But they aren't going after the users. They are going after the ISPs and trying to coerce them into dropping whichever user the cartel doesn't like. Going after the users would entail gathering evidence and either suing the user or having them arrested.
If the cartel would have done this first off, 90% of the users would've stopped doing it even if only a few people were sued or convicted. What did they do? They said they wouldn't even try to touch the "fans" (the ones who broke the law). Instead, they tried to go after universities for supplying internet access to students and those who made software which could transfer files over a network.
Imagine if retail stores acted this way. First they'd try to sue backpack and car manufacturers because shoplifters can use these things to carry stolen goods. They also wouldn't even try to prosecute these shoplifters under the law--calling them "valued customers." The lawsuits don't work, so they try to get legislation passed which requires all cars have "inventory detection systems" in them which won't allow you to put anything into your car unless it has a special electronic tag from a store saying it was purchased legally. It wouldn't allow you to put bread you baked yourself into your own car, but they don't care. It just means more sales for them. That bill goes down in flames, so they concoct another one that gives them permission to beat customers with sticks if a security guard suspects that person may be shoplifting. That probably isn't going to pass, so they decide to visit apartment buildings and say things like: "we think the people in apartment # 1234b may have shoplifted something from our store. Please evict them now or we sue the building's owner for contributory theft."
Maybe they did have something on Napster because the whole intent of the thing did seem to be to distribute copyrighted works without permission of the owner. Contributory infringement could have happened in that specific case, but they should not have been given any court time until they at least tried to go after the primary infringers.
Ahhh, but you assume their Ultimate Goal is to stop copyright infringement. Maybe their goal is to take over the internet. Suing and disrupting the operations of innocent third parties (such as ISPs and developers of communication software) certainly helps with that goal.
In essence their business has a presensce in every State and thus should follow current laws
Slashdot content is accessed throughout the world, so by your logic, you have a presence in every country and you should follow all their current laws. Even if they contradict or are unreasonable.
BTW, the dictator from Yosmucklastan wants his money. You forgot to pay your dues. Under Yosmucklastan law all good "comrades" are required to "donate" 50% of their income to the "cause.";-)
I don't understand why they should have to charge the tax for the buyer's state. Wouldn't it be much easier for everyone involved if the business selling the goods was taxed in its own state? Is there some sort of legality forbidding this? Or are the sales tax states afraid that all these companies will move to states which don't have sales taxes?
I live in a state that has use taxes. I've paid them on my tax form in the correct spot, but every year they claim some sort of error and add that money back to my refund. ???? The bureaucrats seem to have no clue!
Maybe they are afraid what they're doing is illegal? I know this state has a fedral IRS processing center, but the IRS has everyone in this state ship their forms somewhere else. My only guess is the taliban-like government in this state was caught doing some crooked things.
I just hope I can scrape enough money together to get out of here someday...
Do the processors used in Macs have SIMD opcodes? (Single Instruction Multiple Data aka MMX/3dnow) If not, this would certainly bias the results in favor of the IA32 PC as the guy was mostly doing various transforms on photos. Also, those algorithms were probably integer based. How much better/worse does a Mac do with floating point?
Perhaps different types of programs would have given much different results. What about raytracing? or video encoding/decoding? or encoding ogg vorbis audio?...&etc. These tests may not show the Mac is better, but it would give everyone a clear picture of how they compare performace wise.
Linux may have had problems displaying fonts a few years ago, but XFree86 has added TrueType support and better fonts may be used instead of old crappy ones. Those problems have gone away. Not to mention that article is talking about Mozilla/Netscape and how they try to scale bit mapped fonts.
I'm running Linux/XFree86 with Mozilla using TrueType fonts now, and it looks great.
I think print colour matching may not appear in the GIMP for some time. I could be way off because it was a while since I read about this and it was from a GIMP web page or news group so they know about it). As I remember, Adobe owns a certain patent on color space conversion. This means they can't put it in. Otherwise they'd have to pay for a patent license, and being a free project, they can't afford it. Also being a GNU project, they probably don't want to deal with patents at all.
In some states it is. For example, this Utah law prohibits it--though it may not apply to microsoft as the law only speicifies retailers or wholesalers.
How is this FUD? It may be the fear part, but if you have been following the actions of MS for at least the past decade, you'd be certain that they will do something like this. There is no doubt!
They are getting more and more brazen as their fear mounts. At some point the crap they pull will be noticed by Joe Public and that is when they will be in trouble. Once Joe can't use his CDs where he wants, or record his favorite show on his VCR, there WILL be an outcry.
I'd just like to point out the things the entertainment cartel is doing affect much more than this. I'd rewrite the paragraph more like this:
...Once Joe can't use his cellphone when someone walks by playing RIAA music or record his wedding with a camcorder, or when Aunt Tillie can't publish her nutbread recipie on the internet anymore...
Not only is the cartel trying to take away everyone's right to use cartel products in a fair manner, they are also trying to take away free speech and the common person's right to use their own property!
The blog said IE was doing this a long time ago, and this "feature" sounds a lot like one of the complaints in the antitrust case, so maybe the DoJ forced microsoft to fix it...
Read the article closly. A request from IE to a non-ms server will take longer than a request from a normal browser using compliant TCP to the same server. This not only gives IE a speed advantage with IIS, it makes non-ms servers appear slower than they actually are when you use IE! The only speed advantage is with IE and IIS. As I remember, this sounds like part of the antitrust case against microsoft.
I hate to tell you this, but the Canadian guy was asking how to put more memory into his mp3 player, not how to install a hard drive in it. Some stupid people just assumed that's what he asked. He didn't want to buy a new one because he would have to pay a tax to the RIAA terrorists. Sounded like a good question to me.
I don't see why this NFS question is stupid either. Maybe you're one of the regulars from comp.os.linux.*?;-)
The obligatory joke: In Soviet Russia...you screw Microsoft!
Even the nutjobs at the FSF don't make glibc GPL. They know better. They talk about how bad the LGPL is, but they continue to use it.
Go have a look at the gnu.org site. LGPL is an intermediate step in their plan for world dominance. Whenever they get their Hurd system operational, they plan to change all their libraries to GPL--including libc.
Besides Linux, no major useful software for developers is GPL only. Apache, X, GTK+, Qt (dual licensed).
Is Linux "GPL only"? If you're running it, look in/usr/src/linux/COPYING (the license for Linux). Mr. Torvalds put in a few exceptions to the GPL.
Didn't you know? It's considered acceptable to rape a 5 year old boy. If you're a woman and somehow get pregnant, you can also demand child support. On the other hand, if the victim was a girl, then it'd be a different story.
I remember hearing a story about a 10 year old boy being sexually abused by a woman. Not only did the authorities do nothing about it, she got child support from it!
If Plain Black is really charging for basic documentation, then what they are doing is bait and switch. In their FAQ, they claim it is "absolutely free." They even post their project at freshmeat.net.
Imagine if a company posed as a food charity and advertised "absolutely free" peaches. You go down to their store and they give you a box of canned peaches. You take it home and discover your can opener won't open the cans, so you go back to their store. They say: "you have to buy one of our special can openers. They're $500 and only work for 2 weeks."
That is deceptive bullshit. Bait and switch pure and simple. Not only that, they wasted your time if you can't afford their can opener or don't want to do business with them because they are lying bastards. I don't think the sane people here are saying everyone should be required to give their code away for free. They just want people to be honest about it. Those who have said "give away the program and charge for support" meant things like telephone tech support, on site assistance, and adding custom features. They did not mean putting the code under the GPL then charging money just to find out how to install the thing.
As for the open source model in general, it was never intended to make money. The primary reason for open source is so that those contributing to the project can use it. Those using the program without contributing are just an added benefit. The only for profit model that really works in open source is the one where the company need that software for their business and have employees participating in the project. Open source wasn't intended for pushing political ideals or selling software.
Before someone says my comment about political ideals don't belong in open source, note that the FSF/GNU don't want their crap to be called "open source", they call their "movement" "Free Software." I also think that is deceptive as most normal people use the term "free software" as meaning "no money is asked for copies of this program" not "you may use this program, but we want you to conform to our political ideals."
Britney Spears, who likely would not exist without the RIAA.
You overestimate the terrori^WRIAA. Britney Spears' label is Zomba, who is not a member of the RIAA.
If we buy RIAA CDs, even as used products, we support their methods.
RIAA gets money from plenty of other places than just CDs. If you buy blank music CDs or any CD burner, they get a "royalty." If you listen to the radio, they get royalties from a compulsory license. If you buy from a store that plays music, the RIAA also gets your money from a compulsory license. Look at how the system is set up. Compulsory licenses or "royalites" on digital media always get funneled through the RIAA. This needs to change too.
I have heard specualation that some World War 1 (or maybe 2) planes flew too high and accidently entered orbit. Maybe there is a big updraft in the Burmuda Triangle!;-)
Slashdot Mirror
But they aren't going after the users. They are going after the ISPs and trying to coerce them into dropping whichever user the cartel doesn't like. Going after the users would entail gathering evidence and either suing the user or having them arrested.
If the cartel would have done this first off, 90% of the users would've stopped doing it even if only a few people were sued or convicted. What did they do? They said they wouldn't even try to touch the "fans" (the ones who broke the law). Instead, they tried to go after universities for supplying internet access to students and those who made software which could transfer files over a network.
Imagine if retail stores acted this way. First they'd try to sue backpack and car manufacturers because shoplifters can use these things to carry stolen goods. They also wouldn't even try to prosecute these shoplifters under the law--calling them "valued customers." The lawsuits don't work, so they try to get legislation passed which requires all cars have "inventory detection systems" in them which won't allow you to put anything into your car unless it has a special electronic tag from a store saying it was purchased legally. It wouldn't allow you to put bread you baked yourself into your own car, but they don't care. It just means more sales for them. That bill goes down in flames, so they concoct another one that gives them permission to beat customers with sticks if a security guard suspects that person may be shoplifting. That probably isn't going to pass, so they decide to visit apartment buildings and say things like: "we think the people in apartment # 1234b may have shoplifted something from our store. Please evict them now or we sue the building's owner for contributory theft."
Maybe they did have something on Napster because the whole intent of the thing did seem to be to distribute copyrighted works without permission of the owner. Contributory infringement could have happened in that specific case, but they should not have been given any court time until they at least tried to go after the primary infringers.
Ahhh, but you assume their Ultimate Goal is to stop copyright infringement. Maybe their goal is to take over the internet. Suing and disrupting the operations of innocent third parties (such as ISPs and developers of communication software) certainly helps with that goal.
Slashdot content is accessed throughout the world, so by your logic, you have a presence in every country and you should follow all their current laws. Even if they contradict or are unreasonable.
BTW, the dictator from Yosmucklastan wants his money. You forgot to pay your dues. Under Yosmucklastan law all good "comrades" are required to "donate" 50% of their income to the "cause." ;-)
I don't understand why they should have to charge the tax for the buyer's state. Wouldn't it be much easier for everyone involved if the business selling the goods was taxed in its own state? Is there some sort of legality forbidding this? Or are the sales tax states afraid that all these companies will move to states which don't have sales taxes?
I live in a state that has use taxes. I've paid them on my tax form in the correct spot, but every year they claim some sort of error and add that money back to my refund. ???? The bureaucrats seem to have no clue!
Maybe they are afraid what they're doing is illegal? I know this state has a fedral IRS processing center, but the IRS has everyone in this state ship their forms somewhere else. My only guess is the taliban-like government in this state was caught doing some crooked things.
I just hope I can scrape enough money together to get out of here someday...
Do the processors used in Macs have SIMD opcodes? (Single Instruction Multiple Data aka MMX/3dnow) If not, this would certainly bias the results in favor of the IA32 PC as the guy was mostly doing various transforms on photos. Also, those algorithms were probably integer based. How much better/worse does a Mac do with floating point?
Perhaps different types of programs would have given much different results. What about raytracing? or video encoding/decoding? or encoding ogg vorbis audio? ...&etc. These tests may not show the Mac is better, but it would give everyone a clear picture of how they compare performace wise.
Linux may have had problems displaying fonts a few years ago, but XFree86 has added TrueType support and better fonts may be used instead of old crappy ones. Those problems have gone away. Not to mention that article is talking about Mozilla/Netscape and how they try to scale bit mapped fonts.
I'm running Linux/XFree86 with Mozilla using TrueType fonts now, and it looks great.
I think print colour matching may not appear in the GIMP for some time. I could be way off because it was a while since I read about this and it was from a GIMP web page or news group so they know about it). As I remember, Adobe owns a certain patent on color space conversion. This means they can't put it in. Otherwise they'd have to pay for a patent license, and being a free project, they can't afford it. Also being a GNU project, they probably don't want to deal with patents at all.
In some states it is. For example, this Utah law prohibits it--though it may not apply to microsoft as the law only speicifies retailers or wholesalers.
This sounds a lot like the stories I've heard about Standard Oil. Coincidence? I think not!
How is this FUD? It may be the fear part, but if you have been following the actions of MS for at least the past decade, you'd be certain that they will do something like this. There is no doubt!
I'd just like to point out the things the entertainment cartel is doing affect much more than this. I'd rewrite the paragraph more like this:
...Once Joe can't use his cellphone when someone walks by playing RIAA music or record his wedding with a camcorder, or when Aunt Tillie can't publish her nutbread recipie on the internet anymore...
Not only is the cartel trying to take away everyone's right to use cartel products in a fair manner, they are also trying to take away free speech and the common person's right to use their own property!
Maybe the person who wants the log files committed the crime and wants to "take care of" all those who know about it. ;-)
Don't earn any money! No income, no taxes! No taxes, no tax forms! };-)
The blog said IE was doing this a long time ago, and this "feature" sounds a lot like one of the complaints in the antitrust case, so maybe the DoJ forced microsoft to fix it...
Read the article closly. A request from IE to a non-ms server will take longer than a request from a normal browser using compliant TCP to the same server. This not only gives IE a speed advantage with IIS, it makes non-ms servers appear slower than they actually are when you use IE! The only speed advantage is with IE and IIS. As I remember, this sounds like part of the antitrust case against microsoft.
I hate to tell you this, but the Canadian guy was asking how to put more memory into his mp3 player, not how to install a hard drive in it. Some stupid people just assumed that's what he asked. He didn't want to buy a new one because he would have to pay a tax to the RIAA terrorists. Sounded like a good question to me.
I don't see why this NFS question is stupid either. Maybe you're one of the regulars from comp.os.linux.*? ;-)
The obligatory joke: In Soviet Russia...you screw Microsoft!
Have a nice day. ;-)
Go have a look at the gnu.org site. LGPL is an intermediate step in their plan for world dominance. Whenever they get their Hurd system operational, they plan to change all their libraries to GPL--including libc.
Is Linux "GPL only"? If you're running it, look in /usr/src/linux/COPYING (the license for Linux). Mr. Torvalds put in a few exceptions to the GPL.
Didn't you know? It's considered acceptable to rape a 5 year old boy. If you're a woman and somehow get pregnant, you can also demand child support. On the other hand, if the victim was a girl, then it'd be a different story.
I remember hearing a story about a 10 year old boy being sexually abused by a woman. Not only did the authorities do nothing about it, she got child support from it!
How about C:<enter>### ;-)
If Plain Black is really charging for basic documentation, then what they are doing is bait and switch. In their FAQ, they claim it is "absolutely free." They even post their project at freshmeat.net.
Imagine if a company posed as a food charity and advertised "absolutely free" peaches. You go down to their store and they give you a box of canned peaches. You take it home and discover your can opener won't open the cans, so you go back to their store. They say: "you have to buy one of our special can openers. They're $500 and only work for 2 weeks."
That is deceptive bullshit. Bait and switch pure and simple. Not only that, they wasted your time if you can't afford their can opener or don't want to do business with them because they are lying bastards. I don't think the sane people here are saying everyone should be required to give their code away for free. They just want people to be honest about it. Those who have said "give away the program and charge for support" meant things like telephone tech support, on site assistance, and adding custom features. They did not mean putting the code under the GPL then charging money just to find out how to install the thing.
As for the open source model in general, it was never intended to make money. The primary reason for open source is so that those contributing to the project can use it. Those using the program without contributing are just an added benefit. The only for profit model that really works in open source is the one where the company need that software for their business and have employees participating in the project. Open source wasn't intended for pushing political ideals or selling software.
Before someone says my comment about political ideals don't belong in open source, note that the FSF/GNU don't want their crap to be called "open source", they call their "movement" "Free Software." I also think that is deceptive as most normal people use the term "free software" as meaning "no money is asked for copies of this program" not "you may use this program, but we want you to conform to our political ideals."
Self scan checkouts aren't there to help you get through the store faster. They're for saving the company money. You're doing the labor for them.
Less paid labor = less expense = more company profits.
You overestimate the terrori^WRIAA. Britney Spears' label is Zomba, who is not a member of the RIAA.
RIAA gets money from plenty of other places than just CDs. If you buy blank music CDs or any CD burner, they get a "royalty." If you listen to the radio, they get royalties from a compulsory license. If you buy from a store that plays music, the RIAA also gets your money from a compulsory license. Look at how the system is set up. Compulsory licenses or "royalites" on digital media always get funneled through the RIAA. This needs to change too.
I have heard specualation that some World War 1 (or maybe 2) planes flew too high and accidently entered orbit. Maybe there is a big updraft in the Burmuda Triangle! ;-)
No, the FSF will hire them to enforce the GPL. ;-)