People legally download songs with Napster from me all the time. Although I'd have to agree that Napster by its very nature is not condusive to distributing unknown/indie music.
It would be pretty stupid to send them a check. "Hi. I pirate your music. Here's my name and address. Come and get me." Of course stating on a public forum that you pirate their music isn't much better (If you're logged in).
Are you simply fighting the immediate profit loss from the piracy of your music? Or do you see the distribution of music over the Internet as a threat to the current record industry and therefore to yourselves?
I thought up this idea for a game awhile ago. You could be the Executive Producer (or something) of a TV Talk Show (like Ricki Lake or Donahue). You get to choose who hosts the show, and the different topics from week to week. There some good potential for brawl cut scenes.
If I only had either a whole bunch of time on my hands, or a whole bunch of money. Or both.
Actually condoms do have an expiration date. Also, keeping them in your wallet is a bad idea. Just trying to keep you informed. Unplanned pregnancies are usually not all that "cool".
I remember this. A friend and I were feeding it some problems we were making up. When we said: "My wife thinks my penis is too small." It said: "What about the inlaws."
Also, you could get it to say something by typing SAY and then the phrase. Which lead to this:
us: say Can I fsck you? Dr: Can I fsck you? us: no Dr: Why not?
Now is it lame or is it sick? Or is it lame because it is sick?
I occasionally enjoy The Stile Project because of Stile's writing. It's hard to find social commentary on the 'net that's intelligent and humorous imho (or maybe I'm not looking hard enough). While he does have a whole wack of 'shock value' pictures, videos, and other things, his writing and his music can be very enjoyable.
Just make sure you aren't eating something when you go to his site is all.
I post a little comment about how I personally feel about a certain word being used a certain way, and all of a sudden I'm Big Brother and I'm going to vaporize you?
Calm down.
Sure I used homophobic instead of 'people who hate homosexuals'. I did this mainly because I feel the term homophobic can be extended to those people pretty effortlessly. I don't see how this usage is subverting the truth to make the politically correct feel better. I don't see what sort of gain this allows them.
Seriously, I could care less if you use 'gay' in this manner. I was simply stating that when I come accross people who do, I get pissed off. That's still allowed isn't it? Can I get a little angry? Or does that make you feel oppressed? Having trouble getting it up lately?
One thing I forgot to add in my last post is that a really good reason not to use 'gay' to mean 'bad' is that there are probably people around you who will have a lesser opinion of you because of it.
Anyway, I've just managed to sneak out of my militant pollitically correct meeting to post this message, so I should probably get back to it.
I know you're just joking... but one thing that really gets on my nerves, is the substitution of the word 'bad' (or lame or whatever) with the word 'gay'.
People that use it argue that they don't mean to imply that homosexuality is bad when they say it and and I believe that a lot of them don't. Unfortunately, this implication is still made.
I often confront people about the use of the word 'gay' in this manner. Most people are instantly apologetic and tell me they meant no offence to homosexuality. There's the odd person, however, that tells me "But gay does mean bad." These people are encouraged in their homophobia by others' using this slang. This is reason enough, in my opinion, to stop using it.
As I said before, I realise you're only joking. In fact, you're probably even poking fun at the people who do use the word 'gay' like that. I just figured that this needed to be said.
Hollywood often does remakes. It's not just a recent trend. These remakes are sometimes better than the original too.
It's like saying, "Well, Linux has already been coded. We have to start from scratch."
It's refreshing that the movie world can admit that their movies aren't perfect, and that some would benefit from a remake. Sometimes a remake is done to show respect and to renew the original. Look at Scarface.
I'm just going to get down to what really bugs me about your posting.
I didn't mind your first post. It's been awhile since I've seen Planet of the Apes, and I didn't remember any racist connotations, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Sure... it's possible.
After that though, when some people responded that they didn't think that the movie was refering to black people as apes. You replied inferring that they said it's okay to call black people apes in the right context (when really they said nothing of the kind).
The next guy said "Nobody's calling black people apes". He was clearly talking about the movie and not society, which you accused him of.
You accused me of being willfully stupid and not displaying a comment that you made how you meant it. Well you have been doing this since the start of this discussion. You are creating arguments and disagreements out of nothing.
I have no doubt that there is racism. I do, however, doubt that this movie was created with racist intentions.
And by this I mean the CDs AND pirating their music. By pirating their music you're helping propagate the idea that their music is the only music worth listening to. There's tonnes of stuff on mp3.com and other sites like it. Sure, there's crap on it too, but isn't that also the case with the Record Industry? (though the record industry's crap is probably more professional sounding).
It's becoming easier and easier to record and distribute your own music. So who needs labels anymore?
Let them have their Backstreet Boys and start supporting artists who are brave enough to strike out on their own (GAMH anyone?)
What I'm really concerned with is your claim that computer geeks are one of the most racist groups in society because they don't meet any black people.
What about the computer geeks that are black people? They must have a hard time dealing with their ancestry versus their hatred of black people. (I'm being sarcastic)
Or are you suggesting that black people can't be computer geeks? If this is the case, I'd have to wonder just who the racist is.
I happen to believe that computer geeks don't care much about race. So maybe I'm a little idealistic. When we meet and discuss here on/. we don't ask what someone's ancestry is before we support or denounce their position. We judge people soley on their intelligence, accuracy, and writing skills.
That's just my take on things.
Just an aside: Maybe I'm in the wrong generation or country, but I have never heard of ape used to describe black people (I'm not doubting that this happenes, I've just never heard of it before).
About this whole Planet of the Apes thing: I happen to like Tim Burton. I will definately re-watch some of his films for hints of racism though.
The hostility comes from the fact that the networks sell their ad space based on demographics and location. You could be watching FOX on iCrave with ads for stores in Toronto, Ontario. What good does this do the advertiser?
"We distributed a few thousand copies of the newspaper for free every week. That didn't change the fact that all the information in the paper was copyrighted."
What if there was a law that said otherwise?
This is exactly the case here. It is legal to rebroadcast Canadian TV, unaltered, anywhere in Canada. Not such an open and shut case anymore...
Under Canadian law it is legal to rebroadcast TV signals that are in the air. I think this is to allow some cable companies to pick up some american stations for free and include them in their package (although I could have no idea what I'm talking about).
As long as they don't broadcast to the States (which I guess they're doing), it isn't illegal. They are making it the viewer's responsibility whether the law is broken or not. I'm not sure if that holds up though.
AFAIK, if they only rebroadcast within Canada, it's legal. Hope this clarifies things.
iCraveTV is a great idea that someone had the guts to implement. Great thing is, because of Canadian law, it's perfectly legal.
How much responsibility is it of theirs to make sure only people in Canada access their servers? I'd argue that they're doing enough, but does anyone know for sure? Certainly an interesting question. Another one would be if Canada should change its laws to outlaw this sort of thing.
That, if done right, could seriously reach epic status.
Other books that would make great movies (or maybe I just thought they would): -Bodyguard by William C. Dietz -The Chung Kwo (sp?) series... forget the author.
They're both futuristic type worlds... no trollocs or anything tho...
I've got the most wonderful ADSL plan here in Canada.
For some reason or another, the company has decided not to charge me. I haven't been billed for the setup fees or usage fees at all. I also don't owe them anything (I checked).
I think Austrailians should look into this kind of pricing plan. It is most satisfactory.:)
The Matrix was cool because it was the first pretty original Science Fiction movie to come out of mainstream movie making in awhile. Sure it wasn't that complicated for science fiction, but I had non-geek friends who had to watch it twice to understand it. Just my take on things.
"Did you read the rest of the article or just stop there? The next paragraph mentions that Slashdot does indeed have a moderation system....."
Yes I did read the rest of the article it's just this stuck out to me as being wrong and I felt like commenting on it. You're right though, they do mention the moderation system later on. This article is full of contradictions it seems. From "It needs something like eBay has... It has something like eBay has" to "It isn't journalism... is this really journalism?" (someone else pointed it out)
They need to proofread... sheesh. Or at least skim for consistency.
From the article: "All that seems to be missing from Slashdot-type sites is some kind of reputation rating system, where participants are assigned a trust rating based on feedback from the group and managed by a central authority."
wtf??? Isn't the moderation system like this? It seems to fit the description above, albeit it has a few flaws (probably mostly to do with varying personal opinions, tho).
Hrm. Maybe I'm just missing what they're trying to say. Comments?
What the little blurb up there doesn't mention, is that the tarrif was scheduled for January 1st, 1999. As I understand it, they were going to charge businesses for all cds sold after Jan 1, even though they hadn't agreed on an amount yet! This resulted in some stores adding arbitrary amounts in order to compensate for what they were going to get charged (or maybe they were just BSing me).
What I can't stand about this is, what about software piracy?! There are some $15,000 programs floating around which probably have been copied a time or two. It's not just the recording companies that are being ripped off.
Further more, there are plenty of legal uses for cd-rs.
Slashdot Mirror
People legally download songs with Napster from me all the time. Although I'd have to agree that Napster by its very nature is not condusive to distributing unknown/indie music.
It would be pretty stupid to send them a check. "Hi. I pirate your music. Here's my name and address. Come and get me." Of course stating on a public forum that you pirate their music isn't much better (If you're logged in).
Are you simply fighting the immediate profit loss from the piracy of your music? Or do you see the distribution of music over the Internet as a threat to the current record industry and therefore to yourselves?
I thought up this idea for a game awhile ago. You could be the Executive Producer (or something) of a TV Talk Show (like Ricki Lake or Donahue). You get to choose who hosts the show, and the different topics from week to week. There some good potential for brawl cut scenes.
If I only had either a whole bunch of time on my hands, or a whole bunch of money. Or both.
Actually condoms do have an expiration date. Also, keeping them in your wallet is a bad idea. Just trying to keep you informed. Unplanned pregnancies are usually not all that "cool".
Heh.
I remember this. A friend and I were feeding it some problems we were making up. When we said:
"My wife thinks my penis is too small."
It said:
"What about the inlaws."
Also, you could get it to say something by typing SAY and then the phrase. Which lead to this:
us: say Can I fsck you?
Dr: Can I fsck you?
us: no
Dr: Why not?
we just cracked up.
Keep in mind we were only 15 or so.
Now is it lame or is it sick? Or is it lame because it is sick?
I occasionally enjoy The Stile Project because of Stile's writing. It's hard to find social commentary on the 'net that's intelligent and humorous imho (or maybe I'm not looking hard enough). While he does have a whole wack of 'shock value' pictures, videos, and other things, his writing and his music can be very enjoyable.
Just make sure you aren't eating something when you go to his site is all.
I post a little comment about how I personally feel about a certain word being used a certain way, and all of a sudden I'm Big Brother and I'm going to vaporize you?
Calm down.
Sure I used homophobic instead of 'people who hate homosexuals'. I did this mainly because I feel the term homophobic can be extended to those people pretty effortlessly. I don't see how this usage is subverting the truth to make the politically correct feel better. I don't see what sort of gain this allows them.
Seriously, I could care less if you use 'gay' in this manner. I was simply stating that when I come accross people who do, I get pissed off. That's still allowed isn't it? Can I get a little angry? Or does that make you feel oppressed? Having trouble getting it up lately?
One thing I forgot to add in my last post is that a really good reason not to use 'gay' to mean 'bad' is that there are probably people around you who will have a lesser opinion of you because of it.
Anyway, I've just managed to sneak out of my militant pollitically correct meeting to post this message, so I should probably get back to it.
I know you're just joking... but one thing that really gets on my nerves, is the substitution of the word 'bad' (or lame or whatever) with the word 'gay'.
People that use it argue that they don't mean to imply that homosexuality is bad when they say it and and I believe that a lot of them don't. Unfortunately, this implication is still made.
I often confront people about the use of the word 'gay' in this manner. Most people are instantly apologetic and tell me they meant no offence to homosexuality. There's the odd person, however, that tells me "But gay does mean bad." These people are encouraged in their homophobia by others' using this slang. This is reason enough, in my opinion, to stop using it.
As I said before, I realise you're only joking. In fact, you're probably even poking fun at the people who do use the word 'gay' like that. I just figured that this needed to be said.
Hollywood often does remakes. It's not just a recent trend. These remakes are sometimes better than the original too.
It's like saying, "Well, Linux has already been coded. We have to start from scratch."
It's refreshing that the movie world can admit that their movies aren't perfect, and that some would benefit from a remake. Sometimes a remake is done to show respect and to renew the original. Look at Scarface.
Okay...
I'm just going to get down to what really bugs me about your posting.
I didn't mind your first post. It's been awhile since I've seen Planet of the Apes, and I didn't remember any racist connotations, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Sure... it's possible.
After that though, when some people responded that they didn't think that the movie was refering to black people as apes. You replied inferring that they said it's okay to call black people apes in the right context (when really they said nothing of the kind).
The next guy said "Nobody's calling black people apes". He was clearly talking about the movie and not society, which you accused him of.
You accused me of being willfully stupid and not displaying a comment that you made how you meant it. Well you have been doing this since the start of this discussion. You are creating arguments and disagreements out of nothing.
I have no doubt that there is racism. I do, however, doubt that this movie was created with racist intentions.
That's all I have to say.
And by this I mean the CDs AND pirating their music. By pirating their music you're helping propagate the idea that their music is the only music worth listening to. There's tonnes of stuff on mp3.com and other sites like it. Sure, there's crap on it too, but isn't that also the case with the Record Industry? (though the record industry's crap is probably more professional sounding).
It's becoming easier and easier to record and distribute your own music. So who needs labels anymore?
Let them have their Backstreet Boys and start supporting artists who are brave enough to strike out on their own (GAMH anyone?)
What I'm really concerned with is your claim that computer geeks are one of the most racist groups in society because they don't meet any black people.
/. we don't ask what someone's ancestry is before we support or denounce their position. We judge people soley on their intelligence, accuracy, and writing skills.
What about the computer geeks that are black people? They must have a hard time dealing with their ancestry versus their hatred of black people. (I'm being sarcastic)
Or are you suggesting that black people can't be computer geeks? If this is the case, I'd have to wonder just who the racist is.
I happen to believe that computer geeks don't care much about race. So maybe I'm a little idealistic. When we meet and discuss here on
That's just my take on things.
Just an aside: Maybe I'm in the wrong generation or country, but I have never heard of ape used to describe black people (I'm not doubting that this happenes, I've just never heard of it before).
About this whole Planet of the Apes thing: I happen to like Tim Burton. I will definately re-watch some of his films for hints of racism though.
I built a lego case for my 386 awhile back.
:)
/.
Unfortunately I didn't have enough peices to finish the job (never mind doing it all in one colour).
I also used one of the big grey baseplates as a bottom, so then I couldn't carry it anywhere.
But it was still cool. and remember, a lego case always has room for extra hardware
What I'd like to see are some really different cases. Nerf, Sheet metal, oak (I can just see the wooden cdrom drive).
Maybe I'll work on something like this over the summer. If I do, I'll be sending it in to
The hostility comes from the fact that the networks sell their ad space based on demographics and location. You could be watching FOX on iCrave with ads for stores in Toronto, Ontario. What good does this do the advertiser?
"We distributed a few thousand copies of the newspaper for free every week. That didn't change the fact that all the information in the paper was copyrighted."
What if there was a law that said otherwise?
This is exactly the case here. It is legal to rebroadcast Canadian TV, unaltered, anywhere in Canada. Not such an open and shut case anymore...
Under Canadian law it is legal to rebroadcast TV signals that are in the air. I think this is to allow some cable companies to pick up some american stations for free and include them in their package (although I could have no idea what I'm talking about).
As long as they don't broadcast to the States (which I guess they're doing), it isn't illegal. They are making it the viewer's responsibility whether the law is broken or not. I'm not sure if that holds up though.
AFAIK, if they only rebroadcast within Canada, it's legal. Hope this clarifies things.
iCraveTV is a great idea that someone had the guts to implement.
Great thing is, because of Canadian law, it's perfectly legal.
How much responsibility is it of theirs to make sure only people in Canada access their servers? I'd argue that they're doing enough, but does anyone know for sure? Certainly an interesting question. Another one would be if Canada should change its laws to outlaw this sort of thing.
That, if done right, could seriously reach epic status.
Other books that would make great movies (or maybe I just thought they would):
-Bodyguard by William C. Dietz
-The Chung Kwo (sp?) series... forget the author.
They're both futuristic type worlds... no trollocs or anything tho...
I love seeing people call others stupid when they have no idea what they're talking about. Good show, you've made my night. :)
I've got the most wonderful ADSL plan here in Canada.
:)
For some reason or another, the company has decided not to charge me. I haven't been billed for the setup fees or usage fees at all. I also don't owe them anything (I checked).
I think Austrailians should look into this kind of pricing plan. It is most satisfactory.
The Matrix was cool because it was the first pretty original Science Fiction movie to come out of mainstream movie making in awhile. Sure it wasn't that complicated for science fiction, but I had non-geek friends who had to watch it twice to understand it. Just my take on things.
"Did you read the rest of the article or just stop there? The next paragraph mentions that Slashdot does indeed have a moderation system....."
Yes I did read the rest of the article it's just this stuck out to me as being wrong and I felt like commenting on it. You're right though, they do mention the moderation system later on. This article is full of contradictions it seems. From "It needs something like eBay has... It has something like eBay has" to "It isn't journalism... is this really journalism?" (someone else pointed it out)
They need to proofread... sheesh. Or at least skim for consistency.
From the article:
"All that seems to be missing from Slashdot-type sites is some kind of reputation rating system, where participants are assigned a trust rating based on feedback from the group and managed by a central authority."
wtf??? Isn't the moderation system like this? It seems to fit the description above, albeit it has a few flaws (probably mostly to do with varying personal opinions, tho).
Hrm. Maybe I'm just missing what they're trying to say. Comments?
What the little blurb up there doesn't mention, is that the tarrif was scheduled for January 1st, 1999. As I understand it, they were going to charge businesses for all cds sold after Jan 1, even though they hadn't agreed on an amount yet! This resulted in some stores adding arbitrary amounts in order to compensate for what they were going to get charged (or maybe they were just BSing me).
What I can't stand about this is, what about software piracy?! There are some $15,000 programs floating around which probably have been copied a time or two. It's not just the recording companies that are being ripped off.
Further more, there are plenty of legal uses for cd-rs.
grrrr.
Of course, the thirty seconds you spent posting this were well worth your while.