Again, begging the question: you still accept the theory that it is enforcement of rights that motivates people to create. You just shift the goalposts a little by saying that there are enough honest people to make it work.
The simpler model is that people like to create things, and given decent access to creation, enough people are willing to pay that this is a viable living for creators. The commercial artists who experimented with a low-threshold access to material (by not enforcing copyright) showed us empirical data that this is in fact a more likely explanation of reality.
This study merely confirms what people like Eric Flint already told us 16 years ago.
The problem we have at the moment is that we have this bizarre situation where the law says creators have certain rights as an incentive, and a lot of people do create and share work on that basis, yet actually enforcing your rights is impractical in many circumstances so there's no real deterrent.
Logically speaking you're begging the question here: if people can't enforce their rights, you can't say that the expectation of enforcement is the basis of their creative activity, because if they really couldn't enforce it, they would not do so in your view. And yet we see creative activity everywhere.
"elite", "hedonist degenerate culture", "not anti-arab, just anti-muslim". The perfect trifecta of the modern extreme rightist. I gave a well-reasoned first post, your use of ideological shibboleths makes perfectly clear who has the closed mind here.
No I won't. It is enough that I get to hear this stupid racist shit from actual politicians in my country, I am not giving more time to some Slashdot lowlife.
Oh fuck off with your Likud propaganda. What Israel shouldn't do is use terror bombing against populations and support illegal settlements to provide a casus belli for those terror bombings. Point out where I said that they could not engage in proportiate responses?
All that was obvious from my first post, but you predictably roll out the anti-Semitism dog whistles regardless.
The question should be: 'Is Israel's response to the presence of a large group of people committed to its destruction avoiding the death of innocents as much as possible?' Yes they've made mistakes, but so does everyone.
The answer to the question is "No". The professed aims of Hamas are irrelevant in the face of the power disparity. Israel is like a trained martial artist vs a kid yelling "I'm going to kick your ass!". The proper response to that is to ignore it, because it is not a viable threat, not to brutalise the kid into the hospital.
And the second point: maybe everyone makes mistakes, but the disproportional use of force by the IDF is not a mistake, it's policy.
And finally, when the current Likud government is still sponsoring the illegal settlements and using resistance against them as a casus belli, it is not Israel that is the victim here.
This is all the developers' fault. They are so fucking lazy that they think throwing up a dialog is a solution to the problem. After all, if the user clicks on it, they assented, right?
Microsoft is by far the worst offender, but they are not alone. And this abdication of responsibility by programmers has trained the users to just blindly click away warnings. And they are right: 99% of the time they are bullshit, a symptom of a problem the developers should have fixed.
Stop watching Fox, reading Breitbart and avoiding that visit to a doctor for anti-psychotic medication. Maybe then you will stop seeing conspiracies everywhere.
I'm a little surprised they aren't in a position to play hardball in some of these cases.
Probably complacency. If they feel that they are the only viable streaming service, they will feel no urgency to play hardball; after all, where are the customers going to go?
You and I know the answer, but Netflix' management obviously doesn't, vide the PR bullshit they spout on this news.
CP/M and other precursor OSes are really only of interest to historians and nostalgic geeks,
The fact that you seem to assume that the direct lineage of DOS is the only thing that matters shows you exactly for the kind of young know-it-all I was describing.
Here's a hint: even though I grew up with 8-bit micros during the CP/M to DOS transition years, I at least know that computing had been going on for a lot longer than that, on a variety of machines from micros to mainframes; and I recognise most of what the PC hipsters hail as 'new and innovative' is usually nothing but badly reimplemented 70s technology.
Yeah, the problem is that the Internet is dominated by the voices of the PC generation, who somehow never learned that there actually was a long history of computing before the PC and MS-DOS.
Heck, most of them would be surprised if you told them DOS was a bad rip-off of an existing system to start with.
Self-proclaimed expertise does not correlate well with actual expertise, and Ada seems to be doing quite well in its domains of highly-secure and embbeded software. In fact, it's having a bit of resurgence.
Those who do vocally hate on it seem to be the kind of cowboys that run after every new fad, the sort of programmers you wouldn't trust to code the right way to implement an automatic toilet seat.
(Side note: let's see who spots the reference in that last paragraph.)
No. Because GamerGhazi is built on a tissue of lies. And worse, they paid virtually no attention to this particular scandal, adding even more proof that it was mostly about the gaters' misogyny.
Sorry no. Debian and derivatives have always take the tack that runlevels are user/admin defined, and unless you change things everything will start in runlevel 2.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, begging the question: you still accept the theory that it is enforcement of rights that motivates people to create. You just shift the goalposts a little by saying that there are enough honest people to make it work.
The simpler model is that people like to create things, and given decent access to creation, enough people are willing to pay that this is a viable living for creators. The commercial artists who experimented with a low-threshold access to material (by not enforcing copyright) showed us empirical data that this is in fact a more likely explanation of reality.
This study merely confirms what people like Eric Flint already told us 16 years ago.
Logically speaking you're begging the question here: if people can't enforce their rights, you can't say that the expectation of enforcement is the basis of their creative activity, because if they really couldn't enforce it, they would not do so in your view. And yet we see creative activity everywhere.
"elite", "hedonist degenerate culture", "not anti-arab, just anti-muslim". The perfect trifecta of the modern extreme rightist. I gave a well-reasoned first post, your use of ideological shibboleths makes perfectly clear who has the closed mind here.
No I won't. It is enough that I get to hear this stupid racist shit from actual politicians in my country, I am not giving more time to some Slashdot lowlife.
tl;dr: Fuck off.
No, they become 'terror' if they are indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.
Oh fuck off with your Likud propaganda. What Israel shouldn't do is use terror bombing against populations and support illegal settlements to provide a casus belli for those terror bombings. Point out where I said that they could not engage in proportiate responses?
All that was obvious from my first post, but you predictably roll out the anti-Semitism dog whistles regardless.
The answer to the question is "No". The professed aims of Hamas are irrelevant in the face of the power disparity. Israel is like a trained martial artist vs a kid yelling "I'm going to kick your ass!". The proper response to that is to ignore it, because it is not a viable threat, not to brutalise the kid into the hospital.
And the second point: maybe everyone makes mistakes, but the disproportional use of force by the IDF is not a mistake, it's policy.
And finally, when the current Likud government is still sponsoring the illegal settlements and using resistance against them as a casus belli, it is not Israel that is the victim here.
If you are too stupid to know what an expression means, you should not use it. The rest of your post is of the same level, so fuck off, idiot.
How about not executing files from the Internet, instead of throwing up a 'this may be dangerous, are you sure' dialog?
For fuck's sake, where have you been the past thirty years?
This is all the developers' fault. They are so fucking lazy that they think throwing up a dialog is a solution to the problem. After all, if the user clicks on it, they assented, right?
Microsoft is by far the worst offender, but they are not alone. And this abdication of responsibility by programmers has trained the users to just blindly click away warnings. And they are right: 99% of the time they are bullshit, a symptom of a problem the developers should have fixed.
Erm, no. That's why its called anecdotal. Stop hitting the ganja so hard, dude.
Good grief. You really did just pull the 'Some of my best friends' fallacy, didn't you?
Well, yes, because when the choice is between a technocrat and a lying, cheating, insane weasel, that's a no-brainer.
Stop watching Fox, reading Breitbart and avoiding that visit to a doctor for anti-psychotic medication. Maybe then you will stop seeing conspiracies everywhere.
EPA, NHTSA, they're all government, right?
Yeah, that's called "being a customer", or in formal economics: "demand".
Probably complacency. If they feel that they are the only viable streaming service, they will feel no urgency to play hardball; after all, where are the customers going to go?
You and I know the answer, but Netflix' management obviously doesn't, vide the PR bullshit they spout on this news.
The fact that you seem to assume that the direct lineage of DOS is the only thing that matters shows you exactly for the kind of young know-it-all I was describing.
Here's a hint: even though I grew up with 8-bit micros during the CP/M to DOS transition years, I at least know that computing had been going on for a lot longer than that, on a variety of machines from micros to mainframes; and I recognise most of what the PC hipsters hail as 'new and innovative' is usually nothing but badly reimplemented 70s technology.
Yeah, the problem is that the Internet is dominated by the voices of the PC generation, who somehow never learned that there actually was a long history of computing before the PC and MS-DOS.
Heck, most of them would be surprised if you told them DOS was a bad rip-off of an existing system to start with.
Oh noes! The service that needs the address to deliver to scans it from the package! What is this world coming to!
Really, do you have to work at being this stupid?
<citation needed>
Self-proclaimed expertise does not correlate well with actual expertise, and Ada seems to be doing quite well in its domains of highly-secure and embbeded software. In fact, it's having a bit of resurgence.
Those who do vocally hate on it seem to be the kind of cowboys that run after every new fad, the sort of programmers you wouldn't trust to code the right way to implement an automatic toilet seat.
(Side note: let's see who spots the reference in that last paragraph.)
I know of one: Ada. And it has a well-deserved reputation for safety.
No. Because GamerGhazi is built on a tissue of lies. And worse, they paid virtually no attention to this particular scandal, adding even more proof that it was mostly about the gaters' misogyny.
Sorry no. Debian and derivatives have always take the tack that runlevels are user/admin defined, and unless you change things everything will start in runlevel 2.