I could be wrong about this, but I'm pretty sure that M & M Mars is an American company. I think you had become accustomed to the export model, not the original, until you arrived in its homeland.
I submitted an item on the countdown and it's implication of their return at t-44 hours and was rejected. I assumed that somebody had gotten in ahead of me, but now I see that The Powers simply preferred to wait. Ah well.
2) Here in MD, the police at a state school are yes, real police. Private colleges I dunno -- I'm guessing they're Keystone Kops.
3) Might help him, not likely it would save him. If the Powers can d/l an illegal file, then they've shown that he's distributing illegal files. Having other files is icing.
3) My other brother 3?
4) Good question. I'd overlook it, anyway. Erol's was originally a private club whose members purchased video tapes and held them in a common library, and then membership became very easy to get, and then they simply became a rental agency. Something along those lines might work, except that people insist on "sharing" copies. You and your buds might pass around a CD, or mail the disk to one another, but that's different from making dupes for each other.
Borland used to do it very well in their EULA. They compared it to a book -- loan it to a friend? Sure. Take it home and read it there? Sure. Xerox it so you and a friend can both use it at the same time? Wrong, and you know it's wrong. Let your friend buy a copy.
5) Sure, but there'd still be old-fashioned police work --undercover agents, or the ever-popular drop-a-dime-because-you-were-looking-at-my-girlfri end, or roll-over-on-your-friend-and-we'll-be-nice-about-t he-pot-bust. What the hell, 90% of police work has always been about people, not forensics.
They don't "make stars" -- they don't have a fucking clue what's going to be hot next year. For all they know we're all going to be screaming for Mongolian techno-jazz. All they really know is what was hot last year, so they sign more of that and hope to Christ they didn't wait too long, that they can sell SameAsNSync or Almost-Oasis or NaugaNirvana for a little longer before the market turns again and they're all standing around looking at their shoes and hoping the boss doesn't see them.
Yeah well, you stand for everything that sucks about Slashdot now. Just a bunch of tree hug ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H arrogant bastards who figure a shrug makes everything okay.
You messed with a cliche, man, and when you mess with a cliche you mess with me!
I speak for the poor and oppressed rock stars of this world, because somebody needs to stand up for them, to stop and say, "You can stamp out the family farm, you can destroy public education, you can screw up baseball with phony and senseless post-season wild-card games, but by GOD there's a limit to how much evil I will tolerate. When you start fucking with millionaire musicians, then you've got a fight on your hands, mister!"
Also, does Steve Albini look like this? I didn't think so
You mean, sort of sloppy drunk and goofy? I hope not.
There's gotta' be a pic where she looks more clueful than that.
Re:Oh, community, wherefore art thou?
on
Technoromanticism
·
· Score: 1
Listening carefully, you'd say "Hey, that sounds cool, I wonder what it is?"
Well now, that's almost exactly why I play my music at the proper volume -- good and loud. Of course, I listen to good stuff, so at worst I figure I might enlighten somebody.
(One of these days I'm going to make a tape of whale sounds and play that in the car, just to watch the reactions)
Seriously, though, I do see your point about their community spirit. I suspect, though, that they do see themselves as part of a community, just not mine. Certainly I've seen two boomcars at a stoplight, drivers grinning at each confraternally as every window in the neighborhood shakes (OK, the houses are old and not terribly well-built, but still).
'Course, maybe I'm just old.
"These damned kids, listening to that jungle music. It's all about sex, you know, that's all it is. Sex and dissonance. Doing that Charleston, and the Jitterbug -- country's going to hell, I tell you!"
Re:Oh, community, wherefore art thou?
on
Technoromanticism
·
· Score: 1
Maybe it's just where I live, but I sure don't see anyone leaving a door open with cool music coming out,
Where I live, it's every asshole with a boomcar playing some combination of shouted bad poetry and mercifully-deafening bass (at least I assume they're deaf. It would be a mercy. The levels of distortion and the rattle and buzz of every object not rubber-mounted in the car pretty much destroy any musical value the stuff might have.)
Google looks for links using the terms as well as the content of the page itself. Every time somebody had a The Great Satan then the little counter associating "Satan" with "Microsoft" clicked up.
When that story got around, of course, people put mentions of it on their sites, causing the same counters to spin even more.
But they're all equally arbitrary divisions. It's not like traffic laws are based on English common law, rent codes on Napoleonic, and civil cases on the UCMJ. They're simply specialties within the law, and I'm sure in most small towns they're handled by the same people in the same room.
I'm sure that by now there lawyers who specialize in "technology" issues, by which I imagine they would mean computers, telcomm, and electronics, just as there are malpractice attorneys. Certainly many law enforcement agencies have felt it necessary to spin off seperate units to handle these cases. It therefore might not laughable to allow judges to specialize as well.
It doesn't mean that each judge needs a CS degree, any more than the judges in Orphans Court need to be orphans. It does mean that they might develop a working knowledge of the field.
There's a post somewhere in this page (I think up from here) purporting to be from an attorney, commenting that tech issues are simple compared to law, and in some ways he's right (although I have to ask -- anybody out there doing IT for a law firm? Do your lawyers generally know where the power button is?). But that doesn't mean that any given attorney knows what issues to study, and you can't bone up on an issue of which you are unaware.What's your favorite intelligent-and-well-meaning-but-ignorant-user story?
Put it this way: If you walked into traffic court and found that the judge had never driven a car, might that bother you? Might it make it a little hard to explain what you meant about the blind spot of a truck? What if he didn't realize that left turns are different from right turns because of oncoming traffic? Are you certain that you would think to explain it to him?
Yes, you certainly can. There is a difference, however, between some star chamber deciding that you owe Uncle Whiskers $3 billion and that same court sending you to jail. The case described was one in which the Infernal Revenue court decided that X owed Y dollars. He wasn't convicted of a crime, he was notified of a debt (in Uncle's eyes).
Had he failed to pay that debt, then, perhaps, he would have been guilty of a crime and a jury trial should have been an option, after which the Minions of the State would have hanged him by the neck until dead, enslaved his people, and salted the earth of his homeland, as per normal procedure.
The point is that owing tax is not, by itself, a crime -- we all owe tax when we earn money here in this great country. What happens if you don't pay it becomes more complex, but filling out your 1040 is not a confession of a crime, and discussions of the amount owed are not criminal charges. (For that matter, if you get a refund it's not a pardon.)
Mind you, this becomes somewhat academic when the Revenooers (sorry, it's that hayseed thing slipping through) sieze your property and kill your dog and whatnot, but while they are apparently empowered to shoot you many, many times if you get in their way, I don't think that they are empowered to jail you without a trial in a real court.
But obviously, a lot of people disagree with me either because they don't want to open their mind (my opinion) or because I'm not thinking clearly (their opinion).
Well, I favour the latter hypothesis, of course, but you sound like a man who feels this thread has run on long enough, and I can't say I blame you. Perhaps we should agree to disagree until the next good/. article brings us all back into the lists.:)
Guess it's just me (after all, I'm just a citizen of that "hayseed jurisdiction", right next to those inbred yokels in DC), but:
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
I think the dodge in question (is there a lawyer in the house?) is that your tax bill is a procedural matter rather than a crime as such. I'm not sure that tax fraud could be settled without a jury option, but levying the bill can.
OJ proved (the following civil case against him vindicated this view point) the the outcome of a trial in the US can be bought.
Yeah, we're off-topic, but I can't let this one stand -- do you really believe that OJ Simpson had more money and people available to him than the state of California? Just how much do you think football players / actors make?
His legal team was what, three or four lawyers? How many in the prosecutor's office? He had how many investigators, compared to the LAPD?
He had more available to him than Joe Schmoe up for assault and battery with a public defender, but not a fraction of his opposition. The prosecution was out-lawyered, plain and simple, not out-gunned. The verdict may not have been good, but it wasn't bought.
I know that live shows are hard work -- I've watched a few (personally I can't tap my foot at the same time I hum). Then again, producing an album isn't trivial either (it's certainly beyond me). My question wasn't really whether or not the band earns their pay, but whether Napster users will care. I haven't heard anybody shouting "Recorded music should be free!"
Remember, these folks aren't downloading to feed themselves. They're doing it for entertainment. They're taking, not what they need, but what they want. Why should they stop at this particular line? This is stretching a point, but if there existed a means surreptitiously to broadcast your show to a nearby frat house and keg, are you sure they wouldn't do that and save themselves the cover? Remember, they're taking something weightless and they're not doing it for the money, and those seem to be the chief criteria. Your local tavern owner could be "the Man" just as easily as a record company. ("Oh, I'd gladly pay the band directly, you know, but these bars are making obscene profits off these cover charges and inflated drink prices. I'm doing this for the music, man! Power to the people!")
And of course nobody is forced to make a living by recording. I just don't see why anybody should be forced away from it. Michael Jackson isn't hoarding food, he's providing entertainment, and if people don't choose to pay for it they can certainly soldier on without it (God knows that in his case I'd pay some not to hear it). There's no compelling need here, just desire, and I can't fathom how Napster's desire to suck at the trough overrides the desire of some musicians to charge for their recordings.
Slashdot Mirror
I could be wrong about this, but I'm pretty sure that M & M Mars is an American company. I think you had become accustomed to the export model, not the original, until you arrived in its homeland.
Of course, if I did that less often she might be able to think more clearly about classical mechanics...
Perhaps so, since "acceleration" could equally have described the stars' slowing down, or changing direction while maintaining speed.
Sorry. Let me save the Grammer Nazi the effort and slap my own wrist: "its implication", not "it's implication".
I submitted an item on the countdown and it's implication of their return at t-44 hours and was rejected. I assumed that somebody had gotten in ahead of me, but now I see that The Powers simply preferred to wait. Ah well.
So do the MIT police get badgenumbers like 1.276e-27?
1)'Bout time, if you ask me.
2) Here in MD, the police at a state school are yes, real police. Private colleges I dunno -- I'm guessing they're Keystone Kops.
3) Might help him, not likely it would save him. If the Powers can d/l an illegal file, then they've shown that he's distributing illegal files. Having other files is icing.
3) My other brother 3?
4) Good question. I'd overlook it, anyway. Erol's was originally a private club whose members purchased video tapes and held them in a common library, and then membership became very easy to get, and then they simply became a rental agency. Something along those lines might work, except that people insist on "sharing" copies. You and your buds might pass around a CD, or mail the disk to one another, but that's different from making dupes for each other.
Borland used to do it very well in their EULA. They compared it to a book -- loan it to a friend? Sure. Take it home and read it there? Sure. Xerox it so you and a friend can both use it at the same time? Wrong, and you know it's wrong. Let your friend buy a copy.
5) Sure, but there'd still be old-fashioned police work --undercover agents, or the ever-popular drop-a-dime-because-you-were-looking-at-my-girlfri end, or roll-over-on-your-friend-and-we'll-be-nice-about-t he-pot-bust. What the hell, 90% of police work has always been about people, not forensics.
They don't "make stars" -- they don't have a fucking clue what's going to be hot next year. For all they know we're all going to be screaming for Mongolian techno-jazz. All they really know is what was hot last year, so they sign more of that and hope to Christ they didn't wait too long, that they can sell SameAsNSync or Almost-Oasis or NaugaNirvana for a little longer before the market turns again and they're all standing around looking at their shoes and hoping the boss doesn't see them.
You messed with a cliche, man, and when you mess with a cliche you mess with me!
"A day late and a dollar short"
But USA Today is television!
I speak for the poor and oppressed rock stars of this world, because somebody needs to stand up for them, to stop and say, "You can stamp out the family farm, you can destroy public education, you can screw up baseball with phony and senseless post-season wild-card games, but by GOD there's a limit to how much evil I will tolerate. When you start fucking with millionaire musicians, then you've got a fight on your hands, mister!"
So I take that you'd be willing to pony up Metallica royalties for a year?
It may be a small percentage, but a little slice of a big pie can still come out to quite a bit of money.
Personally I'd happily accept a penny for every Metallica album sold.
You mean, sort of sloppy drunk and goofy? I hope not.
There's gotta' be a pic where she looks more clueful than that.
Well now, that's almost exactly why I play my music at the proper volume -- good and loud. Of course, I listen to good stuff, so at worst I figure I might enlighten somebody.
(One of these days I'm going to make a tape of whale sounds and play that in the car, just to watch the reactions)
Seriously, though, I do see your point about their community spirit. I suspect, though, that they do see themselves as part of a community, just not mine. Certainly I've seen two boomcars at a stoplight, drivers grinning at each confraternally as every window in the neighborhood shakes (OK, the houses are old and not terribly well-built, but still).
'Course, maybe I'm just old.
"These damned kids, listening to that jungle music. It's all about sex, you know, that's all it is. Sex and dissonance. Doing that Charleston, and the Jitterbug -- country's going to hell, I tell you!"
Where I live, it's every asshole with a boomcar playing some combination of shouted bad poetry and mercifully-deafening bass (at least I assume they're deaf. It would be a mercy. The levels of distortion and the rattle and buzz of every object not rubber-mounted in the car pretty much destroy any musical value the stuff might have.)
When that story got around, of course, people put mentions of it on their sites, causing the same counters to spin even more.
Jeez, what kind of uncreative moron would use his own name, for God's sake!
I'm sure that by now there lawyers who specialize in "technology" issues, by which I imagine they would mean computers, telcomm, and electronics, just as there are malpractice attorneys. Certainly many law enforcement agencies have felt it necessary to spin off seperate units to handle these cases. It therefore might not laughable to allow judges to specialize as well.
It doesn't mean that each judge needs a CS degree, any more than the judges in Orphans Court need to be orphans. It does mean that they might develop a working knowledge of the field.
There's a post somewhere in this page (I think up from here) purporting to be from an attorney, commenting that tech issues are simple compared to law, and in some ways he's right (although I have to ask -- anybody out there doing IT for a law firm? Do your lawyers generally know where the power button is?). But that doesn't mean that any given attorney knows what issues to study, and you can't bone up on an issue of which you are unaware.What's your favorite intelligent-and-well-meaning-but-ignorant-user story?
Put it this way: If you walked into traffic court and found that the judge had never driven a car, might that bother you? Might it make it a little hard to explain what you meant about the blind spot of a truck? What if he didn't realize that left turns are different from right turns because of oncoming traffic? Are you certain that you would think to explain it to him?
Had he failed to pay that debt, then, perhaps, he would have been guilty of a crime and a jury trial should have been an option, after which the Minions of the State would have hanged him by the neck until dead, enslaved his people, and salted the earth of his homeland, as per normal procedure.
The point is that owing tax is not, by itself, a crime -- we all owe tax when we earn money here in this great country. What happens if you don't pay it becomes more complex, but filling out your 1040 is not a confession of a crime, and discussions of the amount owed are not criminal charges. (For that matter, if you get a refund it's not a pardon.)
Mind you, this becomes somewhat academic when the Revenooers (sorry, it's that hayseed thing slipping through) sieze your property and kill your dog and whatnot, but while they are apparently empowered to shoot you many, many times if you get in their way, I don't think that they are empowered to jail you without a trial in a real court.
Well, I favour the latter hypothesis, of course, but you sound like a man who feels this thread has run on long enough, and I can't say I blame you. Perhaps we should agree to disagree until the next good /. article brings us all back into the lists. :)
Yeah, and then you might have traffic courts! And civil courts! And small-claims courts! And rent courts! It would never end!
Yeah, we're off-topic, but I can't let this one stand -- do you really believe that OJ Simpson had more money and people available to him than the state of California? Just how much do you think football players / actors make?
His legal team was what, three or four lawyers? How many in the prosecutor's office? He had how many investigators, compared to the LAPD?
He had more available to him than Joe Schmoe up for assault and battery with a public defender, but not a fraction of his opposition. The prosecution was out-lawyered, plain and simple, not out-gunned. The verdict may not have been good, but it wasn't bought.
Remember, these folks aren't downloading to feed themselves. They're doing it for entertainment. They're taking, not what they need, but what they want. Why should they stop at this particular line? This is stretching a point, but if there existed a means surreptitiously to broadcast your show to a nearby frat house and keg, are you sure they wouldn't do that and save themselves the cover? Remember, they're taking something weightless and they're not doing it for the money, and those seem to be the chief criteria. Your local tavern owner could be "the Man" just as easily as a record company. ("Oh, I'd gladly pay the band directly, you know, but these bars are making obscene profits off these cover charges and inflated drink prices. I'm doing this for the music, man! Power to the people!")
And of course nobody is forced to make a living by recording. I just don't see why anybody should be forced away from it. Michael Jackson isn't hoarding food, he's providing entertainment, and if people don't choose to pay for it they can certainly soldier on without it (God knows that in his case I'd pay some not to hear it). There's no compelling need here, just desire, and I can't fathom how Napster's desire to suck at the trough overrides the desire of some musicians to charge for their recordings.