Why not just allow it? I mean, half the people here seem to think all intellectual properties should be banned and that "information wants to be free". So why not? Where do you draw the line? It's just a whole bunch of letters and code strung together right? Hey it gets the job done right?
Socialist pigs roam everywhere!
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
I've read through most of this topic, and I see a bunch of people who think money is evil and that capitalism is bad. Free is good. Leeching is good. Gratitude is bad.
Wake up people. Maintaining a web business costs money. It costs money to purchase routers, servers, bandwidth, programmers, accountants, managers, rent space, etc...
Why should anyone do this for you just so you can get it all for free? That is totally un-American. You think ads are evil? You think money-hungry corporations lead to a decline in innovation, information, and technology? Now THAT's the biggest pile of bs I've heard in a while.
Why is the U.S.A so powerful? We invented the airplane, pretty much pioneered the internet, lead in the world of biology, chemistry, genetics, medicine, transportation, etc... You name it, we made it big.
Would all this be possible if money-hungry corporations weren't allowed to exist? Who do you think funds research and development? You work hard and come up with something ingenious, and you will profit immensely from it. That's the capitalist spirit.
Think of communist countries around the world. What have they ever invented? Nothing! And why is that? Everything belongs to everybody. No one has incentive to create, innovate, nor invent. I mean, why invent something just so you get nothing out of it other than a pat on the back? That's human nature. Nobody will work hard if there's nothing in it for them.
So now, nobody wants to click on banners. They use filters and proxies to make ads disappear, all the while they're stealing bandwidth from yahoo, reading their articles, utilizing their services, depleting their bandwidth, etc... You want it all for free, and you don't want to give back anything. You're selfish and all you care about is yourself and nobody else. You justify it by saying these companies are greedy and evil.
So now internet business is dying, dying to a point where 90% of the online companies are going under. Free hosting is dead. Free email is dying. Free and creative content is diminishing. Jobs are being lost. Companies are shutting down. Happy now?! Was it all worth the ad filtering?
And in the end, the very people who hate money, think corporations are all evil, who hate ads with a vengeance and never ever clicks on them... They're the ones getting hurt most, because the very internet they love so much is dying. This only affect them and nobody else.
So you love the net before money-grubbing corporations got into it heh? Well why don't you just crawl back into your time hole of 1992 and look at useless sites like coffee pot cams (useless in terms of today's world of course) and nasty-looking personal sites? Yeah go back to the stone ages and enjoy your damn caves. That's what you deserve.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
Just a piece of good advice. If you're thinking about cashing in on the gold rush of new domain names, watch out for those scamming registrars who offer to "PRE"-register a domain name for you. They will always make you pay in advance for something that might not even make it. It's a scam. However tantalizing it may be, DON'T fall for it. You'll get swindled out of your lunch money.
Why? I'll give you a quick run-down:
- there's no guarantee that the domains will ever become reality
- even if these new tld's make it out, the particular registrar will probably be competing with countless others in what they call round-robin style of handing out domains. Basically, it means if there are 10 registrars, ICANN will let them take turns. You pre-registered sex.xxx, but someone else ahead of you might take it before you. So if there are 50 other competitors, your chance will be 1/50, if even that!
- how do you know the registrar won't be "cheating" to get sex.xxx in front of you? If they do how would you be able to prove it? And trust me, nobody's gonna be giving you a bar of gold if they can get it for free, without your knowledge.
But I may be wrong. I think many of them have already been chosen to administer a particular tld. But whatever the case, just say NO to PRE-registering, at all costs.
I should know... I got swindled out of sex.web back in 1997!!!! And that crap hasn't even come out yet after all these years!!
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
You know what. Idealab is the company that funded eToys, which was the stupid company that tried to sue etoy.com, which was active much earlier than etoys.com, to rob etoy.com of their domain name. I've also heard from many others that Idealab pretty much rapes you if you ever went to them for VC funding. I hate these MF's and will never ever use their stupid lame ass plugin. I'd rather slashdot or redhat start something like this... then I'll voluntarily install it.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
I'm sorry, but innovations of the internet are DEAD! Dead because the end user and advertiser has way too much control over everything. This isn't so with television and radio. There's no way for people to "filter" out ads, or measure exact click-thrus, or ignore the ads effectivly.
But look what has happened as a result. Massive amounts of money can be made with tv and radio, and thus you have innovation in special effects, professionalism, entertainment, etc...
Not so with the internet. Back a year ago indeed it was truly innovative. People were coming up with new ways of doing things all the time. But look at now... because the very audience that benefits from the web are too stingy to respond to ads, use programs to filter out banners while leeching information from the websites that spent a long time creating content, privacy paranoia, etc...
All the while the advertisers forget about the benefits of branding, and want to measure everything in terms of click-thrus. Yeah right when was the last time you clicked through a Coke ad on tv? Sometimes these things don't work until later on when you have to make a decision. That's where the true power of advertising is in, not those measly click-thrus. Besides, if an advertiser made a banner that was un-attractive, so the website hosting it be responsible for the poor performance of it? I think not.
So there you have it folks. The internet is DOOMED by the very people it benefits. Nobody wants to spend money online. They don't want to click on banners. All they want are free stuff like Napster music. I'm telling you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, will be innovating anymore. You see pets.com disappear, free internet access providers close down, content sites go broke, and innovation goes to hell.
So tell me, are you all happy? Good because it's gonna get a lot worse. The internet in 5 years will be worse than it is today. The total amount of useful websites will deminish greatly. Sad but true. The internet will never be like television. Instead it'll always be like channel 58, where bad reception is the norm, and good content will be harder to find.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
1) Blizzard, the maker of the game Diablo, has absolutely no grounds for suing. Diablo is a word that's in the dictionary. It is not an "invented" word.
2) The movie is not in any way related to the video game. There's absolutely ZERO confusion. They are in different markets. This is in the trademark laws. When you apply for one, you need to specify what market you will be in.
3) Suppose Blizzard did specify "movie" in their trademark. Who's coming out with the movie first? I mean, what if I trademarked a word, a common word found in the dictionary, and then just sat on it and did nothing with it... Until someone comes along with a movie of the same title. And then I sued. Wouldn't that be trademark-squatting? It's one thing if the word were "invented" by Blizzard, but it's another when it is a common word they didn't invent.
My guess is that the people at Blizzard, deep down in their hearts, know that this suit is pure nonsense. But out of their own selfishness, they're deploying this lottery tactic. They know they will most likely lose, but who knows... they "might" just win. It's all a game. If you don't try, you can't win. So let's sue them and see if it sticks. If it does, we just won the lottery, if we lose, we just lose a few bucks. It's like the lottery.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
This will never work, just like all the other stuff like Divx. Why? Because mp3's already exist for a small file format and cdr's are as cheap as dirt these days. It's not like DVD where it actually brought something new to the table (tens of gigs of storage, which cdr's still can't match). This dataplay thing is just the same old same old, recycled and re-deployed.
Besides, there ain't no way for software to be 100% un-crackable, period. Haven't we all learned that by now? Absolutely no way. This thing will waste away just like divx did.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
This stupid proposal by Napster is a calculated and insincere one, one designed to make the public "like" napster and "hate" the record labels more.
Think about it. What feaking idiotic record label is gonna take this raw deal? It's a trick, a very stupid one at that too. If they take it, it'll mean Napster stays alive and makes tons more money in the process. Would it be unreasonable to expect that Napster's gain at the end would be more than $1 billion? Otherwise why would they offer such a deal?
No. What the record companies do is this. They'll keep suing, and they WILL WIN. Then they will own Napster. Period!
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
Re:Lecter Never Chopped Off His Own Hand
on
Hannibal's Return
·
· Score: 1
Ok, I might as well ruin it for you. But if you still want the challenge, then please, don't read the next paragraph or two.
Yes, they did show him in a sling, but they never showed his hand missing.
When the cops came and Starling put her hands up in the air, did you notice she had no cuffs? Now how could that be unless she had the keys, or he had the keys...
And even if nobody had the keys, couldn't it have been easier for Hannibal to cut the chains on the cuff instead of his own arm? And even then you'd see the remaining cuff on Starling's hand, wouldn't you?
Unless it was a filming error on the director's part, I'd say Hannibal never cut off his hand.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
Slashdot Mirror
Why not just allow it? I mean, half the people here seem to think all intellectual properties should be banned and that "information wants to be free". So why not? Where do you draw the line? It's just a whole bunch of letters and code strung together right? Hey it gets the job done right?
Socialist pigs roam everywhere!
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
I've read through most of this topic, and I see a bunch of people who think money is evil and that capitalism is bad. Free is good. Leeching is good. Gratitude is bad.
Wake up people. Maintaining a web business costs money. It costs money to purchase routers, servers, bandwidth, programmers, accountants, managers, rent space, etc...
Why should anyone do this for you just so you can get it all for free? That is totally un-American. You think ads are evil? You think money-hungry corporations lead to a decline in innovation, information, and technology? Now THAT's the biggest pile of bs I've heard in a while.
Why is the U.S.A so powerful? We invented the airplane, pretty much pioneered the internet, lead in the world of biology, chemistry, genetics, medicine, transportation, etc... You name it, we made it big.
Would all this be possible if money-hungry corporations weren't allowed to exist? Who do you think funds research and development? You work hard and come up with something ingenious, and you will profit immensely from it. That's the capitalist spirit.
Think of communist countries around the world. What have they ever invented? Nothing! And why is that? Everything belongs to everybody. No one has incentive to create, innovate, nor invent. I mean, why invent something just so you get nothing out of it other than a pat on the back? That's human nature. Nobody will work hard if there's nothing in it for them.
So now, nobody wants to click on banners. They use filters and proxies to make ads disappear, all the while they're stealing bandwidth from yahoo, reading their articles, utilizing their services, depleting their bandwidth, etc... You want it all for free, and you don't want to give back anything. You're selfish and all you care about is yourself and nobody else. You justify it by saying these companies are greedy and evil.
So now internet business is dying, dying to a point where 90% of the online companies are going under. Free hosting is dead. Free email is dying. Free and creative content is diminishing. Jobs are being lost. Companies are shutting down. Happy now?! Was it all worth the ad filtering?
And in the end, the very people who hate money, think corporations are all evil, who hate ads with a vengeance and never ever clicks on them... They're the ones getting hurt most, because the very internet they love so much is dying. This only affect them and nobody else.
So you love the net before money-grubbing corporations got into it heh? Well why don't you just crawl back into your time hole of 1992 and look at useless sites like coffee pot cams (useless in terms of today's world of course) and nasty-looking personal sites? Yeah go back to the stone ages and enjoy your damn caves. That's what you deserve.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
Just a piece of good advice. If you're thinking about cashing in on the gold rush of new domain names, watch out for those scamming registrars who offer to "PRE"-register a domain name for you. They will always make you pay in advance for something that might not even make it. It's a scam. However tantalizing it may be, DON'T fall for it. You'll get swindled out of your lunch money.
Why? I'll give you a quick run-down:
- there's no guarantee that the domains will ever become reality
- even if these new tld's make it out, the particular registrar will probably be competing with countless others in what they call round-robin style of handing out domains. Basically, it means if there are 10 registrars, ICANN will let them take turns. You pre-registered sex.xxx, but someone else ahead of you might take it before you. So if there are 50 other competitors, your chance will be 1/50, if even that!
- how do you know the registrar won't be "cheating" to get sex.xxx in front of you? If they do how would you be able to prove it? And trust me, nobody's gonna be giving you a bar of gold if they can get it for free, without your knowledge.
But I may be wrong. I think many of them have already been chosen to administer a particular tld. But whatever the case, just say NO to PRE-registering, at all costs.
I should know... I got swindled out of sex.web back in 1997!!!! And that crap hasn't even come out yet after all these years!!
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
You know what. Idealab is the company that funded eToys, which was the stupid company that tried to sue etoy.com, which was active much earlier than etoys.com, to rob etoy.com of their domain name. I've also heard from many others that Idealab pretty much rapes you if you ever went to them for VC funding. I hate these MF's and will never ever use their stupid lame ass plugin. I'd rather slashdot or redhat start something like this... then I'll voluntarily install it.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
Hey I think I'm gonna patent "web bugs" and sue Microsoft and Doubleclick. He he...
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
I'm sorry, but innovations of the internet are DEAD! Dead because the end user and advertiser has way too much control over everything. This isn't so with television and radio. There's no way for people to "filter" out ads, or measure exact click-thrus, or ignore the ads effectivly.
But look what has happened as a result. Massive amounts of money can be made with tv and radio, and thus you have innovation in special effects, professionalism, entertainment, etc...
Not so with the internet. Back a year ago indeed it was truly innovative. People were coming up with new ways of doing things all the time. But look at now... because the very audience that benefits from the web are too stingy to respond to ads, use programs to filter out banners while leeching information from the websites that spent a long time creating content, privacy paranoia, etc...
All the while the advertisers forget about the benefits of branding, and want to measure everything in terms of click-thrus. Yeah right when was the last time you clicked through a Coke ad on tv? Sometimes these things don't work until later on when you have to make a decision. That's where the true power of advertising is in, not those measly click-thrus. Besides, if an advertiser made a banner that was un-attractive, so the website hosting it be responsible for the poor performance of it? I think not.
So there you have it folks. The internet is DOOMED by the very people it benefits. Nobody wants to spend money online. They don't want to click on banners. All they want are free stuff like Napster music. I'm telling you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, will be innovating anymore. You see pets.com disappear, free internet access providers close down, content sites go broke, and innovation goes to hell.
So tell me, are you all happy? Good because it's gonna get a lot worse. The internet in 5 years will be worse than it is today. The total amount of useful websites will deminish greatly. Sad but true. The internet will never be like television. Instead it'll always be like channel 58, where bad reception is the norm, and good content will be harder to find.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
3 points:
1) Blizzard, the maker of the game Diablo, has absolutely no grounds for suing. Diablo is a word that's in the dictionary. It is not an "invented" word.
2) The movie is not in any way related to the video game. There's absolutely ZERO confusion. They are in different markets. This is in the trademark laws. When you apply for one, you need to specify what market you will be in.
3) Suppose Blizzard did specify "movie" in their trademark. Who's coming out with the movie first? I mean, what if I trademarked a word, a common word found in the dictionary, and then just sat on it and did nothing with it... Until someone comes along with a movie of the same title. And then I sued. Wouldn't that be trademark-squatting? It's one thing if the word were "invented" by Blizzard, but it's another when it is a common word they didn't invent.
My guess is that the people at Blizzard, deep down in their hearts, know that this suit is pure nonsense. But out of their own selfishness, they're deploying this lottery tactic. They know they will most likely lose, but who knows... they "might" just win. It's all a game. If you don't try, you can't win. So let's sue them and see if it sticks. If it does, we just won the lottery, if we lose, we just lose a few bucks. It's like the lottery.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
This will never work, just like all the other stuff like Divx. Why? Because mp3's already exist for a small file format and cdr's are as cheap as dirt these days. It's not like DVD where it actually brought something new to the table (tens of gigs of storage, which cdr's still can't match). This dataplay thing is just the same old same old, recycled and re-deployed.
Besides, there ain't no way for software to be 100% un-crackable, period. Haven't we all learned that by now? Absolutely no way. This thing will waste away just like divx did.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
This stupid proposal by Napster is a calculated and insincere one, one designed to make the public "like" napster and "hate" the record labels more.
Think about it. What feaking idiotic record label is gonna take this raw deal? It's a trick, a very stupid one at that too. If they take it, it'll mean Napster stays alive and makes tons more money in the process. Would it be unreasonable to expect that Napster's gain at the end would be more than $1 billion? Otherwise why would they offer such a deal?
No. What the record companies do is this. They'll keep suing, and they WILL WIN. Then they will own Napster. Period!
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?
Ok, I might as well ruin it for you. But if you still want the challenge, then please, don't read the next paragraph or two.
Yes, they did show him in a sling, but they never showed his hand missing.
When the cops came and Starling put her hands up in the air, did you notice she had no cuffs? Now how could that be unless she had the keys, or he had the keys...
And even if nobody had the keys, couldn't it have been easier for Hannibal to cut the chains on the cuff instead of his own arm? And even then you'd see the remaining cuff on Starling's hand, wouldn't you?
Unless it was a filming error on the director's part, I'd say Hannibal never cut off his hand.
---------
Did you just fart? Or do you always smell like that?