I think the parent was more serious than funny and I totally agree with him. WinXP looks like a toy when left in it's natural state. But not just any toy, a toy designed by a colour blind wanna be hippie. My eyes had never been so offended since the last time Margaret Thatcher was on television.
copyright holders given an amazing amount of control over their works
And rightly so! We, the common people do not have a right to demand unlimited access to someone else's creative expression. Who would bother to write a book or a song if once produced it became a free-for-all to copy? The benefit to the public is that artist are willing to share their creative expression. But No! The public want's more. We want it for ourselves, to be able to do with it whatever we want. That's just plain selfish. Perhaps not as selfish as music companies but that does not make copyright laws wrong or even unjust.
But again I say, the period of time that copyrights exist for needs to be looked at. But the public do not have some natural right disregard copyright laws and act as if they are on some moral high ground.
I would like to keep this on topic so I will address only copyrighted music.
My bet is that you will find that most music downloaded using Kazaa and the likes is primarily music that has been produced in the last 10 years with a high percentage in the last 3. This music, I feel, must be protected by copyright.
Even if the copyright laws were changed to minimize the length a copyright can exist it can only realisticly be reduced to somewhere beyond 10 years. Reducing it to anything less than 10 years really starts to erode the rights artist have to protect their creations. This will still mean that a majority of people will still be breaking copyright laws.
First of all, your analogy is pretty flimsy. There is a big difference between your chair and someone's creative expression of an idea. Your chair isn't even copyrighted nor could it be patented unless you came up with some radical design.
As for fair payment for effort taken, what are you on about. This has little to do with copyright, or are you just angry that you can't legally obtain the latest Nsync album for free?
I agree with you that the length that a copyright exists for must be looked at and debated but does this mean should do away with copyright altogether? We both say no. But you are still harping on about payment for effort which is quite frankly none of your business. If you like Nsync and are willing to pay for their album then so be it. If you think it is too pricy then go ahead and complain to Nsync and their record company and whoever else may be listening, but don't forget that copyright is there to protect the artist creative expression of an idea, both the rich and the poor artists. Do artist need their work protected? Yes! Is copyright justified? Yes! Do we need continued debate about it's particulars? Yes!
Copyright does not protect ideas but the expression of those ideas. But I do agree that the length of time that copyrights exist for is too long. Something should be done about that. But does this legitamize (sp?) downloading songs from the internet? In most cases I say no cause most people are downloading pretty recent songs for which I believe copyrights are totally valid.
If you read up on some of the ancient philosophers and how they defined law you will actually find that most, if not all considered unjust laws to be invalid. While in practice the lawmakers would probably disagree and charge you with breaking the law if you chose to do so, theoretically I have no problem with there claim. Slavery would in this case fall into the unjust area of law. I doubt the 'average man' would disagree with me there. But do copyright laws fall into the unjust area? I challenge anyone to explain to me how copyright laws are fundamentally unjust. You can't get everything for free.
"Of course this is probably really because you have to opt out of the extra point manually each time you think it unjustified instead of going to the trouble of adding it if you think it justified."
That's because anyone with the extra point option think that all of their comments are quite naturally +1 Insightful and possibly also +1 Funny all at the same time. To have only one bonus point is almost unAmerican.
I hate to admit it but as a country we have seemed to become a lot more racist. Started with Pauline Hanson (who I will soon once again have the pleasure of not voting for) and has escalated since Sept 11. And the Liberal Party (the conservatives) have seemed to have swung further to the right. But as history tells us, in times of crisis (or percieved crisis) we tend to vote in the conservatives.
But what I really loved about the brochure was the blue ink welcome and signature, really personalised it I felt. Made it seem like Depty Ditto signed mine personally.
Mine is framed and is hanging next to my wedding photos!
I've got to both agree and disagree with you. My original post was really just to boost my karma. But I believe there is some truth to it. I have found that some Americans have a 'I am American therefore I am great' attitude when mixing with other people. I don't know if it is shere arrogance or just confidence but it really restricts their ability to accept and embrace other cultures. Most of the time I have dealt with Americans singularly and call many of them my friends. However, when dealing with Americans when there is a group can be quite frustrating.
But yes, most of our hatred is directed towards the government and their foreign policies.
That can work to a certain extent but our family was eating out here in Oz the other night and a North American waitress was serving us. We all guessed that she was Canadian from her accent and we were spot on. There are subtle differences between the two.
What's more, what USian would bring themselves to deny their own country of origin? There have been times when I've had to say, "I'm Australian.... sorry."
The Bible (that is the Word of God) would beg to differ. Matthew 5:45 "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."
Where the hell did privacy come into this Mr. AC? We were talking about freedom, and more specifically, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is not always spelt out word for word in other countries but test it in a court of law and it is just as strong as it is in the US. Freedom of speech. at least where I live, does not have to be protected, it is implied in the constitution. No government can take that right away from me. As for US privacy and freedom being protected have you read the Patriot Act lately?
Do you American's think you are the only country that has freedom of speech. You hold up your Bill of Rights as if it is the only document world wide that gives people freedom. It's time some of you stopped being so insular and took a look at how the rest of the world works.
Who is going to be there to help me when my posts get modded up and down like a yoyo only to finally hit rock bottom at -1 Flamebait, never to rise again.
I meant no offense. People have ripped into my comments (as you have) and with good reason too (yes, my comment made just a little bit more sense than the parent, but not much more). It's just what happens on/.. I sow and I reap but I take it all on the chin. Just lighten up a little bit.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the parent was more serious than funny and I totally agree with him. WinXP looks like a toy when left in it's natural state. But not just any toy, a toy designed by a colour blind wanna be hippie. My eyes had never been so offended since the last time Margaret Thatcher was on television.
copyright holders given an amazing amount of control over their works
And rightly so! We, the common people do not have a right to demand unlimited access to someone else's creative expression. Who would bother to write a book or a song if once produced it became a free-for-all to copy? The benefit to the public is that artist are willing to share their creative expression. But No! The public want's more. We want it for ourselves, to be able to do with it whatever we want. That's just plain selfish. Perhaps not as selfish as music companies but that does not make copyright laws wrong or even unjust.
But again I say, the period of time that copyrights exist for needs to be looked at. But the public do not have some natural right disregard copyright laws and act as if they are on some moral high ground.
I would like to keep this on topic so I will address only copyrighted music.
My bet is that you will find that most music downloaded using Kazaa and the likes is primarily music that has been produced in the last 10 years with a high percentage in the last 3. This music, I feel, must be protected by copyright.
Even if the copyright laws were changed to minimize the length a copyright can exist it can only realisticly be reduced to somewhere beyond 10 years. Reducing it to anything less than 10 years really starts to erode the rights artist have to protect their creations. This will still mean that a majority of people will still be breaking copyright laws.
First of all, your analogy is pretty flimsy. There is a big difference between your chair and someone's creative expression of an idea. Your chair isn't even copyrighted nor could it be patented unless you came up with some radical design.
As for fair payment for effort taken, what are you on about. This has little to do with copyright, or are you just angry that you can't legally obtain the latest Nsync album for free?
I agree with you that the length that a copyright exists for must be looked at and debated but does this mean should do away with copyright altogether? We both say no. But you are still harping on about payment for effort which is quite frankly none of your business. If you like Nsync and are willing to pay for their album then so be it. If you think it is too pricy then go ahead and complain to Nsync and their record company and whoever else may be listening, but don't forget that copyright is there to protect the artist creative expression of an idea, both the rich and the poor artists. Do artist need their work protected? Yes! Is copyright justified? Yes! Do we need continued debate about it's particulars? Yes!
We are talking about copyrights, not patents.
Copyright does not protect ideas but the expression of those ideas. But I do agree that the length of time that copyrights exist for is too long. Something should be done about that. But does this legitamize (sp?) downloading songs from the internet? In most cases I say no cause most people are downloading pretty recent songs for which I believe copyrights are totally valid.
If you read up on some of the ancient philosophers and how they defined law you will actually find that most, if not all considered unjust laws to be invalid. While in practice the lawmakers would probably disagree and charge you with breaking the law if you chose to do so, theoretically I have no problem with there claim. Slavery would in this case fall into the unjust area of law. I doubt the 'average man' would disagree with me there. But do copyright laws fall into the unjust area? I challenge anyone to explain to me how copyright laws are fundamentally unjust. You can't get everything for free.
"Of course this is probably really because you have to opt out of the extra point manually each time you think it unjustified instead of going to the trouble of adding it if you think it justified."
That's because anyone with the extra point option think that all of their comments are quite naturally +1 Insightful and possibly also +1 Funny all at the same time. To have only one bonus point is almost unAmerican.
p.s Yes, I even bonus pointed this post
If you had read the article (jk) then you would know that the worm attacks those with simply passwords like [empty], xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, admin, Admin, password, Password, 1, 12, 123, 1234, 12345, 123456, 1234567, 12345678, 123456789, 654321, 54321, 111, 000000, 00000000, 11111111, 88888888, pass, passwd, database, abcd, abc123, oracle, sybase, 123qwe, server, computer, Internet, super, 123asd, ihavenopass, godblessyou, enable, xp, 2002, 2003, 2600, 0, 110, 111111, 121212, 123123, 1234qwer, 123abc, 007, alpha, patrick, pat, administrator, root, sex, god, foobar, a, aaa, abc, test, test123, temp, temp123, win, pc, asdf, secret, qwer, yxcv, zxcv, home, xxx, owner, login, Login, pwd, pass, love, mypc, mypc123, admin123, pw123, mypass, mypass123, pw
bullsh*t
I hate to admit it but as a country we have seemed to become a lot more racist. Started with Pauline Hanson (who I will soon once again have the pleasure of not voting for) and has escalated since Sept 11. And the Liberal Party (the conservatives) have seemed to have swung further to the right. But as history tells us, in times of crisis (or percieved crisis) we tend to vote in the conservatives.
But what I really loved about the brochure was the blue ink welcome and signature, really personalised it I felt. Made it seem like Depty Ditto signed mine personally.
Mine is framed and is hanging next to my wedding photos!
Well if Europe goes to the moon then that will help the US get the full support of the Security Council .... won't it?
Neat trick considering there never was a DirectX 4.
Oh look, a flock of flying pigs heading north for the winter!
I've got to both agree and disagree with you. My original post was really just to boost my karma. But I believe there is some truth to it. I have found that some Americans have a 'I am American therefore I am great' attitude when mixing with other people. I don't know if it is shere arrogance or just confidence but it really restricts their ability to accept and embrace other cultures. Most of the time I have dealt with Americans singularly and call many of them my friends. However, when dealing with Americans when there is a group can be quite frustrating.
But yes, most of our hatred is directed towards the government and their foreign policies.
True, but nor does it imply that God only blesses the honest.
That can work to a certain extent but our family was eating out here in Oz the other night and a North American waitress was serving us. We all guessed that she was Canadian from her accent and we were spot on. There are subtle differences between the two.
.... sorry."
What's more, what USian would bring themselves to deny their own country of origin? There have been times when I've had to say, "I'm Australian
The Bible (that is the Word of God) would beg to differ. Matthew 5:45 "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."
.... don't tell anyone you're an American.
Where the hell did privacy come into this Mr. AC? We were talking about freedom, and more specifically, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is not always spelt out word for word in other countries but test it in a court of law and it is just as strong as it is in the US. Freedom of speech. at least where I live, does not have to be protected, it is implied in the constitution. No government can take that right away from me. As for US privacy and freedom being protected have you read the Patriot Act lately?
Do you American's think you are the only country that has freedom of speech. You hold up your Bill of Rights as if it is the only document world wide that gives people freedom. It's time some of you stopped being so insular and took a look at how the rest of the world works.
However it's adverb form may take on an extra meaning.
microsoftly adv.
1. With much energy and no rythm
"The monkey danced microsoftly"
Who is going to be there to help me when my posts get modded up and down like a yoyo only to finally hit rock bottom at -1 Flamebait, never to rise again.
it is simply a daytime soap played out on a race track.
p.s If you don't get it then you didn't read the article
Look Mr AC,
/.. I sow and I reap but I take it all on the chin. Just lighten up a little bit.
I meant no offense. People have ripped into my comments (as you have) and with good reason too (yes, my comment made just a little bit more sense than the parent, but not much more). It's just what happens on