Look at regular TV, its free, thats the only reason why its so successful.
Regular (read: broadcast) TV is not free. The price of watching TV is watching advertisements. You might not have a problem with that. Some people do.
Cable TV is very much not free. It, too, is quite successful. While there are some people who steal service (although, from your posting history, you will disagree with my usage of the word "steal" here, but that's okay; you're a fucking retard anyway), an overwhelming majority of people who receive Cable TV signals pay for them.
Look at the internet, its free, and its successful.
The internet is not free either. Routers, lines, switches, and everything else all cost money, in terms of initial capital expenditure, maintenance, and personnel costs. While you yourself might not be billed explicitly for internet access, you are paying the price, as are other people.
Most websites are not free. They, like broadcast television, have advertisements, or are membership-based. There are very few good places for free content that do not attempt to recoup costs through advertising, or asking for donations.
The RIAA controls every type of music imaginable, and has a monopoly, they dont let independent music on MTV, so they wonder why people pirate their music?
The RIAA cannot prevent me from writing my own songs, and performing them in front of a live audience. Nor can the RIAA prevent me from distributing recordings (either live, or in a studio) containing my own songs either online, or direct mail, or in person. Sure, I probably can't get space at the local Best Buy, Tower Records, or FYE. But that's how business works. Grammy Malda can't sell her homemade jams at the local MegaSupermarket, either.
MTV is as much a monopoly as CBS or NBC is. NBC will not let me write my own TV show and put it on TV. I guess that means I should make copies of Friends and ER available online. Are you really as retarded as you seem? Yes, actually, it appears that you are:
Why not let some free Music get play on MTV and maybe people wouldnt pirate the RIAA so much anymore.
Because, by and large, most people do not want to listen to "free" or "independent" music. I personally find most popular music today to be horrible. Obviously, a significant portion of the population disagrees, which is why it's called "popular music" in the first place. That's fine. They're free to have their own opinion, and buy the songs. But they (and you) do not have the right to download music without paying for it--either out of protest, or for any other reason.
You, once again, are a completely and utterly nimwitted and retarded juvenile who lacks a superego.
Re:I didn't volunteer my money to burn up on reent
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Does your car stereo have line in? If so, then get the Belkin. It probably fits your needs. If not, then get the Griffin and buy another dock connector cable for $20.
Just remember: Apple's inadequacies are "third-party opportunities," at least until Apple duplicates the functionality and gives the third-party the Cold Shoulder of Death.
Oh, the humanity! How many people will have to suffer through this before Apple releases a fix?!?!?!
Only the soulless Mac OS 9 fanboys who read Macintouch (also known as "Quark Bigots" and "Claris Em@ilers") and post to MacNN Forums via a stick in their teeth.
The rest of us couldn't give two shits about the issue, because we're not idiots savant incapable of leading a normal social life, but being able to perceive a slight pop between songs (not even during the fucking thing, but after it, and before the next one) that is juuuuuuust barely audible by bats.
The new iPod is pure, 100%, unadulterated hot sex.
Apart from the fact that the Back, Menu, Play/Pause, and Forwards buttons will activate if you so much as glance in their direction (not an issue if you use the remote or actually have the capability to control where your hands go), this thing is the single most clever device Apple's created.
No. No, no, no. If you didn't have the music on your computer, the labels wouldn't care if you hadn't bought it or not. But you had the music, and you didn't pay for it. Whether or not you would have paid for it if you hadn't gotten it for free is irrelevant, especially in this argument, but I'll reiterate for those of you just joining us on the ClueTrain:
Whether or not you would have paid for the song is irrelevant. You still infringed upon the copyright, and that is actionable. I don't buy into the labels' specious claims of "lost revenue" to the extent that they claim. But they have undoubtedly lost some revenue, because there are many people who would buy the music if they weren't so lazy, or if the process was as "easy" as downloading it. (This is, incidentally, why Apple opened up the iTunes Music Store). So instead of coming up with some involved heuristic of the likelihood that you would have bought the albums, etc., they claim as damages (for lawsuits) the full value of what you downloaded/distributed without paying for.
But what he said (and you seem to disagree with this as well, so that's good) is that he might be due damages for "lost sales." But there's nothing to prove that he lost sales due to his site being blocked by the filter.
No it wouldn't. For piracy (software and music), they have something tangible like a software installation or the presence of a music file. For you, there's nothing.
It's because you have a penchant for shitty keyboards and synths.
Re:Redifference between uppercase and lowercase
on
Verbing Weirds Google
·
· Score: 1
It runs on Linux (a huge-assed cluster, no less). This is Slashdot, the de facto community symbol of the "rise" of Linux as a "viable" desktop/server operating system.
And it took Dick Feynman's demonstration with the ice water for the theory to be accepted as fact. Before that NASA was claiming that the O rings were fine. Feynman had been tipped off by engineers who thought otherwise. It was not an accident he had very cold ice water to hand.
Unfortunately, it wasn't Dick Feynman's thesis. Dick himself acknowledged that General Kutyna (another member of the commission) tipped him off to this (rather blatantly, too).
Slashdot Mirror
You, sir, are a retard.
Look at regular TV, its free, thats the only reason why its so successful.
Regular (read: broadcast) TV is not free. The price of watching TV is watching advertisements. You might not have a problem with that. Some people do.
Cable TV is very much not free. It, too, is quite successful. While there are some people who steal service (although, from your posting history, you will disagree with my usage of the word "steal" here, but that's okay; you're a fucking retard anyway), an overwhelming majority of people who receive Cable TV signals pay for them.
Look at the internet, its free, and its successful.
The internet is not free either. Routers, lines, switches, and everything else all cost money, in terms of initial capital expenditure, maintenance, and personnel costs. While you yourself might not be billed explicitly for internet access, you are paying the price, as are other people.
Most websites are not free. They, like broadcast television, have advertisements, or are membership-based. There are very few good places for free content that do not attempt to recoup costs through advertising, or asking for donations.
The RIAA controls every type of music imaginable, and has a monopoly, they dont let independent music on MTV, so they wonder why people pirate their music?
The RIAA cannot prevent me from writing my own songs, and performing them in front of a live audience. Nor can the RIAA prevent me from distributing recordings (either live, or in a studio) containing my own songs either online, or direct mail, or in person. Sure, I probably can't get space at the local Best Buy, Tower Records, or FYE. But that's how business works. Grammy Malda can't sell her homemade jams at the local MegaSupermarket, either.
MTV is as much a monopoly as CBS or NBC is. NBC will not let me write my own TV show and put it on TV. I guess that means I should make copies of Friends and ER available online. Are you really as retarded as you seem? Yes, actually, it appears that you are:
Why not let some free Music get play on MTV and maybe people wouldnt pirate the RIAA so much anymore.
Because, by and large, most people do not want to listen to "free" or "independent" music. I personally find most popular music today to be horrible. Obviously, a significant portion of the population disagrees, which is why it's called "popular music" in the first place. That's fine. They're free to have their own opinion, and buy the songs. But they (and you) do not have the right to download music without paying for it--either out of protest, or for any other reason.
You, once again, are a completely and utterly nimwitted and retarded juvenile who lacks a superego.
Who was our closest ally in Iraq?
Great Britain (Nukes.)
How, exactly, did we bully them?
You're a fucking retard. No testing necessary.
Well played, Trebek.
Now you only have to figure out what to do with that 18' mass of cable between your iPod and the tape deck.
Or just wait until Griffin gets its thumb out of its ass and releases the iTrip.
Yeah. So you're gonna have that extra wire hanging out going nowhere from the Belkin.
Dunno about your car, but mine's cluttered enough as it is.
Does your car stereo have line in? If so, then get the Belkin. It probably fits your needs. If not, then get the Griffin and buy another dock connector cable for $20.
Just remember: Apple's inadequacies are "third-party opportunities," at least until Apple duplicates the functionality and gives the third-party the Cold Shoulder of Death.
Griffin makes one.
Oh, the humanity! How many people will have to suffer through this before Apple releases a fix?!?!?!
Only the soulless Mac OS 9 fanboys who read Macintouch (also known as "Quark Bigots" and "Claris Em@ilers") and post to MacNN Forums via a stick in their teeth.
The rest of us couldn't give two shits about the issue, because we're not idiots savant incapable of leading a normal social life, but being able to perceive a slight pop between songs (not even during the fucking thing, but after it, and before the next one) that is juuuuuuust barely audible by bats.
Not that I'm bitter.
If you cancel your order, I will destroy you.
The new iPod is pure, 100%, unadulterated hot sex.
Apart from the fact that the Back, Menu, Play/Pause, and Forwards buttons will activate if you so much as glance in their direction (not an issue if you use the remote or actually have the capability to control where your hands go), this thing is the single most clever device Apple's created.
The Belkin add-ons look kinda tacky, though.
No. No, no, no. If you didn't have the music on your computer, the labels wouldn't care if you hadn't bought it or not. But you had the music, and you didn't pay for it. Whether or not you would have paid for it if you hadn't gotten it for free is irrelevant, especially in this argument, but I'll reiterate for those of you just joining us on the ClueTrain:
Whether or not you would have paid for the song is irrelevant. You still infringed upon the copyright, and that is actionable. I don't buy into the labels' specious claims of "lost revenue" to the extent that they claim. But they have undoubtedly lost some revenue, because there are many people who would buy the music if they weren't so lazy, or if the process was as "easy" as downloading it. (This is, incidentally, why Apple opened up the iTunes Music Store). So instead of coming up with some involved heuristic of the likelihood that you would have bought the albums, etc., they claim as damages (for lawsuits) the full value of what you downloaded/distributed without paying for.
But what he said (and you seem to disagree with this as well, so that's good) is that he might be due damages for "lost sales." But there's nothing to prove that he lost sales due to his site being blocked by the filter.
No it wouldn't. For piracy (software and music), they have something tangible like a software installation or the presence of a music file. For you, there's nothing.
Try again.
Not quite. While LCDs do not, indeed, get bad over time, older LCDs weren't made nearly as well as the ones made today.
Nah. He already got one right:
"I speak better English than this villain Bush"
So does Windows 2000 Advanced Server.
I believe you're mistaken. It'd actually be faster than you can say "InDesign."
Mac OS X 10.10, perhaps. Minor version numbers don't need to be single digits.
Get that shit out of here. Texas is a foul, foul state.
630. I win.
Lewiston isn't worth claiming. That's why it wasn't included.
It's because you have a penchant for shitty keyboards and synths.
It runs on Linux (a huge-assed cluster, no less). This is Slashdot, the de facto community symbol of the "rise" of Linux as a "viable" desktop/server operating system.
Sad.
I do wish the 'smart playlists' would allow better use of boolean operators. How can you ask for all songs rated 3+ but not ambient music or trance?
That's a trick question, right? Ambient/Trance should never be rated 3+.
waiting to happen. Expect to see hosting providers outlaw this quickly, if they haven't done so in their ToSes already.
And it took Dick Feynman's demonstration with the ice water for the theory to be accepted as fact. Before that NASA was claiming that the O rings were fine. Feynman had been tipped off by engineers who thought otherwise. It was not an accident he had very cold ice water to hand.
Unfortunately, it wasn't Dick Feynman's thesis. Dick himself acknowledged that General Kutyna (another member of the commission) tipped him off to this (rather blatantly, too).
They'll sell it to us over six months ago.
For free.
Asshead.