"ROFL.. Napster makes a fat whopping zero every month. They make a fat whopping zero every year. And that's just revenues. On the whole they're hemorraghing to the tune of millions of dollars every month. When was the last time you paid to use Napster?"
You might be right about Napster not making any money, but when was the last time you paid to use Yahoo.com? Where do you suppose their revenue comes from?
If I take a 5-second clip of a movie to add to my Film Critic class, this is what is known as fair use. This is legal. In order to do this with a DVD, I would need a tool to decode it. DeCSS is such a tool. DeCSS can (and this is what the lawyers are bantering about) be considered legal under the Fair Use clause.
I don't much mind when people state their opinions, but try and keep your "facts" at least somewhat informed.
Not to mention the not-so-new idea that some seriously mutated, never-before-seen-by-humans microbes exist in the upper atmosphere. Thousands of years of floating around, being beaten on by unfiltered UV, nowhere near us so we might acclimate ourselves to it...
I would imagine that a suborbital flight would be pretty darned optimal for picking up stuff like this.
Damn. Why does the only post that breaches my threshold (2) have to ask the precise question I was going to ask??
Seems to me that they can just recreate these conditions in a lab. The UV such microbes would receive is a known quantity, as is the heat and accelerations (if that's even a factor). So just spin a microwave oven on a tether for 10 minutes. =)
But seriously, can anyone explain what this is supposed to be aside from a visual stunt?
For starters, not very many of us Americans are familiar with soccer, so the Brazilian team Corinthians has little or no impact on us. But what if it were the Minnesota Vikings wanted to register vikings.com and found it was held by a Scandanavian man who wasn't doing anything with it? Would our viewpoint soften a little?
Not only is Magneto not presented as a loathsome character on purpose, I don't think he's nessesarily wrong.
A trait of a civilized an honorable culture is to not destroy that which is less advanced, instead protecting it. In the XMen scenario, it is the humans that are picking a fight.
If the humans are actually superior, they are dishonorable. If they are inferior, then they are stupid. Either way, Magneto is simply engaging in genodefense (if I can use that term).
Since there are valid free songs on Napster, this is a bogus example on it's face. I'm not even going to explain it, I think you know where you're off.
This is avoided by making a plugin (in which case the user is the "editor", not Napster) that takes a part of a song, compares it to a known checksum, and ok's the file.
1) I've also noted two instances of people taking some mp3.com-type band and calling it "metallica - one.mp3" or similar. I thought that was cute.
2) Solution: create (plugin) a method by which part of the sender's file is read in (not nessesarily the beginning), say 3k, and compared to a trusted db. Of course this could then be used by the RIAA to argue Napster could block known copywritten songs, but...
I think after reading all of the sides here on/. (and this is easily my most-participated in discussion, hands down), I'm going to have to agree with you. The charm of the movie really hinged on the question, so while I've always assumed that he was a replicant (that's how I interpret the unicorn sequence) I'm going to have to keep a questionmark at the end of my statment.
That's a hell of a spin. Deckard dreams of unicorns as a push toward immortality and Gaff does something similar with the origami. Coincidence? I doubt it (I've always thought Deckard was a replicant but that's because I saw the director's cut first), but yours is the best plausible denial I've seen so far.
No sequel was ever made. It was discussed off and on until it was shot down permanently (as permanently as "no sequel" gets in Hollywood, anyways). Scott has discussed doing something along the same lines but had said he wishes to avoid mucking directly with such a classic.
If you have differing info, maybe you could...I dunno, mention the movie by name. Yeesh.
I dunno. I sorta see your point but I have to think that if I paint a sailboat I have some sort of right to say it's a painting of a sailboat. If it looks just like one and you disagree, that's fine. Even if it looks much more like an easter egg, it's still my call.
I guess maybe there are two (if not more sides) to art. What I intend and what people take from it. And maybe that's what separates artists; what one strives for.
Slashdot Mirror
"I've got the power, hey yeaaaah..." - Snap
.02
My
Quux26
You might be right about Napster not making any money, but when was the last time you paid to use Yahoo.com? Where do you suppose their revenue comes from?
.02
My
Quux26
Not sure how you'd do such a thing. I have every right as an artist to make a song called "metallica one" and distribute it for free.
.02
My
Quux26
That having been said, I can honestly say that I don't see how his post adds to the discussion (putting microbes through some stress) even a little.
Slashdot is as much a podium for creationism rants as it is for atheism rants. ...which is to say not at all.
.02
My
Quux26
a) Define "fail"
.02
b) How would failing disprove evolution?
My
Quux26
A theory (in this case, god) begins to lose it's value when it is undiscernable from chance.
.02
My
Quux26
Whe the heck would you have a payload of bacteria on the outside of a ICBM?
.02
My
Quux26
Yeesh. I'm going through your posts one by one and you display an amazing ability to count on nobody looking very hard.
" You may not agree with the law or its interpretation, but that's no excuse for breaking it! "
How else do you get the validity of a law tested?? You have an OBLIGATION to break lousy laws.
" to derail the Truths that have been revealed to all of us through the words of our Lord. "
Do I even need to touch this one?
" ...the fact that open source imitates rather than innovating,... "
Uh... DeCSS...? You remember, that little program that has the MPAA on it's ear, the open-source program that has Fair Use applications? That thing?
.02
My
Quux26
Incorrect, and boldly so.
If I take a 5-second clip of a movie to add to my Film Critic class, this is what is known as fair use. This is legal. In order to do this with a DVD, I would need a tool to decode it. DeCSS is such a tool. DeCSS can (and this is what the lawyers are bantering about) be considered legal under the Fair Use clause.
I don't much mind when people state their opinions, but try and keep your "facts" at least somewhat informed.
.02
My
Quux26
Jesus.
.02
My
Quux26
I would imagine that a suborbital flight would be pretty darned optimal for picking up stuff like this.
.02
My
Quux26
I thought you were talking about the original post. Mea culpa. [giving self joe-forehead]
.02
My
Quux26
Who said anything about fighting?
If you don't survive to reproduce, you don't pass on your genetic traits. This IS well understood
And ignore the other guy,...
WHO???
Btw this is so far off topic its not even funny.
I'm not even sure that you're reading the same post that I am!
.02
My
Quux26
Seems to me that they can just recreate these conditions in a lab. The UV such microbes would receive is a known quantity, as is the heat and accelerations (if that's even a factor). So just spin a microwave oven on a tether for 10 minutes. =)
But seriously, can anyone explain what this is supposed to be aside from a visual stunt?
.02
My
Quux26
No. And I'm a flaming atheist.
.02
My
Quux26
A trait of a civilized an honorable culture is to not destroy that which is less advanced, instead protecting it. In the XMen scenario, it is the humans that are picking a fight.
If the humans are actually superior, they are dishonorable. If they are inferior, then they are stupid. Either way, Magneto is simply engaging in genodefense (if I can use that term).
.02
My
Quux26
Since there are valid free songs on Napster, this is a bogus example on it's face. I'm not even going to explain it, I think you know where you're off.
.02
My
Quux26
This is avoided by making a plugin (in which case the user is the "editor", not Napster) that takes a part of a song, compares it to a known checksum, and ok's the file.
.02
My
Quux26
2) Solution: create (plugin) a method by which part of the sender's file is read in (not nessesarily the beginning), say 3k, and compared to a trusted db. Of course this could then be used by the RIAA to argue Napster could block known copywritten songs, but...
.02
My
Quux26
And this is bad why? [grin]
.02
My
Quux26
I think after reading all of the sides here on /. (and this is easily my most-participated in discussion, hands down), I'm going to have to agree with you. The charm of the movie really hinged on the question, so while I've always assumed that he was a replicant (that's how I interpret the unicorn sequence) I'm going to have to keep a questionmark at the end of my statment.
.02
My
Quux26
That's a hell of a spin. Deckard dreams of unicorns as a push toward immortality and Gaff does something similar with the origami. Coincidence? I doubt it (I've always thought Deckard was a replicant but that's because I saw the director's cut first), but yours is the best plausible denial I've seen so far.
.02
My
Quux26
If you have differing info, maybe you could ...I dunno, mention the movie by name. Yeesh.
.02
My
Quux26
I guess maybe there are two (if not more sides) to art. What I intend and what people take from it. And maybe that's what separates artists; what one strives for.
.02
My
Quux26
Yeah, I can agree. I saw no artifacts in the DVD. Not one. Altho it could definetly be beefed up a bit since it is DVD and all...
.02
My
Quux26