Right, but that's ultimately not the point. You have to ask the question "different from what?" Every clique has their uniform: redneck, preppie, yuppie, hippie, punk, whatever. Hell, the Jargon File even outlines a uniform for hackers.
I don't know many people who just wear whatever the fuck they want. It's sad.
Trust, me, I know about the second kind too. Maybe you missed where I mentioned that abortion is, in fact, abused. That doesn't mean I'm willing to abandon the legitimate cases, as I also said.
And while these cases may be in the minority (which I see no reason to believe without some evidence or links), they are not so uncommon as to be ignorable.
Anyone? The 14-year-old rape victim? The forced underaged wife of a Mormon polygamist? The woman who learns on the ultrasound that the child is ancephalic and will not survive regardless? The woman who learns that she has a less than even chance of surviving the pregnancy?
Yeah. Real selfish. Damn the child. Make it suffer through whatever hell it must. As long as we take no steps, we are morally clean and righteous. Utter bullshit.
If you're wondering, yes, I have been faced with learning that my unborn son would have physical abnormalities, and that we would have to make the decision on whether to abort or not. A life spent as a staunch pro-choice supporter, and the doctor saying this flat-out made me feel like I'd been punched in the gut by a tractor. The defect turned out to be non-chromosomal and not that bad, as such things go, and we had the child. Best thing that ever happened to me. But had the risks to my wife's life been large, or had the likelihood been that we would have been condemning a human to a life of suffering, I firmly believe that I would have voted to abort.
In theological terms, I would risk Eternal Damnation to save my wife her life and/or keep my child from a life of suffering.
All that said, I do not agree with all abortions, and I do feel that abortion can be and has been abused for selfish reasons. However, banning it outright because of this is simply throwing out the baby with the bathwater. (Sorry.)
The GP didn't say that everyone who believes in global warming believes in homeopathy. It's that people who believe in homeopathy also tend to believe in global warming. I think the point is that that these people are willing to embrace scientific evidence which supports something they believe in, but not evidence which doesn't.
Golly gee! I never realized that we have entertainers here in Canada, or in Europe where I lived for much of the '90s. Thank you for that revelation.
Perhaps you would care to point out where I implied or said anything to the effect that all entertainers are citizens of the U.S.A.? Hint: you'll have to change my very clear wording to do so. Draw a Venn diagram; that'll help explain it.
I think at least one important difference is that the photocopier can reasonably be presumed to be for fair use only in most circumstances. Are you really prepared to stand there and photocopy a book for anybody who wants a copy? Remember, you have to pay the copying cost and take the time to do it. I'm guessing most people wouldn't find this rewarding. So I'm willing to assume that the guy at the Xerox with the textbook is probably just copying something for study or review, not distribution.
Ripping a CD or similar for backup or using in a different format, I would also consider fair use (note: I'm a musician and I do earn royalties). I would expect to be allowed to do the same; as a teen I often stayed up late waiting for good reception from Vancouver radio stations (I grew up in northern B.C.) so that I could tape songs and listen to them on my Walkman. I don't think anybody really would have begrudged me that, and I wouldn't consider that any different from putting an old tape on CD so I could listen to it that way. These days, why should ripping a CD to play on a solid state digital player--portable or PC--be any different?
So that's OK then. IMHO and IANAL, of course.;)
Now, I've got my encoded, digital, and supposedly perfect copy on my drive. The next step is: where do I keep it? To my way of thinking, if I put it in a private, non-shared location, that should be fine. But if I put it in a directory which I know to be shared or accessible to the public--no matter the protocol--then I would say that I have made a conscious decision to distribute it. Whether I charge for this or not is irrelevant; I still know that others will now be able to make use of the content. That is obviously no longer fair use, unless it's a snippet or excerpt for use in a critical review or essay of some kind.
Note that I wouldn't object to someone doing this with any work from which I receive royalties; I would prefer that people hear the music. But then, I make my living programming; my music royalty cheques suffice to maybe get my wife and me a night on the town once every few months (or more recently, they pay for a few packs of diapers and some stain remover).
That all said, I think this judgement is horse shit. Having Kazaa or any other p2p sharing software installed doesn't imply intent to distribute, and AFAIK there is no real way to say that it was or was not set up for sharing. The only evidence to this that I see in TFA is the defendant's statement that it was not. I'm willing to buy that; I have often used eDonkey2000, limewire, bittorrent, and a bunch of others over the years, but I have never shared anything I knew to be protected. And of course I think it's ridiculous to think that mere possession of a tool indicates the intent to use it in the worst way. I own a truck; I do not run over people. I have owned rifles and shotguns; never once did I even point one at a human. I have an axe and a machete, but they are for wood-splitting and brush-clearing, respectively. They are tools. Kazaa is a tool. Owning it does not mean anything in itself.
So: rip your music. Play it on different devices. Make mix CDs for friends. But if you put it up for everybody to download then as far as I can tell you're in the wrong. And the RIAA still needs to be "dipped in Gravy Train and thrown to a crazed pack of poodles" (Berke Breathed wrote that; I don't think he'll sue me).
"Twitchy" doesn't really cover driving natives to the edge of town in -25 C and dropping them off to freeze to death, then refusing any external investigation.
Look, I really, really want to trust the cops. I did when I was a kid, and a teen. My sister babysat for a cop who ended up having to shoot a guy in self-defence and he was totally fucked up by the incident.
I am nice to cops. I have never had a bad experience with cops. I have been pulled over several times--once the officer approached from the rear with his hand on his weapon (unbuckled). That morning, a kid had been kidnapped in the town we were touring out of, and we were in an old windowless Dodge van; we more or less understood his position.
But: I'd feel a lot better if they allowed independent review of cases where their conduct is in question. Here in Canada, there is a lot of unrest about the seemingly untouchable nature of the RCMP (and local authorities, like the Vancouver PD). They always quote some old line that they can't jeopardize ongoing investigations--and that may be true in some cases--but a lot of these instances are not big investigations. Open it up.
I know quite a few people of the kind who almost pride themselves on being computer illiterate non-geeks who have figured out torrents (and earlier, limewire, edonkey, etc).
Maybe they're just above-average average joes. Maybe not all Joe Sixpacks will do it, but I know many who have--usually because they've called me for help. If they want it, and don't know how to do it, chances are they know someone to ask.
I don't understand how somebody can be marked "Insightful" when their post says ". ..will never. .."
More experienced people have said that that there would never be a market worldwide for more than about 6 computers. Or heavier-than-air craft would never fly. You get my drift.
Maybe it won't be everybody's cup of tea in the short term. Maybe it will be replaced with something else before these issues are addressed. Or, just maybe, somebody will come along and successfully address them first.
You're quite sure that this, and nothing else, could have been the cause? It's wasn't common feline leukemia? It wasn't radon? There is no other possible conclusion? What is the evidence? Lots of cats die that way.
If the evidence consisted of "the cat laid on the monitor, and then died of cancer (or X)", then that's not exactly what one might call conclusive evidence that a cat will die from sleeping on or near an operating CRT. It's also not evidence that the CRT was the cause of this particular cat's death.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen--just that unless you've got a lot more evidence than you posted, your dad's monitor is not to be blamed. Yet.
People who would make business decisions based on having seen you slip at a bus stop probably aren't worth dealing with. If you judge that they are then you're trading your principles for the money you get from dealing with them, in which case, what are you complaining about?
And while I might be ridiculed by a certain subset of people (say, a religious group posting some of my antics at certain shows I've played), I'd have to remember who's doing the ridiculing, and whose opinions I respect. Meaning, of course, NOT THEIRS.
Slashdot Mirror
Got root?
Torben
Right, but that's ultimately not the point. You have to ask the question "different from what?" Every clique has their uniform: redneck, preppie, yuppie, hippie, punk, whatever. Hell, the Jargon File even outlines a uniform for hackers.
I don't know many people who just wear whatever the fuck they want. It's sad.
Trust, me, I know about the second kind too. Maybe you missed where I mentioned that abortion is, in fact, abused. That doesn't mean I'm willing to abandon the legitimate cases, as I also said.
And while these cases may be in the minority (which I see no reason to believe without some evidence or links), they are not so uncommon as to be ignorable.
Anyone? The 14-year-old rape victim? The forced underaged wife of a Mormon polygamist? The woman who learns on the ultrasound that the child is ancephalic and will not survive regardless? The woman who learns that she has a less than even chance of surviving the pregnancy?
Yeah. Real selfish. Damn the child. Make it suffer through whatever hell it must. As long as we take no steps, we are morally clean and righteous. Utter bullshit.
If you're wondering, yes, I have been faced with learning that my unborn son would have physical abnormalities, and that we would have to make the decision on whether to abort or not. A life spent as a staunch pro-choice supporter, and the doctor saying this flat-out made me feel like I'd been punched in the gut by a tractor. The defect turned out to be non-chromosomal and not that bad, as such things go, and we had the child. Best thing that ever happened to me. But had the risks to my wife's life been large, or had the likelihood been that we would have been condemning a human to a life of suffering, I firmly believe that I would have voted to abort.
In theological terms, I would risk Eternal Damnation to save my wife her life and/or keep my child from a life of suffering.
All that said, I do not agree with all abortions, and I do feel that abortion can be and has been abused for selfish reasons. However, banning it outright because of this is simply throwing out the baby with the bathwater. (Sorry.)
The GP didn't say that everyone who believes in global warming believes in homeopathy. It's that people who believe in homeopathy also tend to believe in global warming. I think the point is that that these people are willing to embrace scientific evidence which supports something they believe in, but not evidence which doesn't.
Torben
You keep using that word (controversy). I do not think it means what you think it means.
Torben
Golly gee! I never realized that we have entertainers here in Canada, or in Europe where I lived for much of the '90s. Thank you for that revelation.
Perhaps you would care to point out where I implied or said anything to the effect that all entertainers are citizens of the U.S.A.? Hint: you'll have to change my very clear wording to do so. Draw a Venn diagram; that'll help explain it.
Torben
I think at least one important difference is that the photocopier can reasonably be presumed to be for fair use only in most circumstances. Are you really prepared to stand there and photocopy a book for anybody who wants a copy? Remember, you have to pay the copying cost and take the time to do it. I'm guessing most people wouldn't find this rewarding. So I'm willing to assume that the guy at the Xerox with the textbook is probably just copying something for study or review, not distribution.
;)
Ripping a CD or similar for backup or using in a different format, I would also consider fair use (note: I'm a musician and I do earn royalties). I would expect to be allowed to do the same; as a teen I often stayed up late waiting for good reception from Vancouver radio stations (I grew up in northern B.C.) so that I could tape songs and listen to them on my Walkman. I don't think anybody really would have begrudged me that, and I wouldn't consider that any different from putting an old tape on CD so I could listen to it that way. These days, why should ripping a CD to play on a solid state digital player--portable or PC--be any different?
So that's OK then. IMHO and IANAL, of course.
Now, I've got my encoded, digital, and supposedly perfect copy on my drive. The next step is: where do I keep it? To my way of thinking, if I put it in a private, non-shared location, that should be fine. But if I put it in a directory which I know to be shared or accessible to the public--no matter the protocol--then I would say that I have made a conscious decision to distribute it. Whether I charge for this or not is irrelevant; I still know that others will now be able to make use of the content. That is obviously no longer fair use, unless it's a snippet or excerpt for use in a critical review or essay of some kind.
Note that I wouldn't object to someone doing this with any work from which I receive royalties; I would prefer that people hear the music. But then, I make my living programming; my music royalty cheques suffice to maybe get my wife and me a night on the town once every few months (or more recently, they pay for a few packs of diapers and some stain remover).
That all said, I think this judgement is horse shit. Having Kazaa or any other p2p sharing software installed doesn't imply intent to distribute, and AFAIK there is no real way to say that it was or was not set up for sharing. The only evidence to this that I see in TFA is the defendant's statement that it was not. I'm willing to buy that; I have often used eDonkey2000, limewire, bittorrent, and a bunch of others over the years, but I have never shared anything I knew to be protected. And of course I think it's ridiculous to think that mere possession of a tool indicates the intent to use it in the worst way. I own a truck; I do not run over people. I have owned rifles and shotguns; never once did I even point one at a human. I have an axe and a machete, but they are for wood-splitting and brush-clearing, respectively. They are tools. Kazaa is a tool. Owning it does not mean anything in itself.
So: rip your music. Play it on different devices. Make mix CDs for friends. But if you put it up for everybody to download then as far as I can tell you're in the wrong. And the RIAA still needs to be "dipped in Gravy Train and thrown to a crazed pack of poodles" (Berke Breathed wrote that; I don't think he'll sue me).
Torben
People in the media and entertainment industries are not citizens?
"Twitchy" doesn't really cover driving natives to the edge of town in -25 C and dropping them off to freeze to death, then refusing any external investigation.
Look, I really, really want to trust the cops. I did when I was a kid, and a teen. My sister babysat for a cop who ended up having to shoot a guy in self-defence and he was totally fucked up by the incident.
I am nice to cops. I have never had a bad experience with cops. I have been pulled over several times--once the officer approached from the rear with his hand on his weapon (unbuckled). That morning, a kid had been kidnapped in the town we were touring out of, and we were in an old windowless Dodge van; we more or less understood his position.
But: I'd feel a lot better if they allowed independent review of cases where their conduct is in question. Here in Canada, there is a lot of unrest about the seemingly untouchable nature of the RCMP (and local authorities, like the Vancouver PD). They always quote some old line that they can't jeopardize ongoing investigations--and that may be true in some cases--but a lot of these instances are not big investigations. Open it up.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=mathemat
Of course, here's a differing view (section 1 is the etymology):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics
Have fun!
Most people might consider any piece of soft tissue for snot removal a Kleenex, but that don't make it so.
Torben
. . .but read and understand the safety FAQ first:
http://www.laserfaq.org/sam/lasersaf.htm#safssl2
Torben
I know quite a few people of the kind who almost pride themselves on being computer illiterate non-geeks who have figured out torrents (and earlier, limewire, edonkey, etc).
Maybe they're just above-average average joes. Maybe not all Joe Sixpacks will do it, but I know many who have--usually because they've called me for help. If they want it, and don't know how to do it, chances are they know someone to ask.
Torben
I don't understand how somebody can be marked "Insightful" when their post says ". . .will never. . ."
More experienced people have said that that there would never be a market worldwide for more than about 6 computers. Or heavier-than-air craft would never fly. You get my drift.
Maybe it won't be everybody's cup of tea in the short term. Maybe it will be replaced with something else before these issues are addressed. Or, just maybe, somebody will come along and successfully address them first.
Torben
I'd like to believe that too.
My heart broke a long time ago.
Torben
You're quite sure that this, and nothing else, could have been the cause? It's wasn't common feline leukemia? It wasn't radon? There is no other possible conclusion? What is the evidence? Lots of cats die that way.
If the evidence consisted of "the cat laid on the monitor, and then died of cancer (or X)", then that's not exactly what one might call conclusive evidence that a cat will die from sleeping on or near an operating CRT. It's also not evidence that the CRT was the cause of this particular cat's death.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen--just that unless you've got a lot more evidence than you posted, your dad's monitor is not to be blamed. Yet.
Torben
If all the Firefox users didn't jump off a cliff, would you?
Just wondering.
(In other words, you're letting others make your decisions for you, and admitting as much in public.)
Torben
It's worse than you think. The conspiracies are starting to work together. It's almost like a...um...what's that word?
Anyone who's been beaten by an Aussie after complaining about the steak can confirm both points.
Torben
It's what you did during Stairway to Heaven in grade 10.
Unless you're a Slashdot regular, of course.
Torben
You have all rights, when you are alone. Introduce another human into the equation, and the discussion gets more complex.
Torben
I don't know, but I read about them, so they must exist.
Meh.
People who would make business decisions based on having seen you slip at a bus stop probably aren't worth dealing with. If you judge that they are then you're trading your principles for the money you get from dealing with them, in which case, what are you complaining about?
And while I might be ridiculed by a certain subset of people (say, a religious group posting some of my antics at certain shows I've played), I'd have to remember who's doing the ridiculing, and whose opinions I respect. Meaning, of course, NOT THEIRS.
Being laughed at by an idiot is funny.
Torben