If the only things he had done were constantly embarrassing himself and golfing, you wouldn't have gotten a -1 mod. It's the damage that he's doing to our country that upsets people.
Why would anybody buy a used DVD if you can just pirate the movie? Per your argument, the victims are anybody who bought the DVD rather than the studios. This makes piracy even more problematic. Really there's no good justification to pirate something that you can buy.
That's fair enough. But certainly the reason to pay $19.99 for the DVD is to watch the movie. And I'm pretty sure you wouldn't pay $20T for the OP's home video!
The incremental cost of water is nearly zero. If you have any doubt about that, look at your water bill. In fact the incremental cost of enough water for a day is probably about the same as the incremental electricity from downloading and watching a movie. And most "cultural data" is already free. The popular movies on BT aren't classic documentaries!
Most things that are being downloaded on BT aren't situations where the author has been dead for 49 years. Usually it's stuff that's been out for 49 minutes. Most of the pro-piracy arguments come down to watching whatever you want whenever you want being a basic human right. More than food and clean water it seems. Yet we still expect people to pay for food and water.
Your example is poor, because nobody actually *paid* you $20 trillion so (shock) your video isn't worth that much. People *do* pay $19.99 for a ticket to see a 3D movie in a theater. For those who balk at those prices, you can buy the BluRay a few months later for that price. So there clearly *is* a market for the movies and they do have a well established price and a lot of volume at that price.
If rich people want to pay extra for a view, who am I to stop them. With other forms of power, locating the infrastructure near poor people was really awful. Nobody should have to live near a coal plant. There are always going to be differences between rich and poor. If we had universal basic income, universal healthcare, but the poor people had to live near windmills, well I think we would be just fine.
This is true. But as I've pointed out elsewhere, we also don't know that it's *not* physically disabled. I don't know why anybody would buy this without an explanation, though.
I don't know whether this is just value-based pricing for something with zero cost or if Dell is actually delivering something different here. The reason that the Intel ME can be so intrusive is that it has complete control over the network interfaces. It's possible that these systems have the built-in network interface disabled (not connected to anything) and separate wireless/ethernet systems. Or maybe not, but until we know, we can't really say if this is reasonable or not.
They don't have an agreement with Redbox. Redbox is buying the discs retail. In other words, they buy the retail disc/code, sell the code and rent out the disc. Seems pretty reasonable to me. No different than if I bought a dictionary, cut it in half, and sold one person A-M and another N-Z
I obviously have no way to quantify this, but as my job involves interacting with people, knowing what's going on in the world certain seems like a basic prerequisite. And the annual cost of all of the subscriptions is about my hourly pay rate, so I would say that yes, we can conclude that the subscriptions more than pay for themselves.
There may or may not be tracking. I'll probably add fuel to your fire, but I read all of these on a Kindle device where the paper downloads with no advertisements. Now Amazon may be tracking which articles I spend the most time on, but I'm not looking at ads. I see a lot of complaints in this thread about the various websites. And there is certain some veracity to the claims. If you really object to the web sites, you could order the print edition or the kindle edition. In the end, my original assertion stands. You have to pay for quality journalism.
This is a shining example of why, if we disagree, we should participate in the RFC process rather than go off on our own. And if we don't get our wishes in the RFC process, we shouldn't stage a rebellion. We need a functioning network. Four TLDs are reserved for this..test,.example,.invalid, and.localhost. If.dev should have been a reserved TLD, there were 15 years to get it added from the time RFC2606 was published until.dev became a TLD.
And you will run into "conflict and confusion" if you do this. As I've pointed out already, there was an RFC for this in 1999. The "right" way to do this has been defined for almost two decades. So you can either be self-righteous and declare that it's your local network and you'll do what you want (in which case, you should probably disconnect it from the internet) or you can follow the well-defined standard and avoid difficulty. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf...
Apparently neither the OP nor the mods understand how DNS works. If you have internal resources, use the TLDs reserved for this purpose. The RFC was published in 1999! https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf...
Maybe the reason that the internet is devolving is your unwillingness to pay. I pay for the New York Times, The Atlantic, The Economist, and The Washington Post. And they are well worth every penny. I have no idea why anybody would expect to get their news for free. Real journalism is a resource-intensive process that has to be funded. Now I don't *like* the current paywalls in that I often get blocked from content I've paid for since I haven't logged in on a particular device or linked a publisher to a specific account. But having the price for quality news set at zero is nonsensical.
Is it possible that there are just too many things to think about these days? As an example, there are a hundred brands of toothpaste. That's a parity product, but maybe I should think about the level of corporate responsibility of the manufacturer when deciding? Or just price? Well except my kid doesn't like all of the flavors and I want him to use it. I don't think that everybody should think about everything. We should be experts in certain areas. Unfortunately, we seem to live in an age where "experts" aren't trusted because of some combination of legitimate selling-out and some manifestations of cognitive dissonance. And I don't see any good solutions.
Now *this* is a great Troll. Maybe we need a +1 Troll mod! I have no opinion on Rust. It seems to be an improvement on C++ although they didn't make the language expressive enough that it could do without a pre-processor. They think that meta programming is a feature (it's not, ever). Given this, I would tend to think that any terribly strong opinions on rust (for or against) would be unwarranted. Maybe I'll get -1 Feeding a troll.
This seems reasonable but the article only claims 375 million jobs. In a world of 7B people this is a lot. A bit more than a sock factory. But it's by no means the whole economy.
Slashdot Mirror
If the only things he had done were constantly embarrassing himself and golfing, you wouldn't have gotten a -1 mod. It's the damage that he's doing to our country that upsets people.
Why would anybody buy a used DVD if you can just pirate the movie? Per your argument, the victims are anybody who bought the DVD rather than the studios. This makes piracy even more problematic. Really there's no good justification to pirate something that you can buy.
That's fair enough. But certainly the reason to pay $19.99 for the DVD is to watch the movie. And I'm pretty sure you wouldn't pay $20T for the OP's home video!
The incremental cost of water is nearly zero. If you have any doubt about that, look at your water bill. In fact the incremental cost of enough water for a day is probably about the same as the incremental electricity from downloading and watching a movie. And most "cultural data" is already free. The popular movies on BT aren't classic documentaries!
Most things that are being downloaded on BT aren't situations where the author has been dead for 49 years. Usually it's stuff that's been out for 49 minutes. Most of the pro-piracy arguments come down to watching whatever you want whenever you want being a basic human right. More than food and clean water it seems. Yet we still expect people to pay for food and water.
More details please.
Your example is poor, because nobody actually *paid* you $20 trillion so (shock) your video isn't worth that much. People *do* pay $19.99 for a ticket to see a 3D movie in a theater. For those who balk at those prices, you can buy the BluRay a few months later for that price. So there clearly *is* a market for the movies and they do have a well established price and a lot of volume at that price.
If rich people want to pay extra for a view, who am I to stop them. With other forms of power, locating the infrastructure near poor people was really awful. Nobody should have to live near a coal plant. There are always going to be differences between rich and poor. If we had universal basic income, universal healthcare, but the poor people had to live near windmills, well I think we would be just fine.
In the rare cases where they are a anti-features, they can charge extra to disable them!
This is true. But as I've pointed out elsewhere, we also don't know that it's *not* physically disabled. I don't know why anybody would buy this without an explanation, though.
I don't know whether this is just value-based pricing for something with zero cost or if Dell is actually delivering something different here. The reason that the Intel ME can be so intrusive is that it has complete control over the network interfaces. It's possible that these systems have the built-in network interface disabled (not connected to anything) and separate wireless/ethernet systems. Or maybe not, but until we know, we can't really say if this is reasonable or not.
He's already rich and famous. He now does what he wants.
They don't have an agreement with Redbox. Redbox is buying the discs retail. In other words, they buy the retail disc/code, sell the code and rent out the disc. Seems pretty reasonable to me. No different than if I bought a dictionary, cut it in half, and sold one person A-M and another N-Z
You can have .dev.test and .test.test! Or you can use a TLD that you own!
I obviously have no way to quantify this, but as my job involves interacting with people, knowing what's going on in the world certain seems like a basic prerequisite. And the annual cost of all of the subscriptions is about my hourly pay rate, so I would say that yes, we can conclude that the subscriptions more than pay for themselves.
There may or may not be tracking. I'll probably add fuel to your fire, but I read all of these on a Kindle device where the paper downloads with no advertisements. Now Amazon may be tracking which articles I spend the most time on, but I'm not looking at ads. I see a lot of complaints in this thread about the various websites. And there is certain some veracity to the claims. If you really object to the web sites, you could order the print edition or the kindle edition. In the end, my original assertion stands. You have to pay for quality journalism.
No, you use HTTP with properly named machines.
And you were warned in 1999 not to use .dev, but to use one of the TLDs reserved for this purpose.
This is a shining example of why, if we disagree, we should participate in the RFC process rather than go off on our own. And if we don't get our wishes in the RFC process, we shouldn't stage a rebellion. We need a functioning network. Four TLDs are reserved for this. .test, .example, .invalid, and .localhost. If .dev should have been a reserved TLD, there were 15 years to get it added from the time RFC2606 was published until .dev became a TLD.
And you will run into "conflict and confusion" if you do this. As I've pointed out already, there was an RFC for this in 1999. The "right" way to do this has been defined for almost two decades. So you can either be self-righteous and declare that it's your local network and you'll do what you want (in which case, you should probably disconnect it from the internet) or you can follow the well-defined standard and avoid difficulty. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf...
Apparently neither the OP nor the mods understand how DNS works. If you have internal resources, use the TLDs reserved for this purpose. The RFC was published in 1999! https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf...
Maybe the reason that the internet is devolving is your unwillingness to pay. I pay for the New York Times, The Atlantic, The Economist, and The Washington Post. And they are well worth every penny. I have no idea why anybody would expect to get their news for free. Real journalism is a resource-intensive process that has to be funded. Now I don't *like* the current paywalls in that I often get blocked from content I've paid for since I haven't logged in on a particular device or linked a publisher to a specific account. But having the price for quality news set at zero is nonsensical.
Is it possible that there are just too many things to think about these days? As an example, there are a hundred brands of toothpaste. That's a parity product, but maybe I should think about the level of corporate responsibility of the manufacturer when deciding? Or just price? Well except my kid doesn't like all of the flavors and I want him to use it. I don't think that everybody should think about everything. We should be experts in certain areas. Unfortunately, we seem to live in an age where "experts" aren't trusted because of some combination of legitimate selling-out and some manifestations of cognitive dissonance. And I don't see any good solutions.
Now *this* is a great Troll. Maybe we need a +1 Troll mod! I have no opinion on Rust. It seems to be an improvement on C++ although they didn't make the language expressive enough that it could do without a pre-processor. They think that meta programming is a feature (it's not, ever). Given this, I would tend to think that any terribly strong opinions on rust (for or against) would be unwarranted. Maybe I'll get -1 Feeding a troll.
This seems reasonable but the article only claims 375 million jobs. In a world of 7B people this is a lot. A bit more than a sock factory. But it's by no means the whole economy.