and a set of improvements to the Mandriva software management tools.
I hope by "improvements," they mean returning some of the functionality the software management tools used to have. There was a time when the software manager would give you basic information, like the total number of packages selected and their sizes, overall progress etc. Then, a couple of releases back, all of that info disappeared. There may be a way of getting "verbose" output, but the default is decidedly minimalist.
Or - if you really liked it (or are just the sort of music fan who likes to collect physical objects) - you could buy that vinyl/CD box set (did they say it was $80.00!?!? Holy shit!) I like that aspect too. There are those who will spend the money to get the premium (how's the beer over in Koln, BigA?); use them to generate revenue from the shiny discs.
But really, the thing I like most about this is seeing a band is choose a model that suits them, sort of like a FOSS developer choosing the license that suits the project he is working on. I hope more artists who have fulfilled their contractual obligations and new artists as well will explore their options and use some of their creativity to market themselves to their fans.
On the off-chance you haven't already seen this, Courtney Love made much the same point in this speech at the Digital Hollywood Online Entertainment conference many years ago. She was responding to the whole Metalica vs. Napster thing. I think she was ahead of her time.
Many people need to support the band in order for it to stay afloat.
This is true, but there are many ways of supporting a band. Seeing them live, buying merch directly from them, turning others on to their music, wearing a beaten-up old t-shirt with their name on it, performing drunken, off-key renditions of their songs to anyone who will listen... these things all help to promote and support a band and probably do more for their bottom line than what they actually receive from the sale of their CDs.
You bring up a good point about the "tragedy of the commons" though, and I don't have the background in economics to counter with anything intelligent, other than my gut feeling that tells me if something is truly "worth it," enough people will support it.
A good example is my favorite Internet Radio station, which is entirely listener-supported and commercial free. A lot of people I have told about it think I'm crazy for sending them money every month when I could just listen to it for "free." And I'm sure a lot of people do just that. I did for a good year or so before I decided to start supporting them. But I have been supporting them for a couple of years now, and others must be as well since they are still in business, playing music 24/7.
The reason I support them (and I assume the reason others do as well) is simply because I value what they do, and I would regret it horribly if they went quiet one day and I did nothing to prevent that. They still might go quiet despite my support, but I can't control that. I can only do what I can do.
And this brings up another point. This idea of voluntarily supporting the music you like might not be enough to pay for all the payolla, Lear jets and cocaine that seems to be necessary to keep the traditional "music industry" going, but maybe we don't need all that. Maybe we just need people who love to create art (and we've had those since the stone age) and people who love to listen to/watch/feel/smell/taste it to recognize how much they value each other. It may not work in all cases, but I'll bet it would allow more musicians to give up their day jobs than the current system.
Of course it does. That's sort of the point, isn't it? You pay what it is worth to you. If it is worth nothing, pay nothing. If nobody pays anything, we are unlikely to see more music from Radiohead (especially under such permissive marketing schemes) but it wasn't worth anything to you so who cares?
If, on the other hand, it is worth something to you, you might want to send them something to encourage them to continue making music.
I would say they appear to have fucked themselves. By taking steps to decide which text messages are "appropriate" for their network, are they not assuming responsibility for the content of all text messages carried on their network? The terms "safe harbour" and "common carrier" spring to mind.
Of course, IANAL, and may be full of it. But this doesn't look like a very smart move.
Maybe we don't need a "pirate party" per se, but we need more people representing the "other side" of the copyright debate. The current Conservative government stated in their platform from the last election that they would eliminate the 'levy" on blank media (look under Section 35 Copyright Legislation). Well, that certainly has not happened, and the music industry is lobbying them hard to extend the tax to other forms of media. Add to that the efforts of industryshills from the US who would like Canada to radify WIPO and enact legislation similar to the DMCA, and I would say we are currently at a serious disadvantage.
you are right, just older than the average NIN fan.
I don't know if GratefulNet is older than me or not. I'm old enough to know who Abbie Hoffman is, and I wouldn't classify myself as a NIN fan, but rather a music fan. GratefulNet's "steal steal steal" rant reminded me of a recent story that quoted Reznor saying much the same thing. It seemed relevant to the topic and I was making a cheap joke.
I think we need a shake-up, too. Not sure if what you propose is the answer. I actually like TPB's approach a lot more.
In Canada, there is a proposal to add a tax to ipods and hard drives, similar to the tax we already pay on CDs. The proceeds of these taxes are funnelled into an account controlled by a music industry group, supposedly to be distrubuted to artists. No consideration is given to other artists who may use CDs, hard drives or even ipods in the production and storage of their own art, let alone people who use media for things like running a business or just storing personal data. Apparently we are all doing exactly what you are proposing - just downloading all of our entertainment and never paying for anything.
Funny, though, despite this widespread "stealing," the music/movie/tv industries somehow manage to rake in billions of dollars every year. Alas, it is apparently not enough, as they also manage to show a loss in order to avoid paying the artists who they are trying to protect from us.
I would like to see a legal assult launched to counter this movement by the industry to steal money from people like myself who use a lot of media for purposes that have nothing to do with the music industry. There are retail groups in Canada who have voiced their opposition to this tax, but they are really just acting out of self-interest and could potentially be appeased with some "compromise."
Anyway, to draw my rambling response to your reply to my cheap joke (thanks, btw, for taking it in the spirit it was intended) to a close, we need a Pirate party in Canada and I think the US as well. I don't want to give up huge swaths of our culture in a boycott, and I don't want to declare all-out bloody war on the entertainment industry. I just want to shine a light on the propaganda that is currently being accepted at face value by the polititians, courts and general public, and demonstrate where their position may diverge from the truth.
as an international corporation, Intuit would send information across the border
Yeah, that's an interesting bit.
The "free enterprise" party who govern the province I live in contracted the maintenance of our health care records out to a US firm, completely oblivious of the fact that - thanks to the PATRIOT ACT - the company could be compelled to turn our information over to the eff-bee-eye or the en-essay or one of those other alphabet agencies they've got down there, and it's illegal for them to tell us (their customer) when this takes place.
I know this will sound like "well duh" to those in the US, but my Canadian brain has a hard time wrapping itself around the concept.
My opinion is that she should just approach her son and talk to him frankly about any issues that she's concerned about.
That's what I tell people when I get similar requests. Put the computer in the living room, explain the rules and hope your work as a parent has been effective. All she is doing by attempting to lock out "inappropriate" material is making said material more desirable and at the same time telling her son she really doesn't trust him. It's like asking him to provide a urine sample to prove he isn't using drugs or alcohol, or to take a lie detector test to prove he isn't cheating on his school work. What's she going to do when he starts driving to make sure he doesn't speed? Is she going to accompany him on dates to ensure he doesn't engage in unprotected sex? Is she going to follow him around stores making sure he doesn't shop lift?
She should tell her son that sex is a natural and healthy part of life for adults but viewing pornography on the family computer is not acceptable. And she should realize it is not the end of the world if his curiosity gets the better of him some times. There is plenty of intolerant, racist, sexist, negative imagery and speech on the Internet. I would be more worried about him being exposed to that, but that's just my opinion.
And to the person who modded you Redundant, try using your mod points to promote posts you think are Insightful or Interesting. Save the negative mods for those who are truly abusive.
Is the information from all these various probes being shared or is each nation building up its own little pool of data?
Well... they're certainly building up a nice pool of space junk around the moon. Give us a hundred years and I'm sure we will have turned poor Luna in to a garbage dump.
More like the Chinese government wants to break the encryption so they can more easily hack other governments data. They just post it under "Research".
Yeah, the Chinese government is the only government that would like to do that.
You forgot to select Tools -> Folder Options, click the View tab, scroll down and uncheck the box next to "Hide extensions for known file types" so you know you are actually looking at a dll file and not something else. You also could have selected the radio button to "Show hidden files and folders," if you *really* want to live on the edge;)
I see a bit of a contradiction in your position. On the one hand, you feel the prestige value of the Emmys has fallen and cite the "Dick in a Box" video winning as an example, yet you concede that the video is "hilarious." If the award is for comedy, shouldn't a video that is "hilarious" qualify? I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that you feel the comedy in that video is low-brow schoolboy type humour that only immature geeks like us really find funny, but I don't think that is the case. The test for comedy is does it make people laugh. If it does, it's funny, and there's no sense in feeling ashame of yourself for laughing.
Kevin Smith commented once that when it comes down to it, what people really want are dick and fart jokes. It might not be quite that simple, but I think there is a ring of truth to it. People laugh at stupid things, especially if they involve bodily functions.
As for Spike Lee, there is quite a bit of comedy in his movies, particularly early ones like Do the Right Thing. I have no way of knowing this, but I suspect he would find Dick In A Box funny and maybe even deserving of an award. Seeing a young Andy Samberg walk down the aisle to accept his award might remind Spike of being a young films student full of promise and a B&W comedy called She's Gotta Have It (which - according to IMDB - originally received an X rating due to the sexual content).
But, hey, you're entitled to your opinion, and I appreciate you taking the time to help me understand where you're coming from.
I didn't say every funny video on youtube should get an award. I was disagreeing with the gp's opinion that the video didn't deserve the award it won.
There are millions of songs on the radio. There are hundreds of movies released every year. There are dozens of Broadway plays. They don't all get Grammys, Oscars or Tonys, but some do. Whether or not the ones that do deserve them is a matter of opinion. I was simply stating mine.
Not to mention the Barry Gibb talk show with Jimmy Fallon.
I wasn't even going to watch the show, cause I had no interest in listening to his music. I'm glad I did. I thought he did a great job hosting, and even enjoyed the songs he performed. Just goes to show that even if a performer's material isn't to your taste, if he's talented - and you keep an open mind - you will probably be entertained.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope by "improvements," they mean returning some of the functionality the software management tools used to have. There was a time when the software manager would give you basic information, like the total number of packages selected and their sizes, overall progress etc. Then, a couple of releases back, all of that info disappeared. There may be a way of getting "verbose" output, but the default is decidedly minimalist.
Oh, sure, slashdot the petition in favour of net neutrality. That'll convince 'em ISPs shouldn't do traffic shaping
1894? You were so close to having a really cool ID number!
Or - if you really liked it (or are just the sort of music fan who likes to collect physical objects) - you could buy that vinyl/CD box set (did they say it was $80.00!?!? Holy shit!) I like that aspect too. There are those who will spend the money to get the premium (how's the beer over in Koln, BigA?); use them to generate revenue from the shiny discs.
But really, the thing I like most about this is seeing a band is choose a model that suits them, sort of like a FOSS developer choosing the license that suits the project he is working on. I hope more artists who have fulfilled their contractual obligations and new artists as well will explore their options and use some of their creativity to market themselves to their fans.
And I hope those SOBs who call us theives rot.
On the off-chance you haven't already seen this, Courtney Love made much the same point in this speech at the Digital Hollywood Online Entertainment conference many years ago. She was responding to the whole Metalica vs. Napster thing. I think she was ahead of her time.
This is true, but there are many ways of supporting a band. Seeing them live, buying merch directly from them, turning others on to their music, wearing a beaten-up old t-shirt with their name on it, performing drunken, off-key renditions of their songs to anyone who will listen
You bring up a good point about the "tragedy of the commons" though, and I don't have the background in economics to counter with anything intelligent, other than my gut feeling that tells me if something is truly "worth it," enough people will support it.
A good example is my favorite Internet Radio station, which is entirely listener-supported and commercial free. A lot of people I have told about it think I'm crazy for sending them money every month when I could just listen to it for "free." And I'm sure a lot of people do just that. I did for a good year or so before I decided to start supporting them. But I have been supporting them for a couple of years now, and others must be as well since they are still in business, playing music 24/7.
The reason I support them (and I assume the reason others do as well) is simply because I value what they do, and I would regret it horribly if they went quiet one day and I did nothing to prevent that. They still might go quiet despite my support, but I can't control that. I can only do what I can do.
And this brings up another point. This idea of voluntarily supporting the music you like might not be enough to pay for all the payolla, Lear jets and cocaine that seems to be necessary to keep the traditional "music industry" going, but maybe we don't need all that. Maybe we just need people who love to create art (and we've had those since the stone age) and people who love to listen to/watch/feel/smell/taste it to recognize how much they value each other. It may not work in all cases, but I'll bet it would allow more musicians to give up their day jobs than the current system.
Of course it does. That's sort of the point, isn't it? You pay what it is worth to you. If it is worth nothing, pay nothing. If nobody pays anything, we are unlikely to see more music from Radiohead (especially under such permissive marketing schemes) but it wasn't worth anything to you so who cares?
If, on the other hand, it is worth something to you, you might want to send them something to encourage them to continue making music.
It's really quite simple.
I would say they appear to have fucked themselves. By taking steps to decide which text messages are "appropriate" for their network, are they not assuming responsibility for the content of all text messages carried on their network? The terms "safe harbour" and "common carrier" spring to mind.
Of course, IANAL, and may be full of it. But this doesn't look like a very smart move.
I love that song!
Maybe we don't need a "pirate party" per se, but we need more people representing the "other side" of the copyright debate. The current Conservative government stated in their platform from the last election that they would eliminate the 'levy" on blank media (look under Section 35 Copyright Legislation). Well, that certainly has not happened, and the music industry is lobbying them hard to extend the tax to other forms of media. Add to that the efforts of industry shills from the US who would like Canada to radify WIPO and enact legislation similar to the DMCA, and I would say we are currently at a serious disadvantage.
I don't know if GratefulNet is older than me or not. I'm old enough to know who Abbie Hoffman is, and I wouldn't classify myself as a NIN fan, but rather a music fan. GratefulNet's "steal steal steal" rant reminded me of a recent story that quoted Reznor saying much the same thing. It seemed relevant to the topic and I was making a cheap joke.
I think we need a shake-up, too. Not sure if what you propose is the answer. I actually like TPB's approach a lot more.
In Canada, there is a proposal to add a tax to ipods and hard drives, similar to the tax we already pay on CDs. The proceeds of these taxes are funnelled into an account controlled by a music industry group, supposedly to be distrubuted to artists. No consideration is given to other artists who may use CDs, hard drives or even ipods in the production and storage of their own art, let alone people who use media for things like running a business or just storing personal data. Apparently we are all doing exactly what you are proposing - just downloading all of our entertainment and never paying for anything.
Funny, though, despite this widespread "stealing," the music/movie/tv industries somehow manage to rake in billions of dollars every year. Alas, it is apparently not enough, as they also manage to show a loss in order to avoid paying the artists who they are trying to protect from us.
I would like to see a legal assult launched to counter this movement by the industry to steal money from people like myself who use a lot of media for purposes that have nothing to do with the music industry. There are retail groups in Canada who have voiced their opposition to this tax, but they are really just acting out of self-interest and could potentially be appeased with some "compromise."
Anyway, to draw my rambling response to your reply to my cheap joke (thanks, btw, for taking it in the spirit it was intended) to a close, we need a Pirate party in Canada and I think the US as well. I don't want to give up huge swaths of our culture in a boycott, and I don't want to declare all-out bloody war on the entertainment industry. I just want to shine a light on the propaganda that is currently being accepted at face value by the polititians, courts and general public, and demonstrate where their position may diverge from the truth.
I didn't know Trent Reznor read slashdot
+1 Funny. Wake up, mods!
Yeah, that's an interesting bit.
The "free enterprise" party who govern the province I live in contracted the maintenance of our health care records out to a US firm, completely oblivious of the fact that - thanks to the PATRIOT ACT - the company could be compelled to turn our information over to the eff-bee-eye or the en-essay or one of those other alphabet agencies they've got down there, and it's illegal for them to tell us (their customer) when this takes place.
I know this will sound like "well duh" to those in the US, but my Canadian brain has a hard time wrapping itself around the concept.
Thank you, hobo.
That's what I tell people when I get similar requests. Put the computer in the living room, explain the rules and hope your work as a parent has been effective. All she is doing by attempting to lock out "inappropriate" material is making said material more desirable and at the same time telling her son she really doesn't trust him. It's like asking him to provide a urine sample to prove he isn't using drugs or alcohol, or to take a lie detector test to prove he isn't cheating on his school work. What's she going to do when he starts driving to make sure he doesn't speed? Is she going to accompany him on dates to ensure he doesn't engage in unprotected sex? Is she going to follow him around stores making sure he doesn't shop lift?
She should tell her son that sex is a natural and healthy part of life for adults but viewing pornography on the family computer is not acceptable. And she should realize it is not the end of the world if his curiosity gets the better of him some times. There is plenty of intolerant, racist, sexist, negative imagery and speech on the Internet. I would be more worried about him being exposed to that, but that's just my opinion.
And to the person who modded you Redundant, try using your mod points to promote posts you think are Insightful or Interesting. Save the negative mods for those who are truly abusive.
Well
Yeah, the Chinese government is the only government that would like to do that.
You forgot to select Tools -> Folder Options, click the View tab, scroll down and uncheck the box next to "Hide extensions for known file types" so you know you are actually looking at a dll file and not something else. You also could have selected the radio button to "Show hidden files and folders," if you *really* want to live on the edge ;)
I see a bit of a contradiction in your position. On the one hand, you feel the prestige value of the Emmys has fallen and cite the "Dick in a Box" video winning as an example, yet you concede that the video is "hilarious." If the award is for comedy, shouldn't a video that is "hilarious" qualify? I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that you feel the comedy in that video is low-brow schoolboy type humour that only immature geeks like us really find funny, but I don't think that is the case. The test for comedy is does it make people laugh. If it does, it's funny, and there's no sense in feeling ashame of yourself for laughing.
Kevin Smith commented once that when it comes down to it, what people really want are dick and fart jokes. It might not be quite that simple, but I think there is a ring of truth to it. People laugh at stupid things, especially if they involve bodily functions.
As for Spike Lee, there is quite a bit of comedy in his movies, particularly early ones like Do the Right Thing. I have no way of knowing this, but I suspect he would find Dick In A Box funny and maybe even deserving of an award. Seeing a young Andy Samberg walk down the aisle to accept his award might remind Spike of being a young films student full of promise and a B&W comedy called She's Gotta Have It (which - according to IMDB - originally received an X rating due to the sexual content).
But, hey, you're entitled to your opinion, and I appreciate you taking the time to help me understand where you're coming from.
Apparently.
I didn't say every funny video on youtube should get an award. I was disagreeing with the gp's opinion that the video didn't deserve the award it won.
There are millions of songs on the radio. There are hundreds of movies released every year. There are dozens of Broadway plays. They don't all get Grammys, Oscars or Tonys, but some do. Whether or not the ones that do deserve them is a matter of opinion. I was simply stating mine.
Not to mention the Barry Gibb talk show with Jimmy Fallon.
I wasn't even going to watch the show, cause I had no interest in listening to his music. I'm glad I did. I thought he did a great job hosting, and even enjoyed the songs he performed. Just goes to show that even if a performer's material isn't to your taste, if he's talented - and you keep an open mind - you will probably be entertained.