In this case, XM gave the consumer a device which could have the technology to grab any broadcast music directly from the receiver and store it in MP3. In effect, they are essentially handing you MP3s of the songs they broadcast
You mean the way most walkman style devices, home stereos and portable "ghetto blaster" style radios have allowed you to record a radio station to tape for the last 30 years or so? Yeah it's not MP3. So what. It's trivial to make an MP3 from a tape. Hell if you have a line out on the player, it's trivial to skip the tape all together and go straight to MP3.
Damn, my fiancee thought I'd be rich till you pointed this one out. Now she just thinks I may literally kill us both during the night.
Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap
on
IsoHunt Shut Down?
·
· Score: 1
Total BS. You should have every right to make money from your work. You should have no right whatsoever to control how it is used. You should be able to sue people for using your work without paying you, you shouldn't be able to throw them in jail.
Copyright is broken.
Oh and by the way I HAVE created content of value.
Quick mod him up insightful! He hasn't read the article up for discussion but has an opinion that meshes well with/. group think! Man I wish I had mod point but I used them all yesterday./. has reached rock bottom and is starting to dig. (no pun intended).
You aren't listening to me at all on the driving advice are you? I have been driving for 15 years now. I live in the city suburbs and experience heavy traffic regularly. I do not need to suddenly exceed the speed limit to avoid other drivers. There's just about always a better way.
My point is that this would only render me safe if EVERYONE followed the law and left the governor device enabled. And if you believe that, then please explain to me why so many people get shot and killed in countries where you can't own a gun.
Hefty fines and complete loss of license for disabling the device. Yes there will be a changeover period. That can't be helped. After that this is no different to twits who do 200 in a 40 zone now. They exist and are a problem. How does the law handle them?
Lucky you - there was a shoulder. In many events, there have not been shoulders. Instead of dismissing my example and arguing another irrelvant example of your own where the variables are different, explain what I should have done in the event of no shoulder and traffic on the other side.
I'd be dead. Pure and simple. There was no way I could make up a difference of 60km/hr or more in the amount of time I had. I was driving a station wagon not a race car. I'd either have bounced off the front of the first truck or it would have gone over the top of me. Absolute best case I would have run off the road and into the bushes. Depending on what was on the side of the road either my fiancee would have been crushed or we both would.
There's no law that says you have to sit like a lemming in a dangerous situation and just die either. What's your point here? If my choices are break the law or get hurt, the law can rot!
I agree. The fault however is with laws that can put you in dangerous situations. Either the laws about speed limits should be properly enforced with technology or they should change. This grey area where everyone does what think reasonable with zero guidance or regard for the law is a big danger.
As for talking to the cops about these situations, in several cases I did when I signed on for duty (reservist). Oddly enough, none of them found my solutions to be inappropriate.
Where I live they'd tell you that in one breath and book you in the same breath without hesitation. They don't get to exercise that discretion. Good luck with the magistrate. That's where these "tougher on speeding" laws lead when they're only rarely enforced. A driver behaving like everyone else is labeled a criminal for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
1. I'm on a roundabout (traffic circle to some) planning to exit. I am in the outermost lane intending to take the next exit. I have the right of way and am signalling correctly for my intentions (signal still showing right). Another vehicle enters the roundabout without slowing or merging with the first lane of the roundabout (aiming straight for lane 2). There are cars to my right.
Regardless of right of way you should be driving defensively. You should have slowed down enough entering the roundabout to correctly judge what the other driver was about to do. If you were already traveling at the speed limit through the roundabout that's your mistake right there. If you were traveling at an appropriate speed you would be able to either stop in time or speed up enough without breaking the limit.
2. I'm in the outer lane of a two lane road at the speed limit, passing a truck that is about 8mph below the speed limit. I have cars behind me with less than a 2 second gap between us and the road is wet. With no warning, the truck that I am passing begins drifting aggresively into my lane. I can either a) stop, causing people behind me to hit me or b) accelerate past the truck. Got an option c for me?
No. You'd put yourself in a corner. Clearly you think that travelling through a roundabout at the speed limit is acceptable. They're fucking suppose to replace traffic lights. For your own sake SLOW DOWN AT ROUND ABOUTS.
3. I am in the slow lane of a 3 lane motorway at 5mph below the speed limit. The roads are wet. I have cars to my right and there is no hard shoulder (space to my left) for 2 miles. For reasons best known to him, some maniac behind me is doing about 10mph above the speed limit (so 15mph more than me). On this occasion I didn't choose to accelerate because I didn't believe he would actually keep going. I did tap my brakes once when he was about 400m behind me just to show some lights in case he hadn't noticed me (this manoeure did not reduce my speed by more than 1mph). He didn't slow or stop and I still have a neck that causes me pain to this day. Acceleration in this case would have let me move to a point where I had more options. What would you have done in this situation?
So you're advocating that every time someone approaches too closely from behind you should accelerate? GIVE ME A BREAK. Look I'm sorry that you were hurt but accelerating would only have served any purpose if there wsa a way to get out of this man's way and even then by the time you realised it would have probably been too late. (Sounds like exactly what happened).
You do realise the irony of this by the way don't you. If the other guy was speed limited and so were you, you'd never have had to worry about him hitting you if you were both at the limit (and if there was any inaccuracy at leading to a difference in speed at least it would be a slow relative speed collision). Thanks for pointing out a situation where speed limited cars would actually have caused you not to get hurt. What was your point again?
For the record, none of these situations are hypothetical, and these don't even include situations where speed has let me evade violence involving automatic rifles (and no, I don't mean semi-automatic).
Yeah. Ever had 2 semi trailers bearing down on you at 100km/hr or more, while you're sticking to a roadwork speed limit of 40km/hr? I have. I know for a fact that if I hadn't gotten out of the way I didn't have time to accelerate. There was a shoulder. I got out of the way, and the only reason me and my fiancee are alive today is that I happened to look in the rear vision mirror when I did (before I could even hear the trucks). I would still much rather everyone else was speed limited than have
Hell sometimes you have a bad day and you cause the accident. I had a prang in a parking lot earlier this month. First accident in 12 years, so I'm not a lousy driver. I looked behind to the right then to the left and waited for tr
The irony! You can use your own argument against youself, and should: "We must preserve freedom, so we need to steal our entertainment - something we do not need, and which is a luxury - because now that it's easier to do, we especially don't feel like paying for it."
Nice straw man. I said nothing about stealing anything. I don't support theft. I don't support copyright infringement (which is different to theft) either. Show me where I said "piracy" is good? However, nor do I support a bunch of middlemen taking most of the profits. If you're going to start your attack with the suggestion that I'm some sort of pirate sympathiser because I don't like the MPAA/RIAA cartels, I'm going to conclude that you're not talking to the right person.
Your rhetorical excesses (um, including Godwin, not "Goddard," unless you're making some rocketry allusion that I'm missing, here) are way off base.
Yep. Thanks for correcting that one. I typed it up fast and made a mistake.
First, you're welcome to attract funding, hire writers, talent, studio people and facilities, and make/release a movie any time you want, distributed by any means you want, and at whatever price (or lack of) that you might want to offer to your prospective audience. The web is full of productions like that, right? There is no barrier to entry, at this point.
What rubbish is this? If it were so simple, lots of actors, writers, directors etc. would go independent once they got popular and pocket the money currently paid to the associations. The truth is it's very hard to get into any kind of main stream distribution unless you pay the piper. As for internet releases etc. sure that's grand, but it's a much more difficult thing to distribute purely on the net and your audience is much smaller. Not many people are willing to sit for hours on a torrent and use up their Internet bandwidth. Hell a lot of people I know are still on dialup.
And if you don't want to allow a production company that happens to be an MPAA member from getting your dollars, just don't buy the work those hundreds (thousands) of people produce. But then have the intellectual honesty to not rip it off, either.
Once again you demonstrate the ability to open your mouth and let unfounded accusations and RUBBISH come out. Take a look at the posts I've made on USENET about not buying the latest flight sim. I don't buy heavily encumbered DRM'd rubbish even when I do want it. I don't steal it either thank you very bloody much.
Another thing, you're quick to criticise but I wonder how quickly you'd steal food if a large cartel decided to control all food supply and charge ridiculously for it. Food is a consumable unlike media content so the analogy doesn't extend to charging repeatedly too easily but imagine being asked for more money after each bite you took out of an apple on pain of 5 years imprisonment. Don't like it? Grow your own! Well we don't NEED music, movies, or software the way we need food but it's still a damn unreasonable thing to slap DRM all over it and run your business on the basis of trying to charge for it repeatedly.
Personally, where I work, I try to be very very conscious about peoples abilities, and completely shut off everything else. I don't care if you're a nice guy or not, doesn't matter at all...unless it impacts your ability to do work or other people's ability to do their work. Stink in a meeting? Whatever, you're doing a great job and don't worry we wouldn't make you meet with our customers directly as we know you wouldn't deal with it well.
If someone is sitting there in a meeting reeking of course it's going to affect their job and everyone else around them because they're not thinking about what's being discussed but about his bad smell. Likewise some hygiene is important or you'll find the employee is always getting sick. If your coder is nicely isolated from the customer because you would be embarassed to let him or her represent the company they can't be doing a very good job. Part of the job is to understand the customer's needs.
I've fired people that I actually liked a lot. I've fired more people that I'd actually hang out with outside of work than people that I wouldn't. On a personal level, I really can't stand some of the people I work with. Bottom line is though, that has just about zero impact on how they do their jobs. It takes all kinds.
Sure you don't fire people because you disagree with aspects unrelated to their job, but if you're sitting there thinking "I hate Bob. He's a twit" of course it's having an effect. You shouldn't be worried about their personal life. That's unprofessional. However if they're rude or arrogant or bring things to the table that lower morale that means they're NOT doing a good job. There isn't anything wrong with firing someone you like if they're unable to do the job and you're unable to help them change that because they're incapable of its impractical.
Yes, because text where every fourth phrase begins with "In my honest opinion" is so much more readable and sounds so much more confident. Lets all feel the need to apologise for our opinions.
Do you know what a BLOG site is? Yep. You guessed it. Opinions. You don't state them unless you think they're correct and it's impossible to be objective. If you don't like that what the fuck are you doing here? What kind of arrogant condescending fool comes onto a blog site and slams others for having an opinion? You think that makes you sound smart or wise?
By the way how do you measure intelligence? Yeah Linux wrote the original kernel and maintains it. Yes that requires intelligence of a form that's rare. That doesn't mean the guy can't be wrong or behave unintelligently in other matters. Doesn't mean that disagreeing with one of his opinions makes you stupid or unintelligent.
This TRASH is what gets modded as insightful on/. these days??? Bloody hell.
I'm no fan of DRM, but comparing the inability to play a song on every player made to the plight of working 12-14 hours per day, every day, in dangerous facilities, from the time you're 6 till you die, is offbase.
How about imprisoning someone for breaking the DRM and playing the song anyway? Is that off base?
In any case do you REALLY think DRM technology will only be useful and used by media content companies? It's a tool to restrict and will be used in other matters including those to do with life and death.
You may have no use for the trade association these creative people support, but you'd better also have no use for films as good as Serenity. No money, no Serenity. You don't "win" anything by ripping off the very people that you're hoping will scrape together the money, talent, and time to make another movie you'll like.
Gimme a break. This has to be the most disingenuous argument I've read on slashdot in months and that's saying a lot.
Your argument is since a trade association is one way to help facilitate the production of good movie/tv content, we should put up with anything the current monopolistic trade associations do?
We need software therefore anyone producing software at any cost and no matter how restrictive the licensing is good? We need food, therefore we should put up with a supermarket monopoly that will price gouge? We need medicine, therefore testing a medical association for testing on the weak and poor should be tolerated? We need government, therefore we need Nazism? (purposefully invoking Goddard's Law here) The ends justify the means?
By the way it's been a long time since the big studios made something I truly like. Their best work comes about when they donate the money and stay out of the way of the creators ala most (but not all) of Babylon 5.
"Velocity measured by a GPS is inherently 3 dimension, but consumer GPS receivers only report 2D (horizontal) speed on their readout. Garmin's specifications quote 0.1mph accuracy but due to signal degredation problems noted above, perhaps 0.5mph accuracy in typical automobile applications would be what you can count on."
That's very probably more accurate than your car's speedo.
So please check your facts before spreading such nonsense.
Let me clarify that 2nd point. This is the way it is where I live. NSW, Australia. We have a 12 demerit point system. If you lose 12 over any 3 year period your license is suspended. 3 points for 1km/hr over the limit. Double points on long weekends and holiday periods.
What right do you have to endanger me with your suggestion of limiting my car's maximum speed. So far, the ability to turn on the power and significantly exceed the speed limit has saved my life a number of times.
Then let me suggest 2 things: 1) You're not a very good driver if the only way you can avoid an accident is to accelerate like a mad man. "I have to be able to speed to be safe" is just rubbish. 2) If what you were saying was true, the law needs to be changed. As it stands speeding 4 times even by 1 km/hr would lose you your license if done within a 3 year period.
Name me one person who's managed to stick to the limit ALL THE TIME, and I'll show you an obsessive compulsive that's probably not safe on the road.
How about built in GPS speed limiters? No not devices aimed at fining you when you break the law, but devices that cap the speed limit to begin with. The only people who break the law then would be those that wilfully remove the devices. Oh and please don't use the argument that sometimes the speed is necessary to safely avoid trouble/overtake/whatever. Clearly wilful speeding currently causes more accidents than would be prevented by not having the speed limiter on the car.
This IS a technological not legislative problem. The trouble is the government authorities have become addicted to the revenue stream.
That happened near you too? Someone didn't hold down the shift key when their Sony music CD and now they want revenge? So they got a friend to distract the owner at Best Buy, and filled out an ahem complaint form.
Call me crazy, but can't this last issue be fixed by locking your door? If you keep your doors locked, then it's really not too hard to figure out who's coming into your computer.
Yep and the penalty for not locking your door should be that you become a registered pedo. Fantastic logic.
Doctors tend to be very insulting (under the guise of clinical) and are often incompetent. Insult their patients? Regularly!
I've had a doctor dismiss a sever ear blockage and ask why I wanted to take the day off to have it taken care of. Another one basically made fun of my weight. (No he didn't just use clinical terms. He insulted me and my mother waiting out side and told me I looked pregnant). I've had another continue to up the medication on someone very close that damn near killed her even though she was reporting contraindications that the drug company warns requires the patient to stop.
That's just the medical profession. I could go on about every other profession (how about a plumber that wanted to charge a blind man $8000 to unblock a single pipe - his relatives did it for free).
Lack of professionalism unique to I.T.? Gimme a break!
That only proves you're experienced with 2 women, who are genetically similar no less.
Some women just feel uncomfortable at that time of the month. Other's get grumpy. Others get downright irrational. I have met lovely women that turn into an irrational mess at that time of the month. So much so that I could tell even without daring to have that conversation. I've had one female boss who didn't do well at that time of the month and that was hell - she was generally a grumpty person to begin with so that made things unbearable. I've had plenty of female bosses though and she's the only one I'm glad I'm rid of, so I don't think I have an issue with women in authority in general. Frankly she needed something to fix her hormones. She was all over the place and not very professional.
Women feel like crap before their periods, during their periods, and sometimes just after their periods. Other part of the cycle they ovulate. Also your lack of familiarity with women shows big time. Not all women experience the same negative effects or to the same degree during their period.
Slashdot Mirror
In this case, XM gave the consumer a device which could have the technology to grab any broadcast music directly from the receiver and store it in MP3. In effect, they are essentially handing you MP3s of the songs they broadcast
You mean the way most walkman style devices, home stereos and portable "ghetto blaster" style radios have allowed you to record a radio station to tape for the last 30 years or so? Yeah it's not MP3. So what. It's trivial to make an MP3 from a tape. Hell if you have a line out on the player, it's trivial to skip the tape all together and go straight to MP3.
I didn't realise thinking and being part of a trade were mutually exclusive.
We will be in a lot of trouble if the Cylons find us first.
Which Cyclons? The 70s tin cans or the 00s babywatch starlets?
Damn, my fiancee thought I'd be rich till you pointed this one out. Now she just thinks I may literally kill us both during the night.
Total BS. You should have every right to make money from your work. You should have no right whatsoever to control how it is used. You should be able to sue people for using your work without paying you, you shouldn't be able to throw them in jail.
Copyright is broken.
Oh and by the way I HAVE created content of value.
I haven't RTFA but....
/. group think! Man I wish I had mod point but I used them all yesterday. /. has reached rock bottom and is starting to dig. (no pun intended).
Quick mod him up insightful! He hasn't read the article up for discussion but has an opinion that meshes well with
You aren't listening to me at all on the driving advice are you? I have been driving for 15 years now. I live in the city suburbs and experience heavy traffic regularly. I do not need to suddenly exceed the speed limit to avoid other drivers. There's just about always a better way.
My point is that this would only render me safe if EVERYONE followed the law and left the governor device enabled. And if you believe that, then please explain to me why so many people get shot and killed in countries where you can't own a gun.
Hefty fines and complete loss of license for disabling the device. Yes there will be a changeover period. That can't be helped. After that this is no different to twits who do 200 in a 40 zone now. They exist and are a problem. How does the law handle them?
Lucky you - there was a shoulder. In many events, there have not been shoulders. Instead of dismissing my example and arguing another irrelvant example of your own where the variables are different, explain what I should have done in the event of no shoulder and traffic on the other side.
I'd be dead. Pure and simple. There was no way I could make up a difference of 60km/hr or more in the amount of time I had. I was driving a station wagon not a race car. I'd either have bounced off the front of the first truck or it would have gone over the top of me. Absolute best case I would have run off the road and into the bushes. Depending on what was on the side of the road either my fiancee would have been crushed or we both would.
There's no law that says you have to sit like a lemming in a dangerous situation and just die either. What's your point here? If my choices are break the law or get hurt, the law can rot!
I agree. The fault however is with laws that can put you in dangerous situations. Either the laws about speed limits should be properly enforced with technology or they should change. This grey area where everyone does what think reasonable with zero guidance or regard for the law is a big danger.
As for talking to the cops about these situations, in several cases I did when I signed on for duty (reservist). Oddly enough, none of them found my solutions to be inappropriate.
Where I live they'd tell you that in one breath and book you in the same breath without hesitation. They don't get to exercise that discretion. Good luck with the magistrate. That's where these "tougher on speeding" laws lead when they're only rarely enforced. A driver behaving like everyone else is labeled a criminal for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Fine I will explain to you:
1. I'm on a roundabout (traffic circle to some) planning to exit. I am in the outermost lane intending to take the next exit. I have the right of way and am signalling correctly for my intentions (signal still showing right). Another vehicle enters the roundabout without slowing or merging with the first lane of the roundabout (aiming straight for lane 2). There are cars to my right.
Regardless of right of way you should be driving defensively. You should have slowed down enough entering the roundabout to correctly judge what the other driver was about to do. If you were already traveling at the speed limit through the roundabout that's your mistake right there. If you were traveling at an appropriate speed you would be able to either stop in time or speed up enough without breaking the limit.
2. I'm in the outer lane of a two lane road at the speed limit, passing a truck that is about 8mph below the speed limit. I have cars behind me with less than a 2 second gap between us and the road is wet. With no warning, the truck that I am passing begins drifting aggresively into my lane. I can either a) stop, causing people behind me to hit me or b) accelerate past the truck. Got an option c for me?
No. You'd put yourself in a corner. Clearly you think that travelling through a roundabout at the speed limit is acceptable. They're fucking suppose to replace traffic lights. For your own sake SLOW DOWN AT ROUND ABOUTS.
3. I am in the slow lane of a 3 lane motorway at 5mph below the speed limit. The roads are wet. I have cars to my right and there is no hard shoulder (space to my left) for 2 miles. For reasons best known to him, some maniac behind me is doing about 10mph above the speed limit (so 15mph more than me). On this occasion I didn't choose to accelerate because I didn't believe he would actually keep going. I did tap my brakes once when he was about 400m behind me just to show some lights in case he hadn't noticed me (this manoeure did not reduce my speed by more than 1mph). He didn't slow or stop and I still have a neck that causes me pain to this day. Acceleration in this case would have let me move to a point where I had more options. What would you have done in this situation?
So you're advocating that every time someone approaches too closely from behind you should accelerate? GIVE ME A BREAK. Look I'm sorry that you were hurt but accelerating would only have served any purpose if there wsa a way to get out of this man's way and even then by the time you realised it would have probably been too late. (Sounds like exactly what happened).
You do realise the irony of this by the way don't you. If the other guy was speed limited and so were you, you'd never have had to worry about him hitting you if you were both at the limit (and if there was any inaccuracy at leading to a difference in speed at least it would be a slow relative speed collision). Thanks for pointing out a situation where speed limited cars would actually have caused you not to get hurt. What was your point again?
For the record, none of these situations are hypothetical, and these don't even include situations where speed has let me evade violence involving automatic rifles (and no, I don't mean semi-automatic).
Yeah. Ever had 2 semi trailers bearing down on you at 100km/hr or more, while you're sticking to a roadwork speed limit of 40km/hr? I have. I know for a fact that if I hadn't gotten out of the way I didn't have time to accelerate. There was a shoulder. I got out of the way, and the only reason me and my fiancee are alive today is that I happened to look in the rear vision mirror when I did (before I could even hear the trucks). I would still much rather everyone else was speed limited than have
Hell sometimes you have a bad day and you cause the accident. I had a prang in a parking lot earlier this month. First accident in 12 years, so I'm not a lousy driver. I looked behind to the right then to the left and waited for tr
The irony! You can use your own argument against youself, and should: "We must preserve freedom, so we need to steal our entertainment - something we do not need, and which is a luxury - because now that it's easier to do, we especially don't feel like paying for it."
Nice straw man. I said nothing about stealing anything. I don't support theft. I don't support copyright infringement (which is different to theft) either. Show me where I said "piracy" is good? However, nor do I support a bunch of middlemen taking most of the profits. If you're going to start your attack with the suggestion that I'm some sort of pirate sympathiser because I don't like the MPAA/RIAA cartels, I'm going to conclude that you're not talking to the right person.
Your rhetorical excesses (um, including Godwin, not "Goddard," unless you're making some rocketry allusion that I'm missing, here) are way off base.
Yep. Thanks for correcting that one. I typed it up fast and made a mistake.
First, you're welcome to attract funding, hire writers, talent, studio people and facilities, and make/release a movie any time you want, distributed by any means you want, and at whatever price (or lack of) that you might want to offer to your prospective audience. The web is full of productions like that, right? There is no barrier to entry, at this point.
What rubbish is this? If it were so simple, lots of actors, writers, directors etc. would go independent once they got popular and pocket the money currently paid to the associations. The truth is it's very hard to get into any kind of main stream distribution unless you pay the piper. As for internet releases etc. sure that's grand, but it's a much more difficult thing to distribute purely on the net and your audience is much smaller. Not many people are willing to sit for hours on a torrent and use up their Internet bandwidth. Hell a lot of people I know are still on dialup.
And if you don't want to allow a production company that happens to be an MPAA member from getting your dollars, just don't buy the work those hundreds (thousands) of people produce. But then have the intellectual honesty to not rip it off, either.
Once again you demonstrate the ability to open your mouth and let unfounded accusations and RUBBISH come out. Take a look at the posts I've made on USENET about not buying the latest flight sim. I don't buy heavily encumbered DRM'd rubbish even when I do want it. I don't steal it either thank you very bloody much.
Another thing, you're quick to criticise but I wonder how quickly you'd steal food if a large cartel decided to control all food supply and charge ridiculously for it. Food is a consumable unlike media content so the analogy doesn't extend to charging repeatedly too easily but imagine being asked for more money after each bite you took out of an apple on pain of 5 years imprisonment. Don't like it? Grow your own! Well we don't NEED music, movies, or software the way we need food but it's still a damn unreasonable thing to slap DRM all over it and run your business on the basis of trying to charge for it repeatedly.
Personally, where I work, I try to be very very conscious about peoples abilities, and completely shut off everything else. I don't care if you're a nice guy or not, doesn't matter at all...unless it impacts your ability to do work or other people's ability to do their work. Stink in a meeting? Whatever, you're doing a great job and don't worry we wouldn't make you meet with our customers directly as we know you wouldn't deal with it well.
If someone is sitting there in a meeting reeking of course it's going to affect their job and everyone else around them because they're not thinking about what's being discussed but about his bad smell. Likewise some hygiene is important or you'll find the employee is always getting sick. If your coder is nicely isolated from the customer because you would be embarassed to let him or her represent the company they can't be doing a very good job. Part of the job is to understand the customer's needs.
I've fired people that I actually liked a lot. I've fired more people that I'd actually hang out with outside of work than people that I wouldn't. On a personal level, I really can't stand some of the people I work with. Bottom line is though, that has just about zero impact on how they do their jobs. It takes all kinds.
Sure you don't fire people because you disagree with aspects unrelated to their job, but if you're sitting there thinking "I hate Bob. He's a twit" of course it's having an effect. You shouldn't be worried about their personal life. That's unprofessional. However if they're rude or arrogant or bring things to the table that lower morale that means they're NOT doing a good job. There isn't anything wrong with firing someone you like if they're unable to do the job and you're unable to help them change that because they're incapable of its impractical.
"Druids hate orcs". Reality check violated. Dazed and confused but continuing anyway.
Bad analogy. Bad, BAD analogy!
Yes, because text where every fourth phrase begins with "In my honest opinion" is so much more readable and sounds so much more confident. Lets all feel the need to apologise for our opinions.
/. these days??? Bloody hell.
Do you know what a BLOG site is? Yep. You guessed it. Opinions. You don't state them unless you think they're correct and it's impossible to be objective. If you don't like that what the fuck are you doing here? What kind of arrogant condescending fool comes onto a blog site and slams others for having an opinion? You think that makes you sound smart or wise?
By the way how do you measure intelligence? Yeah Linux wrote the original kernel and maintains it. Yes that requires intelligence of a form that's rare. That doesn't mean the guy can't be wrong or behave unintelligently in other matters. Doesn't mean that disagreeing with one of his opinions makes you stupid or unintelligent.
This TRASH is what gets modded as insightful on
I'm no fan of DRM, but comparing the inability to play a song on every player made to the plight of working 12-14 hours per day, every day, in dangerous facilities, from the time you're 6 till you die, is offbase.
How about imprisoning someone for breaking the DRM and playing the song anyway? Is that off base?
In any case do you REALLY think DRM technology will only be useful and used by media content companies? It's a tool to restrict and will be used in other matters including those to do with life and death.
You may have no use for the trade association these creative people support, but you'd better also have no use for films as good as Serenity. No money, no Serenity. You don't "win" anything by ripping off the very people that you're hoping will scrape together the money, talent, and time to make another movie you'll like.
Gimme a break. This has to be the most disingenuous argument I've read on slashdot in months and that's saying a lot.
Your argument is since a trade association is one way to help facilitate the production of good movie/tv content, we should put up with anything the current monopolistic trade associations do?
We need software therefore anyone producing software at any cost and no matter how restrictive the licensing is good?
We need food, therefore we should put up with a supermarket monopoly that will price gouge?
We need medicine, therefore testing a medical association for testing on the weak and poor should be tolerated?
We need government, therefore we need Nazism? (purposefully invoking Goddard's Law here)
The ends justify the means?
By the way it's been a long time since the big studios made something I truly like. Their best work comes about when they donate the money and stay out of the way of the creators ala most (but not all) of Babylon 5.
GPS is only accurate to within a few metres for position. It's MUCH more accurate for speed.
Here's the handheld I own:
http://gpsinformation.net/etrexlegend.htm
- Speed Accuracy specification 0.1 knot RMS steady state.
Here's an interpretation.
http://gpsinformation.net/main/gpsspeed.htm
"Velocity measured by a GPS is inherently 3 dimension, but consumer GPS receivers only report 2D (horizontal) speed on their readout. Garmin's specifications quote 0.1mph accuracy but due to signal degredation problems noted above, perhaps 0.5mph accuracy in typical automobile applications would be what you can count on."
That's very probably more accurate than your car's speedo.
So please check your facts before spreading such nonsense.
Let me clarify that 2nd point. This is the way it is where I live. NSW, Australia. We have a 12 demerit point system. If you lose 12 over any 3 year period your license is suspended. 3 points for 1km/hr over the limit. Double points on long weekends and holiday periods.
What right do you have to endanger me with your suggestion of limiting my car's maximum speed. So far, the ability to turn on the power and significantly exceed the speed limit has saved my life a number of times.
Then let me suggest 2 things:
1) You're not a very good driver if the only way you can avoid an accident is to accelerate like a mad man. "I have to be able to speed to be safe" is just rubbish.
2) If what you were saying was true, the law needs to be changed. As it stands speeding 4 times even by 1 km/hr would lose you your license if done within a 3 year period.
Total BS on all counts.
Name me one person who's managed to stick to the limit ALL THE TIME, and I'll show you an obsessive compulsive that's probably not safe on the road.
How about built in GPS speed limiters? No not devices aimed at fining you when you break the law, but devices that cap the speed limit to begin with. The only people who break the law then would be those that wilfully remove the devices. Oh and please don't use the argument that sometimes the speed is necessary to safely avoid trouble/overtake/whatever. Clearly wilful speeding currently causes more accidents than would be prevented by not having the speed limiter on the car.
This IS a technological not legislative problem. The trouble is the government authorities have become addicted to the revenue stream.
That happened near you too? Someone didn't hold down the shift key when their Sony music CD and now they want revenge? So they got a friend to distract the owner at Best Buy, and filled out an ahem complaint form.
Good little troll. Now go back and re-read the second definition. Use a dictionary if you must.
Call me crazy, but can't this last issue be fixed by locking your door? If you keep your doors locked, then it's really not too hard to figure out who's coming into your computer.
Yep and the penalty for not locking your door should be that you become a registered pedo. Fantastic logic.
I know C++ and Java and many more! Wait that's multilingual. What do you mean computer languages don't count?! What were we talking about again?
Doctors tend to be very insulting (under the guise of clinical) and are often incompetent. Insult their patients? Regularly!
I've had a doctor dismiss a sever ear blockage and ask why I wanted to take the day off to have it taken care of. Another one basically made fun of my weight. (No he didn't just use clinical terms. He insulted me and my mother waiting out side and told me I looked pregnant). I've had another continue to up the medication on someone very close that damn near killed her even though she was reporting contraindications that the drug company warns requires the patient to stop.
That's just the medical profession. I could go on about every other profession (how about a plumber that wanted to charge a blind man $8000 to unblock a single pipe - his relatives did it for free).
Lack of professionalism unique to I.T.? Gimme a break!
That only proves you're experienced with 2 women, who are genetically similar no less.
Some women just feel uncomfortable at that time of the month. Other's get grumpy. Others get downright irrational. I have met lovely women that turn into an irrational mess at that time of the month. So much so that I could tell even without daring to have that conversation. I've had one female boss who didn't do well at that time of the month and that was hell - she was generally a grumpty person to begin with so that made things unbearable. I've had plenty of female bosses though and she's the only one I'm glad I'm rid of, so I don't think I have an issue with women in authority in general. Frankly she needed something to fix her hormones. She was all over the place and not very professional.
Women feel like crap before their periods, during their periods, and sometimes just after their periods. Other part of the cycle they ovulate. Also your lack of familiarity with women shows big time. Not all women experience the same negative effects or to the same degree during their period.