Should we expect people who work hard to write software or create music (or for that matter, anything that can be distributed online) to do so without expecting something in return?
For that matter, would you do whatever it is you do for a living for free? I suspect that you either don't have a job, or are just another clueless anarchist (perhaps both).
Either way, you don't seem to understand that by "freeing" information, you remove the incentive for people to create it.
If people here actually practiced what they preach, the RIAA would already be dead and buried. Instead, they choose to continue to download music by RIAA-signed musicians, and essentially make the RIAA's case against P2P for them.
I wish people would support independent musiscans. But it's not about the music or musicians to these people, nor is it about 'freedom' or whatever other tripe they use to justify downloading/distributing music they have no rights over. It's always been about getting what they want for free.
Before iTunes, people here pissed and moaned about how they wanted to legitimately pay for music, but online and for a reasonable price, and that downloading music for free from P2P was the only reasonable alternative
Then iTunes comes out, providing EXACTLY that. But were the complainers happy? Nope, instead they stab Apple in the back and devise ways to get Apple's product without paying for it.
Way to show your appreciation folks!! Is it really any wonder why the likes of the RIAA wants to hunt you down??
Apps like this aren't motivated by free speech, this is all about free beer. I just wish some of you would be honest about that.
I may not be a business expert (but I play on on slashdot) but being able to sign decade-long product/service contracts doesn't sound like a company in trouble to me.
A) realizes that the actions of a few do not represent the beliefs of the whole
Unfortunately for liberals/democrats, these people end up being their public face. The best think the Kerry campaign could do is to tell these nutjobs to back off, but I suspect the DNC actually approves of such tactics.
B) uses a non-American definition of "liberal" or C) realizes that most USian "Liberals" are about as far from real progressives as Georgie Boy.
Very true. The brand of liberalism adopted by far too many in this country anymore has very little to do with individual liberty.
I was going to say that it's a shame that prominant Democrats don't have the stones to reign the fanatics in, until I realized that today's Democrat politicians were probably engaged in similar activities themselves 45 years ago.
Whether or not they're successful is hardly the point. The fact that these groups are trying to silence the Republican Party, and are unabashedly announcing their intent to do so should frighten any true advocate of free speech.
In light of such actions, how can one associate "liberty" with "liberal" anymore?
...that the world outside of Slashdot isn't giving Google a free pass.
When all of the dirty laundry is aired and skeletons are pulled from the closets, I wonder what Google and their IPO will look like in the eyes of the Slashdot community. So far, they've gotten off relatively light, IMHO.
Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So you're saying there's nothing wrong with Linux, or any other OSS out there? Or are you saying that everyone, including those that do know better, should strictly limit themselves to OSS even though it likely isn't the best tool for the job? What does that achieve?
Zealots like you are EXACTLY what the grandparent is refering to. You grapple for the tiniest scrap of a "flaw" that nobody but the most creatively stupid of users could only stumble upon, and use it to bolster your "M1cr0$0ft 15 t3h 5ux0rz" argument.
Nothing can abate your hatred of Microsoft, so do us all a favor and keep your rabies away from the rest of us.
What scare me are the people who honestly believe they are entitled to the works that musicians create. Scarier still are those who think they're doing musicians a favor.
If everyone thought as you do, there wouldn't be a music industry. Fortunately for you, there are still people out there buyinc CDs who are subsidizing your hobby.
Or is only immoral by some puritanical "you shouldn't get something without working for it" ethic?
There is a word for "getting something without working for it", and it's not "puritanical". It's called "freeloading".
Right you are, but that's not the point I'm trying to get thru people's thick skulls. The distinction people are making is more like:
stealing (illegal) = unacceptable behavior
vs.
copyright infringement (illegal) = acceptable behavior
Let's imagine, for a moment, that EVERYBODY stops buying CDs and instead downloads all of their music for free via P2P. They aren't physically taking anything from the RIAA, are they? But you can be damned sure that the music industry would crumble with zero sales revenue. Their claims that P2P downloads is cutting into their revenue, I believe, is very valid.
Now that's not to say that the RIAA's business model is effective, or that their product is reasonably priced (far from on both counts). But attacking all those people who are downloading music without paying for it gives the RIAA a convenient alternative to lowering prices.
If people stopped downloading music, the RIAA would have no choice but to lower their CD prices.
You all can use whatever moral thermometer you want to justify downloading music you haven't paid for, but it all still comes down to the fact that you take posession of a song/album that RIAA companies sell for $x.xx, but they don't collect the $x.xx from the sale of that song/album.
And don't give me that typical crap line of "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so I'm not depriving them of a sale." If you don't really want it, or can't afford it, that doesn't justify copyright infringement. And I fully support the RIAA's actions against you, because by your own admission, you are not their customer.
"a lot of the blurbs/'article texts' in slashdot are just the same thign rewritten from other sites for the sake of rewriting it - and end up being confugins, inaccurate and sensationalistic."
Poor writing skills do not justify plagiarism. If you can't digest an article's point and accurately summarize it in your own words, you probably shouldn't be subitting stories.
I wish the editors would better police these posts... one of these days something like this is going to get them in big trouble.
I think the word you are looking for is "copied", you fool.
"...a statement of fact, and so can't be copyrighted."
What rubbish! Are you saying that newscasts, newspaper and magazine articles, and any other publication with factual information can't be copyrighted? You need to go back to pretend law school, mate.
Your computer becomes a spam zombie within minutes of being connected to the Internet.
Not a windows bug. Proper maintenance will prevent this.
Outlook Express has no junk mail filtering.
You call it a bug. I call it a missing feature. You can remedy this by using another e-mail client.
Your screen becomes deluged with popup windows with no escape because closing one opens about ten others.
Again, this problem can be solved with proper maintenance. Just disable javascript and ActiveX. I don't get inundated with popups, so you must be doing something wrong.
I know you were trying to be witty, but you just came off as ignorant.
Slashdot Mirror
Does that make it right?
Should we expect people who work hard to write software or create music (or for that matter, anything that can be distributed online) to do so without expecting something in return?
For that matter, would you do whatever it is you do for a living for free? I suspect that you either don't have a job, or are just another clueless anarchist (perhaps both).
Either way, you don't seem to understand that by "freeing" information, you remove the incentive for people to create it.
I wish people would support independent musiscans. But it's not about the music or musicians to these people, nor is it about 'freedom' or whatever other tripe they use to justify downloading/distributing music they have no rights over. It's always been about getting what they want for free.
Then iTunes comes out, providing EXACTLY that. But were the complainers happy? Nope, instead they stab Apple in the back and devise ways to get Apple's product without paying for it.
Way to show your appreciation folks!! Is it really any wonder why the likes of the RIAA wants to hunt you down??
Apps like this aren't motivated by free speech, this is all about free beer. I just wish some of you would be honest about that.
Remember last year when an alternative energy company proposed to build a windmill farm on Martha's Vineyard? You can imagine how well that went over.
Green energy is a great platform for some Democrats, at least until they're asked to put their money where their mouth is.
Afterall, it's not like Teddy was flying the plane!
*ducks*
As if we needed more proof that Microsoft is in the government's pockets!
Come back when you have an original thought, Slashbot.
And unless you can prove any of that, by all means lets see the proof. Until then it's nothing but speculation.
I may not be a business expert (but I play on on slashdot) but being able to sign decade-long product/service contracts doesn't sound like a company in trouble to me.
because OSS publishes and fixes their bugs, rather than MS' security through obsecurity
Right, that's why Microsoft isn't releasing a HUGE security overhaul in the form of a new service pack.
Oh wait, they are! So much for security through obscurity!
Unfortunately for liberals/democrats, these people end up being their public face. The best think the Kerry campaign could do is to tell these nutjobs to back off, but I suspect the DNC actually approves of such tactics.
B) uses a non-American definition of "liberal" or C) realizes that most USian "Liberals" are about as far from real progressives as Georgie Boy.
Very true. The brand of liberalism adopted by far too many in this country anymore has very little to do with individual liberty.
I was going to say that it's a shame that prominant Democrats don't have the stones to reign the fanatics in, until I realized that today's Democrat politicians were probably engaged in similar activities themselves 45 years ago.
In light of such actions, how can one associate "liberty" with "liberal" anymore?
When all of the dirty laundry is aired and skeletons are pulled from the closets, I wonder what Google and their IPO will look like in the eyes of the Slashdot community. So far, they've gotten off relatively light, IMHO.
Zealots like you are EXACTLY what the grandparent is refering to. You grapple for the tiniest scrap of a "flaw" that nobody but the most creatively stupid of users could only stumble upon, and use it to bolster your "M1cr0$0ft 15 t3h 5ux0rz" argument.
Nothing can abate your hatred of Microsoft, so do us all a favor and keep your rabies away from the rest of us.
And you thought they were kidding...
...so don't say I didn't warn you: Killer Japanese Seizure Robots!
What scare me are the people who honestly believe they are entitled to the works that musicians create. Scarier still are those who think they're doing musicians a favor.
Or is only immoral by some puritanical "you shouldn't get something without working for it" ethic?
There is a word for "getting something without working for it", and it's not "puritanical". It's called "freeloading".
stealing (illegal) = unacceptable behavior
vs.
copyright infringement (illegal) = acceptable behavior Let's imagine, for a moment, that EVERYBODY stops buying CDs and instead downloads all of their music for free via P2P. They aren't physically taking anything from the RIAA, are they? But you can be damned sure that the music industry would crumble with zero sales revenue. Their claims that P2P downloads is cutting into their revenue, I believe, is very valid.
Now that's not to say that the RIAA's business model is effective, or that their product is reasonably priced (far from on both counts). But attacking all those people who are downloading music without paying for it gives the RIAA a convenient alternative to lowering prices.
If people stopped downloading music, the RIAA would have no choice but to lower their CD prices.
And don't give me that typical crap line of "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so I'm not depriving them of a sale." If you don't really want it, or can't afford it, that doesn't justify copyright infringement. And I fully support the RIAA's actions against you, because by your own admission, you are not their customer.
Poor writing skills do not justify plagiarism. If you can't digest an article's point and accurately summarize it in your own words, you probably shouldn't be subitting stories.
I wish the editors would better police these posts... one of these days something like this is going to get them in big trouble.
"...a statement of fact, and so can't be copyrighted."
What rubbish! Are you saying that newscasts, newspaper and magazine articles, and any other publication with factual information can't be copyrighted? You need to go back to pretend law school, mate.
Not a windows bug. Proper maintenance will prevent this.
Outlook Express has no junk mail filtering.
You call it a bug. I call it a missing feature. You can remedy this by using another e-mail client.
Your screen becomes deluged with popup windows with no escape because closing one opens about ten others.
Again, this problem can be solved with proper maintenance. Just disable javascript and ActiveX. I don't get inundated with popups, so you must be doing something wrong.
I know you were trying to be witty, but you just came off as ignorant.
Real cute, but if the crash/fatality ratio of gas-powered cars was 1/1, you could bet your ass that they'd stop making them.
Or something like that, right?