I think what "we" owe "them" is going to be well covered by the no-lube assfucking we (the younger generation) are going to get from Social Security. But thanks for raising the question.
Replace "huge carrot" with "huge fraudulent carrot", and realize that artists are routinely conned by their label reps, and tricked into selling themselves and their work into indentured servitude, and then you're on track.
The record companies have zero moral authority, because they exist only by fraud and deceit. I'll steal as much as I can from them. The artists, unfortunately, are the dupes. Hopefully, they'll learn.
Damn, never mind reading what she has to say and evaluating it...if she's not an "authority" her opinion is meaningless. Of course! How could I be so stupid! I'll just bop right on over to the RIAA's website and get some rightthink to put me back on track.
Then they shouldn't be surprised when their customers say "Ummm...gofuckyourself." THEN how are they going to pay for their shiny new Benzes? Corporations do not have a right to exist. They do not have a right to continue using unworkable business models. I happen to believe that they don't have any rights at all, but unfortunately due to the greatest legal cock-up in history, they have the same rights as I do. Since they have infinitely more money, that makes them quite a bit more equal than any of us.
Today's corporate system has nothing to do with free-market capitalism. It's an oligopoly, plain and simple.
"get a large voting bloc of stock." Oh! OK! I just happen to have a couple hundred mil sitting here in my checking account that I'm not using. I'll just pop on down to the broker's and buy a bunch of stock in a company I believe is evil, thereby reinforcing their evil behavior, and I'll ask them ever so nicely to please stop being evil. They'll say "But, you poor wretch, if we stop being evil, YOU will lose MONEY!" and all the other stock holders will rip out my throat and use my organs in their diabolical experiments.
Great plan. I'll get right on it. Never mind those social commentaries or regulatory options...the REAL answer to corporate greed is BUY MORE STOCK!
Look at the parallels! I do it for more than seven hours a day, five days a week, and I come home crabby and hating human beings. Quick! Somebody publish a paper!
Define "Use". I want to "use" my computer to play DVD's I've purchased (where DVD is defined as "Whatever high-resolution consumer video format is on the menu this week) and play music I've encoded from media I have purchased and share and lend said media to my friends. I also want to "use" my computer to connect to a heterogenous network whose lingua franca is not owned by any one interest, be it commercial or governmental.
So, that's what I want to "use" my computer for, in addition to any writin' and 'rithmetic I want to do. Palladium is designed to take away my power to use and extend my computer as I see fit, and it's going to be large enough to force its way into the market.
Unless, as I hope will happen, AMD will buck the trend, which will give them a decisive advantage over Intel.
The source of the "rumor" (or "press release") doesn't matter, though. Even if Osborne had NOT tried to sell their vapor-ware, had the word gotten out, the same thing could well have happened. So, yes, Apple does have a stake in controlling that information.
I'm sure MS will be delighted to lease you a signature-checker-box that they will control and administer for you to put inside your firewall. It will, of course, be surrounded by a 50' kill zone and a double barbed-wire fence containing starved Dobermans, covered by four 7.62mm minigun turrets and an ED-209 rapid response unit.
And a brand-new shiny MCSE to run the thing. All for the low low price of $2.5M/year! Get yours today!
You get claustrophobic in movie theaters, do you? I mean, this thing is going to be pretty darn wide. If so, I'm sorry to hear that. The rest of us will adapt just fine.
Boeing has addressed these concerns in another article I read in Aviation Week and Space Technology. With a skillful pilot (or computer) executing coordinated turns, you aren't going to feel a thing. And with video screens and passenger-controllable cameras, window seats aren't a huge deal.
And the passengers on the leading edge will have a FANTASTIC view.
And what the hell are you talking about, untested? You think Boeing's just going to start selling seats on the prototype? Just because an airplane looks conventional doesn't mean it's safe. Look at the delamination issues Airbus is facing with their composite empennages.
Sure, some people are going to be "scared" of the new design, but I bet many more people are going to be interested in the new layout.
The government is doing things I do not approve of. They are monitoring privileged communications on a wholesale basis, and they are holding prisoners without due process. So, yes, I'm protesting.
Governments are not entitled to any presumption of innocence. Indeed, governments have no rights whatsoever: The powers of government derive from the will of the people, and the government has no authority to contravene that will. It also does not have the authority to change the social contract (also known as the Constitution) without due process. In other words, when laws are passed that allow the government to do things that are Wrong, the people have a responsibility not only to protest, but to disregard those laws. It is not appropriate for the government to wantonly pass such laws and rely on the checks and balances system to (hopefully, someday) curb their excesses.
If you don't think that unlawful search and seizure and denial of due process are egregious abuses of power by our government, I have nothing further to argue with you about. I think it is dangerously naive to just assume the government holds The People in higher regard than extending its own powerbase. That assumption is not supported by history.
As far as your demand for evidence, the existence of the system is evidence enough. There is no legal justification for such a system to exist, period.
So, in the absence of the full story, we should assume that the government is not doing anything bad? What happens when they START doing something bad, like denying people their right to habeas corpus, and denying them their right to a speedy trial by jury? What happens when they use the information they gather (or manufacture said information) to start prosecuting (or persecuting) people who disagree with the government's policies?
The framers knew that throughout history, governments have accumulated power and then used that power to oppress people. Until you can come up with a convincing argument why THIS government bucks this historical trend, your position is nothing more than sticking your head in the sand. Note that I do believe that the form of government we practice here in the US is the least bad option, and that government does, for the large part, work very well. But it is our responsibility as citizens to police the government, and make sure it does not overstep its authority. That's what this discussion is about.
What if space aliens were going to take over the world that day, and were thwarted by the Mouties' clever EW plan?
Doesn't matter. The government is still denying access to a paid-for public utility (the airwaves) by the people who pay for it, simply because the government is not able to "protect" its citizenry to the degree they want to.
Of course, we won't be "protected" enough until we're under 24/7 surveillance...but we're not supposed to talk about that.
Freedom is freedom. Taking freedom away is Bad. The REASONS governments hide behind to take away freedoms are almost always specious, and always incompletely articulated.
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal and independent station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the change."
If you don't recognize that text, go smack your history teachers. Unless, of course, you're not an American, and then you might very well consider the Declaraton of Independence a quite uncivilized document. In that event, I say that you are welcome to your opinion, and you are welcome to try and enforce that opinion on me. Bring friends. Lots of them.
/IT IS NOT A LEGAL CONTRACT/. Legal contracts happen BEFORE money changes hands.
Remind me never to buy anything from you. If you're not a savvy enough businessperson to make money in an ethically sound manner, then you shouldn't be in business.
Cheat to win is not an acceptable way to run a business.
I never liked "caveat emptor" as a corporate policy. Of course, it is wise to investigate your purchases thoroughly, but that doesn't make it ethical to exploit people who do not.
Nonsense. When money changes hands, THAT is the contract. If they do not secure my agreement before they accept my money, they don't get to change the deal after that fact.
The box doesn't even SAY "see our web site for what you'll have to agree to in order to not get dicked." Well, at least no game I've ever looked at does. If NWN is different, I'll eat my hat.
Let me restate the poster's (assumed) position more clearly and forcefully.
Bioware has a responsibility to inform all of its potential customers of the stipulations of the EULA before accepting their money. Since they have not done so (like, by clear labeling on the box), their "contract" is null and void. When I pay money for a box and take it out of the store, I can do whatever I want to with it.
Slashdot Mirror
I think what "we" owe "them" is going to be well covered by the no-lube assfucking we (the younger generation) are going to get from Social Security. But thanks for raising the question.
Replace "huge carrot" with "huge fraudulent carrot", and realize that artists are routinely conned by their label reps, and tricked into selling themselves and their work into indentured servitude, and then you're on track.
The record companies have zero moral authority, because they exist only by fraud and deceit. I'll steal as much as I can from them. The artists, unfortunately, are the dupes. Hopefully, they'll learn.
Damn, never mind reading what she has to say and evaluating it...if she's not an "authority" her opinion is meaningless. Of course! How could I be so stupid! I'll just bop right on over to the RIAA's website and get some rightthink to put me back on track.
Then they shouldn't be surprised when their customers say "Ummm...gofuckyourself." THEN how are they going to pay for their shiny new Benzes? Corporations do not have a right to exist. They do not have a right to continue using unworkable business models. I happen to believe that they don't have any rights at all, but unfortunately due to the greatest legal cock-up in history, they have the same rights as I do. Since they have infinitely more money, that makes them quite a bit more equal than any of us.
Today's corporate system has nothing to do with free-market capitalism. It's an oligopoly, plain and simple.
"get a large voting bloc of stock." Oh! OK! I just happen to have a couple hundred mil sitting here in my checking account that I'm not using. I'll just pop on down to the broker's and buy a bunch of stock in a company I believe is evil, thereby reinforcing their evil behavior, and I'll ask them ever so nicely to please stop being evil. They'll say "But, you poor wretch, if we stop being evil, YOU will lose MONEY!" and all the other stock holders will rip out my throat and use my organs in their diabolical experiments.
Great plan. I'll get right on it. Never mind those social commentaries or regulatory options...the REAL answer to corporate greed is BUY MORE STOCK!
Look at the parallels! I do it for more than seven hours a day, five days a week, and I come home crabby and hating human beings. Quick! Somebody publish a paper!
Define "Use". I want to "use" my computer to play DVD's I've purchased (where DVD is defined as "Whatever high-resolution consumer video format is on the menu this week) and play music I've encoded from media I have purchased and share and lend said media to my friends. I also want to "use" my computer to connect to a heterogenous network whose lingua franca is not owned by any one interest, be it commercial or governmental.
So, that's what I want to "use" my computer for, in addition to any writin' and 'rithmetic I want to do. Palladium is designed to take away my power to use and extend my computer as I see fit, and it's going to be large enough to force its way into the market.
Unless, as I hope will happen, AMD will buck the trend, which will give them a decisive advantage over Intel.
The source of the "rumor" (or "press release") doesn't matter, though. Even if Osborne had NOT tried to sell their vapor-ware, had the word gotten out, the same thing could well have happened. So, yes, Apple does have a stake in controlling that information.
I'm sure MS will be delighted to lease you a signature-checker-box that they will control and administer for you to put inside your firewall. It will, of course, be surrounded by a 50' kill zone and a double barbed-wire fence containing starved Dobermans, covered by four 7.62mm minigun turrets and an ED-209 rapid response unit.
And a brand-new shiny MCSE to run the thing. All for the low low price of $2.5M/year! Get yours today!
I can't find one. Can you?
You get claustrophobic in movie theaters, do you? I mean, this thing is going to be pretty darn wide. If so, I'm sorry to hear that. The rest of us will adapt just fine.
Boeing has addressed these concerns in another article I read in Aviation Week and Space Technology. With a skillful pilot (or computer) executing coordinated turns, you aren't going to feel a thing. And with video screens and passenger-controllable cameras, window seats aren't a huge deal.
And the passengers on the leading edge will have a FANTASTIC view.
And what the hell are you talking about, untested? You think Boeing's just going to start selling seats on the prototype? Just because an airplane looks conventional doesn't mean it's safe. Look at the delamination issues Airbus is facing with their composite empennages.
Sure, some people are going to be "scared" of the new design, but I bet many more people are going to be interested in the new layout.
The government is doing things I do not approve of. They are monitoring privileged communications on a wholesale basis, and they are holding prisoners without due process. So, yes, I'm protesting.
Governments are not entitled to any presumption of innocence. Indeed, governments have no rights whatsoever: The powers of government derive from the will of the people, and the government has no authority to contravene that will. It also does not have the authority to change the social contract (also known as the Constitution) without due process. In other words, when laws are passed that allow the government to do things that are Wrong, the people have a responsibility not only to protest, but to disregard those laws. It is not appropriate for the government to wantonly pass such laws and rely on the checks and balances system to (hopefully, someday) curb their excesses.
If you don't think that unlawful search and seizure and denial of due process are egregious abuses of power by our government, I have nothing further to argue with you about. I think it is dangerously naive to just assume the government holds The People in higher regard than extending its own powerbase. That assumption is not supported by history.
As far as your demand for evidence, the existence of the system is evidence enough. There is no legal justification for such a system to exist, period.
So, in the absence of the full story, we should assume that the government is not doing anything bad? What happens when they START doing something bad, like denying people their right to habeas corpus, and denying them their right to a speedy trial by jury? What happens when they use the information they gather (or manufacture said information) to start prosecuting (or persecuting) people who disagree with the government's policies?
The framers knew that throughout history, governments have accumulated power and then used that power to oppress people. Until you can come up with a convincing argument why THIS government bucks this historical trend, your position is nothing more than sticking your head in the sand. Note that I do believe that the form of government we practice here in the US is the least bad option, and that government does, for the large part, work very well. But it is our responsibility as citizens to police the government, and make sure it does not overstep its authority. That's what this discussion is about.
"Methods of dealing with potential terrorism..."
Sounds like a good plot for a Tom Cruise movie. Oh, wait...
What if space aliens were going to take over the world that day, and were thwarted by the Mouties' clever EW plan?
Doesn't matter. The government is still denying access to a paid-for public utility (the airwaves) by the people who pay for it, simply because the government is not able to "protect" its citizenry to the degree they want to.
Of course, we won't be "protected" enough until we're under 24/7 surveillance...but we're not supposed to talk about that.
Freedom is freedom. Taking freedom away is Bad. The REASONS governments hide behind to take away freedoms are almost always specious, and always incompletely articulated.
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal and independent station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the change."
If you don't recognize that text, go smack your history teachers. Unless, of course, you're not an American, and then you might very well consider the Declaraton of Independence a quite uncivilized document. In that event, I say that you are welcome to your opinion, and you are welcome to try and enforce that opinion on me. Bring friends. Lots of them.
Umm...
I have Opera, Quicktime, and Real installed on my computer, along with Mozilla 1.0 and IE6. It hasn't blown up yet. I fail to see what the problem is.
/IT IS NOT A LEGAL CONTRACT/. Legal contracts happen BEFORE money changes hands.
Remind me never to buy anything from you. If you're not a savvy enough businessperson to make money in an ethically sound manner, then you shouldn't be in business.
Cheat to win is not an acceptable way to run a business.
I never liked "caveat emptor" as a corporate policy. Of course, it is wise to investigate your purchases thoroughly, but that doesn't make it ethical to exploit people who do not.
Nonsense. When money changes hands, THAT is the contract. If they do not secure my agreement before they accept my money, they don't get to change the deal after that fact.
The box doesn't even SAY "see our web site for what you'll have to agree to in order to not get dicked." Well, at least no game I've ever looked at does. If NWN is different, I'll eat my hat.
I thank my lucky stars that I don't have "golden ears". 128k MP3 sounds fine to me. If I need music to sound better than that, I'll perform it.
God save me from a discerning ear...it'd be way too expensive.
Let me restate the poster's (assumed) position more clearly and forcefully.
Bioware has a responsibility to inform all of its potential customers of the stipulations of the EULA before accepting their money. Since they have not done so (like, by clear labeling on the box), their "contract" is null and void. When I pay money for a box and take it out of the store, I can do whatever I want to with it.
Rich was talking about the A-12 Avenger II ATB (Advanced Technology Bomber) that was supposed to replace the A-6 Intruder strike bomber.
I've also heard that LBJ transposed RS to SR. Seems like he was bad at reading.
Don't care what you call it...it's an amazing bird.