I am an atheist, and I DO want religion taught in schools. In a religious studies and/or history class.
I think it is fairly ridiculous that a phenomena that has had a huge impact on history, culture, art, laws, etc throughout the world is NOT taught in school. I also believe that if children understood the variety of backgrounds/beliefs in the world they may grow up understanding people from other cultures a little better.
The beliefs themselves should be taught not as a "this is a true thing", but as a "this is something people believe", with an emphasis on historical and cultural differences.
The USA has spent a whole pile of money getting involved in a conflict that is somewhat related to religious belief. Teaching an understanding of those beliefs helps create a better formed electorate, which IMHO is one of the primary purposes of public education.
I do agree however, that religion is not something for any schools (public or private) to cover in science class. It makes about as much sense as teaching Shakespeare in math class.
Many lawyers disagree with you (see the section headed "But is faking a U.S. IP address illegal?")
Specifically: "Prof. Fewer said he doubts that the use of a VPN qualified as the breaking of a digital lock on a device designed to prohibit unauthorized copying, since it merely cloaks a user’s IP address."
The issue I have here is that due to free trade between the US & Canada, It is perfectly legal to go to the US, fill up my trunk with cheap US-made DVD's and bring them across the border duty free.
Apparently if I bring those exact same bits across the border via Netflix, I am an shameful, immoral thief.
No, the argument was: When you pirate a game (specifically in the sense of acquiring the game without paying the developers for it), you deprive the developers of compensation for their work. (emphasis mine)
This has two parts: 1) You acquire something 2) The developers are deprived of something.
In case (1) Game is loaned to you, the developer is deprived of nothing. The developer received compensation for the original sale. In case (2) Buying the game used, the developer is deprived of nothing. The developer received compensation for the original sale. In case (3) Not getting the game, you acquire nothing
I disagree that it is stealing, but for different reasons. If one accepts the definition that stealing is the acquisition of something without providing adequate compensation to the original owner, they piracy is indeed stealing.
The argument with piracy is that when you pirate a game (specifically in the sense of acquiring the game without paying the developers for it), you deprive the developers of compensation for their work, therefore it is stealing.
Agreed! But in this case, Canadians have paid Netflix, who has (presumably) compensated the content creators.
So is it "stealing" to deprive a middleman (Bell) compensation for their work, when I receive nothing from Bell?
In that case, NSA [extremetech.com], Google [quora.com], Facebook [pcworld.com] et al. collecting our data aren't "stealing" anything either.
They aren't "stealing" anything. How can one "steal" information? That's like stealing the number 4 or the color blue.
Distinction without difference. The infringer gets something for nothing — like a thief. The copyright holder loses something — like a theft-victim.
There's an obvious difference. The "infringer" gains something different than the copyright holder loses.
If I steal your car, I gain a car and you lose it.
In this case, I gain access to view a piece of content. The copyright holder only "loses" the ability to sell that content to me through a different channel.
If you can download a song against its owner's wishes, why can't you move into my home while I'm away and change the locks [credit.com]? It is (or ought to be) just as socially (un)acceptable...
That's just silly. How exactly does downloading a song "change the locks" on the song?
I agree there should be copyright terms. These promote the health and innovation of the arts. I disagree that terms should be unnecessarily restrictive.
In this case, the distinction that "you are permitted to view this content from this specific pile of dirt, but not from that pile of dirt over there" seems unnecessarily restrictive.
you are obtaining content that you have not paid for
But the Canadians are obtaining content that they have paid for. They paid Netflix for content.
If that same Canadian takes their laptop to the US, and watches Netflix they receive US Netflix. I think it is a fallacy to think that most of society would consider accessing a service at one geographic location legal and at another "stealing"
Netflix could differentiate accounts so that Canadian customers could never access things they don't have a license to sell in Canada no matter what address they come in from.
Which is exactly why I do not consider the behavior "stealing". Netflix could cut down on 99% of this simply by tying Netflix.ca accounts to Canadian Netflix.
They choose not to. I fail to see how this becomes the moral responsibility of the Canadian populace.
I fail to see the immorality of my actions due to the fact that I circumvent a licensing agreement that I was not party to.
Great, so Bell paid for an "exclusive" license for NBC content in Canada. Why should their agreement have anything to do with what sites I access? Last time I checked, Bell Media is not the governing body of Canada.
For the end user this is neither a copyright violation nor a licensing violation. It may violate Netflix terms of service, but I do not believe that violating a websites terms of service is necessarily immoral.
And this is the problem with industry thinking. It is NOT stealing
No, the problem in this case is not only is it NOT stealing, it is not actually illegal.
Accessing US Netflix outside of the US may break terms of use (which Netflix would have a VERY hard time winning a lawsuit over), but does not currently break any Canadian laws. No more than using a VPN to access any other website.
This whole thing is bloody retarded. In this case, Canadians: - Pay for the content - Pay for the VPN to access the content
At least if nothing else, this has convinced me to NEVER sign up for any Bell services.
Yeah you'd think these media giants would come out with their own streaming services instead of trying to fight the tide
Uhhh...they have. That's the whole point. She's trying to paint US Netflix with the "it's illegal and immoral" brush so people sign up for Bell Media's streaming service.
Problem is she's wrong on both counts (it being neither illegal nor immoral).
The best option? Tear down ALL the borders. Everybody has a right to move and live where they want.
here won't be a 'home country'. Home is where you live. Better to make the social programs global. There's plenty of money locked up in the financial industry to do it.
I certainly hope you are trolling, cause otherwise you are an idiot.
Your "solution" that makes a cute sound bite but is obviously unworkable on any number of levels. Who would "tear down the borders? Which social programs would be provided? Which government would be in charge? How would you resolve the vast social, cultural, religious and historical differences among the populace?
Even if we magically managed to resolve the above, there would still be huge issues of disparity between resource rich and resource poor areas. i.e. this would cause all sorts of new problems and not solve any of the existing ones.
BTW, the US financial sector was worth about $6.2 trillion in 2014. The US spends about $3.8 trillion on healthcare annually. There is not "plenty of money locked up in the financial system to pay for it"
Hell, Canada spent $214.9 billion on health care in 2014.
As a Canadian I think of my height in imperial, but distances in (kilo)metres (and speed in km/h); my weight in pounds, but general volumetric stuff in litres.
Yep, exactly the same here. Similarly I think of temperatures in Celsius, but use feet / inches when building stuff.
But Celsius makes much more sense in Canada. Here, the range of habitable temperatures are basically -30 to +30.
Outside that it's either too damn cold or too damn hot.
I would also argue that the trivial benefits the imperial system has in being "good for some things in day to day life" are far outweighed by the inconvenience of every other country on the planet using a different measurement system.
their audio kit is powerful enough and well-tuned to hear the quietest parts fine without cringing painfully during the loud parts.
What theatres are you going to?!? Every theatre I go to seems to have decided to make the "quietest parts fine" by having the loud parts loud enough for your ears to bleed.
The worst part is they are sometimes loud enough you can hear distortion from the speakers (right before you ear canal fills with blood).
Are the SF editors just retarded or are they intentionally just trying to shoot themselves in the head?
What were they thinking: "Wow, taking control of GIMP and adding adware to it certainly stirred up some controversy....let's see what happens if we hijack NMap! No such thing as bad publicity, right?"
Someone needs to hit these people upside the head with a clue-bat and let them know that yes, there IS such a thing as bad publicity.
PS Guess we can talk about this in a couple of weeks on main when the Slashdot editors finally get the go-ahead from their corporate overlords.
Interesting how MS's astroturfers now have to stage a defense against FUD. It was not so long ago that they were the ones propagating FUD galore.
Or there are those of us who don't give a flying fig who is spreading the FUD...we disagree with anyone spreading FUD regardless of the source.
Not everyone is on a particular side of the Microsoft / Linux holy war.
You can't excuse bad behavior by pointing to other people's bad behavior. Most of us learned in kindergarten that "But Johnny was doing it too!" is not a valid excuse.
Ching ching ching? We haven't even heard a clank clank clank coming from Chernobyl for decades now. And won't for decades more (or at least until they're forced to go in there and rebuild the fucking dome that hides that "oops".)
Prosperity measured in half-life is anything but.
Using Chernobyl (or Fukushima) as a reason not to build more reactors is the same logic as saying we shouldn't build boats because of the Titanic.
443 reactors provide 10% of the worlds power needs right now. Safely. citation. It would not be by any means an insurmountable endeavor to build 2500 additional reactors and get us completely off of coal/oil/gas.
Even better would be 1000 additional reactors, and supplement the remaining with hydro/solar/wind/etc.
Build more nuclear plants, and use the power to operate the desalination plants you also build.
BONUS! By removing sea water from the oceans for the purpose of desalination, you mitigate the ocean level rise due to global warming!
DOUBLE BONUS! By building nuclear plants, you mitigate the production of greenhouse gasses, reducing global warming!
TRIPLE BONUS! By having an excess of water, you can grow more cattle and crops and increase the planets carrying capacity!
QUADRUPLE BONUS! Excess fresh water allows you to address ongoing desertification!
Ching ching ching ching ching... -- human net prosperity slot machine paying out
Although I am a proponent of nuclear power (and wind and solar and geothermal etc), you'd have to be REALLY bad at math to believe that the amount of water pulled from the oceans for desalination would have any meaningful impact on ocean levels.
. The buyers will get some unreliable software, possibly reducing the "trust" on the warez hacker and sowing discord among the pirates and their customers.
More likely, I would think this would reduce the trust of the software and original software developer. After all, the software appears to be working, other than the "bugs". Most users aren't sophisticated enough to think "maybe that shady warez site did something that affected the original software!", they'll just think the original software is crap. Especially when they go online and see complaints for exactly the same bugs from other (unbeknownst to them) warez users.
This seems like a really bad idea. I would suggest to have it work for a while (say 6 months), then pop up a message indicating that this is illegally copied software. Long enough that the warez hacker doesn't realize, but not so long that they get full use of the product.
Slashdot Mirror
I am an atheist, and I DO want religion taught in schools. In a religious studies and/or history class.
I think it is fairly ridiculous that a phenomena that has had a huge impact on history, culture, art, laws, etc throughout the world is NOT taught in school. I also believe that if children understood the variety of backgrounds/beliefs in the world they may grow up understanding people from other cultures a little better.
The beliefs themselves should be taught not as a "this is a true thing", but as a "this is something people believe", with an emphasis on historical and cultural differences.
The USA has spent a whole pile of money getting involved in a conflict that is somewhat related to religious belief. Teaching an understanding of those beliefs helps create a better formed electorate, which IMHO is one of the primary purposes of public education.
I do agree however, that religion is not something for any schools (public or private) to cover in science class. It makes about as much sense as teaching Shakespeare in math class.
Many lawyers disagree with you (see the section headed "But is faking a U.S. IP address illegal?")
Specifically:
"Prof. Fewer said he doubts that the use of a VPN qualified as the breaking of a digital lock on a device designed to prohibit unauthorized copying, since it merely cloaks a user’s IP address."
You have heard of tarriffs, have you not?
The issue I have here is that due to free trade between the US & Canada, It is perfectly legal to go to the US, fill up my trunk with cheap US-made DVD's and bring them across the border duty free.
Apparently if I bring those exact same bits across the border via Netflix, I am an shameful, immoral thief.
No, the argument was: When you pirate a game (specifically in the sense of acquiring the game without paying the developers for it), you deprive the developers of compensation for their work. (emphasis mine)
This has two parts:
1) You acquire something
2) The developers are deprived of something.
In case (1) Game is loaned to you, the developer is deprived of nothing. The developer received compensation for the original sale.
In case (2) Buying the game used, the developer is deprived of nothing. The developer received compensation for the original sale.
In case (3) Not getting the game, you acquire nothing
I disagree that it is stealing, but for different reasons. If one accepts the definition that stealing is the acquisition of something without providing adequate compensation to the original owner, they piracy is indeed stealing.
Agreed! But in this case, Canadians have paid Netflix, who has (presumably) compensated the content creators.
So is it "stealing" to deprive a middleman (Bell) compensation for their work, when I receive nothing from Bell?
They aren't "stealing" anything. How can one "steal" information? That's like stealing the number 4 or the color blue.
There's an obvious difference. The "infringer" gains something different than the copyright holder loses.
If I steal your car, I gain a car and you lose it.
In this case, I gain access to view a piece of content. The copyright holder only "loses" the ability to sell that content to me through a different channel.
That's just silly. How exactly does downloading a song "change the locks" on the song?
I agree there should be copyright terms. These promote the health and innovation of the arts. I disagree that terms should be unnecessarily restrictive.
In this case, the distinction that "you are permitted to view this content from this specific pile of dirt, but not from that pile of dirt over there" seems unnecessarily restrictive.
But the Canadians are obtaining content that they have paid for. They paid Netflix for content.
If that same Canadian takes their laptop to the US, and watches Netflix they receive US Netflix. I think it is a fallacy to think that most of society would consider accessing a service at one geographic location legal and at another "stealing"
Which is exactly why I do not consider the behavior "stealing". Netflix could cut down on 99% of this simply by tying Netflix.ca accounts to Canadian Netflix.
They choose not to. I fail to see how this becomes the moral responsibility of the Canadian populace.
I fail to see the immorality of my actions due to the fact that I circumvent a licensing agreement that I was not party to.
Great, so Bell paid for an "exclusive" license for NBC content in Canada. Why should their agreement have anything to do with what sites I access? Last time I checked, Bell Media is not the governing body of Canada.
For the end user this is neither a copyright violation nor a licensing violation. It may violate Netflix terms of service, but I do not believe that violating a websites terms of service is necessarily immoral.
No, the problem in this case is not only is it NOT stealing, it is not actually illegal.
Accessing US Netflix outside of the US may break terms of use (which Netflix would have a VERY hard time winning a lawsuit over), but does not currently break any Canadian laws. No more than using a VPN to access any other website.
This whole thing is bloody retarded. In this case, Canadians:
- Pay for the content
- Pay for the VPN to access the content
At least if nothing else, this has convinced me to NEVER sign up for any Bell services.
No, the government would consider that tax evasion. Not the same thing at all.
Uhhh...they have. That's the whole point. She's trying to paint US Netflix with the "it's illegal and immoral" brush so people sign up for Bell Media's streaming service.
Problem is she's wrong on both counts (it being neither illegal nor immoral).
I don't have a TV set. I read books. Books have taught me to be scared of idiots.
You scare me.
I certainly hope you are trolling, cause otherwise you are an idiot.
Your "solution" that makes a cute sound bite but is obviously unworkable on any number of levels. Who would "tear down the borders? Which social programs would be provided? Which government would be in charge? How would you resolve the vast social, cultural, religious and historical differences among the populace?
Even if we magically managed to resolve the above, there would still be huge issues of disparity between resource rich and resource poor areas. i.e. this would cause all sorts of new problems and not solve any of the existing ones.
BTW, the US financial sector was worth about $6.2 trillion in 2014. The US spends about $3.8 trillion on healthcare annually. There is not "plenty of money locked up in the financial system to pay for it"
Hell, Canada spent $214.9 billion on health care in 2014.
Yep, exactly the same here. Similarly I think of temperatures in Celsius, but use feet / inches when building stuff.
But Celsius makes much more sense in Canada. Here, the range of habitable temperatures are basically -30 to +30.
Outside that it's either too damn cold or too damn hot.
I would also argue that the trivial benefits the imperial system has in being "good for some things in day to day life" are far outweighed by the inconvenience of every other country on the planet using a different measurement system.
It's more likely that it was a PITA to certify / support drivers for a device they decided was only used by a very small fraction of their users.
Presumably manufacturers will still provide drivers, just Microsoft is saying they won't certify / provide them by default anymore.
This makes total sense for fringe devices.
What theatres are you going to?!? Every theatre I go to seems to have decided to make the "quietest parts fine" by having the loud parts loud enough for your ears to bleed.
The worst part is they are sometimes loud enough you can hear distortion from the speakers (right before you ear canal fills with blood).
Theatres suck.
Seriously, WTF?
Are the SF editors just retarded or are they intentionally just trying to shoot themselves in the head?
What were they thinking:
"Wow, taking control of GIMP and adding adware to it certainly stirred up some controversy....let's see what happens if we hijack NMap! No such thing as bad publicity, right?"
Someone needs to hit these people upside the head with a clue-bat and let them know that yes, there IS such a thing as bad publicity.
PS
Guess we can talk about this in a couple of weeks on main when the Slashdot editors finally get the go-ahead from their corporate overlords.
Every single machine that combusts fossil fuel. It's just that the catastrophic "failure" occurs over decades, not minutes.
The failures at both Chernobyl was not a machine failure. It was a series of incredibly stupid actions performed by unqualified people.
Fukushima was arguably not a machine failure. Would you consider it a "machine failure" if a car was destroyed by a meteorite?
The point is, both of these "failures" were completely preventable by appropriate actions of the people involved.
The fact that some governments have chosen not to enforce appropriate controls over the technology is a societal problem, not a technical one.
Or there are those of us who don't give a flying fig who is spreading the FUD...we disagree with anyone spreading FUD regardless of the source.
Not everyone is on a particular side of the Microsoft / Linux holy war.
You can't excuse bad behavior by pointing to other people's bad behavior. Most of us learned in kindergarten that "But Johnny was doing it too!" is not a valid excuse.
Using Chernobyl (or Fukushima) as a reason not to build more reactors is the same logic as saying we shouldn't build boats because of the Titanic.
443 reactors provide 10% of the worlds power needs right now. Safely. citation. It would not be by any means an insurmountable endeavor to build 2500 additional reactors and get us completely off of coal/oil/gas.
Even better would be 1000 additional reactors, and supplement the remaining with hydro/solar/wind/etc.
Although I am a proponent of nuclear power (and wind and solar and geothermal etc), you'd have to be REALLY bad at math to believe that the amount of water pulled from the oceans for desalination would have any meaningful impact on ocean levels.
Great, Now we're at war with SOUTH Korea and are all going to die of anthrax.
Thanks Obama
If you don't understand the difference between a pithy remark and an actual desire to do someone harm, then there's no helping you.
Or are you making the "insightful" claim that all football players are sociopaths?
More likely, I would think this would reduce the trust of the software and original software developer. After all, the software appears to be working, other than the "bugs". Most users aren't sophisticated enough to think "maybe that shady warez site did something that affected the original software!", they'll just think the original software is crap. Especially when they go online and see complaints for exactly the same bugs from other (unbeknownst to them) warez users.
This seems like a really bad idea. I would suggest to have it work for a while (say 6 months), then pop up a message indicating that this is illegally copied software. Long enough that the warez hacker doesn't realize, but not so long that they get full use of the product.