How do you expect them to make profits if they just keep giving their product away? Are you just going to label every distro that gets business-oriented a sell-out?
Either you want Linux to go bigtime and you deal with taking a back seat to the big boys, or you can have your little community of free support which will always be seen as too technical for the masses. Take your pick. You can't have both.
They won't until they figure out a way to not wipe out part of the memory whenever you switch systems in a dual-boot configuration. The iPaq actually has a pretty poor flash-management controller, from what I understand. (Not that CE cares. Hell, it doesn't even know when you install a different boot-loader.)
Pretty poorly, considering that you're still talking like some child who thinks his dad is proudly listening.
I never claimed to have an "inherent" right (I have a more-than-nagging suspicion you don't understand what that word means) to own anything, other than my own life and liberty. But I inherit (notice the different meaning from the same stem here) a right to listen to that music when I buy a facsimile of it, whether that facsimile is in the form of a CD, a vibrating quantum aggregate or a paper printout of the binary code for an ISO image. What I choose to do with that is my right. So, to counter your facile claim about rights, I reply that I do have them once I buy the product.
So again, Bubba, keep trying with your vacuous holier-than-thou speeches if it makes you feel self-righteous. Just be aware that from this end, it looks like a talking sock-puppet. Regardless of what you and the other media sponges out here (upon whose infallible moderation your ego seems to rely) may pronounce, I and many others like myself will continue to trade our music online. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but you should probably just get used to it.
Alright, I'll say this once, so as to help you out of the little rut your mind seems to have gotten itself into: There is no way to tell that the songs on the album suck or that the media has been altered prior to buying the CD. Also, if I don't buy the album, I won't be able to have the songs I do like.
There. Was that helpful? I hope so, because at this point I must admit that a certain kind of ennui creeps over me at the thought of having to do this again.
If it wasn't worth it, why did you buy the CD? Still with me?
No. And I fear my reply will do little to change that if you don't see the problem with your logic so far.
So if you buy a disc with errors, take it back. Say it was defective.
So, in other words, the burden of getting a working product is on me. I have to o back to the store and waste my time. That's a great customer service plan ya got there, Chuck. You'd feel right at home in the Ukraine.
First off, if you are still eating McDonald's - let alone contemplating stealing it - then we are already off on the wrong foot, as you are obviously a very different person from me. But to address your post, it is not the same, that's why.
A hamburger is constructed from physical materials which cost energy to produce. The cost of me downloading a song is entirely covered by me. So that kind of invalidates your simplistic comparison, doesn't it?
So why not do society a favor and stop mindlessly repeating some mantra you picked up on your local McNews channel and start using your head. Downloading songs is not stealing insofar as you are downloading that which you have already paid for in some format. What are you, a Republican, for crissakes? And guess what, Jimmy? Not all stealing is wrong either. Consult your local ethics class for details.
Learn to not dichotomize the world. Nothing is ever black and white and this online music-sharing thing is as close to 50% gray as it gets. Please think before you reply.
Because if I wanted to buy the five or so good songs from an album, I also had to buy the five or so shit songs which were recorded not out of artistic integrity, but because it was stipulated in the contract that the artist had to produce X "full-length" albums per Y years. Are you still with me?
Now, since I don't own an MD player, as they were prohibitively expensive until recently, the best quality media I could get was the CD. Unfortunately, the record companies soon figured out that buying from the lowest bidder was putting more money in their pockets, so it wasn't long before the CDs were being burned on cheap media. On top of that, they recently started adding intentional errors to "prevent ripping". Still here?
So I download the music that I like from albums that are not very good as a whole to replace the ones which self-destructed after being left out on a counter one night.
Why should I not "steal" music which I've already bought, but was delivered in a shit format? Why should I not "steal" music which is not available any longer? Why should I feel bad about taking a miniscule portion of some conglomerate's profits which for years has been selling me inferior music (thanks to ridiculous contractual obligations) on inferior media (originally, to save money; now to fuck me in the ass) for huge profits which go straight into the backpockets of knobs like Jack Valenti and almost none of which end up in the artists' hands?
Please, please please, tell me why I should stop "stealing" again. Please.
What comes around goes around! Cry me a river, indeed.
I'm sorry, but I can't take you seriously when you talk about integrity in politics. Nor can I accept your starting premise about what he should have done when asked because (are you ready?) he should never have been asked about the affair in the first place.
Enough on this. This is a tired old subject. I don't want to go any furhter and have to deal with the agony of you telling me how El Chimpo is somehow better or has higher integrity.
Whoa, hold on there, tiger. Before this goes too far off-topic, I'm not defending Bill per se, but I find even his sordid history to be of a qualitatively different kind of crime than that suggested by one Mr. Hatch. Magnitudes of scale different, actually.
Given that you don't have a UID, I won't go much further, as it will come to nothing for me. But try to not automatically categorize people in the future. It may at least save you some typing.
If you're still around and still interested in five or ten years and still posting on slashdot, let me know how it went for you. For the record, I'd bet the farm you wouldn't last one year in China.
If you are too thick to see the parallel between Futuremark's ineffectiveness as an "objective arbiter" and the limp treatment meted out by the DoJ, then I guess there's not much left to say.
But do go on. It's amusing to watch you broadcast your limits.
Wank? On what grounds? I think there's more than enough evidence in the world to conclude that BG is a POS, whether you say it in a funny way or not. So get off the "Being anti-MS is so old" routine. It will be old once the people who run the company stop being the richest people in the world and get more than a slap on the wrist in court.
Having said that, I think the parallels between nVidia/FutureMark and MS/DOJ are pretty straightforward.
Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) Failed to resolve given hostname/IP: www.anything.kp. Note that you can't use '/mask' AND '[1-4,7,100-]' style IP ranges WARNING: No targets were found in the entire country, so 0 hosts scanned. Nmap run completed -- 0 IP addresses in domain ".kp" (0 hosts up) scanned in 16 seconds
Why on Earth is anyone interested in a non-intuitive 133+(@d3 instead of the oh-so-easy-to-grasp lat & lng? WTF?
What possible reason can there be to not use this must intuitive scheme, given that it's possible to look up the l&l of every zip code anyway? Certainly, it's not security...
Slashdot Mirror
How do you expect them to make profits if they just keep giving their product away? Are you just going to label every distro that gets business-oriented a sell-out?
Either you want Linux to go bigtime and you deal with taking a back seat to the big boys, or you can have your little community of free support which will always be seen as too technical for the masses. Take your pick. You can't have both.
They won't until they figure out a way to not wipe out part of the memory whenever you switch systems in a dual-boot configuration. The iPaq actually has a pretty poor flash-management controller, from what I understand. (Not that CE cares. Hell, it doesn't even know when you install a different boot-loader.)
Pretty poorly, considering that you're still talking like some child who thinks his dad is proudly listening.
I never claimed to have an "inherent" right (I have a more-than-nagging suspicion you don't understand what that word means) to own anything, other than my own life and liberty. But I inherit (notice the different meaning from the same stem here) a right to listen to that music when I buy a facsimile of it, whether that facsimile is in the form of a CD, a vibrating quantum aggregate or a paper printout of the binary code for an ISO image. What I choose to do with that is my right. So, to counter your facile claim about rights, I reply that I do have them once I buy the product.
So again, Bubba, keep trying with your vacuous holier-than-thou speeches if it makes you feel self-righteous. Just be aware that from this end, it looks like a talking sock-puppet. Regardless of what you and the other media sponges out here (upon whose infallible moderation your ego seems to rely) may pronounce, I and many others like myself will continue to trade our music online. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but you should probably just get used to it.
Go home, kid. You bother me.
Alright, I'll say this once, so as to help you out of the little rut your mind seems to have gotten itself into: There is no way to tell that the songs on the album suck or that the media has been altered prior to buying the CD. Also, if I don't buy the album, I won't be able to have the songs I do like.
There. Was that helpful? I hope so, because at this point I must admit that a certain kind of ennui creeps over me at the thought of having to do this again.
If it wasn't worth it, why did you buy the CD? Still with me?
No. And I fear my reply will do little to change that if you don't see the problem with your logic so far.
So if you buy a disc with errors, take it back. Say it was defective.
So, in other words, the burden of getting a working product is on me. I have to o back to the store and waste my time. That's a great customer service plan ya got there, Chuck. You'd feel right at home in the Ukraine.
Dr Demento influenced
;o)
Then you should appreciate my username!
As if this is what I said. And this fine gem coming from some dork who won't even use a real username.
Right.
First off, if you are still eating McDonald's - let alone contemplating stealing it - then we are already off on the wrong foot, as you are obviously a very different person from me. But to address your post, it is not the same, that's why.
A hamburger is constructed from physical materials which cost energy to produce. The cost of me downloading a song is entirely covered by me. So that kind of invalidates your simplistic comparison, doesn't it?
So why not do society a favor and stop mindlessly repeating some mantra you picked up on your local McNews channel and start using your head. Downloading songs is not stealing insofar as you are downloading that which you have already paid for in some format. What are you, a Republican, for crissakes? And guess what, Jimmy? Not all stealing is wrong either. Consult your local ethics class for details.
Learn to not dichotomize the world. Nothing is ever black and white and this online music-sharing thing is as close to 50% gray as it gets. Please think before you reply.
Let's go through this slowly... Ready?
Because if I wanted to buy the five or so good songs from an album, I also had to buy the five or so shit songs which were recorded not out of artistic integrity, but because it was stipulated in the contract that the artist had to produce X "full-length" albums per Y years. Are you still with me?
Now, since I don't own an MD player, as they were prohibitively expensive until recently, the best quality media I could get was the CD. Unfortunately, the record companies soon figured out that buying from the lowest bidder was putting more money in their pockets, so it wasn't long before the CDs were being burned on cheap media. On top of that, they recently started adding intentional errors to "prevent ripping". Still here?
So I download the music that I like from albums that are not very good as a whole to replace the ones which self-destructed after being left out on a counter one night.
I hope that wasn't too difficult to follow.
Why?
Why should I not "steal" music which I've already bought, but was delivered in a shit format? Why should I not "steal" music which is not available any longer? Why should I feel bad about taking a miniscule portion of some conglomerate's profits which for years has been selling me inferior music (thanks to ridiculous contractual obligations) on inferior media (originally, to save money; now to fuck me in the ass) for huge profits which go straight into the backpockets of knobs like Jack Valenti and almost none of which end up in the artists' hands?
Please, please please, tell me why I should stop "stealing" again. Please.
What comes around goes around! Cry me a river, indeed.
I don't understand! We sue the fuckers, and they still won't buy our products!
-- Jack Valenti
I'm sorry, but I can't take you seriously when you talk about integrity in politics. Nor can I accept your starting premise about what he should have done when asked because (are you ready?) he should never have been asked about the affair in the first place.
Enough on this. This is a tired old subject. I don't want to go any furhter and have to deal with the agony of you telling me how El Chimpo is somehow better or has higher integrity.
Whoa, hold on there, tiger. Before this goes too far off-topic, I'm not defending Bill per se, but I find even his sordid history to be of a qualitatively different kind of crime than that suggested by one Mr. Hatch. Magnitudes of scale different, actually.
Given that you don't have a UID, I won't go much further, as it will come to nothing for me. But try to not automatically categorize people in the future. It may at least save you some typing.
Cheers.
OK, just wanted to confirm that.
If you're still around and still interested in five or ten years and still posting on slashdot, let me know how it went for you. For the record, I'd bet the farm you wouldn't last one year in China.
hen hao, ke shi...
You've never actually lived as an adult in a Communist country, am I correct?
One question:
Have you ever actually lived in a Communist country?
Erm, so a guy who gets a blowjob is somehow comparable to this?
OK.
That in this day and age, the fool was still voted into office last time around?
- OR -
That he will likely be voted in again?
You decide.
If you are too thick to see the parallel between Futuremark's ineffectiveness as an "objective arbiter" and the limp treatment meted out by the DoJ, then I guess there's not much left to say.
But do go on. It's amusing to watch you broadcast your limits.
Anti-MS?
You bet.
Wank?
On what grounds? I think there's more than enough evidence in the world to conclude that BG is a POS, whether you say it in a funny way or not. So get off the "Being anti-MS is so old" routine. It will be old once the people who run the company stop being the richest people in the world and get more than a slap on the wrist in court.
Having said that, I think the parallels between nVidia/FutureMark and MS/DOJ are pretty straightforward.
But then, I'm Bill Gates.
Yes, but we also have Puppetry of the Penis.
nmap -sS www.anything.kp
Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
Failed to resolve given hostname/IP: www.anything.kp. Note that you can't use '/mask' AND '[1-4,7,100-]' style IP ranges
WARNING: No targets were found in the entire country, so 0 hosts scanned.
Nmap run completed -- 0 IP addresses in domain ".kp" (0 hosts up) scanned in 16 seconds
Yawn.
This is a damn good point...
Why on Earth is anyone interested in a non-intuitive 133+(@d3 instead of the oh-so-easy-to-grasp lat & lng? WTF?
What possible reason can there be to not use this must intuitive scheme, given that it's possible to look up the l&l of every zip code anyway? Certainly, it's not security...