Moreover, the people of Sweden are decidedly on their side, with the Pirate Party, which is sympathetic to TPB's cause, being one of the top ten political parties in the country.
I really don't know what to say.... Are you really suggesting that the Pirate Party is an influential and relevant political force? Based on that??
I'm probably not alone in that I've never heard of this movie nor studio. Not saying that I alone am a good measure of a movie's success, but I'd like to know the criteria by which this is being judged a success.
If it had the WMA's on the cd, just rip it and get it in a decent format (mp3, aac).
It didn't, as far as I could tell. To tell you the truth, I'm not sure in what format the music was actually stored on the CD. Granted, I haven't bought a CD in about 7 years, and wasn't really up on what the RIAA does to CDs these days.
In any case, the most apparent (to me anyway) way to do what we wanted was technically illegal, and that in itself is a big chunk of this problem.
This past weekend my girlfriend got some new perspective on why the morality of "piracy" is a very gray area. She wanted to copy music from a CD she'd purchased to her iPod, but we found that the audio was encoded as protected WMA. The only way to do what she wanted was to "illegally" strip the DRM from the audio first.
She has no intention of buying another album from that particular artist, at the very least.
A conflict of interest is a situation in which someone in a position of trust, such as a lawyer, insurance adjuster, a politician, executive or director of a corporation or a medical research scientist or physician, has competing professional or personal interests. Such competing interests can make it difficult to fulfill his or her duties impartially.
This Intel employee isn't in a position of trust, and has no competing interest in either promoting Intel or denigrating OLPC.
Conflict of interest? This is as much of a conflict of interest as a RedHat employee saying bad things about Microsoft. I do not think it means what you think it means.
If I recall correctly, folks around here aren't particularly thrilled when companies like Comcast impose artificial bandwidth ceilings on their paying customers. Why then is it such a good thing when other service providers do it? How is this any less intrusive?
Ya know what? I'm gettin pretty damned tired of environmentalists finding fault with and rejecting every new advance and discovery that doesn't meet their impossible standards for acceptable energy production.
Every new advance, no matter how small, gets us toward cleaner production and more efficient use of energy, and all we hear from greens is griping.
How about acknowledging for once that we're making positive steps, and maybe offer something more constructive than demanding we all live in caves?
"The over-50 exemption was created to give states more time to get everyone new licenses, and officials say the risk of someone in that age group being a terrorist, illegal immigrant or con artist is much less."
So it's capitalism's fault that people choose not to live within their means? Corporations are forcing people to overextend themselves and buy things they cannot afford?
That's not to say the problems you describe do not exist; they just aren't caused by capitalism.
If we simply got rid of copyright laws and made all content public domain (as many here advocate), how many of this site's readers would lose their jobs?
Hi! Could you also tell me next week's Powerball numbers?
I'm sorry, that's just bullshit. If what you speculate was anywhere NEAR the mark, the **AA's would have already coerced ISPs to block sites like Pirate Bay. That they haven't should speak volumes about your theory.
A lot of folks used to see nothing wrong with owning another human beeing; doesn't mean it was morally justified.
No, I'm not trying to draw a parallel between slavery and copyright infringement. Just saying that a majority doesn't necessarily define what is right and wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I get it. Submitter is a Pirate Party Pundit (ha ha! see what I did there?). Nothing like an objective source.
Sorry pal, you can pretend all you want, but even in Sweden a "top ten party" shouldn't impress anybody.
Moreover, the people of Sweden are decidedly on their side, with the Pirate Party, which is sympathetic to TPB's cause, being one of the top ten political parties in the country.
I really don't know what to say.... Are you really suggesting that the Pirate Party is an influential and relevant political force? Based on that??
I'm probably not alone in that I've never heard of this movie nor studio. Not saying that I alone am a good measure of a movie's success, but I'd like to know the criteria by which this is being judged a success.
That makes sense; and thanks for the heads-up. I might take another crack at that CD tonight just to satisfy my curiosity.
If it had the WMA's on the cd, just rip it and get it in a decent format (mp3, aac).
It didn't, as far as I could tell. To tell you the truth, I'm not sure in what format the music was actually stored on the CD. Granted, I haven't bought a CD in about 7 years, and wasn't really up on what the RIAA does to CDs these days.
In any case, the most apparent (to me anyway) way to do what we wanted was technically illegal, and that in itself is a big chunk of this problem.
There was a "feature" on the disc that would export the music to her hard drive. The end result was a bunch of protected WMA files.
iTunes was unable to import the CD directly; it didn't see it as a music CD. I'm curious now to see if that CD would even play in a regular CD player.
Quite true.
This past weekend my girlfriend got some new perspective on why the morality of "piracy" is a very gray area. She wanted to copy music from a CD she'd purchased to her iPod, but we found that the audio was encoded as protected WMA. The only way to do what she wanted was to "illegally" strip the DRM from the audio first.
She has no intention of buying another album from that particular artist, at the very least.
Does Ford have the right to prevent you from printing images of a car you own?
You mean "Does Ford have the right to prevent you from selling images of a car you own?
And the answer should still be know. Just thought I'd clarify.
I'm not sure which routers you're talking about, but my JoeSixpack D-Link router supports static DHCP. Just assign an IP to each MAC address.
You mean like Global Warming?
He's not working on the rival product (the OLPC, from his/Intel's point of view).
Granted, claiming to be an independent source of OLPC news and commentary is less than honest, but I maintain that no conflict exists.
Now if he had been working for OLPC while secretly being funded by Intel to trash the project, that would be a conflict of interest.
From wikipedia
This Intel employee isn't in a position of trust, and has no competing interest in either promoting Intel or denigrating OLPC.
Conflict of interest? This is as much of a conflict of interest as a RedHat employee saying bad things about Microsoft. I do not think it means what you think it means.
The headline says "caught" as if this person was doing something illegal or unethical. Please explain.
If I recall correctly, folks around here aren't particularly thrilled when companies like Comcast impose artificial bandwidth ceilings on their paying customers. Why then is it such a good thing when other service providers do it? How is this any less intrusive?
Ya know what? I'm gettin pretty damned tired of environmentalists finding fault with and rejecting every new advance and discovery that doesn't meet their impossible standards for acceptable energy production.
Every new advance, no matter how small, gets us toward cleaner production and more efficient use of energy, and all we hear from greens is griping.
How about acknowledging for once that we're making positive steps, and maybe offer something more constructive than demanding we all live in caves?
if you are a law abiding citizen what is wrong with proving who you are?
In other words, if you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide. Right?
"The over-50 exemption was created to give states more time to get everyone new licenses, and officials say the risk of someone in that age group being a terrorist, illegal immigrant or con artist is much less."
I thought this sort of thing was illegal.
It would be more productive (IMHO) to address society's overall lack of willpower and restraint than to restrict those who profit from it.
So it's capitalism's fault that people choose not to live within their means? Corporations are forcing people to overextend themselves and buy things they cannot afford?
That's not to say the problems you describe do not exist; they just aren't caused by capitalism.
Until capitalism is abolished in this country we will have no freedom.
And replace it with what?
If we simply got rid of copyright laws and made all content public domain (as many here advocate), how many of this site's readers would lose their jobs?
You know there is only one way this will end.
Hi! Could you also tell me next week's Powerball numbers?
I'm sorry, that's just bullshit. If what you speculate was anywhere NEAR the mark, the **AA's would have already coerced ISPs to block sites like Pirate Bay. That they haven't should speak volumes about your theory.
Insightful indeed.
A lot of folks used to see nothing wrong with owning another human beeing; doesn't mean it was morally justified.
No, I'm not trying to draw a parallel between slavery and copyright infringement. Just saying that a majority doesn't necessarily define what is right and wrong.
Where are these "new computer users" you speak of?