We can't afford what we are doing in Iraq or Afghanistan due to the economy and an artificially high price of oil compared to demand. Add that to the fact that most Americans are getting very tired of being the World Police, (insert your own movie related joke here) and I think they are not sweating it too much, instead trying to capitalize on it.
I'm ex USAF, son of retired USAF, and in spite of (or because of) this, I am finally realizing that our involvement in these wars may help us in the short term, but hurts us in the long term. Perhaps imposing our version of freedom on people who don't want it isn't such a great idea. They need their own civil war and to figure it out on their own. What we *don't* need is to yet again become the common enemy that unites both sides.
You can order from HP or Dell and get the components you want without building from scratch. Most nerds are going to at least customize a base system to get the better video card and more ram, period. I know of NO real programmer or anyone that truly uses a computer for a living, who just marches off and buys a bone stock box. Maybe someone's mom, for an email machine, but anyone with any brains about computing will always pick at least some of the components.
While I don't agree that the majority of Iranians support their government, a large enough minority does to make a quick transition to some type of truly representative governing impossible without violence.
What I absolutely agree with is the idea that the US, the UN and everyone else needs to stay out of the way and not become a distraction or 'common enemy'. The greatest good we can do in America is to be less dependent on oil, lowering the price. Right now a little bit of isolationism would help force them to get their own house in order. In time.
I know this sounds odd, but it makes we want to get a million people who are not Iranians and put enough information on our Facebook pages to at least slow the Iranian govt. down, by making them wade through it.
This is slashdot, news for nerds. Nerds don't buy computers from Best Buy. Real nerds don't ever even shop for anything at Best Buy. Best Buy is where wannabe nerds go so they can pay higher than advertised prices on products that the salespersons know little about, but they still know more than the wannabe nerds. I could go on, but I think you get the picture, and the rest of the people reading this already knew these facts.
Its more of a case of precedent, not the actual law. This is why the judge released her with no $ bond. It appears that he gets it. Even the police were sympathetic somewhat. It was only the manager who was being the dick, it seems.
But she caught short clips, and it is obvious her intent wasn't to try to fully capture the film, from what I can see. Being curious and capturing a couple of minutes shouldn't be a criminal act regardless. Kick her out, fine, but it sounds like the theatre manager is simply enjoying being a dick to me.
Fair use only applies if she was exhibiting the short clips for the purpose of a review, to parody (but not to satire) or to educate. Since she didn't own a legal copy to be exempted as an "archive copy", these are about her only outs. I hope they continue to prosecute, as this is the only way to show how genuinely borked our current legal system is, by allowing this silliness to get to a real court.
This demonstrates why "copyright infringement" should only be a civil issue and not criminal issue. Of course, the people who are actually copying the movie to sell them are running around free, while the incidental filming is prosecuted. Same legal genius thinking that gets us to prosecute little old ladies for stealing mp3's, even if they don't even know what an mp3 is.
Karma whoring at it's finest. Some of us run departments, play on Facebook, have successful marriages, fish on the weekends, visit with family regularly, and still have the time to hit slashdot, simply because it saves us time by consolidating tech news.
I know its fun for/.ers ourselves lonely losers, but in reality, most of the readers are likely quite successful in one way or another, or all the "your rights online" and quazi-political articles and such would be meaningless.
Lets not forget that Chrome OS being Linux based and open source means it is likely to benefit other projects as much as those other projects benefit Chrome. Some tweaks may help Linux servers or desktops, etc. More importantly, it opens up a different class of computing, basically "internet only" which is what netbooks are supposed to be, kinda. The current generation of netbooks haven't tempted me because they do too much, too slowly. This might make them an essential item as well as more affordable, which increases sales, which creates jobs, rinse, repeat.
How about Google simply allowing logged in readers to use checkboxes to hide certain outlets? Let me filter out the Fox News's and others that want only to get subscriptions, and let me view the ones who make their money off of ads.
Are you kidding me? That kind of crap is for chemists. We physicists just let our wave functions interact until there is barrier penetration through tunneling. We enforce strict segregation of fermions, but boson-on-boson action is encouraged. As a fermion, I'm usually spin-up when I see their wave functions collapsing.
Well, now that you put it that way, it's easy to see why particle physicists get all the girls.;)
The fact that all serious climate scientists believe man made global warming is the best model to explain their data is all us non-climate scientists really need to know.
And the fact that all serious Christian ministers believe that God is an old man on a mountain and has an inferiority complex that demands we grovel to him is all we need to know about the beginning of the universe? No thanks to either.
Drawing conclusions based on 61mb of data is impossible for the layman, but I am not willing to take what 30 scientists using a close set of data swear is the "truth" at face value either. Hopefully this will force the methods used to be more open.
Indeed. They're way behind the UK Government though - who needs PS3s, when they can just make it illegal for someone to not decrypt any files they find...
Last I heard, that wasn't working out so good either. What is one more criminal violation when you are accused of several? Making it illegal to not decrypt files is like requiring tax stamps on illegal drugs. Yes they do it, but it seldom produces any results in the courts.
1. Block any and all direct links to Newscorp owned sites in the search results.
And Fox would sue because they are being singled out because they are "conservative" or similar (I have already commented on this last time this topic was brought up on/.) In order for Google to be fair and unbiased, they have to consider all news sources. They point out on the news page that a machine picks the stories, not a human. Until they have a better reason to block News Corp., they would be inviting scrutiny and a potential lawsuit, no matter how baseless (and unwinable) the lawsuit would be. Google is doing the best thing they can do, which is to ignore News Corp.'s words in public and treat them according to their robots.txt requests.
You're casting pearls before swine. Most people find it more comforting to blame others for their lack of success than to go out and work the 60+ hours a week and take the risks. Even by a reasonably modest definition of financial success (over 100k a year), you find that most of those people regularly spend some of their free time honing their skills instead of bitching about their bosses. Then again, most people making 100k or more a year are self-employed and willing to sacrifice a little comfort and take some extra risk in order to get ahead in the long run. Attitude is half the reason for success, and the foundation to justify working the extra time needed to move up and on. Most people don't "buy it", don't trust "the system", so they won't work on commission, don't want stock options, and simply want to punch in at 8am and leave at 5pm, guaranteed pay on Friday, go to the bar and complain about the boss/wife/kids. And you damn sure better pay time and a half for overtime. We need lots of those kinds of people to do the ground level work, so that's ok. They work relatively cheap and can be easily replaced. In many cases, even speaking English is optional. Not cynical, just realistic.
There is an old saying: The reason it is so lonely at the top is because it is so crowded at the bottom.
Look at Slashdot cheering at the piracy. It's really sickening how much Slashdot LOVES piracy now and encourages it at every opportunity.
Slashot loves technology. It's the users that love and encourage piracy, and enjoy something for nothing. While I am at it, I would like to take the time to encourage you to go to PublicDomainTorrents and download some movies for free. Or maybe you can grab a torrent to "pirate" Linux and other GPL s0ftwarez. To the ISPs that throttle, all torrent traffic looks the same, so hopefully you don't have one of those ISPs.
Remember kids: Drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes and downloading music and movies makes you look cool, and girls really dig it!
But at least they got some overvalued homes in the deal. They (we) *did* get more than just 'intellectual property'. Even if the homes burned down, the dirt under them are still worth SOMETHING...
I feel lucky being 44, and was on the forefront of the web. I too had a BBS, 1, 2 then 3 lines, and before that, I was a user of BBSes. My first internet account was a unix shell, and once I got graphical internet, most of my time was usenet and irc, perhaps as it was a direct extension of what we did on the BBS. It wasn't terrible not having the internet and cell phones when I grew up (grad. HS in 83). I would miss it, but it would not be the end of civilization.
You are right that we would BBS again, we would form local user groups, again. We would still be able to find "stuff" just fine, although we would be choosier at 50k than at 10mb connections. We would till be emailing, via FidoNet, and we would just have to get over the fact that email wasn't instantanious.
The real hit would be all the businesses that are now solely internet based, including the company I work for. I started in the early 90s, and they were a regional distributor of products, and now almost all our business is internet based. In a way, it would benefit me, as all the guys who did what I did back before the internet are gone, so there aren't many in my field that remember "pre-internet", which of course would be an advantage. Not an advantage I hope to use as it would be a bitch, but change always bring opportunity to those that can adapt. Regardless of whether there is or isn't an internet, that won't change what I drive, where I live, who my family is, or what I had for dinner. It would only change what I am occupied with for 50 or so hours during the week.
Some TV shows are best watched as DVDs anyway. The best example is Carnivale, which was on HBO. You really have to pay attention or you miss details, and by the next week, you might have already forgotten them. Watching one or two a day for a few weeks allows you to have better continuity in viewing, and "get" the plot in a deeper sense. I can't imagine trying to wait a week between episodes for a TV show like that, which is deep in mysticism and complexity. Either DVR it, or buy the DVDs.
Now Mythbusters, Family Guy, and other shows that don't really require continuity, once a week is fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Or it is kinda like this article from 1998. Sometimes life imitates art.
Isn't that pretty much a given feature of Chrome OS?
We can't afford what we are doing in Iraq or Afghanistan due to the economy and an artificially high price of oil compared to demand. Add that to the fact that most Americans are getting very tired of being the World Police, (insert your own movie related joke here) and I think they are not sweating it too much, instead trying to capitalize on it.
I'm ex USAF, son of retired USAF, and in spite of (or because of) this, I am finally realizing that our involvement in these wars may help us in the short term, but hurts us in the long term. Perhaps imposing our version of freedom on people who don't want it isn't such a great idea. They need their own civil war and to figure it out on their own. What we *don't* need is to yet again become the common enemy that unites both sides.
You can order from HP or Dell and get the components you want without building from scratch. Most nerds are going to at least customize a base system to get the better video card and more ram, period. I know of NO real programmer or anyone that truly uses a computer for a living, who just marches off and buys a bone stock box. Maybe someone's mom, for an email machine, but anyone with any brains about computing will always pick at least some of the components.
While I don't agree that the majority of Iranians support their government, a large enough minority does to make a quick transition to some type of truly representative governing impossible without violence.
What I absolutely agree with is the idea that the US, the UN and everyone else needs to stay out of the way and not become a distraction or 'common enemy'. The greatest good we can do in America is to be less dependent on oil, lowering the price. Right now a little bit of isolationism would help force them to get their own house in order. In time.
I know this sounds odd, but it makes we want to get a million people who are not Iranians and put enough information on our Facebook pages to at least slow the Iranian govt. down, by making them wade through it.
This is slashdot, news for nerds. Nerds don't buy computers from Best Buy. Real nerds don't ever even shop for anything at Best Buy. Best Buy is where wannabe nerds go so they can pay higher than advertised prices on products that the salespersons know little about, but they still know more than the wannabe nerds. I could go on, but I think you get the picture, and the rest of the people reading this already knew these facts.
Its more of a case of precedent, not the actual law. This is why the judge released her with no $ bond. It appears that he gets it. Even the police were sympathetic somewhat. It was only the manager who was being the dick, it seems.
But she caught short clips, and it is obvious her intent wasn't to try to fully capture the film, from what I can see. Being curious and capturing a couple of minutes shouldn't be a criminal act regardless. Kick her out, fine, but it sounds like the theatre manager is simply enjoying being a dick to me.
Fair use only applies if she was exhibiting the short clips for the purpose of a review, to parody (but not to satire) or to educate. Since she didn't own a legal copy to be exempted as an "archive copy", these are about her only outs. I hope they continue to prosecute, as this is the only way to show how genuinely borked our current legal system is, by allowing this silliness to get to a real court.
This demonstrates why "copyright infringement" should only be a civil issue and not criminal issue. Of course, the people who are actually copying the movie to sell them are running around free, while the incidental filming is prosecuted. Same legal genius thinking that gets us to prosecute little old ladies for stealing mp3's, even if they don't even know what an mp3 is.
Karma whoring at it's finest. Some of us run departments, play on Facebook, have successful marriages, fish on the weekends, visit with family regularly, and still have the time to hit slashdot, simply because it saves us time by consolidating tech news.
I know its fun for /.ers ourselves lonely losers, but in reality, most of the readers are likely quite successful in one way or another, or all the "your rights online" and quazi-political articles and such would be meaningless.
My dreams only have advertising for Lightspeed Briefs.
Lets not forget that Chrome OS being Linux based and open source means it is likely to benefit other projects as much as those other projects benefit Chrome. Some tweaks may help Linux servers or desktops, etc. More importantly, it opens up a different class of computing, basically "internet only" which is what netbooks are supposed to be, kinda. The current generation of netbooks haven't tempted me because they do too much, too slowly. This might make them an essential item as well as more affordable, which increases sales, which creates jobs, rinse, repeat.
How about Google simply allowing logged in readers to use checkboxes to hide certain outlets? Let me filter out the Fox News's and others that want only to get subscriptions, and let me view the ones who make their money off of ads.
Are you kidding me? That kind of crap is for chemists. We physicists just let our wave functions interact until there is barrier penetration through tunneling. We enforce strict segregation of fermions, but boson-on-boson action is encouraged. As a fermion, I'm usually spin-up when I see their wave functions collapsing.
Well, now that you put it that way, it's easy to see why particle physicists get all the girls. ;)
Since ET already gets all our TV transmissions, plus cell phones and wifi, I don't think this one will make much difference.
But now they have the recipe.
The fact that all serious climate scientists believe man made global warming is the best model to explain their data is all us non-climate scientists really need to know.
And the fact that all serious Christian ministers believe that God is an old man on a mountain and has an inferiority complex that demands we grovel to him is all we need to know about the beginning of the universe? No thanks to either.
Drawing conclusions based on 61mb of data is impossible for the layman, but I am not willing to take what 30 scientists using a close set of data swear is the "truth" at face value either. Hopefully this will force the methods used to be more open.
Indeed. They're way behind the UK Government though - who needs PS3s, when they can just make it illegal for someone to not decrypt any files they find...
Last I heard, that wasn't working out so good either. What is one more criminal violation when you are accused of several? Making it illegal to not decrypt files is like requiring tax stamps on illegal drugs. Yes they do it, but it seldom produces any results in the courts.
1. Block any and all direct links to Newscorp owned sites in the search results.
And Fox would sue because they are being singled out because they are "conservative" or similar (I have already commented on this last time this topic was brought up on /.) In order for Google to be fair and unbiased, they have to consider all news sources. They point out on the news page that a machine picks the stories, not a human. Until they have a better reason to block News Corp., they would be inviting scrutiny and a potential lawsuit, no matter how baseless (and unwinable) the lawsuit would be. Google is doing the best thing they can do, which is to ignore News Corp.'s words in public and treat them according to their robots.txt requests.
The majority of people actually earn way less than half of 100k per year. 84% of U.S. HOUSEHOLDS, not just individuals, make less than 100k, per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States
You're casting pearls before swine. Most people find it more comforting to blame others for their lack of success than to go out and work the 60+ hours a week and take the risks. Even by a reasonably modest definition of financial success (over 100k a year), you find that most of those people regularly spend some of their free time honing their skills instead of bitching about their bosses. Then again, most people making 100k or more a year are self-employed and willing to sacrifice a little comfort and take some extra risk in order to get ahead in the long run. Attitude is half the reason for success, and the foundation to justify working the extra time needed to move up and on. Most people don't "buy it", don't trust "the system", so they won't work on commission, don't want stock options, and simply want to punch in at 8am and leave at 5pm, guaranteed pay on Friday, go to the bar and complain about the boss/wife/kids. And you damn sure better pay time and a half for overtime. We need lots of those kinds of people to do the ground level work, so that's ok. They work relatively cheap and can be easily replaced. In many cases, even speaking English is optional. Not cynical, just realistic.
There is an old saying: The reason it is so lonely at the top is because it is so crowded at the bottom.
Look at Slashdot cheering at the piracy. It's really sickening how much Slashdot LOVES piracy now and encourages it at every opportunity.
Slashot loves technology. It's the users that love and encourage piracy, and enjoy something for nothing. While I am at it, I would like to take the time to encourage you to go to PublicDomainTorrents and download some movies for free. Or maybe you can grab a torrent to "pirate" Linux and other GPL s0ftwarez. To the ISPs that throttle, all torrent traffic looks the same, so hopefully you don't have one of those ISPs.
Remember kids:
Drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes and downloading music and movies makes you look cool, and girls really dig it!
But at least they got some overvalued homes in the deal. They (we) *did* get more than just 'intellectual property'. Even if the homes burned down, the dirt under them are still worth SOMETHING...
I feel lucky being 44, and was on the forefront of the web. I too had a BBS, 1, 2 then 3 lines, and before that, I was a user of BBSes. My first internet account was a unix shell, and once I got graphical internet, most of my time was usenet and irc, perhaps as it was a direct extension of what we did on the BBS. It wasn't terrible not having the internet and cell phones when I grew up (grad. HS in 83). I would miss it, but it would not be the end of civilization.
You are right that we would BBS again, we would form local user groups, again. We would still be able to find "stuff" just fine, although we would be choosier at 50k than at 10mb connections. We would till be emailing, via FidoNet, and we would just have to get over the fact that email wasn't instantanious.
The real hit would be all the businesses that are now solely internet based, including the company I work for. I started in the early 90s, and they were a regional distributor of products, and now almost all our business is internet based. In a way, it would benefit me, as all the guys who did what I did back before the internet are gone, so there aren't many in my field that remember "pre-internet", which of course would be an advantage. Not an advantage I hope to use as it would be a bitch, but change always bring opportunity to those that can adapt. Regardless of whether there is or isn't an internet, that won't change what I drive, where I live, who my family is, or what I had for dinner. It would only change what I am occupied with for 50 or so hours during the week.
Some TV shows are best watched as DVDs anyway. The best example is Carnivale, which was on HBO. You really have to pay attention or you miss details, and by the next week, you might have already forgotten them. Watching one or two a day for a few weeks allows you to have better continuity in viewing, and "get" the plot in a deeper sense. I can't imagine trying to wait a week between episodes for a TV show like that, which is deep in mysticism and complexity. Either DVR it, or buy the DVDs.
Now Mythbusters, Family Guy, and other shows that don't really require continuity, once a week is fine.