Because the intent and result of the vast majority of the taping of feature films that goes on is to later illegally distribute it. To cut down on the latter, it only makes sense to cut down on the former.
Note: in the following example, I am not comparing copyright infringement to child abuse.
The government has a very significant interest in stopping child abuse. So they arrest anyone who possesses, transfers, sells, whatever, child porn. Whatever value there is in the latter is much outweighed by the benefits in stopping the former.
I mean, if I saw somebody taping a feature film, the general assumption by the average individual is that he's later going to transfer it and illegally distribute it. That's also probably what the vast majority of such people do.
"Look, this other site is completely broken and no longer reacts to my clicking on links. (At least the Firefox 0.8 I use at work is idiotic enough to think that some popups I've clicked a link for, are still "unwanted".)"
This caught my eye. And yes, this has annoyed me in every version of Mozila/* I've used. Apparently when you disable unwanted popups, and you click on a popup-generating link before the page has finished loading, it doesn't work. I don't really want to dig around for bugs, but I can't see how this isn't a known issue.
Quite right. The problem with this IMO is that Firefox isn't ready for default installations. It's not integrated into Windows like IE is. For example, if you switched out IE for Firefox, the Favorites folder on the Start Menu is useless.
Is there a blog or something out there that tracks defaults from computer manufacturers?
I redid my parents' computer several months ago to upgrade them from Win98 to XP (which took some convincing in and of itself). I put Mozilla on there and put the icon right next to the IE one. Then I explained to Mom some of the different aspects concerning IE, and why Mozilla may be a better choice. I made sure to get across that I wasn't telling or forcing them to change, I was educating them on the alternatives. I find that people don't like it when you tell them to change their ways, especially when they consider themselves somewhat competant in it (browsing the web, etc.).
Providing and example and subtle education on alternatives works better, but is much harder and takes longer. I just find that people I've dealt with (Dad and girlfriend) get somewhat insulted when you tell them that the browser they've been using sucks and they should use another.
Not really. Lack of enough interest is the root of ignorance. I'm ignorant of much of quantum physics, because I have other things to do and don't really have the interest or the time to research it.
Doesn't mean I'm lazy. Nobody can not be ignorant of something.
Look guys, the head of the Helix project is straight-talking, follows the/. discussion, is supporting Linux, and is a subscriber. What else can you ask for?
I was of the impression that GStreamer was just a backend, and wasn't tied to GNOME/GTK at all.
I quote from the FAQ:
Q: What is GStreamer's relationship with the KDE community ?
A: The GStreamer community wants to have as good a relationship as possible with KDE, and we hope that someday KDE decides to adopt GStreamer as their multimedia API, just like the GNOME community plans on doing. There have been contacts from time to time between the GStreamer community and KDE and we do already have support for the aRTSd sound server used by KDE. Also, some of the KDE hackers have created Qt bindings of GStreamer and made a simple video player.
I having some trouble understanding this. RealPlayer did some ugly things with their software a few years ago, during the dot-com boom (who didn't?), but they've cleaned up their act, released some excellent software (I use RP10 every day), and open-sourced their main framework. What's left to complain about?
I, for one, will be mighty happy to get a stable, mature, free media framework on my Linux system.
That site appears to be down. Can you relay the important info? I never got a Tribes II key either.
Re:Not my area of expertise (legal or IP)
on
P2P Bits
·
· Score: 1
Well sure, if the law made anybody who "aids" an infringer an infringer itself. The act says "intentionally", though, where intent is "based upon all relevant information about such acts then reasonably available to the actor, including whether the activity relies on infringement for its commercial viability."
I think you'd have a hard time proving that AMD, ASUS, Addtronics, nVidia and NEC are intentionally inducing your infringement if you use their equipment to download music.
Of course, "intentionally aids infringement" is pretty nebulous. AMD is intentionally providing you with the capability, but its intent isn't that it will be used for such purpose, and its business model doesn't depend on it. Sounds like something the judge would have to decide, if (God forbit) this passed.
Slashdot Mirror
Because the intent and result of the vast majority of the taping of feature films that goes on is to later illegally distribute it. To cut down on the latter, it only makes sense to cut down on the former.
Note: in the following example, I am not comparing copyright infringement to child abuse.
The government has a very significant interest in stopping child abuse. So they arrest anyone who possesses, transfers, sells, whatever, child porn. Whatever value there is in the latter is much outweighed by the benefits in stopping the former.
I mean, if I saw somebody taping a feature film, the general assumption by the average individual is that he's later going to transfer it and illegally distribute it. That's also probably what the vast majority of such people do.
I believe each set of numbers means something unique. I know the first three have something to do with the state (or region) of birth.
Dammit, you almost made me spew my turkey sandwich. Not cute when you work in a cube farm.
Wachovia
AmSouth
I set up a rough Wikipedia page to track them.
Another couple data points: Wachovia and AmSouth both work fine with Moz/Linux.
Yeah, looks like around 5% according to the Zeitgeist.
"Look, this other site is completely broken and no longer reacts to my clicking on links. (At least the Firefox 0.8 I use at work is idiotic enough to think that some popups I've clicked a link for, are still "unwanted".)"
This caught my eye. And yes, this has annoyed me in every version of Mozila/* I've used. Apparently when you disable unwanted popups, and you click on a popup-generating link before the page has finished loading, it doesn't work. I don't really want to dig around for bugs, but I can't see how this isn't a known issue.
Quite right. The problem with this IMO is that Firefox isn't ready for default installations. It's not integrated into Windows like IE is. For example, if you switched out IE for Firefox, the Favorites folder on the Start Menu is useless.
Is there a blog or something out there that tracks defaults from computer manufacturers?
I redid my parents' computer several months ago to upgrade them from Win98 to XP (which took some convincing in and of itself). I put Mozilla on there and put the icon right next to the IE one. Then I explained to Mom some of the different aspects concerning IE, and why Mozilla may be a better choice. I made sure to get across that I wasn't telling or forcing them to change, I was educating them on the alternatives. I find that people don't like it when you tell them to change their ways, especially when they consider themselves somewhat competant in it (browsing the web, etc.).
Providing and example and subtle education on alternatives works better, but is much harder and takes longer. I just find that people I've dealt with (Dad and girlfriend) get somewhat insulted when you tell them that the browser they've been using sucks and they should use another.
It works for me.
Not really. Lack of enough interest is the root of ignorance. I'm ignorant of much of quantum physics, because I have other things to do and don't really have the interest or the time to research it.
Doesn't mean I'm lazy. Nobody can not be ignorant of something.
Hey, I go to school there and I didn't even know about that. Learn something new every day, eh?
Eh, I'm not convinced. I like their player better than WMP, and I never like vivo.
Before the dogs come for blood, it's Ogg Vorbis, not Verbix.
Look guys, the head of the Helix project is straight-talking, follows the /. discussion, is supporting Linux, and is a subscriber. What else can you ask for?
Thanks, Real, for supporting the community.
Actually, Helix's license agreement is already very much open source.
Troll. Give them a chance. When you start getting Real spam on your phone, then complain.
I was of the impression that GStreamer was just a backend, and wasn't tied to GNOME/GTK at all.
I quote from the FAQ:
Q: What is GStreamer's relationship with the KDE community ?
A: The GStreamer community wants to have as good a relationship as possible with KDE, and we hope that someday KDE decides to adopt GStreamer as their multimedia API, just like the GNOME community plans on doing. There have been contacts from time to time between the GStreamer community and KDE and we do already have support for the aRTSd sound server used by KDE. Also, some of the KDE hackers have created Qt bindings of GStreamer and made a simple video player.
Why don't you relate their arguments, instead of just flame them without evidence to back it up?
I'd guess it's because they're based out of Hungary.
I having some trouble understanding this. RealPlayer did some ugly things with their software a few years ago, during the dot-com boom (who didn't?), but they've cleaned up their act, released some excellent software (I use RP10 every day), and open-sourced their main framework. What's left to complain about?
I, for one, will be mighty happy to get a stable, mature, free media framework on my Linux system.
It's an analogy, and a good one.
I don't understand how visiting a website with Windows Explorer is tantamount to letting remote sites manage your files. Please explain.
That site appears to be down. Can you relay the important info? I never got a Tribes II key either.
Well sure, if the law made anybody who "aids" an infringer an infringer itself. The act says "intentionally", though, where intent is "based upon all relevant information about such acts then reasonably available to the actor, including whether the activity relies on infringement for its commercial viability."
I think you'd have a hard time proving that AMD, ASUS, Addtronics, nVidia and NEC are intentionally inducing your infringement if you use their equipment to download music.
Of course, "intentionally aids infringement" is pretty nebulous. AMD is intentionally providing you with the capability, but its intent isn't that it will be used for such purpose, and its business model doesn't depend on it. Sounds like something the judge would have to decide, if (God forbit) this passed.