"If I decide that they are allowed to play Manhunt 2, then that's that."
And nothing prevents you from buying the game for your kids. If anything, this gives you, the parent, MORE control over what content your kids have access to since they have to go through you to get it.
If large-scale piracy is blocked from the network, doesn't it stand to reason that the network will perform better overall for ATT's customers?
People here rightly bemoan bandwidth strangling caused by botnets. Do those same people have a similar problem with their network being saturated by music, movies, and game downloads?
Movie theatres aren't supposed to sell tickets to "R" rated movies to minors, just as video game vendors aren't supposed to sell "AO" rated games to minors. I don't see the inconsistency you imply.
There are a lot of small lifestyle changes people can make that will have a huge impact on our environment.
1. Recycling 2. Fuel-efficient vehicles 3. Energy-efficient home hardware/appliances 4. Turn off the damn lights and TV when they're not in use 5. Attach electronics to a power strip and turn it off when not in use.
I'm sure there are hundreds of ways people can make a positive impact on the planet, and I think anyone with a sense of personal responsibility will consciously do what they can.
I have no beef with scientists dedicated to expanding our knowledge of the universe; to the contrary I admire them.
But you can't tell me that there aren't numerous scientists out there trying to use their research to promote their personal philosophy/ideology. That was my point; not that ALL scientists are trying to do so.
Conservatives attack social programs because *in too many cases) they encourage people to abdicate their personal responsibility to themselves and their families to the government (and ultimately, taxpayers).
You aren't going to hear me defend our current Clown-in-Chief as a conservative in any way.
But if people are going to be expected by the left to take responsibility for their environmental wellbeing, why can't us on the right expect people to take responsibility for their financial wellbeing?
It sounds like you're upset at the lack of personal responsibility in our society. Us conservatives have been barking up that particular tree for some time. Perhaps there is some common ground we can work from to get people to be better stewards of themselves, as well as the planet.
Yes, because we all know that scientists are above the petty musings of mankind, like political ideologies and personal agendas. They would NEVER stoop to slant their research with preconceived notions, or tailor their reports to maximize future research grants. How DARE us plebeians question their superiority and accuse them of being mere mortals!
I figured that's where you were going with that. I suppose then if someone just happened upon a public, wide open collection such as yours, well, shame on them for helping themselves, right?
Do you actually believe that? Are you like one of Party faithful in 1984 who "properly" believes one thing is happening despite all the evidence to the contrary staring you in the face?
"Your argument takes the form of 1. students share files on a network 2. they are doing it to let others copy music."
You don't think that's the case for the majority of people who share music files on a network?? What you find offensive, I find is a reasonable assumption.
I'm open to your ideas, though. For what purpose do YOU think students are sharing their music files?
(1) Authors of literary and artistic works shall enjoy the exclusive right of authorizing the making available to the public of the original and copies of their works through sale or other transfer of ownership.
And U.S. Copyright Law {Title 17 U.S.C. Section 101 et seq., Title 18 U.S.C. Section 2319}
Federal law protects copyright owners from the unauthorized reproduction, adaptation, performance, display or distribution of copyright protected works.
If a student is consciously making his/her mp3 collection available for others to download, they are violating the law. If you find that offensive, that's your problem, not mine, nor is it my fault. Don't like it? Change the law.
What if someone leaves a case of beer in an unlocked car and some kids take it?
What if someone at the library gets up and you copy his CD?
Are you kidding me??
All of these far-fetched analogies would be appropriate if they weren't that: far-fetched. What is the likelihood of the above actually happening, let alone resulting in criminal charges??
On the other hand, how often does a college student knowingly share a folder on their PC with the network (that doesn't happen by accident, folks!), and storing their entire mp3 collection in said shared folder? If you've spent any time on a college dorm network in the last 10 years, you have a pretty good idea.
These "analogies" that so many Slashdotters parade to undermine the legitimacy/logic of copyright law are nothing but specious "devil's advocate" nitpicking.
Without commenting on this particular case, I really wish people would keep their imaginations in check and accept the reality that a lot (at the very least) of these students in similar cases are doing exactly what the RIAA is accusing them of.
If Cuba were so great, don't you suppose they'd be able to thrive with or without trade with the United States? How is Cuba's socialist utopia held hostage by a single inept and greedy country, when they are free to trade with the rest of the world?
If Cuba's healthcare system is so great, why did they have to bring in a Spanish doctor to treat Castro? I hear his own native doctors damn near killed him, and had to bring in the foreign doctor to save his life.
But yeah, it's America's fault; not the dictator who violently overthrew the government and continues to imprison anyone foolish enough to speak out against him. Utopia indeed.
Tyrants almost always disguise their lust for power as sympathy for the persecuted and downtrodden. Castro did it in the 50's; Chavez is doing the same thing now.
I hope our youth are paying attention to what's happening in Venezuela right now, because I think the next 20 years will be an invaluable lesson in how a dictator-to-be dupes a populace with promises of govenrment-provided prosperity and national unity. In other words, he's going to steal from the minority rich to buy the support of the majority poor, and anyone who dissents will be silenced.
Pay attention, folks! Dictators haven't changed much since Lenin, despite each's promises of a socialist utopia. Maybe one of these centuries we'll recognize these tyrants before we let them rise to power and exploit their people.
Slashdot Mirror
"If I decide that they are allowed to play Manhunt 2, then that's that."
And nothing prevents you from buying the game for your kids. If anything, this gives you, the parent, MORE control over what content your kids have access to since they have to go through you to get it.
So again, what's the problem here?
If large-scale piracy is blocked from the network, doesn't it stand to reason that the network will perform better overall for ATT's customers?
People here rightly bemoan bandwidth strangling caused by botnets. Do those same people have a similar problem with their network being saturated by music, movies, and game downloads?
Movie theatres aren't supposed to sell tickets to "R" rated movies to minors, just as video game vendors aren't supposed to sell "AO" rated games to minors. I don't see the inconsistency you imply.
Is there any compelling reason why kids SHOULD be allowed to buy this game?
We'll just have to disagree then.
There are a lot of small lifestyle changes people can make that will have a huge impact on our environment.
1. Recycling
2. Fuel-efficient vehicles
3. Energy-efficient home hardware/appliances
4. Turn off the damn lights and TV when they're not in use
5. Attach electronics to a power strip and turn it off when not in use.
I'm sure there are hundreds of ways people can make a positive impact on the planet, and I think anyone with a sense of personal responsibility will consciously do what they can.
I have no beef with scientists dedicated to expanding our knowledge of the universe; to the contrary I admire them.
But you can't tell me that there aren't numerous scientists out there trying to use their research to promote their personal philosophy/ideology. That was my point; not that ALL scientists are trying to do so.
Conservatives attack social programs because *in too many cases) they encourage people to abdicate their personal responsibility to themselves and their families to the government (and ultimately, taxpayers).
You aren't going to hear me defend our current Clown-in-Chief as a conservative in any way.
But if people are going to be expected by the left to take responsibility for their environmental wellbeing, why can't us on the right expect people to take responsibility for their financial wellbeing?
It sounds like you're upset at the lack of personal responsibility in our society. Us conservatives have been barking up that particular tree for some time. Perhaps there is some common ground we can work from to get people to be better stewards of themselves, as well as the planet.
What does "fair" have to do with determining whether or not humans are making the Earth's climate change?
Seems the only difference is who pays them.
"Is the theory of gravity "consensus science?""
You mingle the Theory of Gravity with Global Climate Change Theory as if they have been equally tested, examined, probed, challenged, and refined.
"Almost everyone would have to change their lifestyle, yet some of us still care more about justice and not making others pay for our actions."
Ahh, so this is about morality? I thought science was just the facts.
I hope you realize you just advocated the manipulation of scientific research to further a political agenda.
Yes, because we all know that scientists are above the petty musings of mankind, like political ideologies and personal agendas. They would NEVER stoop to slant their research with preconceived notions, or tailor their reports to maximize future research grants. How DARE us plebeians question their superiority and accuse them of being mere mortals!
I figured that's where you were going with that. I suppose then if someone just happened upon a public, wide open collection such as yours, well, shame on them for helping themselves, right?
Do you actually believe that? Are you like one of Party faithful in 1984 who "properly" believes one thing is happening despite all the evidence to the contrary staring you in the face?
"Your argument takes the form of 1. students share files on a network 2. they are doing it to let others copy music."
You don't think that's the case for the majority of people who share music files on a network?? What you find offensive, I find is a reasonable assumption.
I'm open to your ideas, though. For what purpose do YOU think students are sharing their music files?
And U.S. Copyright Law {Title 17 U.S.C. Section 101 et seq., Title 18 U.S.C. Section 2319}
If a student is consciously making his/her mp3 collection available for others to download, they are violating the law. If you find that offensive, that's your problem, not mine, nor is it my fault. Don't like it? Change the law.
What if someone leaves a case of beer in an unlocked car and some kids take it?
What if someone at the library gets up and you copy his CD?
Are you kidding me??
All of these far-fetched analogies would be appropriate if they weren't that: far-fetched. What is the likelihood of the above actually happening, let alone resulting in criminal charges??
On the other hand, how often does a college student knowingly share a folder on their PC with the network (that doesn't happen by accident, folks!), and storing their entire mp3 collection in said shared folder? If you've spent any time on a college dorm network in the last 10 years, you have a pretty good idea.
These "analogies" that so many Slashdotters parade to undermine the legitimacy/logic of copyright law are nothing but specious "devil's advocate" nitpicking.
Without commenting on this particular case, I really wish people would keep their imaginations in check and accept the reality that a lot (at the very least) of these students in similar cases are doing exactly what the RIAA is accusing them of.
"Microsoft releases patches for both, and neither are apparently being applied by the servers in question."
So in other words, it's the inattentive sysadmins that are at fault. Why do you blame Windows and IIS then?
Perhaps it has something to do with what I've experienced as well.
Tried 2 different releases of KUbuntu (Dapper, Feisty; AMD64) today. Neither would boot properly, and Feisty wouldn't even boot in graphics safe mode.
I don't ask a lot from Linux, but I expect it to at least work enough to BEGIN the install. Color me unimpressed.
When was the last time a convict actually was given the maximum possible sentence?
What makes you think I'm a Bush supporter? I didn't vote for him in either election.
If Cuba were so great, don't you suppose they'd be able to thrive with or without trade with the United States? How is Cuba's socialist utopia held hostage by a single inept and greedy country, when they are free to trade with the rest of the world?
If Cuba's healthcare system is so great, why did they have to bring in a Spanish doctor to treat Castro? I hear his own native doctors damn near killed him, and had to bring in the foreign doctor to save his life.
But yeah, it's America's fault; not the dictator who violently overthrew the government and continues to imprison anyone foolish enough to speak out against him. Utopia indeed.
Tyrants almost always disguise their lust for power as sympathy for the persecuted and downtrodden. Castro did it in the 50's; Chavez is doing the same thing now.
I hope our youth are paying attention to what's happening in Venezuela right now, because I think the next 20 years will be an invaluable lesson in how a dictator-to-be dupes a populace with promises of govenrment-provided prosperity and national unity. In other words, he's going to steal from the minority rich to buy the support of the majority poor, and anyone who dissents will be silenced.
Pay attention, folks! Dictators haven't changed much since Lenin, despite each's promises of a socialist utopia. Maybe one of these centuries we'll recognize these tyrants before we let them rise to power and exploit their people.
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul." --George Bernard Shaw
Will 6789878767653 play "Stones"?