It works in the field - you can take it camping, etc, because you can carry spare batteries for it if you're not going to have access to a powersource to recharge it.
True, sort of. The one thing I really don't like about the Archos line is the design of the battery compartments -- replacing the AA NiMHs is possible, but the covers and catches clearly aren't designed for doing so as a matter of routine use.
We had a customer who said "I want this technology to allow me to track down the little @#$#er so I can take him out back and shoot him!"
A technology that would allow tracking of individuals who break the law would be more acceptable than one that infringes upon the fair-use rights of law-abiding consumers.
However, shooting is a bit excessive for bootlegging, and ought to be reserved for spammers and other such varmints.
The free market does not guarantee that every product every consumer wishes to purchase will be made available for sale.
You are sidestepping the issue -- which is odd because you correctly describe it later:
Remember that a free market is any place at which buyers and sellers exchange goods/services/money on mutually agreeable terms.
If you can't get what you want because nobody has the desire or ability to produce it at a price you are willing to pay, that's just life. If, however, you can't get what you want because some third party has coercively interposed himself between buyer and seller, then the free market has been subverted.
The 'net is littered with stories of companies' servers being repeatedly blackholed even after they either cleaned up their act
Yeah, and the criminal justice system is littered with stories of criminals being executed even after they repented of their crime. Too bad.
It is not up to the blacklist organizations to punish.
Blacklisting spammers, and keeping them blacklisted for a long period even after they (claim to) clean up their acts is indeed punishment. It's also the only way to keep the problem under control.
If a blackhole provider makes it so easy to GET ON the blackhole list, then it should be JUST AS EASY TO GET OFF ONCE THE SERVER IS FIXED.
Sorry; it can't work that way. Spammers would simply engage in (another) deception to get off the blacklist just before the next mass defecation upon the Net.
And what if a company only sends say 10% spam and the rest is legitimate e-mail. Is it fair for them to get blacklisted, and their legitimate business damaged for the small amount of spam they send?
Yes. If I punch every tenth person I meet without provocation or obtain one-tenth of my income by theft, I will and should go to jail. The 90% proper behavior doesn't matter.
Am I the only one who thinks that's funny? Senator Dashle? The same senator that got an anthrax letter? No shit he's not reading the letters you send him.
An anthrax letter does not give Daschle the right to reject communications from his constituents, for the same reason a nearby shellburst does not give a soldier the right to desert his post. In both cases, it's the man's job -- to be done as safely as possible, but in any case to be done.
There are sterilization procedures available, and presumably in place.
Salon has an interview with Morton David Goldberg, who is a top copyright lawyer and partner with Cowan Liebowitz and Latman in New York. He feels the Supreme Court shouldn't have even heard the case. His arguments don't seem very insightful or well thought out to me.
That's an understatement. In fact, several of his arguments are, frankly, absurd:
Salon: Putting aside the possible legal dangers of a broad Court decision, how do you think an Eldred victory in the Supreme Court would affect the world of ideas? What are the larger cultural dangers?
MDG:There will be fewer derivative works prepared from existing works, because there's much more of an incentive to create a derivative work if you can get an exclusive right from the copyright holder.
Of course, the derivative work would enjoy copyright protection in its own right, thus providing incentive without any need of an exclusive grant from the original copyright holder.
MDG:There would also be much less incentive to prepare new works. This is difficult to show empirically
I'll just bet it is! The "incentive" of possible income to one's great-grandchildren 70-90 years after one has joined the choir invisible is so tenuous as to be laughable.
My point is quite obvious -- since the phone company is not operating in a free-market arena (it has a government-granted monopoly on stringing up a network of phone lines), the free-market contract argument (if you don't like their policies, take your business elsewhere) is not applicable. They don't get to have it both ways.
either side is free to include whatever terms it wishes because each side is also free to refuse to accept the terms (provided no threats of violence are made if one should choose not to accept the terms, of course)
The phone company's terms suck. I'm gonna string my own lines. Shucky Darnit (or, if you don't mind stronger language, Ayn H. Rand) -- those darn Men With Guns are coming to enforce some "franchise".
Suppressing theft of service (I, not some telemarketer, pay for my own phone line), trespass (I want them out of my premeses), and harassment are well within the proper sphere of government, troll.
Actually, the Weakly Standard crew is best described (to the extent they can be said to possess a coherent political ideology at all) as "Corporate Statist".
And yet Fett understands the protocol. When he captures Solo, he calls him "Captain Solo." (Whether this is in deference to Han's former rank in the Imperial starfleet, or simply because Han owns and pilots his own ship, we don't know. I suspect it's the former.)
Never mind that only the latter is in any way indicated on the screen.
But the discs do say, "Will not play on PC", so Sony can deflect the blame anyway.
I doubt that would be sufficient to get them off the hook, as the damage goes far beyond what is implied by the warning. At a minimum, they'd need a prominent warning that the "CD" can cause your computer to lock up and require professional servicing.
To get an idea of where the baseline lies, read some of the warnings on products that everybody with three firing neurons knows are dangerous if misused..
no, the RIAA did not forget. You are just "collateral damage," they have no problems screwing you over in order to (try to) defeat the average college student with 10 gigs of mp3z. Sort of a "collective punishment" scheme.
You're cutting them slack they don't deserve. They want you to have to buy an extra copy if the first one is damaged/stolen/whatever. If this were not the case, they would replace first copies at cost when presented with proof of original purchase.
However, if we compare this to the adjusted all-time opening weekened statistics boxofficemojo.com [boxofficemojo.com] , we see that Not One of the top 100 was more recent then 1989.
What this indicates to me, is that over the course of the last two decades, hollywood has shifted it's advertising dollar from a constant support of a released movie, to an all-out blitz opening weekends.
This does not compute -- one of these two statements has got to be wrong.
You forgot about the First Amendment. The First amendment prevents the government from banning spam
The First Amendment does no such thing, any more than it prevents the government from banning grafitti or late-night operation of sound trucks. Freedom of speech does not include the "right" to a captive audience or the "right" to compel others to provide you with a forum.
What sets up the suspend-disbelief-by-the-neck-until-dead isn't one more amazing invention -- it's the question of how the guy who invented something the CEO of 3M would kill for could still have $$$ problems.
...never interrupt the enemy while he is making a mistake.
One of the problems we've had in defending Fair Use rights is the difficulty of framing the issues in "Joe Sixpack" terms. Use it as an example of the legislation Hollywood wants to purchase (the point can be illustrated with a demonstration of a DVD that has fast-forward lockouts, if you have one available).
Slashdot Mirror
True, sort of. The one thing I really don't like about the Archos line is the design of the battery compartments -- replacing the AA NiMHs is possible, but the covers and catches clearly aren't designed for doing so as a matter of routine use.
A technology that would allow tracking of individuals who break the law would be more acceptable than one that infringes upon the fair-use rights of law-abiding consumers.
However, shooting is a bit excessive for bootlegging, and ought to be reserved for spammers and other such varmints.
You are sidestepping the issue -- which is odd because you correctly describe it later:
If you can't get what you want because nobody has the desire or ability to produce it at a price you are willing to pay, that's just life. If, however, you can't get what you want because some third party has coercively interposed himself between buyer and seller, then the free market has been subverted.Yeah, and the criminal justice system is littered with stories of criminals being executed even after they repented of their crime. Too bad.
It is not up to the blacklist organizations to punish.
Blacklisting spammers, and keeping them blacklisted for a long period even after they (claim to) clean up their acts is indeed punishment. It's also the only way to keep the problem under control.
If a blackhole provider makes it so easy to GET ON the blackhole list, then it should be JUST AS EASY TO GET OFF ONCE THE SERVER IS FIXED.
Sorry; it can't work that way. Spammers would simply engage in (another) deception to get off the blacklist just before the next mass defecation upon the Net.
Yes. If I punch every tenth person I meet without provocation or obtain one-tenth of my income by theft, I will and should go to jail. The 90% proper behavior doesn't matter.
Simple: The Bells looted their way to a monopoly by getting the government to prevent anybody else from stringing up their own wires. Duh.
An anthrax letter does not give Daschle the right to reject communications from his constituents, for the same reason a nearby shellburst does not give a soldier the right to desert his post. In both cases, it's the man's job -- to be done as safely as possible, but in any case to be done.
There are sterilization procedures available, and presumably in place.
That's an understatement. In fact, several of his arguments are, frankly, absurd:
I'd like to see the NRA put a nice Eddie Eagle page in kids.us. When the liberal Democrats on the hill hear about that, pass the popcorn....
Good Idea.
(up to 2 weeks).
Forget this part.
My point is quite obvious -- since the phone company is not operating in a free-market arena (it has a government-granted monopoly on stringing up a network of phone lines), the free-market contract argument (if you don't like their policies, take your business elsewhere) is not applicable. They don't get to have it both ways.
The phone company's terms suck. I'm gonna string my own lines. Shucky Darnit (or, if you don't mind stronger language, Ayn H. Rand) -- those darn Men With Guns are coming to enforce some "franchise".
There goes your argument.
Suppressing theft of service (I, not some telemarketer, pay for my own phone line), trespass (I want them out of my premeses), and harassment are well within the proper sphere of government, troll.
Of course not. It was for movies, not books, and for the top, not the bottom.
Yes it is, as I type this.
Ironically, a lot of what the author's criticisms of the Old Republic boil down to "they didn't prepare for easily predictable events"....
Actually, the Weakly Standard crew is best described (to the extent they can be said to possess a coherent political ideology at all) as "Corporate Statist".
Never mind that only the latter is in any way indicated on the screen.
I doubt that would be sufficient to get them off the hook, as the damage goes far beyond what is implied by the warning. At a minimum, they'd need a prominent warning that the "CD" can cause your computer to lock up and require professional servicing.
To get an idea of where the baseline lies, read some of the warnings on products that everybody with three firing neurons knows are dangerous if misused..
You're cutting them slack they don't deserve. They want you to have to buy an extra copy if the first one is damaged/stolen/whatever. If this were not the case, they would replace first copies at cost when presented with proof of original purchase.
What this indicates to me, is that over the course of the last two decades, hollywood has shifted it's advertising dollar from a constant support of a released movie, to an all-out blitz opening weekends.
This does not compute -- one of these two statements has got to be wrong.
The First Amendment does no such thing, any more than it prevents the government from banning grafitti or late-night operation of sound trucks. Freedom of speech does not include the "right" to a captive audience or the "right" to compel others to provide you with a forum.
In other words, they think that the issues magically go away if they use a different name.
Evidently, they think the public is as dumb as a bag of rocks. (Hey, we elected them -- what more proof do they need?)
What sets up the suspend-disbelief-by-the-neck-until-dead isn't one more amazing invention -- it's the question of how the guy who invented something the CEO of 3M would kill for could still have $$$ problems.
One of the problems we've had in defending Fair Use rights is the difficulty of framing the issues in "Joe Sixpack" terms. Use it as an example of the legislation Hollywood wants to purchase (the point can be illustrated with a demonstration of a DVD that has fast-forward lockouts, if you have one available).