Pure trash as an aim and end goal in itself, purposely taking the stripping of value to its limits.
from:
Am I the only one who finds this strip badly drawn and entirely unfunny? I promised myself that when I hit forty, I wouldn't lose touch, but I am beginning to feel a bit old: I appear to be the only person not carrying a bible who thinks the endless torrent(no pun intended) of graphic violence, profanity and scatalogical humor pouring from the web to be more boorish than humorous. Am I alone?
I don't see any discussion of intent or the stripping of value anywhere in there. Maybe you're way better at catching inferences than I am though. The poster was complaining about the endless torrent of graphic violence, profanity and scatalogical humor. I didn't see him complaining about creations which contain graphic violence, profanity and scatalogical humor that are completely devoid of any redeeming meaningful value and consist only of trash.
Also, I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to argue that PBF (or anything really, we're talking about art here), consists only of trash and is completely devoid of redeeming meaningful value. "Completely devoid of redeeming meaningful value" sounds almost useless as a phrase, come to think of it. Could we just say "unfunny" instead? Or if you wanted to use your words, "devoid of value"?
Could you give me some examples of the contemporary creations that have no redeeming meaningful value and no historical counterpart? I'm hard pressed to believe that webcomics have no precedent.
No one, including the RIAA's lawyer, has ever stated or implied or suggested that ripping your own personal copies of CDs to your computer is not a legitimate practice.
Are you joking? The way this sentence is constructed assures that it is false. I'll assume that you meant that there has been no official communication from the RIAA stating that making personal copies of CDs is not a legitimate practice.
This is almost true. I seem to remember a couple incidents to the contrary.
Here is one from February 2006, where the RIAA and other copyright industry associations submitted a filing that included this gem as part of their argument that space-shifting and format-shifting do not count as noninfringing uses, even when you are talking about making copies of your own CDs: "Nor does the fact that permission to make a copy in particular circumstances is often or even routinely granted, necessarily establish that the copying is a fair use when the copyright owner withholds that authorization. In this regard, the statement attributed to counsel for copyright owners in the MGM v. Grokster case is simply a statement about authorization, not about fair use."
The other incident that springs to mind is the whole DRM on CDs situation. Members of the RIAA were (still are?) releasing "CDs" with DRM to control how you rip the songs to your computer. If they could do this at all effectively then it would be much more widespread right now. What does it matter what they are saying when their actions speak so much louder?
I've got an N770 which is even cheaper than the N800. It doesn't have all the features of the N800 (No flash 9, no skype), but it still works really well for ebooks. The screen size and resolution are great and FBreader is awesome.
I've read maybe 10 books on it since I got it and am loving it. Checking email and/. in airports and hotels is just a bonus.
He's clearly not looking to circumvent existing anti-discrimination laws. Quit picking nits.
The important thing here (and what everyone but you is discussing) is the method that the information was retrieved. Personal information is getting easier to come by because of the Internet. Some of that personal information can legally be used in employment decisions. Welcome to the discussion.
How many people downloaded and paid for it on one machine and then decided to download it to another (at work, on a laptop in a hotel, whatever)? There are several things online I end up downloading countless times because it's easier to get it off the net than it is to keep everything on me.
"The existing Zip Car rental system has shown that people are willing to be part of a service that rewards members who are good custodians, according to Lark. He said the City Car could create the same type of community feeling of responsibility."
Your example of car-sharing is a good one. Hopefully if this project or one like it comes to fruition it will be more like car-sharing and car-rental and less like shopping carts and community bicycles (in North America anyway. Other commenters have pointed out that some cultures are more respectful of publically available resources).
My pessimism comes from assuming that the kiosks will be automatic and insufficient to monitor damages and that someone will eventually ruin it for everyone. I hope that such a project will sucessfully come to fruition, but I remain skeptical that people will find a way to screw it up.
Another approach for the cleanliness and vandalism issue would be to make the whole thing out of super hard plastic or something (no comfy seats, sorry; bring your own cushion) and have a pressure washer at the return end. Then at least we keep it automated.
Still not sure how to keep the automation and prevent use by stolen CC/identification. Maybe the kiosk could tie in with the CC companies' online verification systems that are already in place?
"I'm glad you feel qualified to make that decision for every other parent in the country."
The original law was that kids couldn't come in and buy the game. So if you think it's acceptable for your children then you go in and buy the game. I think it makes a lot more sense this way.
"So who gets the domain name ford.com? Ford Motor Company? Ford Musical Instruments? Betty Ford? Joe Ford, the guy down the street? Why should the one with the most money have any intrinsic right to the name? The internet's not just about commerce for big corporations."
(bold is mine)
"I feel that a decent way to address the problem is to actually hold register-ers to the purpose of the various top level domains."
"This is an incredible boon to musicians, who now only get screwed for 35 years, instead of forever."
A short time ago (before that satellite home viewer act of 1999 or whatever was passed) the rights to the music did revert to the artist after 35 years. The RIAA got it so that music recorded was classified as a 'work for hire' and _never_ reverted back. Don't think that the RIAA has done something good here, it has simply nullified one of its negative actions.
Of course when you mention it on slashdot, you know someone's going to come forward and say that they did it already.
I did this a couple of years ago. Unfortunately I didn't have enough lego to make the case solid (some gaps) or all one colour. When I left to go to university my parents took it apart. Oh well. I'll finish it someday.
Other ideas I had were sheet metal, hardwood (wouldn't an oak cdrom drive just look cool?), nerf...
But lego would definately be the best option. How can you beat ultimate expandibility?
Slashdot Mirror
How on earth did you get:
Pure trash as an aim and end goal in itself, purposely taking the stripping of value to its limits.
from:
Am I the only one who finds this strip badly drawn and entirely unfunny? I promised myself that when I hit forty, I wouldn't lose touch, but I am beginning to feel a bit old: I appear to be the only person not carrying a bible who thinks the endless torrent(no pun intended) of graphic violence, profanity and scatalogical humor pouring from the web to be more boorish than humorous. Am I alone?
I don't see any discussion of intent or the stripping of value anywhere in there. Maybe you're way better at catching inferences than I am though. The poster was complaining about the endless torrent of graphic violence, profanity and scatalogical humor. I didn't see him complaining about creations which contain graphic violence, profanity and scatalogical humor that are completely devoid of any redeeming meaningful value and consist only of trash.
Also, I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to argue that PBF (or anything really, we're talking about art here), consists only of trash and is completely devoid of redeeming meaningful value. "Completely devoid of redeeming meaningful value" sounds almost useless as a phrase, come to think of it. Could we just say "unfunny" instead? Or if you wanted to use your words, "devoid of value"?
Could you give me some examples of the contemporary creations that have no redeeming meaningful value and no historical counterpart? I'm hard pressed to believe that webcomics have no precedent.
are not new.
Ever read Macbeth?
There is absolutely no logical reason for prices to be higher in Canada anymore...
Except the really obvious one.
No one, including the RIAA's lawyer, has ever stated or implied or suggested that ripping your own personal copies of CDs to your computer is not a legitimate practice.
Are you joking? The way this sentence is constructed assures that it is false. I'll assume that you meant that there has been no official communication from the RIAA stating that making personal copies of CDs is not a legitimate practice.
This is almost true. I seem to remember a couple incidents to the contrary.
Here is one from February 2006, where the RIAA and other copyright industry associations submitted a filing that included this gem as part of their argument that space-shifting and format-shifting do not count as noninfringing uses, even when you are talking about making copies of your own CDs:
"Nor does the fact that permission to make a copy in particular circumstances is often or even routinely granted, necessarily establish that the copying is a fair use when the copyright owner withholds that authorization. In this regard, the statement attributed to counsel for copyright owners in the MGM v. Grokster case is simply a statement about authorization, not about fair use."
The other incident that springs to mind is the whole DRM on CDs situation. Members of the RIAA were (still are?) releasing "CDs" with DRM to control how you rip the songs to your computer. If they could do this at all effectively then it would be much more widespread right now. What does it matter what they are saying when their actions speak so much louder?
"what's your favorite desktop background image?"
...
Except that most of the users I know refer to that image as their "screen saver".
Help me.
I've got an N770 which is even cheaper than the N800. It doesn't have all the features of the N800 (No flash 9, no skype), but it still works really well for ebooks. The screen size and resolution are great and FBreader is awesome.
/. in airports and hotels is just a bonus.
I've read maybe 10 books on it since I got it and am loving it. Checking email and
no text
"Wasting tax money hurts the country twice over. First when the money is taken out of the economy, and second when it is not put to good use."
Unless NASA's parties consist of burning all of that money then there is no way that the money is being "taken out of the economy".
He's clearly not looking to circumvent existing anti-discrimination laws. Quit picking nits.
The important thing here (and what everyone but you is discussing) is the method that the information was retrieved. Personal information is getting easier to come by because of the Internet. Some of that personal information can legally be used in employment decisions. Welcome to the discussion.
"bat an eyebrow"
This sounds like a technique worth learning.
How many people downloaded and paid for it on one machine and then decided to download it to another (at work, on a laptop in a hotel, whatever)? There are several things online I end up downloading countless times because it's easier to get it off the net than it is to keep everything on me.
A key passage from the article:
"The existing Zip Car rental system has shown that people are willing to be part of a service that rewards members who are good custodians, according to Lark. He said the City Car could create the same type of community feeling of responsibility."
Your example of car-sharing is a good one. Hopefully if this project or one like it comes to fruition it will be more like car-sharing and car-rental and less like shopping carts and community bicycles (in North America anyway. Other commenters have pointed out that some cultures are more respectful of publically available resources).
My pessimism comes from assuming that the kiosks will be automatic and insufficient to monitor damages and that someone will eventually ruin it for everyone. I hope that such a project will sucessfully come to fruition, but I remain skeptical that people will find a way to screw it up.
Another approach for the cleanliness and vandalism issue would be to make the whole thing out of super hard plastic or something (no comfy seats, sorry; bring your own cushion) and have a pressure washer at the return end. Then at least we keep it automated.
Still not sure how to keep the automation and prevent use by stolen CC/identification. Maybe the kiosk could tie in with the CC companies' online verification systems that are already in place?
How would you ensure that the credit card and driver's licence belong to the driver?
I still see theft as a potentially big problem for these cars. Abuse/vandalism even moreso.
How long until there's grafiti everywhere, the seats are slashed, and the cars are rendered unusable by the public?
Not that this isn't a great idea. It's just depressing that people will purposefuly ruin things like this.
(Okay, so not exactly "Tragedy of the Commons")
That was a long long time ago.
"I'm glad you feel qualified to make that decision for every other parent in the country."
The original law was that kids couldn't come in and buy the game. So if you think it's acceptable for your children then you go in and buy the game. I think it makes a lot more sense this way.
From the previous post:
"So who gets the domain name ford.com? Ford Motor Company? Ford Musical Instruments? Betty Ford? Joe Ford, the guy down the street? Why should the one with the most money have any intrinsic right to the name? The internet's not just about commerce for big corporations."
(bold is mine)
"I feel that a decent way to address the problem is to actually hold register-ers to the purpose of the various top level domains."
Um... 'nuff said?
#1 - It's not a tax, it's a tariff.
#2 - It hasn't been imposed yet.
I saw a copy of Windows 3.11 on sale at a local computer store a couple of months ago for around $80 Canadian. I'd be happy to ship it to you.
Maybe you should try checking with the copyright holders instead of the authors.
(or does software revert to authors after a certain time?)
"This is an incredible boon to musicians, who now only get screwed for 35 years, instead of forever."
A short time ago (before that satellite home viewer act of 1999 or whatever was passed) the rights to the music did revert to the artist after 35 years. The RIAA got it so that music recorded was classified as a 'work for hire' and _never_ reverted back. Don't think that the RIAA has done something good here, it has simply nullified one of its negative actions.
Reminds me of the Zero-One-Infinity Rule.
r o-One-Infinity-Rule.html
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Ze
He's just saying that you'd need more than one, whatever that number happens to be.
Well he's obviously a Mac user.
Of course when you mention it on slashdot, you know someone's going to come forward and say that they did it already.
I did this a couple of years ago. Unfortunately I didn't have enough lego to make the case solid (some gaps) or all one colour. When I left to go to university my parents took it apart. Oh well. I'll finish it someday.
Other ideas I had were sheet metal, hardwood (wouldn't an oak cdrom drive just look cool?), nerf...
But lego would definately be the best option. How can you beat ultimate expandibility?