English might be BigJeff5's second language (His post doesn't seem like it.), but a least he understood what the previous poster "thisnamestoolong" wrote. Which is apparently more than you can claim. "thisnamestoolong" said the same thing you did, yet somehow he is perpetuating a "MYTH" and you are not?
Perhaps you should stop insulting other people's reading comprehension and work on improving your own first? Just a thought.
...why should they be allowed to discriminate against someone who the judicial system has deemed innocent?
The judicial system to the best of my knowledge never deems anyone innocent. The best you can hope for is to be declared Not Guilty, or to have the charges dropped. There is also something when a charge was filed against the wrong person. Kinda like having charges transferred from one person to another. (I can't recall what that is called though...)
True. I'm just saying that they provided the product, a digital file with content of some sort, as advertised. How does the fact it is digital content as opposed to physical increase the vendor's obligation to the buyer? Certainly it might be easy for them to do this, but why would you expect a corporation to provide what would effectively be a free bookshelf in perpetuity to anyone? (Remember the unspoken corporation motto: There is no such thing as enough profit.)
I'll see your LG Voyager and raise you one LG VX8300. Nice phone, but Verizon butchered its capabilities. See this website for some examples of what I talking about. Pay extra attention to the post titled "Make MP3 and MIDI Ringtones".
I'm guessing he is a Verizon subscriber. They cripple the firmware of their phones. Basically any feature of the phone which might be used to avoid paying for one of their services is disabled. Bluetooth is usually limited to headsets for example. If you want to send a picture or audio file to another phone (without using any 3rd-party tools, i.e. BitPim) you will need to send it as a MMS message. They charge you for that, by the way. (I used their service in the past. I didn't realize they did this at the time or I wouldn't have signed up.)
I hate DRM as much as the next person (or at least the next person who understands it), but this isn't really that different from buying the actual book. If I buy a book from Amazon, I get one copy. If I lose it for any reason (theft, fire, etc.), they will not replace it. That having been the case with physical books, why would you assume that no similar limitation exists with digital books? Does it say somewhere in their terms of service that you can download the books you purchase from them any number of times? (Serious question as I don't know anything about the kindle book service.)
This is also why I wouldn't buy any ebook reader where I can't load my own ebooks on to it.
Perhaps it did suck, but explain to me how it is that during that time we see works such as Mozart popularized but in the modern age when we have this "wonderful" copyright system (Yes, I know you said "reasonable".), we end up being subjected to such artists as Britney Spears and her ilk?
I think the patronage system seemed to work better. At the very least, if you were untalented no one would front the kind of money necessary to support you. You either got a normal job, or you worked to improve your art. More importantly, like any other job, you only got paid while you were producing art. Under that system an artist was paid to produce works of art, not sell them repeatedly for years at a time. Novel concept isn't it?
I think the point is that if wealthy people get thrown in jail for a few months while waiting for their trial, it's not so hard on them. They still have their millions in their bank accounts that can be used to pay the bills.
Maybe the Anonymous Coward did mean that. I still won't agree with the comment that a person in jail has no expenses. If they have the savings/liquid assets to pay any expenses is irrelevant. They will have expenses that will need to be paid.
You are an idiot. I suppose his landlord (if he rents) is just going to waive his rent? His insurance company isn't going to want their money? The rest of the world doesn't care why he isn't working. He still has bills that will need to be paid. His lawyer is undoubtably sending him bills as well.
Writing a program to act like a mail server for the purpose of sending spam would not be difficult. You wouldn't need to implement any kind of backend just the simple mail transfer protocol. Take a look at the RFCs 821 and 2821. The original RFC is 821. It contains most everything you would need to write a mailer. The actual communication is very simple by design.
And for the record some virus and trojans do implement this.
Disabling right-clicks does not disable copy and paste. You see the menu at the top of your browser? Guess what is under "Edit" on just about every browser in existence. You can usually find View Page Source somewhere nearby as well.
Disabling right-click is stupid and annoying. It serves no purpose.
They did this with Window 95 as well. If a 16 Bit application checked the version number for Windows 95, Windows returned the version number 3.95. This was because idiot programmers do idiotic things like hardcode version checks. I feel somewhat dirty now having defended Microsoft. Maybe I'll feel better if I call them Micro$oft once.;-)
But one lawsuit and they can make any individual person owe them money for life, and with the new restrictions agaisnt personal bankruptcy, they can collect even after you go bankrupt. Sad that those laws were crafted by the industry that brought us the lending crisis.
My (admittedly uninformed) guess is that the banking industry knew the lending crisis was coming and had those laws made to protect themselves from all the debtors just filing bankruptcy.
So in order to avoid further embarrassment they "let her off" with a charge of disorderly conduct.
I don't believe that is the only reason. If she got away free and clear and could show the DA essentially fabricated a case against her, every single case prosecuted by that DA would immediately be called in to question. Makes you wonder to whom else they might have done this.
And what do you do when the system crashes? Where are you going to find all the trained people with experience directing airplanes in three dimensions needed on a moments notice to take over until the system is restarted/fixed?
Let me get this straight in my head. You want to charge me for your service and then use my bandwidth and electricity? You want to run bittorrent 24/7 on my internet connection to distribute files that I may not be allowed to view myself? How does this benefit me? (Listens to crickets chripping in the deafening quiet.) That's what I thought...
Slashdot Mirror
English might be BigJeff5's second language (His post doesn't seem like it.), but a least he understood what the previous poster "thisnamestoolong" wrote. Which is apparently more than you can claim. "thisnamestoolong" said the same thing you did, yet somehow he is perpetuating a "MYTH" and you are not?
Perhaps you should stop insulting other people's reading comprehension and work on improving your own first? Just a thought.
...why should they be allowed to discriminate against someone who the judicial system has deemed innocent?
The judicial system to the best of my knowledge never deems anyone innocent. The best you can hope for is to be declared Not Guilty, or to have the charges dropped. There is also something when a charge was filed against the wrong person. Kinda like having charges transferred from one person to another. (I can't recall what that is called though...)
Wonder what the poor bastard did, refuse to help some honcho spy on or frame someone?.
My understanding is that he told him "No" in front of a large group of witnesses.
True. I'm just saying that they provided the product, a digital file with content of some sort, as advertised. How does the fact it is digital content as opposed to physical increase the vendor's obligation to the buyer? Certainly it might be easy for them to do this, but why would you expect a corporation to provide what would effectively be a free bookshelf in perpetuity to anyone? (Remember the unspoken corporation motto: There is no such thing as enough profit.)
I'll see your LG Voyager and raise you one LG VX8300. Nice phone, but Verizon butchered its capabilities. See this website for some examples of what I talking about. Pay extra attention to the post titled "Make MP3 and MIDI Ringtones".
I'm guessing he is a Verizon subscriber. They cripple the firmware of their phones. Basically any feature of the phone which might be used to avoid paying for one of their services is disabled. Bluetooth is usually limited to headsets for example. If you want to send a picture or audio file to another phone (without using any 3rd-party tools, i.e. BitPim) you will need to send it as a MMS message. They charge you for that, by the way. (I used their service in the past. I didn't realize they did this at the time or I wouldn't have signed up.)
I hate DRM as much as the next person (or at least the next person who understands it), but this isn't really that different from buying the actual book. If I buy a book from Amazon, I get one copy. If I lose it for any reason (theft, fire, etc.), they will not replace it. That having been the case with physical books, why would you assume that no similar limitation exists with digital books? Does it say somewhere in their terms of service that you can download the books you purchase from them any number of times? (Serious question as I don't know anything about the kindle book service.)
This is also why I wouldn't buy any ebook reader where I can't load my own ebooks on to it.
Perhaps it did suck, but explain to me how it is that during that time we see works such as Mozart popularized but in the modern age when we have this "wonderful" copyright system (Yes, I know you said "reasonable".), we end up being subjected to such artists as Britney Spears and her ilk?
I think the patronage system seemed to work better. At the very least, if you were untalented no one would front the kind of money necessary to support you. You either got a normal job, or you worked to improve your art. More importantly, like any other job, you only got paid while you were producing art. Under that system an artist was paid to produce works of art, not sell them repeatedly for years at a time. Novel concept isn't it?
No. No, it didn't.
Not that I'm aware of it. I recall that Bush claimed we were but I don't remember Congress actually declaring war.
What part of "install CD" was too difficult to read?
I think the point is that if wealthy people get thrown in jail for a few months while waiting for their trial, it's not so hard on them. They still have their millions in their bank accounts that can be used to pay the bills.
Maybe the Anonymous Coward did mean that. I still won't agree with the comment that a person in jail has no expenses. If they have the savings/liquid assets to pay any expenses is irrelevant. They will have expenses that will need to be paid.
You are an idiot. I suppose his landlord (if he rents) is just going to waive his rent? His insurance company isn't going to want their money? The rest of the world doesn't care why he isn't working. He still has bills that will need to be paid. His lawyer is undoubtably sending him bills as well.
Writing a program to act like a mail server for the purpose of sending spam would not be difficult. You wouldn't need to implement any kind of backend just the simple mail transfer protocol. Take a look at the RFCs 821 and 2821. The original RFC is 821. It contains most everything you would need to write a mailer. The actual communication is very simple by design.
And for the record some virus and trojans do implement this.
Disabling right-clicks does not disable copy and paste. You see the menu at the top of your browser? Guess what is under "Edit" on just about every browser in existence. You can usually find View Page Source somewhere nearby as well.
Disabling right-click is stupid and annoying. It serves no purpose.
They did this with Window 95 as well. If a 16 Bit application checked the version number for Windows 95, Windows returned the version number 3.95. This was because idiot programmers do idiotic things like hardcode version checks. I feel somewhat dirty now having defended Microsoft. Maybe I'll feel better if I call them Micro$oft once. ;-)
It seems the only thing M$ doesn't do to hit you up for more cash is rent Windows by the hour.
They're working on that too. No joke. IIRC, it was posted on Slashdot before. I think it had something to do with a patent.
IE with elevated privileges by default. What a wonderful idea.
And what happened to perpetual machines?
All work stopped on them.
But one lawsuit and they can make any individual person owe them money for life, and with the new restrictions agaisnt personal bankruptcy, they can collect even after you go bankrupt. Sad that those laws were crafted by the industry that brought us the lending crisis.
My (admittedly uninformed) guess is that the banking industry knew the lending crisis was coming and had those laws made to protect themselves from all the debtors just filing bankruptcy.
So in order to avoid further embarrassment they "let her off" with a charge of disorderly conduct.
I don't believe that is the only reason. If she got away free and clear and could show the DA essentially fabricated a case against her, every single case prosecuted by that DA would immediately be called in to question. Makes you wonder to whom else they might have done this.
And what do you do when the system crashes? Where are you going to find all the trained people with experience directing airplanes in three dimensions needed on a moments notice to take over until the system is restarted/fixed?
Yes, but without the music.
Let me get this straight in my head. You want to charge me for your service and then use my bandwidth and electricity? You want to run bittorrent 24/7 on my internet connection to distribute files that I may not be allowed to view myself? How does this benefit me? (Listens to crickets chripping in the deafening quiet.) That's what I thought...
The government would love you too. Just a thought.