it would be a real disservice to allow SCO to drop their obligations/debits to Novell and the other legal agreements they signed, then broke (allegedly)
No. Not allegedly. A federal court judge has ruled that this actually happened. It is not merely an allegation, they really did break the agreements.
if the goal is to reduce the number of accidents caused by people driving through red lights, then installing the cameras and lengthening the yellow would be the optimal solution.
No, if the goal is to reduce the number of accidents, the optimal solution would be to install the cameras, leave the yellow lights at the correct time, and install countdown timers before the light changes to yellow so drivers have a good idea of how much time they have to get through the intersection.
That's how it's done in my area (in fact, some intersections have the countdown timer with no camera) and it works pretty well.
I met my wife online too, but before that, a motorcycle did wonders for my social life (in fact, it was the bike that gave me the confidence to meet her in person.)
Before I had the bike, I was shy and had low self esteem... I was dateless for over two years. Within a few weeks of getting the bike, I was getting 2-3 girls a week asking me out! Seriously.. a motorcycle turns "shy and introverted" into "dark and brooding". (But don't assume that every woman will ask you out - if one comes over and talks to you about your machine, chat with her a bit about the bike and offer her a ride.)
Some caveats:
Find a bike you *like*. Nothing looks stupider than someone who isn't comfortable on their chosen machine. Be comfortable on it, and you'll exude confidence, which is the most powerful attractant there is.
Dress for the bike. Similar to the above point, a racing suit on a Rebel 250 will just look silly, as will a leather jacket with fringe and chaps on a rice rocket.
It doesn't have to be a Harley or a rice rocket - a guy on a Shadow or Intruder (or even a Rebel) is just as impressive as long as he looks comfortable on it.
Learn a little about motorcycles, so you can hold your own in conversation. Don't talk about them endlessly though - that's just boring.
If you're the "fat WOW-playing" type of geek, lose some weight, unless you're also growing a zz-top beard and riding a Fatboy.
It the MPAA/RIAA have a legitimate point of view, then I can barely comprehend what illegitimate is.
My thoughts exactly. I have no idea how this guy thinks that "we should be able to rape the Public Domain, but nothing we have can ever enter into it, and nobody has any fair use rights" could possibly be considered "legitimate".
So the artists that currently produce vinyl records should abandon what they feel is a worthwhile technology just because you think so?
Wow, that's quite the straw man you have there!
It's a shame that you think that media can only be distributed one way or the other, with absolutely no way for multiple distribution channels to exist simultaneously.
So artists should spend 60 hours a week pressing disks and mailing boxes to cut out the middleman?
You're right! It's sad that in this day and age, the only way to transmit music is by pressing it to a disc and packaging it to send to someone! If only there was some easy way for music, text, and video to be sent easily and painlessly from one person to another! I'm envisioning something like a "web" that connects people together. And if it was electronic, that would be even better! Maybe it could even involve computers in some way!
*sigh* but here I am, dreaming of something that will never be.
Even if you're essentially doing nothing at all you'll have employees and unions reading over it with a fine-tooth comb screaming at everything.
And not just unions - university academic unions.
I worked for 2 1/2 years in a university CS department, and (as one of my co-workers so adroitly put it) they start screaming about "academic freedom" when you talk about changing their parking stall.
False defamation can cause a lot of damage that might never be fully taken back or fully compensated for. Why should somebody have to prove the defamation is false? That's rather harsh, don't you think?
The problem isn't that someone has to prove that the defamation is false (which is wrong, BTW), the problem is that in the UK it doesn't matter whether it's true or not - in the UK, if you accuse someone of defamation, they can be found guilty even if they can prove their statements were true.
That's like guilty until proven innocent.
Only because you're misrepresenting the facts. Neither the US nor the UK defamation laws work the way you believe.
I stopped reading at that point, as it the entire suggestion that paying ticket holders get charged more is absolutely ludicrous.
Assume that the estimate of 1 million downloads of "Wolverine" are accurate. Now, I saw it in the theatre. The ticket price was exactly the same as all of the other movies opening this summer. There was no "piracy surcharge" or anything else like that, so the suggestion that theatre goers make up some sort of "shortfall" is provably false.
The only difference that comes to mind is that slave labor produces something of benefit: cotton, pyramids, etc.
Umm, no.
Slave labour produces something of benefit to the slaver, at the expense of the child. Eg. The slaver gets something, and the child gets nothing.
School labor only produces completed schoolwork: answers to questions whose answers are already known, essays that are thrown away after being graded, tests that serve only to change the letter that appears on a piece of paper at the end of the quarter.
and an educated child. A child that will grow up to have better opportunities and be able to provide better for themselves.
So the difference is: one produces a benefit for the slaver, at the expense of the child, where the other produces no benefit for the educator, and a benefit for the child.
In other words, they are exactly the same, except that they're completely different.
The "Secret" to raising smart kids is to instill in them a work ethic.
You know, every person I've ever known professionally who used the term "work ethic" was so into monitoring what other people were doing that they got lost in a fit of cynical self despair. True story:
"Worker#1" was always on time, worked a full shift, clocked in and out, and produced mediocre work. "Worker#2" was frequently late, goofed off at work occasionally, forgot to clock in or out, and produced outstanding work.
Worker#1 said to me "I don't know why you allow Worker#2 to goof off - I work much harder than he does and am always on time.
I replied "He gets his work done on time, and I wouldn't come down on you if you decided to goof off occasionally or arrive late."
The reply was "I wouldn't do that, because I have a work ethic!"
What Worker#1 failed to recognize was that it was the results that mattered, not how hard you believed yourself to be working. It's not just that - in "creative" industries (web development, in this case), goofing off is vitally important. Creativity can't be forced, and it's been my experience that the brain needs to rest to be able to foster creativity properly. Spending your "down" time mentally criticizing your fellow employees and obsessing over "work ethic" just makes you unhappy.
And how do they get paid if anyone can replicate their content for free?
How about payment for work done? You know, like nearly every other industry. Or should plumbers demand a payment every time you have guest use your toilet?
Just hope for donations? There's a guy with a guitar on the corner of my street who does that. It doesn't seem to be working all that well for him.
Interesting conclusion you've drawn there - if it wasn't working all that well for him, why does he keep doing it? Have you tried asking him, instead of drawing illogical conclusions?
You really think that the "freedom" to steal an author's or musician's work is the same as the freedom to criticize government policies?
Mu. This is an old argument, and regardless of how much you want it to be so, sharing is not stealing.
Perhaps you should do some reading - freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of original speech. Think about this: it's possible for copyright to prevent you from (or possibly punish you for) criticizing the government.
Slashdot Mirror
Vote for the Liberals and you get what you have in the USA, Obama appointing every single judge from the RIAA.
Umm, sorry what? How in the world will voting for the Liberals give the US president the ability to appoint Canadian judges?
And even if it was possible, how the hell would he appoint Americans to the Canadian Judiciary?
And why would he do that when he hasn't done it in the USA? (You know, where he actually *does* have the power to do that.)
Farh is much better for giving a nice range of Human comfort levels. If I say its 50, you know its chilly, and cool.
Umm, no.
If Fahrenheit really was "better", then 50 would be "just right", because it's right smack in the middle of "too cold" and "too hot".
Your argument can be summarized as "it's better because it's what I'm used to".
Fahrenheit is a wonderfully human temperature scale. Over 100 is Way Too Damn Hot, and under 0 is Way Too Damn Cold. I like that.
Exactly - and that's also why 50 is room temperature, right?
After all, if the extremes are 0 and 100, then the most comfortable would be exactly in the middle, right?
it would be a real disservice to allow SCO to drop their obligations/debits to Novell and the other legal agreements they signed, then broke (allegedly)
No. Not allegedly. A federal court judge has ruled that this actually happened. It is not merely an allegation, they really did break the agreements.
if the goal is to reduce the number of accidents caused by people driving through red lights, then installing the cameras and lengthening the yellow would be the optimal solution.
No, if the goal is to reduce the number of accidents, the optimal solution would be to install the cameras, leave the yellow lights at the correct time, and install countdown timers before the light changes to yellow so drivers have a good idea of how much time they have to get through the intersection.
That's how it's done in my area (in fact, some intersections have the countdown timer with no camera) and it works pretty well.
Why would you want to receive a violent beat down at the hands of some street thug?
Well, obviously he's a masochist, and he would need the violent beating in order to reassure himself that it's his fault.
A word of advice: before replying, you might want to read the *entire* post, instead of just the title.
pretend you are not you. How nice
If you had read my post, instead of just the title, you would see that this is the exact opposite of what I was saying.
When your reply contains nothing that is relevant to the post replied to, it just makes you look like an idiot.
I met my wife online too, but before that, a motorcycle did wonders for my social life (in fact, it was the bike that gave me the confidence to meet her in person.)
Before I had the bike, I was shy and had low self esteem ... I was dateless for over two years. Within a few weeks of getting the bike, I was getting 2-3 girls a week asking me out! Seriously.. a motorcycle turns "shy and introverted" into "dark and brooding". (But don't assume that every woman will ask you out - if one comes over and talks to you about your machine, chat with her a bit about the bike and offer her a ride.)
Some caveats:
It the MPAA/RIAA have a legitimate point of view, then I can barely comprehend what illegitimate is.
My thoughts exactly. I have no idea how this guy thinks that "we should be able to rape the Public Domain, but nothing we have can ever enter into it, and nobody has any fair use rights" could possibly be considered "legitimate".
So the artists that currently produce vinyl records should abandon what they feel is a worthwhile technology just because you think so?
Wow, that's quite the straw man you have there!
It's a shame that you think that media can only be distributed one way or the other, with absolutely no way for multiple distribution channels to exist simultaneously.
So artists should spend 60 hours a week pressing disks and mailing boxes to cut out the middleman?
You're right! It's sad that in this day and age, the only way to transmit music is by pressing it to a disc and packaging it to send to someone! If only there was some easy way for music, text, and video to be sent easily and painlessly from one person to another! I'm envisioning something like a "web" that connects people together. And if it was electronic, that would be even better! Maybe it could even involve computers in some way!
*sigh* but here I am, dreaming of something that will never be.
Even if you're essentially doing nothing at all you'll have employees and unions reading over it with a fine-tooth comb screaming at everything.
And not just unions - university academic unions.
I worked for 2 1/2 years in a university CS department, and (as one of my co-workers so adroitly put it) they start screaming about "academic freedom" when you talk about changing their parking stall.
You might want to check my bank balance and a pic of my wife before you make that decision.
No, he really, really doesn't. Remember, he's posting on /. :)
Problem is, you wouldn't get the job then either.
No, but he'd probably get a nice settlement out of the resulting discrimination lawsuit.
when you voluntarily give up information it's not considered an invasion of privacy.
But asking for it still is. Not to mention requiring it for a job application.
the media industry will not believe it regardless of how many studies come to this conclusion
"It is impossible to get a man to understand something when his livelihood requires that he not understand it."
The media industry already knows and understands it. They refuse to admit it because it means acknowledging their own obsolesence.
Disclaimer: I am a UK citizen.
Personally I prefer the UK system.
Evidently that's because you don't understand it.
False defamation can cause a lot of damage that might never be fully taken back or fully compensated for. Why should somebody have to prove the defamation is false? That's rather harsh, don't you think?
The problem isn't that someone has to prove that the defamation is false (which is wrong, BTW), the problem is that in the UK it doesn't matter whether it's true or not - in the UK, if you accuse someone of defamation, they can be found guilty even if they can prove their statements were true.
That's like guilty until proven innocent.
Only because you're misrepresenting the facts. Neither the US nor the UK defamation laws work the way you believe.
Microsoft does marketing better than everything else they do?
Yes. They're a marketing company that has some tech leanings - it's been this way for as long as I've been into computers (the early 80's)
I don't buy it. Embrace Extend Extinguish comes to mind for starters.
You mean the marketing thing they need to do because they're incapable of engineering something good themselves?
I'd say their ability to control the markets they are in is also more effective than their marketing.
Umm, marketing is how they control their markets.
I'm sure there's more if i cared to keep going
Maybe you should, because the examples you gave only undermined your point.
So what's to keep them from dropping this like a radioactive potato when the bevy of tech savvy pro bono lawyers start to tear Mediasentry a new one?
Ethics. /me ducks
Thank you!
I stopped reading at that point, as it the entire suggestion that paying ticket holders get charged more is absolutely ludicrous.
Assume that the estimate of 1 million downloads of "Wolverine" are accurate. Now, I saw it in the theatre. The ticket price was exactly the same as all of the other movies opening this summer. There was no "piracy surcharge" or anything else like that, so the suggestion that theatre goers make up some sort of "shortfall" is provably false.
The staff member had written their name and department all around the data side of the disc, in black permanent marker.
Don't tell me, let me guess.... they wrote on the data side because there was already something written on the label side? :)
The only difference that comes to mind is that slave labor produces something of benefit: cotton, pyramids, etc.
Umm, no.
Slave labour produces something of benefit to the slaver, at the expense of the child. Eg. The slaver gets something, and the child gets nothing.
School labor only produces completed schoolwork: answers to questions whose answers are already known, essays that are thrown away after being graded, tests that serve only to change the letter that appears on a piece of paper at the end of the quarter.
and an educated child. A child that will grow up to have better opportunities and be able to provide better for themselves.
So the difference is: one produces a benefit for the slaver, at the expense of the child, where the other produces no benefit for the educator, and a benefit for the child.
In other words, they are exactly the same, except that they're completely different.
The "Secret" to raising smart kids is to instill in them a work ethic.
You know, every person I've ever known professionally who used the term "work ethic" was so into monitoring what other people were doing that they got lost in a fit of cynical self despair. True story:
"Worker#1" was always on time, worked a full shift, clocked in and out, and produced mediocre work.
"Worker#2" was frequently late, goofed off at work occasionally, forgot to clock in or out, and produced outstanding work.
Worker#1 said to me "I don't know why you allow Worker#2 to goof off - I work much harder than he does and am always on time.
I replied "He gets his work done on time, and I wouldn't come down on you if you decided to goof off occasionally or arrive late."
The reply was "I wouldn't do that, because I have a work ethic!"
What Worker#1 failed to recognize was that it was the results that mattered, not how hard you believed yourself to be working. It's not just that - in "creative" industries (web development, in this case), goofing off is vitally important. Creativity can't be forced, and it's been my experience that the brain needs to rest to be able to foster creativity properly. Spending your "down" time mentally criticizing your fellow employees and obsessing over "work ethic" just makes you unhappy.
And how do they get paid if anyone can replicate their content for free?
How about payment for work done? You know, like nearly every other industry. Or should plumbers demand a payment every time you have guest use your toilet?
Just hope for donations? There's a guy with a guitar on the corner of my street who does that. It doesn't seem to be working all that well for him.
Interesting conclusion you've drawn there - if it wasn't working all that well for him, why does he keep doing it? Have you tried asking him, instead of drawing illogical conclusions?
You really think that the "freedom" to steal an author's or musician's work is the same as the freedom to criticize government policies?
Mu. This is an old argument, and regardless of how much you want it to be so, sharing is not stealing.
Perhaps you should do some reading - freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of original speech. Think about this: it's possible for copyright to prevent you from (or possibly punish you for) criticizing the government.
Copyright is the antithesis of free speech.
Those WIPO treaties were being pushed by the American media companies to normalize with the more stringent copyright laws that were passed in the EU.
What colour is the sky in your world?
Name ONE country besides the US that had DMCA-like copyright provisions before 1999. Just *ONE*.