Great post, but largely irrelevant to the issue here. How much of the current torrent traffic is used for sharing content created before 1997 (2011 minus 14 years)? From a quick glance at the front pages of the torrent sites listed on torrentfreak, closer to zero in percentage. Fixing copyright to favor consumers is a good thing, but that doesn't address the issue of people downloading the newest bluray the same day it is released, which is largely what these companies are after. I have no problem with them going after these pirates.
Supporters of consumer-friendly copyright don't have to align themselves with pirates in order to further their cause, in fact it hurts their cause.
It has to be further integration in their ecosystem, probably like on-demand content with targeted interactive commercials from which you can immediately buy whatever it is being sold.
Say you have itunes/sony network on-demand movies in your to-watch list and it's Friday afternoon, so the TV detects that you'll probably want to enjoy some movies tonight and says "How bout some pizza and snacks delivered to your door?" (Or it's a RomCom and you're a dude, so it's says "Don't forget the condoms bro") Then you can make that delivery order through their commercial partners right on the TV, without having to get on the phone or pull out the credit card or figure out tip. They of course get a cut of the money. They might also push ads for movie/food sale packages through the TV itself, like a Groupon thing but instead of for a single item, it's for an entire packaged TV experience.
Maybe there's also some integration with your smartphone where if you see an ad for a product you want, you can click on a "save to my shopping list" button
I'd say it's more about conceit. The Soviet Union wasn't after GDP, it was after production numbers, a measurement of war/economic capacity and source of national pride.
US beats everyone even in emissions per dollar of economic activity.
Not quite. CO2(million metric tons 2008)/GDP (millions $ 2008):
USA 5833/14.4 = 405 China 6534/4.3 = 1520 Russia 1729/1.68 = 1029 Australia 437/1.01 = 433 Canada 574/1.5 = 382 South Korea 542/0.93 = 583 Japan 1214/4.91 = 247 Germany 829/3.67 = 226 Brazil 428/1.57 = 273 France 415/2.87 = 145 UK 572/2.68 = 213
You see, Anonymous and their supporters will accept the "Anyone can be Anonymous" position only when it's in their favor -- for example when law enforcement makes a public effort to arrest them, then no voice represents Anonymous, Anonymous is anyone. But when a hack occurs that's morally nebulous to a majority of people, out comes the ablative armor of a unified voice of denial.
In a thread about suspected Anonymous members being arrested your post would be +5 Insightful. But here you get down modded because their supporters deem this information counter productive to their damage control efforts. They can't have it both ways and have reasonable people believe them.
Everyone holds bias, but someone who isn't dependent on votes in the near future would be less bound by his/her desire to maintain public image while still possessing the insider experience to give us an insightful appraisal.
Didn't past articles say they were smuggled into Iran by Dubai-based buyers? I guess we can have a debate about how many degrees of separation is needed for effective export restrictions, but I don't know how we can ever draw the lines to be reasonable.
When you don't have absolute power and need to get things done, you have to build a coalition. But building such a coalition requires compromise, often moral compromise. Thus if you're not a politician when you enter government, you will become one soon enough, if not by desire then by necessity.
Don't get me wrong, dictatorships and oligarchies are far worse, but having someone with technical ability in politics won't make any difference -- what makes a difference is some with a clear sense of values and the ability to project it, and that's not a trait exclusive to any field of study.
How so? Because there are instances of "China" and "they"? I'm not really feeling it -- replace it with "American" or "the Americans" and you'll find thousands of instances on this site, especially in articles about the US throwing its weight around. I'm Chinese-American and I can assure you you'll have a far more interesting time analyzing the possible linguistic indicators of xenophobia in the Chinese language. For example, "foreigner" is is a common word in Chinese that most people don't give much thought to when speaking, yet in the US it's almost taboo even in private conversation. Of course that's from a history of invasions and rightly understandable, but it's something that still hasn't been shed through decades of China striving to join the modern cosmopolitan world.
Are actual sandboxes also art? Shit, are we artistically doomed to walk in the shadow of beaches? I could maybe (lot of maybes) accept player creations as art, but this is too far of a stretch.
"I don't fault the Chinese for anything they do now."
Thing is, while Americans are waking up to the misdeeds done unto them, China still gets away with "fucking everyone" to help their economy -- socialized health care is long gone, unions are merely a facade, and minimum wage is 1000 yuan a month in cities where average rent is 1500+, in their places are entirely government funded start-ups put into private hands, rising tax rebates for export companies to offset increasing foreign tariffs, and crackdowns where stories like Scott Olsen's are so myriad that society is numb to them.
It is the same story as in the US of taking money from private citizens to fund the captains of industry and their economic war machines, only to an even greater degree for the sake of helping China catch up. The sad fact we've come to realize is that the country that can more easily oppress can also more easily tip the economic scales in their favor. Yet there are those like you who would, in their dissatisfaction with the old bullies, pave the way and make excuses for the new ones.
Well, one thing I like about Bing is the bird's eye view maps. They're far more useful than Google's satellite view when I'm looking at large properties, or doing architecture models to scale. Guess that makes me an MS shill.
They give accolades to those who aid in a Nobel recipient's research, they also prosecute those who aid primary actors in a crime. GP was wrong to point out intent as the primary indicator of guilt in a crime -- it is not -- the result of one's actions determines guilt, whereas intent determines the severity of punishment. However, in your reply, it needs to be pointed out that intended good and attempted good are not the same both legally and logically, just as intended ill and attempted ill are not the same. Your followup is mostly non-sequitur in relation to GP's error of tying intent to guilt, and I only respond because you've been so highly modded Insightful.
So you would have supported the Standard Oil monopoly of early 20th century USA? They sold oil at far below market price, people liked it, but the result was that it forced competitors out of the market, after which they would raise prices to capitalize on near total control. You would trade short term consumer benefit for long term exploitation?
One difference is that Solyndra received start-up loan guarantees, whereas the established manufacturers in China receive subsidies like tax rebates. The former is government saying, "if your business fails, we'll make it less painful", the latter is the government saying, "even when you have succeeded, we'll still help you against your competition"
You didn't RTFA I presume. The article doesn't talk about competition, it warns about dumping, i.e. saturating the market with far lower than market-priced products so as to inhibit or destroy competition. You may like the cheap prices now, but the ultimate result is that one or very few companies will control the market in the future if this is allowed.
Why do you have 2000 albums? I can't imagine having that many unless I'm getting entire discographies -- and even my favorite musicians aren't that good on a consistent basis to justify getting ALL of their work. What I see, though, is a lot of people filling their iPods with what could be termed "status content" which is to say they have it just so that others can see they have it. These are usually the "popular classics" that they may suffer through once or twice (play count is usually stuck at 1) and go back to their metal, house, pop, whatever, yet they keep them there as evidence of their musical worldliness in the off chance that someone might see their play list.
These are freight trucks used in commerce -- commonly 18-wheel trailer trucks (American version of container trucks), which are required to weigh in at weight stations at certain intervals on their trip. They are often used for smuggling, which was why the weigh station system was built. They are adding more checks to the process, perhaps not because they think they'll catch anyone outright, but because the knowledge of improved operations will deter those who wish to take advantage of this transport system. It has absolutely nothing to do with personal travel. So take off your tin foil hat
Can't believe bullshit paranoia from someone who obviously didn't RTFA and without a sliver of understanding of US freight operations was modded up +5
I'm not endorsing GP's view that this news doesn't belong on/. I'm voicing the issue I have with the popular rebuttal as given here by L4t3r4lu5, which fails to bring me to that side of the argument. I expect well-reasoned counter-arguments and I see none; I'm in limbo here, that's what I'm saying.
but isn't "Stuff that matters" a clarifying explication of "News for nerds"? in other words, it means to imply that "on this website, Nerd news IS what matters" rather than "on this website, Nerd news, oh and also other stuff that matter just as much" and in every definition, "Nerd" means a one-track-mind dedicated to technology or other socially-atrophying pursuits unless of course you redefine (and dilute) the word "Nerd" to encompass every field of interest, but then that would make "Nerd news" indistinguishable from just "news", and make/.'s motto rather banal and lifeless.
now, I'm not saying this news won't give us some very lively conversation, or that I don't appreciate it being here. on the contrary. I guess I'm being pedantic since this excuse always comes up whenever someone makes a point about the mainstream-ification, I guess you could say, of slashdot, and it always strikes me as unconvincing.
Maybe we can zoom out and look at this more strategically -- we can either fund alternative energy initiatives with a weak economy, or with one that's strengthened by domestic oil production. Ramp up oil production, decrease costs of business, increase economic recovery and growth, and you'll have even more tax money to put into alternative energy. By accelerating on one front, we accelerate both.
Slashdot Mirror
Great post, but largely irrelevant to the issue here. How much of the current torrent traffic is used for sharing content created before 1997 (2011 minus 14 years)? From a quick glance at the front pages of the torrent sites listed on torrentfreak, closer to zero in percentage. Fixing copyright to favor consumers is a good thing, but that doesn't address the issue of people downloading the newest bluray the same day it is released, which is largely what these companies are after. I have no problem with them going after these pirates.
Supporters of consumer-friendly copyright don't have to align themselves with pirates in order to further their cause, in fact it hurts their cause.
It has to be further integration in their ecosystem, probably like on-demand content with targeted interactive commercials from which you can immediately buy whatever it is being sold.
Say you have itunes/sony network on-demand movies in your to-watch list and it's Friday afternoon, so the TV detects that you'll probably want to enjoy some movies tonight and says "How bout some pizza and snacks delivered to your door?" (Or it's a RomCom and you're a dude, so it's says "Don't forget the condoms bro") Then you can make that delivery order through their commercial partners right on the TV, without having to get on the phone or pull out the credit card or figure out tip. They of course get a cut of the money. They might also push ads for movie/food sale packages through the TV itself, like a Groupon thing but instead of for a single item, it's for an entire packaged TV experience.
Maybe there's also some integration with your smartphone where if you see an ad for a product you want, you can click on a "save to my shopping list" button
I'd say it's more about conceit. The Soviet Union wasn't after GDP, it was after production numbers, a measurement of war/economic capacity and source of national pride.
US beats everyone even in emissions per dollar of economic activity.
Not quite.
CO2(million metric tons 2008)/GDP (millions $ 2008):
USA 5833/14.4 = 405
China 6534/4.3 = 1520
Russia 1729/1.68 = 1029
Australia 437/1.01 = 433
Canada 574/1.5 = 382
South Korea 542/0.93 = 583
Japan 1214/4.91 = 247
Germany 829/3.67 = 226
Brazil 428/1.57 = 273
France 415/2.87 = 145
UK 572/2.68 = 213
Sources: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)&oldid=324440846
You can also get the sense that countries with smaller pop density and larger inter-city distances face greater challenges to per-capita emissions reduction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ratio_of_GDP_to_carbon_dioxide_emissions
You see, Anonymous and their supporters will accept the "Anyone can be Anonymous" position only when it's in their favor -- for example when law enforcement makes a public effort to arrest them, then no voice represents Anonymous, Anonymous is anyone. But when a hack occurs that's morally nebulous to a majority of people, out comes the ablative armor of a unified voice of denial.
In a thread about suspected Anonymous members being arrested your post would be +5 Insightful. But here you get down modded because their supporters deem this information counter productive to their damage control efforts. They can't have it both ways and have reasonable people believe them.
Everyone holds bias, but someone who isn't dependent on votes in the near future would be less bound by his/her desire to maintain public image while still possessing the insider experience to give us an insightful appraisal.
Perhaps former officials of the US Cabinet.
Didn't past articles say they were smuggled into Iran by Dubai-based buyers?
I guess we can have a debate about how many degrees of separation is needed for effective export restrictions, but I don't know how we can ever draw the lines to be reasonable.
When you don't have absolute power and need to get things done, you have to build a coalition. But building such a coalition requires compromise, often moral compromise. Thus if you're not a politician when you enter government, you will become one soon enough, if not by desire then by necessity.
Don't get me wrong, dictatorships and oligarchies are far worse, but having someone with technical ability in politics won't make any difference -- what makes a difference is some with a clear sense of values and the ability to project it, and that's not a trait exclusive to any field of study.
How so? Because there are instances of "China" and "they"? I'm not really feeling it -- replace it with "American" or "the Americans" and you'll find thousands of instances on this site, especially in articles about the US throwing its weight around. I'm Chinese-American and I can assure you you'll have a far more interesting time analyzing the possible linguistic indicators of xenophobia in the Chinese language. For example, "foreigner" is is a common word in Chinese that most people don't give much thought to when speaking, yet in the US it's almost taboo even in private conversation. Of course that's from a history of invasions and rightly understandable, but it's something that still hasn't been shed through decades of China striving to join the modern cosmopolitan world.
Are actual sandboxes also art? Shit, are we artistically doomed to walk in the shadow of beaches?
I could maybe (lot of maybes) accept player creations as art, but this is too far of a stretch.
"I don't fault the Chinese for anything they do now."
Thing is, while Americans are waking up to the misdeeds done unto them, China still gets away with "fucking everyone" to help their economy -- socialized health care is long gone, unions are merely a facade, and minimum wage is 1000 yuan a month in cities where average rent is 1500+, in their places are entirely government funded start-ups put into private hands, rising tax rebates for export companies to offset increasing foreign tariffs, and crackdowns where stories like Scott Olsen's are so myriad that society is numb to them.
It is the same story as in the US of taking money from private citizens to fund the captains of industry and their economic war machines, only to an even greater degree for the sake of helping China catch up. The sad fact we've come to realize is that the country that can more easily oppress can also more easily tip the economic scales in their favor. Yet there are those like you who would, in their dissatisfaction with the old bullies, pave the way and make excuses for the new ones.
Well, one thing I like about Bing is the bird's eye view maps. They're far more useful than Google's satellite view when I'm looking at large properties, or doing architecture models to scale. Guess that makes me an MS shill.
They give accolades to those who aid in a Nobel recipient's research, they also prosecute those who aid primary actors in a crime. GP was wrong to point out intent as the primary indicator of guilt in a crime -- it is not -- the result of one's actions determines guilt, whereas intent determines the severity of punishment. However, in your reply, it needs to be pointed out that intended good and attempted good are not the same both legally and logically, just as intended ill and attempted ill are not the same. Your followup is mostly non-sequitur in relation to GP's error of tying intent to guilt, and I only respond because you've been so highly modded Insightful.
I thought it was the corporations that control the government? I guess we can switch narratives whenever it's convenient.
Isn't that pretty much free?
So you would have supported the Standard Oil monopoly of early 20th century USA? They sold oil at far below market price, people liked it, but the result was that it forced competitors out of the market, after which they would raise prices to capitalize on near total control. You would trade short term consumer benefit for long term exploitation?
One difference is that Solyndra received start-up loan guarantees, whereas the established manufacturers in China receive subsidies like tax rebates. The former is government saying, "if your business fails, we'll make it less painful", the latter is the government saying, "even when you have succeeded, we'll still help you against your competition"
You didn't RTFA I presume. The article doesn't talk about competition, it warns about dumping, i.e. saturating the market with far lower than market-priced products so as to inhibit or destroy competition. You may like the cheap prices now, but the ultimate result is that one or very few companies will control the market in the future if this is allowed.
Why do you have 2000 albums? I can't imagine having that many unless I'm getting entire discographies -- and even my favorite musicians aren't that good on a consistent basis to justify getting ALL of their work. What I see, though, is a lot of people filling their iPods with what could be termed "status content" which is to say they have it just so that others can see they have it. These are usually the "popular classics" that they may suffer through once or twice (play count is usually stuck at 1) and go back to their metal, house, pop, whatever, yet they keep them there as evidence of their musical worldliness in the off chance that someone might see their play list.
Asking /. to seek change from themselves rather than from others? Prepare for disappointment
(I share your sentiments, though)
These are freight trucks used in commerce -- commonly 18-wheel trailer trucks (American version of container trucks), which are required to weigh in at weight stations at certain intervals on their trip. They are often used for smuggling, which was why the weigh station system was built. They are adding more checks to the process, perhaps not because they think they'll catch anyone outright, but because the knowledge of improved operations will deter those who wish to take advantage of this transport system. It has absolutely nothing to do with personal travel. So take off your tin foil hat
Can't believe bullshit paranoia from someone who obviously didn't RTFA and without a sliver of understanding of US freight operations was modded up +5
I'm not endorsing GP's view that this news doesn't belong on /. I'm voicing the issue I have with the popular rebuttal as given here by L4t3r4lu5, which fails to bring me to that side of the argument. I expect well-reasoned counter-arguments and I see none; I'm in limbo here, that's what I'm saying.
but isn't "Stuff that matters" a clarifying explication of "News for nerds"? /.'s motto rather banal and lifeless.
in other words, it means to imply that "on this website, Nerd news IS what matters" rather than "on this website, Nerd news, oh and also other stuff that matter just as much"
and in every definition, "Nerd" means a one-track-mind dedicated to technology or other socially-atrophying pursuits
unless of course you redefine (and dilute) the word "Nerd" to encompass every field of interest, but then that would make "Nerd news" indistinguishable from just "news", and make
now, I'm not saying this news won't give us some very lively conversation, or that I don't appreciate it being here. on the contrary. I guess I'm being pedantic since this excuse always comes up whenever someone makes a point about the mainstream-ification, I guess you could say, of slashdot, and it always strikes me as unconvincing.
of calling a superconductor a semiconductor? /., where are you editors?
WIRED, where do you get your reporters?
And
Maybe we can zoom out and look at this more strategically -- we can either fund alternative energy initiatives with a weak economy, or with one that's strengthened by domestic oil production. Ramp up oil production, decrease costs of business, increase economic recovery and growth, and you'll have even more tax money to put into alternative energy. By accelerating on one front, we accelerate both.