I like movies. My wife and I watch quite a few of them, both in the theaters and at home. There's absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying movies and still fighting the MPAA through other actions (e.g., we refuse to buy DVDs or rent them).
We also enjoy a wide variety of music, including quite a few 'pop' bands. We aren't self-righteous little college pricks looking to bust Britney Spears' chops because we'll never get our hands on those breasts (although the reasons given are much more high-minded, of course); we like Britney, and Mandy Moore, along with Yo-Yo Ma, the Bobs, and Mozart. And we do buy cds, more now than ever with the ability to sample online; but we'll never purchase a piece of equipment that interferes with our ability to burn or rip, and always return those damn 'protected' cds to the store.
Simply telling people to give up the things they enjoy as some sort of moral statement is not only unrealistic, it's hopelessly arrogant. It's the province of college students and their obsession with 'alterate bands' - most of whom suck shit - as a sort of fashion statement. The same kind of people who think that wearing a baseball cap backwards somehow makes them look 'cool' or 'rebellious'.
There's no moral high ground here; people who like movies or pop bands aren't unthinking sheep with nary an ethical principle to show. They're just as ethical as any geek, which can mean good or bad things depending on how you look at it. They just don't think that right now the restrictions being imposed are so heinous as to give up the entertainment they enjoy altogether.
Overall, they want their entertainment and the freedom to enjoy it as they wish *at the same time*. There's no conflict here and no need for extremist solutions. Once can protest the actions of the MPAA and RIAA, as well as those of Congress, without swearing off mainstream movies and music altogether.
If you don't like the GPL, *don't use GPL'd code*. Unless you're lazy or incompetent you can always write your own proprietary code instead of trying to steal the efforts of others who've decided to GPL *their* works.
If I GPL my code, that's *my* business, not yours. You don't like it, don't use it - it's that simple. But you don't have any business telling me what copyright license I can and cannot use - it isn't your concern. Understand? *My code is not your concern*.
Everyone pays for software. It' factored into the purchase of your computer. If you can't understand how this works you might want to wait to comment on the topic until take 'Economics 101' after you turn 18 and go to college.
Again, I'll ask: please provide a specific example of an individual freedom that has evolved that has been done away with. You cannot, because it has not happened.
Democracy, in Athens. Or have you forgotten that Athens devolved into a monarchy and was eventually conquered?
Rome: went from a republic to one of the worst dictatorships in recorded history, eventually conquered by barabarians.
These are just two examples, both which gave people the right to elect their representatives and subsequently lost this right. In fact, in the western world there's no real example of democracy from the fall of Athens right up to the establishment of the Iceland colony by the Norse.
Rights are won - and lost - all the time. It matters for dick if the *idea* survives if that idea isn't implemented. This appears to be a cycle, not a progression, and nothing in history demands that freedom become more pervasive over time. There is no historical example of this happening any time during the last 6,000 years, with the possible exception - in the First World alone - of the last 200.
Oh, bullshit kid. Get a fucking clue. This legal battle is about the fact that the folks at bnetd, in their spare time, have created a better server product than Blizzard can with paid programmers.
But apart from that you haven't demonstrated any harm whatsoever, nor provided any facts or figures. Furthermore, you don't have the first goddamn idea as to what the folks at Blizzard think since you don't work there and aren't privy to their innermost thoughts.
But no doubt you're an expert on donuts, and using your nightstick on innocent citizens.
Of course, when I worked with the police it was commonly assumed that no citizen was innocent, so the night stick thing is probably just karma for some crime that went unpunished....
Ever notice how the people who actually seem to understand the Constitution and are invested in the Bill of Rights never seem to be interested in public office?
This makes me think that the 'jury duty' style of serving in Congress might actually be a good thing.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The Tenth Amendment, in its entirety. Yes, this does mean that unless specifically granted the power *by the Constitution*, the Federal government simply cannot assume it by default. And that includes powers which violate privacy, as defined through the First and Fourth amendments.
History doesn't bear you out. There are many examples of 'free' societies (by the standards of the time) which eventually devolved into dictatorships, were conquered by foreigners, or simply collapsed altogether. This has happened time and again over recorded history.
The last few hundred years are a very small sample, and we must remember that the vast majority of the worlds population labors under brutal, dictatorial regimes. If anything, the First World is an anomaly which seems to be moving away from freedom much as other societies have done in the past. And with the support of the majority of its citizens, who no longer believe in rights which directly contribute to freedom (e.g., privacy).
This sort of thing just exemplifies how sleazy the folks at Blizzard actually are. Really, all it does is justifiy why deciding not to buy games from them anymore is a good idea.
Of course, that's assuming that the average crack-whore gamer is concerned with little things like ethics. Which from this ongoing discussion I seriously doubt.
Bags are not allowed in my collages book store, for precisly this reason.
Clearly, you've some serious problem which doesn't allow you to distinguish between the situation involving bnetd and...taking a pack into a college bookstore. These two situations aren't anything alike.
Rather than setting up piss-poor analogies which mean zip to 99% of us (who're done with college, boy) why don't you try addressing the issue at hand?
Try providing some evidence to bolster your claims. Please tell us just how many people pirate the games, and specifically what effect this has had on Blizzard's sales. Then compare this to companies which have profited from piracy in some fashion (id, for example) and explain to us why Blizzard is unable to do the same thing.
Oooooh, now this makes a great deal of sense. The very thing that made Doom, Quake, and Half-Life so huge is somehow destroying Blizzard? Is this a reflection on the fans or the company?
They're no more capitalist than you have two dicks and four balls. Capitalism has about as much to do with this as voting had to do with making that crack-snortin' bitch George Bush president.
It's certain the blokes at Black Isle didn't program him, else he'd either stand around confused at every obstacle or take the longest path possible to his destination.
Um, how about "fuck the artist". If I buy a print of the Mona Lisa, scan it into my computer, and put her in a teddy sucking schlong, that's my business. The considerations of the artist don't matter for shit.
What the fuck do you care? If fans want to play around with a movie and re-edit it, who are you to say otherwise? Especially if the end product turns out to be more popular than the shit released to the theaters?
There is no mystery here; being employed in the industry doesn't grant one automatic access to skill. Nor does *not* being employed in the industry somehow guarrantee that a fan won't be as good as the as the people who get paid for job.
Most films use only two cameras, which we can call the 'A' team and the 'B' team. The A team is the most experienced and does the main shot; the B team is less experienced and does the secondary shot.
There's generally also a third team now, in charge of essentially what's a video camera setup (although most often clipped to the A team camera itself). This allows the director to rapidly look at a watered-down version of the primary shot to see if it turned out okay (especially necessary when lighting conditions are uncontrolled).
The only time more than two cameras are at work is during extremely expensive shots, or dangerous stunts. Since it isn't within the budget to do the expensive stuff again, and you don't want to risk your stunt men any more than you have to, at these times other cameras will often be set up in case something goes bad with the A and B teams.
Hell, wait until graphics technology advances to the point where you can make believable human-like characters. Then you'll see edits of Natalie doing the wild thing with whoever happens to be playing Anakin in Ep 2.
And *this* will definitely be a better product than anything Lucas has cooked up....;-)
Ego. Work in the industry for a bit. It's fueled by two things: ego and greed. Neither will allow producers, directors, writers, or anyone remotely involved in the production to give the go-ahead to fans to re-edit their movies - and perhaps come out with a better product.
Hell, they'd rather see a return to the pre-computer era rather than be shown up by some zit-faced 19-year-old with some spare time and creative capability.
I agree the article is mostly rant with little, if any, empirical observation. However, discounting someone simply because of their educational status or occupation, especially in the computer biz, is something only a fool would do.
Some of the best and brightest have no degree and nondescript occupations. In fact, given my extensive experience with college students I'd hazard a guess that getting a degree, especially in computer science, is absolutely no indication of skill or inborn talent whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
I like movies. My wife and I watch quite a few of them, both in the theaters and at home. There's absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying movies and still fighting the MPAA through other actions (e.g., we refuse to buy DVDs or rent them).
We also enjoy a wide variety of music, including quite a few 'pop' bands. We aren't self-righteous little college pricks looking to bust Britney Spears' chops because we'll never get our hands on those breasts (although the reasons given are much more high-minded, of course); we like Britney, and Mandy Moore, along with Yo-Yo Ma, the Bobs, and Mozart. And we do buy cds, more now than ever with the ability to sample online; but we'll never purchase a piece of equipment that interferes with our ability to burn or rip, and always return those damn 'protected' cds to the store.
Simply telling people to give up the things they enjoy as some sort of moral statement is not only unrealistic, it's hopelessly arrogant. It's the province of college students and their obsession with 'alterate bands' - most of whom suck shit - as a sort of fashion statement. The same kind of people who think that wearing a baseball cap backwards somehow makes them look 'cool' or 'rebellious'.
There's no moral high ground here; people who like movies or pop bands aren't unthinking sheep with nary an ethical principle to show. They're just as ethical as any geek, which can mean good or bad things depending on how you look at it. They just don't think that right now the restrictions being imposed are so heinous as to give up the entertainment they enjoy altogether.
Overall, they want their entertainment and the freedom to enjoy it as they wish *at the same time*. There's no conflict here and no need for extremist solutions. Once can protest the actions of the MPAA and RIAA, as well as those of Congress, without swearing off mainstream movies and music altogether.
Max
Maybe they shouldn't be broadcasting the signal onto his property in the first place. If you trespass I'll do with you and your property as I please.
Max
Assuming you have actual capitalism, perhaps, which is not what is practiced in the U.S. of A.
Max
If you don't like the GPL, *don't use GPL'd code*. Unless you're lazy or incompetent you can always write your own proprietary code instead of trying to steal the efforts of others who've decided to GPL *their* works.
If I GPL my code, that's *my* business, not yours. You don't like it, don't use it - it's that simple. But you don't have any business telling me what copyright license I can and cannot use - it isn't your concern. Understand? *My code is not your concern*.
Max
Everyone pays for software. It' factored into the purchase of your computer. If you can't understand how this works you might want to wait to comment on the topic until take 'Economics 101' after you turn 18 and go to college.
Max
Again, I'll ask: please provide a specific example of an individual freedom that has evolved that has been done away with. You cannot, because it has not happened.
Democracy, in Athens. Or have you forgotten that Athens devolved into a monarchy and was eventually conquered?
Rome: went from a republic to one of the worst dictatorships in recorded history, eventually conquered by barabarians.
These are just two examples, both which gave people the right to elect their representatives and subsequently lost this right. In fact, in the western world there's no real example of democracy from the fall of Athens right up to the establishment of the Iceland colony by the Norse.
Rights are won - and lost - all the time. It matters for dick if the *idea* survives if that idea isn't implemented. This appears to be a cycle, not a progression, and nothing in history demands that freedom become more pervasive over time. There is no historical example of this happening any time during the last 6,000 years, with the possible exception - in the First World alone - of the last 200.
Max
Oh, bullshit kid. Get a fucking clue. This legal battle is about the fact that the folks at bnetd, in their spare time, have created a better server product than Blizzard can with paid programmers.
But apart from that you haven't demonstrated any harm whatsoever, nor provided any facts or figures. Furthermore, you don't have the first goddamn idea as to what the folks at Blizzard think since you don't work there and aren't privy to their innermost thoughts.
Max
But no doubt you're an expert on donuts, and using your nightstick on innocent citizens.
Of course, when I worked with the police it was commonly assumed that no citizen was innocent, so the night stick thing is probably just karma for some crime that went unpunished....
Max
Ever notice how the people who actually seem to understand the Constitution and are invested in the Bill of Rights never seem to be interested in public office?
This makes me think that the 'jury duty' style of serving in Congress might actually be a good thing.
Max
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The Tenth Amendment, in its entirety. Yes, this does mean that unless specifically granted the power *by the Constitution*, the Federal government simply cannot assume it by default. And that includes powers which violate privacy, as defined through the First and Fourth amendments.
Max
History doesn't bear you out. There are many examples of 'free' societies (by the standards of the time) which eventually devolved into dictatorships, were conquered by foreigners, or simply collapsed altogether. This has happened time and again over recorded history.
The last few hundred years are a very small sample, and we must remember that the vast majority of the worlds population labors under brutal, dictatorial regimes. If anything, the First World is an anomaly which seems to be moving away from freedom much as other societies have done in the past. And with the support of the majority of its citizens, who no longer believe in rights which directly contribute to freedom (e.g., privacy).
Max
Lessee...we can simulate the intricate details of a nuclear explosion but not the heaving, naked body of Natalie Portman???
Helloooo! Priorities people!
Max
This sort of thing just exemplifies how sleazy the folks at Blizzard actually are. Really, all it does is justifiy why deciding not to buy games from them anymore is a good idea.
Of course, that's assuming that the average crack-whore gamer is concerned with little things like ethics. Which from this ongoing discussion I seriously doubt.
Max
Bags are not allowed in my collages book store, for precisly this reason.
Clearly, you've some serious problem which doesn't allow you to distinguish between the situation involving bnetd and...taking a pack into a college bookstore. These two situations aren't anything alike.
Rather than setting up piss-poor analogies which mean zip to 99% of us (who're done with college, boy) why don't you try addressing the issue at hand?
Max
Try providing some evidence to bolster your claims. Please tell us just how many people pirate the games, and specifically what effect this has had on Blizzard's sales. Then compare this to companies which have profited from piracy in some fashion (id, for example) and explain to us why Blizzard is unable to do the same thing.
Max
Oooooh, now this makes a great deal of sense. The very thing that made Doom, Quake, and Half-Life so huge is somehow destroying Blizzard? Is this a reflection on the fans or the company?
Max
Well, hell son! A network of pure porn! What more could a tech geek ask for?
Max
They're no more capitalist than you have two dicks and four balls. Capitalism has about as much to do with this as voting had to do with making that crack-snortin' bitch George Bush president.
Max
It's certain the blokes at Black Isle didn't program him, else he'd either stand around confused at every obstacle or take the longest path possible to his destination.
Max
Um, how about "fuck the artist". If I buy a print of the Mona Lisa, scan it into my computer, and put her in a teddy sucking schlong, that's my business. The considerations of the artist don't matter for shit.
Max
What the fuck do you care? If fans want to play around with a movie and re-edit it, who are you to say otherwise? Especially if the end product turns out to be more popular than the shit released to the theaters?
There is no mystery here; being employed in the industry doesn't grant one automatic access to skill. Nor does *not* being employed in the industry somehow guarrantee that a fan won't be as good as the as the people who get paid for job.
Max
Most films use only two cameras, which we can call the 'A' team and the 'B' team. The A team is the most experienced and does the main shot; the B team is less experienced and does the secondary shot.
There's generally also a third team now, in charge of essentially what's a video camera setup (although most often clipped to the A team camera itself). This allows the director to rapidly look at a watered-down version of the primary shot to see if it turned out okay (especially necessary when lighting conditions are uncontrolled).
The only time more than two cameras are at work is during extremely expensive shots, or dangerous stunts. Since it isn't within the budget to do the expensive stuff again, and you don't want to risk your stunt men any more than you have to, at these times other cameras will often be set up in case something goes bad with the A and B teams.
Max
Hell, wait until graphics technology advances to the point where you can make believable human-like characters. Then you'll see edits of Natalie doing the wild thing with whoever happens to be playing Anakin in Ep 2.
;-)
And *this* will definitely be a better product than anything Lucas has cooked up....
Max
Ego. Work in the industry for a bit. It's fueled by two things: ego and greed. Neither will allow producers, directors, writers, or anyone remotely involved in the production to give the go-ahead to fans to re-edit their movies - and perhaps come out with a better product.
Hell, they'd rather see a return to the pre-computer era rather than be shown up by some zit-faced 19-year-old with some spare time and creative capability.
Max
I agree the article is mostly rant with little, if any, empirical observation. However, discounting someone simply because of their educational status or occupation, especially in the computer biz, is something only a fool would do.
Some of the best and brightest have no degree and nondescript occupations. In fact, given my extensive experience with college students I'd hazard a guess that getting a degree, especially in computer science, is absolutely no indication of skill or inborn talent whatsoever.
Max