If the government built a public park would that mean it would be ok for all government agencies to surreptitiously intercept and record all communications that take place there?
Like it or not, the internet is a global phenomenon, and a public resource. Yep, that's right, a public resource. Or should be anyway. Perhaps it's not "fair" to those who originally invested in it, but that's tough. When things become public commodities, control goes to the public. This is why it is ok to insanely raise prices in your little store, but illegal to gouge commodities and form monopolistic partnerships. Some people have the misconception that societies have to be "fair". Wrong. Societies exist for themselves, not the individual. Which is why copyright and patents EXPIRE, and become public domain. They are not god given rights, they are only "priveleges" donated to an individual for a limited time by the greater society. Don't like it? Tough. Move to China.
Yes. When I first installed Red Hat Linux 5.0, the biggest stumbling block for me wasn't the command line or unix "way" (I can use *nix just fine, although administration is another thing). It was X. Everything was pretty straightforward until it came to configuring the most important part of a desktop system. I had to run obscure configuration programs and scripts and provide carnal knowledge of my hardware, with the disclamer that my monitor may be destroyed, etc. I had to choose amongst myriad window managers, each with their own control key and window manipulation conventions. Basically the GUI on Linux is a trainwreck of klunky mismatched mixed up parts (or so it was at least from a user perspective).
A Linux GUI needs consistency. Repeat this. While inconsistency under the guise of "choice" is a good way to scare off newbies who are not 1337, it is just a major headache for anybody who want to *quickly* *accomplish* *tasks* without becoming intimitely familiar with the idiosynchrasies of the various parts of the GUI. Look - I may not be a super unix guru, but I'm not the dullest person either. I am a programmer, but I am *also* a user. There are times I want to wear my user hat but *not* my programmer/hacker hat. Unlike in star wars, everything good should NOT need hacking on to work well.
The audio file sharing software appears to be the digital equivalent of unsafe sex: a disaster waiting to happen. To log onto the system is to risk your hard drive on the assumption that the person on the other end is in fact the oxymoron he or she claims to be: an honest felon.
Oh please, this is just laughable. I really don't think anything malicious (other than depriving artists of compensation) can be done through Napster.
It may only be a matter of time before someone's system is attacked. Computer security experts warn that brilliant hackers regularly attempt to gain unathorized access to computers around the world despite complex security systems. Mark Rasch, a former federal prosecutor and security consultant, told the Washington Post that 30 to 50 Web sites are hacked each week.
What the hell do web sites have to do with anything?
In fact, a pro-Napster computer hacker vandalized the D.C. Metro's Web site for several hours in late May, lashing out at Metallica for filing suit against the file sharing company in an effort to halt illegal song trading.
And what does that say about the validity of the argument? Nothing.
This is really just pathetic and laughable. It is really unfortunate that there are some trying to confuse artists even *more*. Napster needs to start behaving and be a bit more responsible and accountable to artists. Artist need to find any way they can to get out of the death clutches of big exploitive record labels. If Napster is exploiting artists it is a temporary misuse of technology. This technology can actually give artists their freedom back. Sure, Napster may be "bad" in some people's eyes...but that doesn't mean all services like it have to be.
This is stupid. The US already has the ESRB, so we don't NEED any laws for this. If you are under 18 you are your PARENT'S RESPONSIBILITY. If they think you can play it, they should allow you. If they don't they shouldn't. By mandating this type of thing you take power AWAY from parents and assume that big brother knows best. This is so ridiculous because anybody can read the ESRB label that says mature audiences. What next, are they going to make Liesure Suit Larry illegal?
Well, no. When software is compiled or otherwise used for some public utility I think that qualifies as a "redistribution". It happens not to be binary. I think instead of saying "binary redistribution" the GPL should say "non-source-code redistribution". In otherwords, if you distribute the *functionality* of a modified GPLed program source you must also make available that source.
I guess it really depends on the determination of "redistribution". I can see a company taking a GPLed program source and using it to serve some intranet function without having to make the source available to the public. But once the functionality of that modified program is opened up to the public at large, I think that could be considered a "redistribution", and the public should have the right to that source.
I think instead we should teach children that using firearms and various other anti-personel munitions actually don't have any bad consequences. When you use these weapons the enemy should merely frown or fall down. In this way we can ensure that children do not grow up with the warped perception that using weapons and hurting people really has any bad consequences for anybody.
Please ban this game. I just purchased this game a while ago. And while it had great graphics, a compelling storyline, and kept me on the edge of my seat, like a good horror movie that I would be allowed to watch, I felt something strange was happening to me. I applied to the Army and Merchant Marines, but I was rejected for psychological disorders or something (stupid bastards, I will kill them tomorrow). So I just decided to become a mercenary. All of a sudden I'm in a world of killing, maiming, assassinations, guerilla warfare. Usama Bin Laden just called me this morning actually.
So you see this is not a joke. This game should be banned before other kids like me go bad.
Oh shaddup. Nobody will ever curl up in bed with a cut of tea and a monitor. Katz's book was more for everybody ELSE than it was for geeks. There are some things that are just worth shelling money out for. In any case a book is not Open Media in any sense. You buy it, you read it. I think they made a good decision judging that most sane people would rather shell out a few bucks for a good book than go blind being cheap-asses reading it on their CRT.
Ok, CmdrTaco, this is just stupid. If I have my setting set to Plain Old Text and include some HTML, Preview renders the HTML. That makes me think "Preview looks correct. I shall post!". And then when I post my link gets mangled. Conclusion: Preview should be aware of what mode I'm attempting to post in and show the ACTUAL result of what will happen when I hit submit.
"Is this situation that bad? How much does an artist get vs. the record company?"
Yes it is. Read Courtney Love's ?a href="http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14 /love/index.html"?Salon article?/a?. Artists are little more than indentured servants who don't even get to own the products they create. Seems awful close to the sweatshop analogy.
"Each sweatshop worker is not producing a unique good with their name on it whose sales reflect their individual work."
Which is basically the opinion of record labels of artists' work. It's "contract" work. Like migrant strawberry pickers.
"Also, I don't know about the relative pay difference between what the record company makes vs. the artist, in comparison to the sweatshop analogy."
Well, most artists have trouble breaking even. Sure in this country our average quality of life is so high that just breaking even or being broke is totally incomparable to any person in a third-world country, but still MOST are not raking it in.
"Again, if your quest is really to kill the record companies, you should try to have the decency to get money to the artist somehow. If you download Metallica songs, and listen to them with frequency, then to me, you are morally obligated to go to paylars.com and send some money his way."
I agree with you 100%. We SHOULD get the money to the artists some how. But right now the record companies are the big fat middle men we have to go through. Why? Let's buck the status quo and show them that artists and fans don't NEED the middle men. Hell, if I could buy CDs or music *directly* from the artist, do you really think I'd pay more to a record company instead?
"I'm all for Napster and the like, because of the fact that they CAN make record companies either more responsible or obsolete entirely. I just feel that people misuse them, and they are not going towards helping artists and helping society."
Yes, I have a whole separate rant about Napster. Everybody is bitching bullshit about how Metallica are some "corporate whores" or something. Utter bullshit. Metallica's whole point is that Napster should be talking to THEM. THEM. The artists. NOT the record companies. Napster should have approached *them* and asked if they wanted to do some deal or something. This needs to be done to *start* the process of direct artist-to-fan distribution. What Napster did though is go over to the record companies and say "Hey, those indentured servants of yours make some good music. Let's get richer mutually exploiting them in opening a new market all for ourselves." Napster should be talking to the artists not the record companies.
As a Java programmer, properties is something I really miss from Delphi. To some extent the JavaBean spec informally defines "sorta-properties", but it seems to be done in a really bungled language-external way.
Every time I have to write setters and getters for all my fields I groan and think how easy it was in Delphi/Object Pascal to just apply an access policy to the field itself.
Nobody is "punishing" AIDs victims by throwing them in jail are they? It was their fault they had unprotected sex, right? So they should be put in jail, right?
Obviously wrong. This is why the war against drugs is failing. Drug addiction is a SYMPTOM of a larger problem. We keep treating the symptom with bad medicine but never attack the root. People are POOR. People are UNCARED FOR. People have PROBLEMS. This is why they turn to drugs (and yes, if you are doing drugs because they are "cool", you too have a problem). We need to solve this problem. Not just punish people.
I think that absolute libertarianess borders on the irresponsible (it IS in our constitutional charter to provide for the wellfare of ALL citizens), while absolute authoritarianess obviously brings a whole bag of liberty infringements. Yes, I thought Harry Browne had a lot of intelligent things to say. Both Browne and Nader agree that the war on drugs has essentially turned into a war on the people. But I think the total laissez faire economic policy of the Libertarian party is completely irresponsible and reprehensible. So this leaves me dead center with respect to libertarianess vs. authoritarianess. That leaves me as a "Left-Liberal" and the acurate description:
"Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality."
Somebody called Nader a "wing-nut". I have no idea what they are talking about, and apparently they haven't spent much time listening to Nader. I am less pro-Green-party than I am pro-Nader. Of all places, we here on Slashdot, the internet community, should have realized by now the great force that megacorporations have, and the corruption they have brought to politics. Nader has been fighting this since the SIXTIES. This is nothing new. He is not some Johnny-come-lately jumping on the federal matching funds bandwagon. If you listen to him, you realize that this is a normal citizen, not some career politition. He takes this position reluctantly because no one else will. So I urge you, before commenting off the cuff how "wing-nut" a guy is, to actually listen to his ideas. Sure, perhaps the Green party has some kooks in it, I don't really know, but Nader is right on. There is not one thing this guy has uttered that I have not completely agreed with, which is so refreshing and surprising that I am going to donate to his campaign and vote for him. It's about time us "apathetic" silent majority get off our keisters and take back control of our country.
Man, your right! We won't be able to compile Object Pascal with GCC. Shit, can we compile Ada, Eiffel or Fortran with GCC. You better look into it, because it would mean all those program written in other languages would be non-free!! Damn!!
Slashdot Mirror
If the government built a public park would that mean it would be ok for all government agencies to surreptitiously intercept and record all communications that take place there?
Like it or not, the internet is a global phenomenon, and a public resource. Yep, that's right, a public resource. Or should be anyway. Perhaps it's not "fair" to those who originally invested in it, but that's tough. When things become public commodities, control goes to the public. This is why it is ok to insanely raise prices in your little store, but illegal to gouge commodities and form monopolistic partnerships. Some people have the misconception that societies have to be "fair". Wrong. Societies exist for themselves, not the individual. Which is why copyright and patents EXPIRE, and become public domain. They are not god given rights, they are only "priveleges" donated to an individual for a limited time by the greater society. Don't like it? Tough. Move to China.
Yes. When I first installed Red Hat Linux 5.0, the biggest stumbling block for me wasn't the command line or unix "way" (I can use *nix just fine, although administration is another thing). It was X. Everything was pretty straightforward until it came to configuring the most important part of a desktop system. I had to run obscure configuration programs and scripts and provide carnal knowledge of my hardware, with the disclamer that my monitor may be destroyed, etc. I had to choose amongst myriad window managers, each with their own control key and window manipulation conventions. Basically the GUI on Linux is a trainwreck of klunky mismatched mixed up parts (or so it was at least from a user perspective).
A Linux GUI needs consistency. Repeat this. While inconsistency under the guise of "choice" is a good way to scare off newbies who are not 1337, it is just a major headache for anybody who want to *quickly* *accomplish* *tasks* without becoming intimitely familiar with the idiosynchrasies of the various parts of the GUI. Look - I may not be a super unix guru, but I'm not the dullest person either. I am a programmer, but I am *also* a user. There are times I want to wear my user hat but *not* my programmer/hacker hat. Unlike in star wars, everything good should NOT need hacking on to work well.
Don't believe the tabloids.
I think I am a confused node now...
This is stupid. The US already has the ESRB, so we don't NEED any laws for this. If you are under 18 you are your PARENT'S RESPONSIBILITY. If they think you can play it, they should allow you. If they don't they shouldn't. By mandating this type of thing you take power AWAY from parents and assume that big brother knows best. This is so ridiculous because anybody can read the ESRB label that says mature audiences. What next, are they going to make Liesure Suit Larry illegal?
Well, no. When software is compiled or otherwise used for some public utility I think that qualifies as a "redistribution". It happens not to be binary. I think instead of saying "binary redistribution" the GPL should say "non-source-code redistribution". In otherwords, if you distribute the *functionality* of a modified GPLed program source you must also make available that source.
I guess it really depends on the determination of "redistribution". I can see a company taking a GPLed program source and using it to serve some intranet function without having to make the source available to the public. But once the functionality of that modified program is opened up to the public at large, I think that could be considered a "redistribution", and the public should have the right to that source.
I think instead we should teach children that using firearms and various other anti-personel munitions actually don't have any bad consequences. When you use these weapons the enemy should merely frown or fall down. In this way we can ensure that children do not grow up with the warped perception that using weapons and hurting people really has any bad consequences for anybody.
Please ban this game. I just purchased this game a while ago. And while it had great graphics, a compelling storyline, and kept me on the edge of my seat, like a good horror movie that I would be allowed to watch, I felt something strange was happening to me. I applied to the Army and Merchant Marines, but I was rejected for psychological disorders or something (stupid bastards, I will kill them tomorrow). So I just decided to become a mercenary. All of a sudden I'm in a world of killing, maiming, assassinations, guerilla warfare. Usama Bin Laden just called me this morning actually.
So you see this is not a joke. This game should be banned before other kids like me go bad.
...trust amongst thieves and all...
Damn, he's screwing up people's ability to pirate music. Bastard.
I think it is the Orthodox Farts we have the most to fear from.
The 00 generation has Britney Spears and ADD.
I fart in your general direction Snooty House.
Oh shaddup. Nobody will ever curl up in bed with a cut of tea and a monitor. Katz's book was more for everybody ELSE than it was for geeks. There are some things that are just worth shelling money out for. In any case a book is not Open Media in any sense. You buy it, you read it. I think they made a good decision judging that most sane people would rather shell out a few bucks for a good book than go blind being cheap-asses reading it on their CRT.
Ok, CmdrTaco, this is just stupid. If I have my setting set to Plain Old Text and include some HTML, Preview renders the HTML. That makes me think "Preview looks correct. I shall post!". And then when I post my link gets mangled. Conclusion: Preview should be aware of what mode I'm attempting to post in and show the ACTUAL result of what will happen when I hit submit.
Sorry, I didn't uncheck +1 Bonus. I'll moderate your Hot Grits up next time AC ;)
"Is this situation that bad? How much does an artist get vs. the record company?"
4 /love/index.html"?Salon article?/a?. Artists are little more than indentured servants who don't even get to own the products they create. Seems awful close to the sweatshop analogy.
Yes it is. Read Courtney Love's ?a href="http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/1
"Each sweatshop worker is not producing a unique good with their name on it whose sales reflect their individual work."
Which is basically the opinion of record labels of artists' work. It's "contract" work. Like migrant strawberry pickers.
"Also, I don't know about the relative pay difference between what the record company makes vs. the artist, in comparison to the sweatshop analogy."
Well, most artists have trouble breaking even. Sure in this country our average quality of life is so high that just breaking even or being broke is totally incomparable to any person in a third-world country, but still MOST are not raking it in.
"Again, if your quest is really to kill the record companies, you should try to have the decency to get money to the artist somehow. If you download Metallica songs, and listen to them with frequency, then to me, you are morally obligated to go to paylars.com and send some money his way."
I agree with you 100%. We SHOULD get the money to the artists some how. But right now the record companies are the big fat middle men we have to go through. Why? Let's buck the status quo and show them that artists and fans don't NEED the middle men. Hell, if I could buy CDs or music *directly* from the artist, do you really think I'd pay more to a record company instead?
"I'm all for Napster and the like, because of the fact that they CAN make record companies either more responsible or obsolete entirely. I just feel that people misuse them, and they are not going towards helping artists and helping society."
Yes, I have a whole separate rant about Napster. Everybody is bitching bullshit about how Metallica are some "corporate whores" or something. Utter bullshit. Metallica's whole point is that Napster should be talking to THEM. THEM. The artists. NOT the record companies. Napster should have approached *them* and asked if they wanted to do some deal or something. This needs to be done to *start* the process of direct artist-to-fan distribution. What Napster did though is go over to the record companies and say "Hey, those indentured servants of yours make some good music. Let's get richer mutually exploiting them in opening a new market all for ourselves." Napster should be talking to the artists not the record companies.
Down with Old Fartism! Up with Pop Superficiality! Rah!...er something...I can't concentrate...I think I need a Pepsi...
As a Java programmer, properties is something I really miss from Delphi. To some extent the JavaBean spec informally defines "sorta-properties", but it seems to be done in a really bungled language-external way.
Every time I have to write setters and getters for all my fields I groan and think how easy it was in Delphi/Object Pascal to just apply an access policy to the field itself.
Nobody is "punishing" AIDs victims by throwing them in jail are they? It was their fault they had unprotected sex, right? So they should be put in jail, right?
Obviously wrong. This is why the war against drugs is failing. Drug addiction is a SYMPTOM of a larger problem. We keep treating the symptom with bad medicine but never attack the root. People are POOR. People are UNCARED FOR. People have PROBLEMS. This is why they turn to drugs (and yes, if you are doing drugs because they are "cool", you too have a problem). We need to solve this problem. Not just punish people.
The only withdrawal symptoms I've had are reverting back to a state of irritability and lack of concentration. 8|
I voted naked with hot grits in my lap. I should be safe then right?
;)
(sorry, just can't help it
Here's a little politics continuum. You have left and right, and then you also have libertarian and authoritarian.
2 873
1 =1&p2=2&p3=2&p4=1&p5=2&e1=1&e2=1&e3=0&e4=0 &e5=0&pres=Ralph+Nader
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html?clicktrade=37
I think that absolute libertarianess borders on the irresponsible (it IS in our constitutional charter to provide for the wellfare of ALL citizens), while absolute authoritarianess obviously brings a whole bag of liberty infringements. Yes, I thought Harry Browne had a lot of intelligent things to say. Both Browne and Nader agree that the war on drugs has essentially turned into a war on the people. But I think the total laissez faire economic policy of the Libertarian party is completely irresponsible and reprehensible. So this leaves me dead center with respect to libertarianess vs. authoritarianess. That leaves me as a "Left-Liberal" and the acurate description:
"Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality."
Somebody called Nader a "wing-nut". I have no idea what they are talking about, and apparently they haven't spent much time listening to Nader. I am less pro-Green-party than I am pro-Nader. Of all places, we here on Slashdot, the internet community, should have realized by now the great force that megacorporations have, and the corruption they have brought to politics. Nader has been fighting this since the SIXTIES. This is nothing new. He is not some Johnny-come-lately jumping on the federal matching funds bandwagon. If you listen to him, you realize that this is a normal citizen, not some career politition. He takes this position reluctantly because no one else will. So I urge you, before commenting off the cuff how "wing-nut" a guy is, to actually listen to his ideas. Sure, perhaps the Green party has some kooks in it, I don't really know, but Nader is right on. There is not one thing this guy has uttered that I have not completely agreed with, which is so refreshing and surprising that I am going to donate to his campaign and vote for him. It's about time us "apathetic" silent majority get off our keisters and take back control of our country.
http://www.self-gov.org/cgi/sec.cgi?quiz=quiz&p
Man, your right! We won't be able to compile Object Pascal with GCC. Shit, can we compile Ada, Eiffel or Fortran with GCC. You better look into it, because it would mean all those program written in other languages would be non-free!! Damn!!