Half the replies on here are whining from folks about how "elitist" nerds are. NONE of you even think to ask how that attitude a) may have been adopted by nerds or b) if that's just yet-another social stigma populated by anti-nerds (ya know, like, way back in, like, high school?)
Nerds weren't just the smart guys who used computers. They were kids in band (yes, I was) or theater. They were ANYone who liked to learn, and not all of them were "unbathed savages" as one particular must-have-been-a-jock pointed out.
So many people on here are JUST like the adults of today: so EAGER to blame the problem on the victim. How many of you actually understand the point? How many of you went through the hell that is 7th, 8th, and 9th grade? No, the blame OBVIOUSLY must be that smart kids don't bathe. That's it.
News. I bathed, I wasn't particularly socially unsmart, I was actually somewhat big (180 in 9th grade, and that wasn't fat). But I got crap too. Sure, after 7th grade no one had any guts to actually fight me (it helps when you're four inches taller than everyone), but the hierarchy was clear. And I wasn't alone.
So, instead of modern day American society, where it must ALWAYS be the minority person's fault, or the woman's fault, etc., why don't we OWN UP to the problem and try to fix it, rather than shove it under the carpet and pretend it doesn't really happen like so many American adults of today?
"good advice. can you go into some detail how to protect railway lines that go across open country? with level railway crossings, open access to stations. fence it all in? build bridges to replace the level crossings, and frisk everybody entering a station?"
You just gave three. Sounds like a good start. Those were even off the top of your head, I bet. Imagine what a hundred authorities on the matter could come up with in a week.
Free speech isn't something you just "turn off" because you don't want to think about it.
Ahhhh... So why isn't Germany fully enganged blowing up Palestinians or Israelis right now? There's a tone of innocent people dying there. Or why hasn't Norway invaded Iraq. Same story. Why didn't Zaire jump in against Serbia when Bosnians were being murdered and exiled?
Your logic is amazingly flawed.
The US got into the war when we were attacked, both times. Before then we supported and supplied the GOOD GUYS in the war (unlike the Germans who both times supported the BAD GUYS rather directly).
Wow, it's not all so cut and dried now, is it?
Finally, I will be sure to convey your opinion of:
'It's just a shame that in a way America is "bigger, stronger and richer" from the blood of the people that died in the camps and on the battle field while they didn't get involved because it "wasn't their problem". '
to the families of the thousands and thousands of AMERICANS that lost their lives at Omaha Beach (and other D-day offenses), to rescue a country that "wasn't their own" and a people that "weren't their own" and to solve a problem that "wasn't their own". I'm sure they'd LOVE to hear of your gratitude.
Personally, _I_ think you may have ALREADY been smokin something. I hope its good.
It's like the DMCA... It ASSUMES that people are guilty because they look at non-real images. It ASSUMES that these people will later go and commit a crime.
Would SOME people commit a crime based on this virtual desire? Probably.
Should the government assume ALL people are criminals and strip our rights to expression because a few people MAY commit a crime?
BTW - Romeo and Juliet - underage sex. Titanic - underage sex. Traffic - Underage sex. Lolita - underage sex. I think you get the picture. There are a LOT of films and artwork that depict "virtual" mature scenes (not necessarily nudity, but the law outlawed any notion that kids may be having sex, even if it wasn't explicitly shown), because it is a part of the film and the characters are supposed to be under 18.
These films were technically outlawed before.
This decision is a win for people's right to expression, especially when there is no real victim. Even if the idea is putrid to most, we can't force value judgements on everyone based on concepts that do not harm others (although we do all the time: see homosexuality, etc.)
"Point is still that Bnetd allows you to play pirated games. "
So does your computer. AOL allows you to pirate games. So does usenet, IRC, FTP, etc.
Should we outlaw the Internet? Hell, why stop there. Let's slap everyone in prison because human society makes a society that criminals can exist in! I mean, why should it occur to people to actually prosecute the GUILTY instead of destroying so called "criminal-friendly" environments.
I don't understand this. The guy mentioned this exact point in his post, yet your reply really completely misses that point. According to your reply, you WOULD advocate the shutdown of the Internet since cheaters and piraters use it, as well as AOL, and CD-burners.
I dunno which is scarier, what Vivendi is doing or that there are people that have completely shut off all logic and reason to think that Vivendi is doing the right thing.
of being a "mother" stop just because your kid is 21?
That does seem to be what you are saying. So now, Sony is supposed to play "mother" to these kids because their own mothers won't?
Something is really wrong with this picture.
This woman is as wrong for trying as the Columbine parents are wrong for suing the whole game industry (which boils down to all of the consumers of said industry) because a couple of kids had bad wiring.
for not fixing their problems or giving them money. It's all "America is evil because they will not educate our children, or give us food, or repair our infrastructure."
Truth is, if these particular middle eastern / African countries weren't so bass-ackwards (bascially because they are religiously-run Islamic regimes), they would HAVE infrastructure and food and education and wouldn't be jealous of us.
They hate us because we actually were semi-intelligent about not raping our people and our lands (at least as long as we hold off Cheney and Norton).
Heh... That's funny, 'cause I used to work for a Corvallis based company (they later moved to Boulder, Colo (geez, I wonder why;)). Most of the devs there were OSU grads and seemed to think that OSU had some blzing star of a CS program. Of course, I learned that grads from there rarely took more than 2 C++ classes, the illusion was dispelled.
OSU is known more for ag than engineering (kinda like most 'State' schools, like Colorado State vs. CU, etc.) anyways, so it doesn't surprise me that they're giving up on C++.
Colorado State more or less did the same thing a coupla years back. CSU grads get C++ classes through electives or intense out-of-school work.
Hmmm... Most colleges known for good CS departments (Ucal-Berkely, UW, UWisc, CU-Boulder, MIT, Illinois, etc.) have extremely Unix intensive courses and large (and sometimes famous) Unix labs for their students.
I guess if "dumbing" down computer science is important (where no one actually LEARNS ANYthing), then Win2k is for them. But the schools that actually TEACH comp sci. in a practical way still seem to favor Unix.
BTW - Unix is used QUITE often in the business sector. Just not for echking email and secretarial word processing. Unix machines do the REAL work behind the scenes.
Why do oil company-lovers always have to bash people who don't like oil companies?
I swear, you could have just said that the poster shouldn't have bashed oil comapnies and left at that instead of going off on a tirade about how wonderful the oil companies are and how undeserving they are of protest (especially because that view is misplaced to a LOT of people). You aren't our mother.
A perfect example of total and complete lack of critical thought. Congratulations.
Did it ever occur to you that this country exists today how it is BECAUSE of innovation.
If it were up to you, Alex Bell should have been thrown in jail for infringing on Elisha Grey's inventions, to name ONE example.
The computer industry would have gotten NOWHERE (because IBM would have claimed all rights and sat there with them, just like AT&T did for a century, why in hell would they wnat to innovate or license if they could just filibuster and make millions?).
The telecom industry would have been flatlined, and consumers would be bound and chained to businesses, because they couldn't even take their toasters apart without getting slapped with a lawsuit (this is under your dictatorship regime).
The idea that the DMCA is intellectual "maturity" and that stifling and crushing innovation except for the one bozo who owns a 'patent' is what will kill this country's R&D and technological advancement.
Jesus. I know you can't help but be comepletely fundamentalist here, but sheesh!
So should I drive to Philidelphia to find this ONE store that supposedly exists, to buy a copy of WCIII (I live in Denver) and drive back a week later to return it for another game?
I have yet to see a store that would allow you to return anything opened for a different title. It's even worse, they'll only allow you ONE WEEK to even do that, otherwise you are SOL. (I brought back a copy of the POS known as Deus Ex, great game but buggy as hell, EIGHT DAYS after I bought it only to be told by the Software Etc. manager/witch that I was SOL. I HAD been a regular customer of theirs for 14 years. No longer.)
The fact is 99% of stores don't offer refunds or returns for different titles. And that means that it is NOT a customer choice, by most legal definitions.
I wonder why (really). More kids warezing the beta means a whole TON of people ready to buy the game when it is released.
I saw the beta and I would have dropped $50 on WCIII in a heartbeat.
Now, with their asswipe suit, I dunno...
It seems like a BAD business move by Blizzard. They may say that they can't allow people to steal their stuff, but that woulda happened ANYWAYS. Now all they did is got a whole bunch of people pissed at them.
Section 1201(a). Did a thesis on it for my telecom degree.
It's a piece of shit. It says that even if you BUY something, you canNOT take it apart and reverse engineer it TO GET AROUND COPY PROTECTION (otherwise it's questionable).
Remember those mod chips for PS1's that allowed you to play copied CD's? Outlawed by the DMCA. Although it is MY PS1 and MY mod chip that someone else made, it is illegal.
Pretty shitty, eh?
That's the DMCA for you. It makes illegal not only the act of piracy but anything that could be conducive to a FUTURE act of piracy.
That is what the SSSCA is all about too. Only then, it's not only illegal to have a situation conducive to FUTURE piracy... It will be illegal to have NOT have a federally regulated watchdog (hardware or software) ensures you don't have a situation conducive to piracy.
Yes. That IS what the DMCA and SSSCA say. No, this isn't a nightmare... It is real life and it is YOUR government (and mine) that is doing this.
Who cares if bnetd makes it easier for people to use pirated software??? AOL made it EASY to pirate software, so why didn't they get shut down? Same with usenet.
This whole illogical argument was used to dethrone Napster and it has no intelligence behind it whatsoever.
Just because I run a service on which illegal things CAN be done, means I should be shut down??? Huh??
That means we have to strip away every person's freedom's because, god knows, every person is a possible CRIMINAL. Since any one could be a criminal, the only solution is to lock them all away!
That's RIAA/MPAA's solution and it looks like Blizzard's solution too.
No really, in general, in my experience, more liberal people will fight harder for the environment. For instance, would you recycle if it cost you $1.00 a time? Would you disallow businesses to set up shop in your town because they may pollute or they would build on open space? Would you pay higher taxes to conserve open space? Would you stop driving your car so we wouldn't have to destroy an arctic wildlife refuge?
Yeah, the questions get harder than just "I like the environmnt " Conservative citizens tend to drop the whole "I love the environment" act when the sh!t hits the fan, while liberals tend to hold on a lot longer.
is that offending and alienating honest people does Blizzard zero good. By viciously attacking bnetd, this is what Blizzard is doing (same thing with RIAA and MPAA).
Dishonest people will ALWAYS find ways to break the law. This BS is like saying, we'll stop larcenous thieves by hiring five thousand policeman and have them shoot on sight anyone wearing all black and/or ski masks.
It won't stop dishonest people from breaking the law (much as the death penalty does not stop people from murdering in cold blood). All it does is strips the freedoms of HONEST people and pisses everyone off.
That's the main point, not the fact that Blizzard is trying to protect its software, but the fact that they throw lawyers at a problem that can never be solved, unless you sell your product to NOBODY, or you enslave the population of the planet and keep everyone in jail cells (and guess which one Blizzard would do first).
There's a difference between a liberal citizen and a liberal congressman. Liberal citizens generally want things to work nice (without compromising our environment), and have a nice world to grow up in, instead of a cement/oil palace that conservative citizens want. Conservative congressmen just want money and power and liberal congressmen want fame AND money and power.
With that logic... The districts that vote Democrat are also USUALLY the districts with the most educated people... (this IS true) Most republican districts come in rural areas with almost no secondary education.
So figure that one out. Who's right and wrong? (Or in typical hypocritical GOP fashion, is everyting YOU say right and everything others say is wrong?)
You are also so intelligent to note that big cities usually vote liberal and big cities also have more crime than Farmville, USA. I guess more people = more crime, but since when does logical analysis ever mean anything to a GOP? I certainly haven't seen it.
Also figure out why Enron gave GW 500 grand in "donations" since he's such a bud of the "small little" guy (or isn't big Oil small people?)
Yeah, Republicans love the little people... Enough to support industries that are shredding our world for money and keeping us back technologically so they can have power? Or the same republicans that dropped the case against monopolies that are killing innovation because the big monopolies gave 'em money. Or the same Republicans that want to tear away your freedom because some BS nebulous "God" said they could do these things? Or these same republicans who want to force God down our throats so much that we become a Christian state (see John Ashcroft, or Bush's "95% of our country believes in God" speech in China, or the countless "prayer and ten commandments in schools" cases)
Yeah, GOP's are out for your best interest all right. Mmmm Hmmm... I'm glad you're voting with obvious analysis of the situation. Sure makes me feel better to know that we have so many dutiful voters who enver actually look at issues and instead vote party lines.
You forgot... To 90% of the republicans out there, anything left of "let's blow that deer's head off for fun" and anything more liberal than "let's run over some prarie dogs with tractors 'cause God don't like 'em" is communist.
In short, if you are not religious conservative, then you are a communist. If you don't like giving big oil $$ to rape the earth for their benefit, you are communist.
That's communism in a nutshell (at least to GOPs).
VERY intelligent idea... I wonder if that's what the ACLU did to McCarthy in 1950's.
Since you are new to this country I'll fill you in on Republicans (you're pretty close on Democrats). GOPs are pro-big-business to the point of doing illegal acts to make sure that big business gets their due. They'll gut the earth and kill everything in their path for a few more bucks of campaign donations and damn the people that say that the environment means ANYthing.
They'll sick the FBI on those who don't share their views and enforce antiquated laws to have you arrested if you speak out against them (It's called the Smith Act, look it up).
Democrats in congress want to restrict freedoms to "save the children" and GOPs want to restrict freedoms so they can have more power to tear apart our earth to get more money and MORE power.
What a great government we have, eh? The coolest thing is, it's prolly one of the LEAST corrupted on the planet.
"Democracies are the worst form of governemnt. Except for all the other kinds."
It's the "software piracy" "fuzzy math" that somehow assumes that everyone pirating is by definition "stealing."
They assume that if person a pirates a movie worth $10, then that person WOULD HAVE bought the movie had s/he not been able to pirate it. Thus, they justify a $10 "operating loss" for that one person pirating.
Multiply by some bullshit arbitrary number and add a few bullshit overhead costs, and viola! You've got the MPAA's fuzzy math numbers!
In the REAL world, person a may or may not have bought the movie (or computer game in most cases), thus that $10 loss is really $5 or less (because maybe half the time they would have bought it legally, etc.)
This wonderful logic is what Microshaft uses to justify it's bribery^H^H^H^H campaign donations to enforce the SPA and piracy laws (and the DMCA and SCCCA). Same with the MPAA.
Ciao! Mistakes - It could be that the purpose of your life is merely to serve as a warning to others.
Re:You /. people really like the word "monopoly"
on
Broadband Obstacles
·
· Score: 1
Not a very good analogy.
Business law and monopolistic practices don't compare very well to traffic law and essentially life-endangering criminal acts.
Microsoft is a monopoly. Period. This was determined by the courts. Under all of the anti-trust laws the US put in place (especially for Standard Oil, remember them?), Microsoft broke them. Plain and simple. No one is in any doubt about that, at least legally.
The matter at hand is what to do about it. Ashcroft and the Bush administration love big business and its campaign donations, so they help destroy innovation and hurt the consumers so they can line their pockets with our cash.
Until we get an adminsitration that gives a damn about the people, and not Big Oil and Big Software, Microsoft will be allowed to stifle innovation, crush market competitors, and dominate other markets with their monopolistic powers, all under the 'watchful' eye of our dear Uncle Sam, who laughs at the workers plight, while big business satiates its greedy desires.
'The concept of swearing being "bad" is just so, so arbitrary that it pisses me off. It's as if someone, a long time ago, thought "Hey, people are feeling too good about themselves... I think we need more rules to place on people's lives... '
Yes, you are exactly right. Someone had this thought and was scared that "good-feeling" people would be very hard for a dictator or a monarchy to control. SO they DID do something about it...
Religion.
And, now we are here today with religious zealots and blowhards "saving" the rest of us from "oh-so-horrible" sex and voyeurism. Why is sex SO bad? Because religion says it's a sin? Why? Isn't it the one and only thing we essentially exist to do? No, wait, that would make people too unruly. Must impose sanction on sex. Wait, but people WATCHING others have sex would make them too unruly. Must impose sanctions on that. Wait, people TALKING about watching people having sex...
You see this trend, and Mr. John "Chain em up if they aren't with Jesus" Ashcroft is a big instigator of this.
Slashdot Mirror
Half the replies on here are whining from folks about how "elitist" nerds are. NONE of you even think to ask how that attitude a) may have been adopted by nerds or b) if that's just yet-another social stigma populated by anti-nerds (ya know, like, way back in, like, high school?)
Nerds weren't just the smart guys who used computers. They were kids in band (yes, I was) or theater. They were ANYone who liked to learn, and not all of them were "unbathed savages" as one particular must-have-been-a-jock pointed out.
So many people on here are JUST like the adults of today: so EAGER to blame the problem on the victim. How many of you actually understand the point? How many of you went through the hell that is 7th, 8th, and 9th grade? No, the blame OBVIOUSLY must be that smart kids don't bathe. That's it.
News. I bathed, I wasn't particularly socially unsmart, I was actually somewhat big (180 in 9th grade, and that wasn't fat). But I got crap too. Sure, after 7th grade no one had any guts to actually fight me (it helps when you're four inches taller than everyone), but the hierarchy was clear. And I wasn't alone.
So, instead of modern day American society, where it must ALWAYS be the minority person's fault, or the woman's fault, etc., why don't we OWN UP to the problem and try to fix it, rather than shove it under the carpet and pretend it doesn't really happen like so many American adults of today?
Ciao!
"good advice. can you go into some detail how to
protect railway lines that go across open country?
with level railway crossings, open access to
stations. fence it all in? build bridges to
replace the level crossings, and frisk everybody
entering a station?"
You just gave three. Sounds like a good start. Those were even off the top of your head, I bet. Imagine what a hundred authorities on the matter could come up with in a week.
Free speech isn't something you just "turn off" because you don't want to think about it.
Ciao!
Ahhhh... So why isn't Germany fully enganged blowing up Palestinians or Israelis right now? There's a tone of innocent people dying there. Or why hasn't Norway invaded Iraq. Same story. Why didn't Zaire jump in against Serbia when Bosnians were being murdered and exiled?
Your logic is amazingly flawed.
The US got into the war when we were attacked, both times. Before then we supported and supplied the GOOD GUYS in the war (unlike the Germans who both times supported the BAD GUYS rather directly).
Wow, it's not all so cut and dried now, is it?
Finally, I will be sure to convey your opinion of:
'It's just a shame that in a way America is "bigger, stronger and richer" from the blood of the people that died in the camps and on the battle field while they didn't get involved because it "wasn't their problem". '
to the families of the thousands and thousands of AMERICANS that lost their lives at Omaha Beach (and other D-day offenses), to rescue a country that "wasn't their own" and a people that "weren't their own" and to solve a problem that "wasn't their own". I'm sure they'd LOVE to hear of your gratitude.
Personally, _I_ think you may have ALREADY been smokin something. I hope its good.
Ciao!
worth restricting people's rights.
It's like the DMCA... It ASSUMES that people are guilty because they look at non-real images. It ASSUMES that these people will later go and commit a crime.
Would SOME people commit a crime based on this virtual desire? Probably.
Should the government assume ALL people are criminals and strip our rights to expression because a few people MAY commit a crime?
BTW - Romeo and Juliet - underage sex. Titanic - underage sex. Traffic - Underage sex. Lolita - underage sex. I think you get the picture. There are a LOT of films and artwork that depict "virtual" mature scenes (not necessarily nudity, but the law outlawed any notion that kids may be having sex, even if it wasn't explicitly shown), because it is a part of the film and the characters are supposed to be under 18.
These films were technically outlawed before.
This decision is a win for people's right to expression, especially when there is no real victim. Even if the idea is putrid to most, we can't force value judgements on everyone based on concepts that do not harm others (although we do all the time: see homosexuality, etc.)
Ciao!
"Point is still that Bnetd allows you to play pirated games. "
So does your computer. AOL allows you to pirate games. So does usenet, IRC, FTP, etc.
Should we outlaw the Internet? Hell, why stop there. Let's slap everyone in prison because human society makes a society that criminals can exist in! I mean, why should it occur to people to actually prosecute the GUILTY instead of destroying so called "criminal-friendly" environments.
I don't understand this. The guy mentioned this exact point in his post, yet your reply really completely misses that point. According to your reply, you WOULD advocate the shutdown of the Internet since cheaters and piraters use it, as well as AOL, and CD-burners.
I dunno which is scarier, what Vivendi is doing or that there are people that have completely shut off all logic and reason to think that Vivendi is doing the right thing.
Ciao!
of being a "mother" stop just because your kid is 21?
That does seem to be what you are saying. So now, Sony is supposed to play "mother" to these kids because their own mothers won't?
Something is really wrong with this picture.
This woman is as wrong for trying as the Columbine parents are wrong for suing the whole game industry (which boils down to all of the consumers of said industry) because a couple of kids had bad wiring.
Ciao!
for not fixing their problems or giving them money. It's all "America is evil because they will not educate our children, or give us food, or repair our infrastructure."
Truth is, if these particular middle eastern / African countries weren't so bass-ackwards (bascially because they are religiously-run Islamic regimes), they would HAVE infrastructure and food and education and wouldn't be jealous of us.
They hate us because we actually were semi-intelligent about not raping our people and our lands (at least as long as we hold off Cheney and Norton).
Ciao!
Heh... That's funny, 'cause I used to work for a Corvallis based company (they later moved to Boulder, Colo (geez, I wonder why ;)). Most of the devs there were OSU grads and seemed to think that OSU had some blzing star of a CS program. Of course, I learned that grads from there rarely took more than 2 C++ classes, the illusion was dispelled.
OSU is known more for ag than engineering (kinda like most 'State' schools, like Colorado State vs. CU, etc.) anyways, so it doesn't surprise me that they're giving up on C++.
Colorado State more or less did the same thing a coupla years back. CSU grads get C++ classes through electives or intense out-of-school work.
Ciao!
Hmmm... Most colleges known for good CS departments (Ucal-Berkely, UW, UWisc, CU-Boulder, MIT, Illinois, etc.) have extremely Unix intensive courses and large (and sometimes famous) Unix labs for their students.
I guess if "dumbing" down computer science is important (where no one actually LEARNS ANYthing), then Win2k is for them. But the schools that actually TEACH comp sci. in a practical way still seem to favor Unix.
BTW - Unix is used QUITE often in the business sector. Just not for echking email and secretarial word processing. Unix machines do the REAL work behind the scenes.
Ciao!
Wow....
:)
I guess 'Dear Ole' CU' has at least one fight song every one of its students knows the words to
GO BUFFS!
Ciao!
Why do oil company-lovers always have to bash people who don't like oil companies?
I swear, you could have just said that the poster shouldn't have bashed oil comapnies and left at that instead of going off on a tirade about how wonderful the oil companies are and how undeserving they are of protest (especially because that view is misplaced to a LOT of people). You aren't our mother.
Ciao!
A perfect example of total and complete lack of critical thought. Congratulations.
Did it ever occur to you that this country exists today how it is BECAUSE of innovation.
If it were up to you, Alex Bell should have been thrown in jail for infringing on Elisha Grey's inventions, to name ONE example.
The computer industry would have gotten NOWHERE (because IBM would have claimed all rights and sat there with them, just like AT&T did for a century, why in hell would they wnat to innovate or license if they could just filibuster and make millions?).
The telecom industry would have been flatlined, and consumers would be bound and chained to businesses, because they couldn't even take their toasters apart without getting slapped with a lawsuit (this is under your dictatorship regime).
The idea that the DMCA is intellectual "maturity" and that stifling and crushing innovation except for the one bozo who owns a 'patent' is what will kill this country's R&D and technological advancement.
Jesus. I know you can't help but be comepletely fundamentalist here, but sheesh!
Ciao!
So should I drive to Philidelphia to find this ONE store that supposedly exists, to buy a copy of WCIII (I live in Denver) and drive back a week later to return it for another game?
I have yet to see a store that would allow you to return anything opened for a different title. It's even worse, they'll only allow you ONE WEEK to even do that, otherwise you are SOL. (I brought back a copy of the POS known as Deus Ex, great game but buggy as hell, EIGHT DAYS after I bought it only to be told by the Software Etc. manager/witch that I was SOL. I HAD been a regular customer of theirs for 14 years. No longer.)
The fact is 99% of stores don't offer refunds or returns for different titles. And that means that it is NOT a customer choice, by most legal definitions.
Anywho...
Ciao!
I wonder why (really). More kids warezing the beta means a whole TON of people ready to buy the game when it is released.
I saw the beta and I would have dropped $50 on WCIII in a heartbeat.
Now, with their asswipe suit, I dunno...
It seems like a BAD business move by Blizzard. They may say that they can't allow people to steal their stuff, but that woulda happened ANYWAYS. Now all they did is got a whole bunch of people pissed at them.
Ciao!
Section 1201(a). Did a thesis on it for my telecom degree.
It's a piece of shit. It says that even if you BUY something, you canNOT take it apart and reverse engineer it TO GET AROUND COPY PROTECTION (otherwise it's questionable).
Remember those mod chips for PS1's that allowed you to play copied CD's? Outlawed by the DMCA. Although it is MY PS1 and MY mod chip that someone else made, it is illegal.
Pretty shitty, eh?
That's the DMCA for you. It makes illegal not only the act of piracy but anything that could be conducive to a FUTURE act of piracy.
That is what the SSSCA is all about too. Only then, it's not only illegal to have a situation conducive to FUTURE piracy... It will be illegal to have NOT have a federally regulated watchdog (hardware or software) ensures you don't have a situation conducive to piracy.
Yes. That IS what the DMCA and SSSCA say. No, this isn't a nightmare... It is real life and it is YOUR government (and mine) that is doing this.
Ciao!
Who cares if bnetd makes it easier for people to use pirated software??? AOL made it EASY to pirate software, so why didn't they get shut down? Same with usenet.
This whole illogical argument was used to dethrone Napster and it has no intelligence behind it whatsoever.
Just because I run a service on which illegal things CAN be done, means I should be shut down??? Huh??
That means we have to strip away every person's freedom's because, god knows, every person is a possible CRIMINAL. Since any one could be a criminal, the only solution is to lock them all away!
That's RIAA/MPAA's solution and it looks like Blizzard's solution too.
Ciao!
Well, you may be the first...
No really, in general, in my experience, more liberal people will fight harder for the environment. For instance, would you recycle if it cost you $1.00 a time? Would you disallow businesses to set up shop in your town because they may pollute or they would build on open space? Would you pay higher taxes to conserve open space? Would you stop driving your car so we wouldn't have to destroy an arctic wildlife refuge?
Yeah, the questions get harder than just "I like the environmnt " Conservative citizens tend to drop the whole "I love the environment" act when the sh!t hits the fan, while liberals tend to hold on a lot longer.
is that offending and alienating honest people does Blizzard zero good. By viciously attacking bnetd, this is what Blizzard is doing (same thing with RIAA and MPAA).
Dishonest people will ALWAYS find ways to break the law. This BS is like saying, we'll stop larcenous thieves by hiring five thousand policeman and have them shoot on sight anyone wearing all black and/or ski masks.
It won't stop dishonest people from breaking the law (much as the death penalty does not stop people from murdering in cold blood). All it does is strips the freedoms of HONEST people and pisses everyone off.
That's the main point, not the fact that Blizzard is trying to protect its software, but the fact that they throw lawyers at a problem that can never be solved, unless you sell your product to NOBODY, or you enslave the population of the planet and keep everyone in jail cells (and guess which one Blizzard would do first).
Ciao!
There's a difference between a liberal citizen and a liberal congressman. Liberal citizens generally want things to work nice (without compromising our environment), and have a nice world to grow up in, instead of a cement/oil palace that conservative citizens want. Conservative congressmen just want money and power and liberal congressmen want fame AND money and power.
Great.
With that logic... The districts that vote Democrat are also USUALLY the districts with the most educated people... (this IS true) Most republican districts come in rural areas with almost no secondary education.
So figure that one out. Who's right and wrong? (Or in typical hypocritical GOP fashion, is everyting YOU say right and everything others say is wrong?)
You are also so intelligent to note that big cities usually vote liberal and big cities also have more crime than Farmville, USA. I guess more people = more crime, but since when does logical analysis ever mean anything to a GOP? I certainly haven't seen it.
Also figure out why Enron gave GW 500 grand in "donations" since he's such a bud of the "small little" guy (or isn't big Oil small people?)
Yeah, Republicans love the little people... Enough to support industries that are shredding our world for money and keeping us back technologically so they can have power? Or the same republicans that dropped the case against monopolies that are killing innovation because the big monopolies gave 'em money. Or the same Republicans that want to tear away your freedom because some BS nebulous "God" said they could do these things? Or these same republicans who want to force God down our throats so much that we become a Christian state (see John Ashcroft, or Bush's "95% of our country believes in God" speech in China, or the countless "prayer and ten commandments in schools" cases)
Yeah, GOP's are out for your best interest all right. Mmmm Hmmm... I'm glad you're voting with obvious analysis of the situation. Sure makes me feel better to know that we have so many dutiful voters who enver actually look at issues and instead vote party lines.
Ciao!
You forgot... To 90% of the republicans out there, anything left of "let's blow that deer's head off for fun" and anything more liberal than "let's run over some prarie dogs with tractors 'cause God don't like 'em" is communist.
In short, if you are not religious conservative, then you are a communist. If you don't like giving big oil $$ to rape the earth for their benefit, you are communist.
That's communism in a nutshell (at least to GOPs).
Ciao!
VERY intelligent idea... I wonder if that's what the ACLU did to McCarthy in 1950's.
Since you are new to this country I'll fill you in on Republicans (you're pretty close on Democrats). GOPs are pro-big-business to the point of doing illegal acts to make sure that big business gets their due. They'll gut the earth and kill everything in their path for a few more bucks of campaign donations and damn the people that say that the environment means ANYthing.
They'll sick the FBI on those who don't share their views and enforce antiquated laws to have you arrested if you speak out against them (It's called the Smith Act, look it up).
Democrats in congress want to restrict freedoms to "save the children" and GOPs want to restrict freedoms so they can have more power to tear apart our earth to get more money and MORE power.
What a great government we have, eh? The coolest thing is, it's prolly one of the LEAST corrupted on the planet.
"Democracies are the worst form of governemnt. Except for all the other kinds."
Ciao!
It's the "software piracy" "fuzzy math" that somehow assumes that everyone pirating is by definition "stealing."
They assume that if person a pirates a movie worth $10, then that person WOULD HAVE bought the movie had s/he not been able to pirate it. Thus, they justify a $10 "operating loss" for that one person pirating.
Multiply by some bullshit arbitrary number and add a few bullshit overhead costs, and viola! You've got the MPAA's fuzzy math numbers!
In the REAL world, person a may or may not have bought the movie (or computer game in most cases), thus that $10 loss is really $5 or less (because maybe half the time they would have bought it legally, etc.)
This wonderful logic is what Microshaft uses to justify it's bribery^H^H^H^H campaign donations to enforce the SPA and piracy laws (and the DMCA and SCCCA). Same with the MPAA.
Ciao!
Mistakes - It could be that the purpose of your life is merely to serve as a warning to others.
Not a very good analogy.
Business law and monopolistic practices don't compare very well to traffic law and essentially life-endangering criminal acts.
Microsoft is a monopoly. Period. This was determined by the courts. Under all of the anti-trust laws the US put in place (especially for Standard Oil, remember them?), Microsoft broke them. Plain and simple. No one is in any doubt about that, at least legally.
The matter at hand is what to do about it. Ashcroft and the Bush administration love big business and its campaign donations, so they help destroy innovation and hurt the consumers so they can line their pockets with our cash.
Until we get an adminsitration that gives a damn about the people, and not Big Oil and Big Software, Microsoft will be allowed to stifle innovation, crush market competitors, and dominate other markets with their monopolistic powers, all under the 'watchful' eye of our dear Uncle Sam, who laughs at the workers plight, while big business satiates its greedy desires.
Ciao!
Yes, you are exactly right. Someone had this thought and was scared that "good-feeling" people would be very hard for a dictator or a monarchy to control. SO they DID do something about it...
Religion.
And, now we are here today with religious zealots and blowhards "saving" the rest of us from "oh-so-horrible" sex and voyeurism. Why is sex SO bad? Because religion says it's a sin? Why? Isn't it the one and only thing we essentially exist to do? No, wait, that would make people too unruly. Must impose sanction on sex. Wait, but people WATCHING others have sex would make them too unruly. Must impose sanctions on that. Wait, people TALKING about watching people having sex...
You see this trend, and Mr. John "Chain em up if they aren't with Jesus" Ashcroft is a big instigator of this.
Ciao!