were wondering if you could also make a guest appearance, but we can only pay you in chainsaws and fake blood. Just kidding, we can't pay you at all!
P.S. you are our hero. We all got chin implants and "Groovy!" tattooed on our nether regions.
Are you pissed that hack-job horror film directors are ripping off the original Evil Dead ideas? e.g. Blair Witch Project: the unseen dead and shaky camera shots.
A lot of basics of war have been thrown out the window in the past to achieve certain goals. Napoleon violated protocol during his campaigns in Europe by attacking at night, but now it is a commonplace event. Just because our Western conception of warfare doesn't agree with what Khomeini did does not mean it was wrong. To him, these diplomats were representatives of the American Machine and he needed at least some leverage with the United States to secure his country's future. You cannot apply our rules of war to desperate people, because they don't have the resources to play fair. They need to get something done, and they do it. I'm not saying taking hostages or flying planes into buildings is at all justified, but in their minds desperate times call for desperate measures. The Iranians were not animals for taking hostages, but they were treated as such. We have to keep perspective in these situations, and remember that most of our countries have done far worse than 911 or the Iran hostage crisis.
Oh of course it has to be the Israeli conflict that is the cause of all this hatred. That makes an awful lot of sense; the US never switched sides during the Iran-Iraqi war, or screwed the Arab countries for the sake of oil or other profitable endeavors. The fact of the matter is that the US has done very terrible things over there. The Ayatollah Khomeini had his reasons for taking hostages two decades ago, and he became a hated man then for protecting the freedoms of his own people.
Drop Israel, and everything will be fine. Or will it?
Everything will not be fine if Israel is dropped because Bin Laden will only want more. Israel is not the root of the problem, American business practices and wartime actions are the roots of this conflict. Bin Laden blew up the Pentagon and the WTC for a reason, it was not an act of random violence like most would like to think.
This bill passed by the American Government seems to extend even beyond the borders of the US and into other countries. If the internet, being an international entity, is to be monitored, should it not be monitored by an international entity as opposed to a single, albeit powerful country? Much internet traffic routes itself through the US out of and into other countries. The abuses made possible by such monitoring is frighteningly obvious. The FBI could easily be gathering information on citizens of other countries who they do not feel any sort of duty to remain professional about. Each country has the right to protect its own citizens, and suddenly the American government decides that it is an international entity and can do whatever it wants. Shouldn't the W3 Consortium or some other omnipotent Internet organization step in and at least monitor such mass information gathering? Of course that will never happen, since all of these organizations are owned by American Business anyways *shudder*. All that power in the hands of a few select people sends chills down my spine.