As far as I care, the federal government is welcome to look into me and my life. They already have my spending history (credit report), job history (taxes), (lack_of_a) criminal record (DUH!), medical records (USAF), and a slew of other details I really don't need to know about.
First, this isn't just about you, it's about me too, and I do care.
Next, the government doesn't have your credit report unless you gave it to them or somebody you do business with gave it to them with your consent. The FBI doesn't know anything about your taxes, that's the IRS. By law the two are kept separate. For example, you can claim on your tax return the proceeds from your bank robbery under "other income" and the IRS by law cannot share that info with the FBI, unless there is a warrant or subpoena.
Why are people so willing to give up the rights that so many people have sacrificed their lives for? You say you were in the USAF. I thought you took an oath to protect our freedoms. Weren't you paying attention?
The libraries are provided FREE of charge by the government.
Well, not exactly. My property tax bill breaks out the amount that goes towards paying for the county libraries. In this way, nothing the government does for me is free.
By having the FBI have access to your reading habits, it could save you from being in a building that gets hit by a plane.
No, it can't. Giving law enforcement access to my reading habits won't save me from being in a building that gets hit by a plane.
everyone in the trade towers and on the flights would have definitely traded this for their lives.
How many of my rights are you willing to give away? These are my rights we're talking about. What gives you the right to decide which of my rights are to be lost? I really don't care how many of your rights you don't care about, but it's wrong of you to be so cavalier about mine. You don't see me going around saying, "Let's take some rights away from jsonmez, he won't care. It's for his own good anyway." That's just wrong.
You have to know what battles to pick, and which ones not to.
I'm a big fan of freedom of speech. Maybe you haven't thought this one through, though. Do you realize the freedom of speech is meaningless if there's no freedom to listen?
At the very least, *you* decided to rip illegal CDs with Media Player, not Microsoft.
Where the heck did this come from? How long has it been illegal to copy a CD to another format? Silly me, I just thought "piracy" was a distribution thing, not a personal preference thing.
Sounds like you might be confusing "right to privacy" with "right to pirate", which is quite different.
How long have you worked for the RIAA? Just curious. It's sad when an industry assumes all its customers are criminals. You have a major problem with logic if the following makes sense to you:
WMA and MP3 files can be used for piracy, therefore all users of WMA and MP3 files are pirates.
Is this where I say, "You clearly didn't read the article"?
Let's say I do as you suggest. I quit going to movies, I cancel my cable subscription, I quit renting movies. Does this protect me from the bad legislation? How does that ensure that I will be able to do as I please with my own content?
It isn't war unless it's declared. Otherwise you can say we've been in a continuous state of war for over 50 years. We've had the Cold War, the War on Drugs, and now the War on Terrorism.
We've also had various "hot" wars that weren't legally wars: the Korean conflict, the Vietnam war, Desert Shield/Desert Storm, Somalia, Boznia, Afganistan. But *none* of these were wars in the legal sense.
If it's important and real, why don't our "leaders" make it legal? Are they above the law?
You guys with these high-tech pasts. I remember when I first used a computer back in 1975. We used paper tape on our TTY33 terminals. Connected to the HP2000C' via acoustic coupler and a dial phone (no pushbuttons for us). 300 baud.
We're not merely trying to secure justice, what we're really fighting is the future massive terrorist attacks.
You need more qualifiers on this. We're not concerned with all terrorist attacks, just those perpetrated against us. If we really believed "if you support terrorists, you are a terrorist" we'd be bombing New York ourselves. Unless, of course, you feel the Irish Republican Army aren't a bunch of terrorists or that they don't get some of their support (money) from New York.
Bush's policies are, for the most part, ineffectual and nonsensical and amount mainly to providing illusions to the US population and shifting power around in Washington.
Just ask yourself a couple questions: Do you really think security measures enacted in the last 10 months would have prevented the 9/11 attacks? Do you really think establishing a cabinet position for Homeland Security will make the various Federal law enforcement agencies work together better? (Note: they worked very closely together for the Atlanta Olympics.)
I suppose it depends on what you call "viable". If you mean they can support themselves and their families for, say, a decade or more, there are thousands. I'll start you off with a short list.
Trey Gunn Bert Lams Hideyo Moriya Paul Richards Matt Seattle Fernando Kabusacki Curt Golden
Now, if by "viable" you mean "earning millions and retiring by age 30" or "so famous everybody recognizes their names" this would be the wrong list.
Maybe _my_ opinion is skewed because I happen to know how to use a PC with a CD burner attached to it, and I am not fanatical about the after quality of the audio.
And you're not interested in the art work, the lyrics, or any other information that might be on the CD or the inserts. One of my CDs even has an entire concert video on it. Not just a song, but an entire concert.
All I'm saying is that for someone who reads slashdot, unless they have a REALLY overactive conscience or can't get broadband or are a serious audiophile, it makes no sense that you would actually buy music when you can get it for free!
Your sample is too small. First, what percentage of the American population buys CDs? What percentage of the CD buying population uses a file sharing service? What percentage of file sharing users have CD burners and know how to use them? What percentage of that group are not bothered by the audio quality or lack of additional content in the package? Is the number of people represented by the last figure a tiny, tiny portion of the number of people represented by the first? This is how file sharing has had little to no negative impact on CD sales.
What the RIAA is concerned with is all those numbers going up. But they've decided that instead of using these trends to leverage their business it's easier to fight the trend through legislation. Just the same way the movie industry tried to fight VCRs.
during the many other recessions that have occured, CD sales didn't even slowdown (the growth rate in sales continued to increase, in fact.)
I don't quite know how to respond to this. Can you tell me how the recession of the early 1970's impacted CD sales?
All this time I've been thinking this is the *first* recession since the CD has gained market penetration exceeding other forms of music distribution. Silly me.
Somebody else talked about the "$2 to create" bit, now lets hit the other side.
Are you completely deficient in shopping skillz? If you're paying more than about $13 you're either using Canadian or Aussie dollars, or you're, well, a moron.
Clear Channel is a pretty ugly company. You probably listen to them now and don't even know it.
I'm positive I haven't listened to a CCC station in at least 8 years. For the last 5 years I haven't listened to the radio at all. For at least 3 years before that it was KUVO radio Denver (NPR jazz).
Oh no! I'm starting to sound like one of those "I don't own a TV and that makes me better than you" people! Aaack!
Hehhehe.. Record a commercial? I don't even do that now. that's what the "Pause" button is for.
You and I are clearly from different planets. I think it is quite strange to record the program you're watching. What's the point? I record things I can't watch for one reason or another.
For example, I record things when my wife watches something on a different channel. Or I record things that are broadcast when I'm asleep or at work or having a squirt-gun fight with my 6-year-old.
If I'm sitting there watching the thing, why on Earth would I record it? So I can watch that sporting event again, knowing exactly what's going to happen? So I can amaze my friends by identifying the murderer at the beginning of the program (assuming they don't already know because they watched it when it was broadcast)?
I'm surprised that everyone on/. thinks G-force limits is a stupid law. Think about it the theme park (large multimillion dollar corporation) makes a ride without thinking about the safety of people riding it.
I haven't heard of any theme park (or corporate owner thereof) making a ride without consideration of their customers. (Perhaps you can name one for me.)
Roller coasters are huge investments and are not taken lightly by those spending the money. Remember, the point is to attract people to the park, not kill them. And it's hard to attract people to the park if the owners are sued out of business, or the national news is constantly running stories on people getting injured or killed.
But you probably know much more about this than I do. I've only ridden about 30 different coasters and my ownership role in Cedar Fair was quite small.
First of all, there's the fact that a lightsaber...
Very funny! Mentioning "fact" in the same breath as Star Wars is a riot! Even ignoring that, it's still very amusing.
"Defensive weapon" is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
The light saber was used so they could rip off old Errol Flynn pirate movies.
The light saber works well in deflecting laser bolts because the laser bolts they're deflecting are moving at about 1/100000000000th the speed of light. Any decent particle beam weapon would cut a Jedi off at the knees.
I'd like to see them try to defend themselves with a light saber against, say, napalm.
Arguing that people who get their philosophy from movies are shallow is like arm wrestling a quadriplegic. *Of course* you're going to come out on top.
I went to junior high school with a quadriplegic. He lost both legs above the knees, his left arm just below the elbow and his right arm just above the wrist. He was a bit of a chubnik, since he couldn't really exercise. But he did like to arm wrestle.
To arm wrestle him, we'd both lie down on the ground, and I'd grasp his right stump, trying not to think about how weird this was. He definitely had the psychological advantage. He was also quite strong, and beat me handily. (Sorry about the bad pun, I couldn't resist).
I forget his name and haven't really given him much thought since then. But he was one of the most determined people I've ever met. I saw him several years later in a pool hall playing a video game. I don't recall the game, but it had simple push button controls. He kicked ass at that game, too.
I never would have guessed I'd be beaten at arm wrestling by a quadriplegic, and you probably don't think a man with no hands could beat you at a video game, but then again life is full of surprises.
Oh, and there's nothing wrong with getting your philosophy from movies. Just as long as you're careful which movies to get it from!
Clearly, the article talks about customers, not people. How the heck can you compare the population of the US to the number of customers they're talking about? My ISP sure as hell doesn't know how many people live in my household, and not all members of my household use the internet.
In order to get to that $2B they're talking about, you'll more likely see $4 or $5 per month per household.
My second question is "How do you divvy up the $2B?"
Assuming all eligible artists sign up with some central clearinghouse first...
Do you give them all equal shares? If so, I'll register with them and record a song. Sure, even I won't want to listen to it, but if I can tap into that revenue stream that'd be great!
Do you base it on radio play? That would mean somebody like ClearChannel communications gets to decide who gets the $2B. That doesn't sound right to me.
Do you base it on album sales? That might work today but not for long if such a scheme takes off.
Do you base it on web page hits? Nobody has ever rigged that before.
Do you require all eligible songs to be somehow marked and each download counted? I'm sure most of the/. community is happy to have somebody tracking all their downloads. Yup, this will work.
Heck, aside from those two silly questions, I say "Let'er rip!"
Gee, you missed the boat on so many levels it's amazing.
First you should understand the simple things, like the difference between a retailer and a wholesaler. Given that you didn't get that right, I'm not surprised you didn't understand anything else.
The sticker on the album doesn't proclaim the album to be a best seller, but that the album contains a smash hit single. See, the album has eight or ten or twelve songs on it. A single is one song. It's not surprising that these artists would have hit albums and not surprising that one or more of the songs on the album would be a smash hit. What is surprising is the record labels uncanny ability to predict it on the sticker they put on the album cover weeks before wholesalers, retailers, and radio stations have even seen the thing. Capische?
Do you even know what stickers I'm talking about? Probably not. This was back in the "olden days" before CDs. Many hot selling "records" (those 12" vinyl things) had stickers on the outside letting you know this was the album with the hit song you'd heard a million times on the radio. It listed the actual names of the hit songs. Amazing, really, considering they were printed and shipped before any radio station played them.
Everybody's got the right to be stupid, why do you feel the need to abuse it?
I used to work for a music wholesaler. I always found it amusing that the new record by the big acts (Rolling Stones, Michael Jackson, the Eagles) had stickers on them proclaiming "Contains the smash hit single [whatever]". The neat part was the labels were always correct even though no radio station had ever played any of the songs and it was days or weeks before the albums and singles ever hit the street.
For the longest time I figured it was all part of the machine; payola to radio programmers, advertising co-payments to record stores, additional marketing to recoup big advances.
But you've shown me the light. I was silly to think like a "conspiracy theorist". The real truth is the record companies can tell in advance what people want to hear. Thanks for clearing that up!
But wait... if they know what everybody wants, why do sign all those bands that aren't successful?
Several years back I tried to buy beer in Ohio. The clerk looked at my Colorado DL and said, "Nope, can't buy beer here. How can I know you're really from Colorado?" I pointed at my car, with the Colorado license plate clearly visible. "Nope, could still be a fake ID."
I didn't get the beer, but I was successful buying liqour at the state store. Go figure.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I care, the federal government is welcome to look into me and my life. They already have my spending history (credit report), job history (taxes), (lack_of_a) criminal record (DUH!), medical records (USAF), and a slew of other details I really don't need to know about.
First, this isn't just about you, it's about me too, and I do care.
Next, the government doesn't have your credit report unless you gave it to them or somebody you do business with gave it to them with your consent. The FBI doesn't know anything about your taxes, that's the IRS. By law the two are kept separate. For example, you can claim on your tax return the proceeds from your bank robbery under "other income" and the IRS by law cannot share that info with the FBI, unless there is a warrant or subpoena.
Why are people so willing to give up the rights that so many people have sacrificed their lives for? You say you were in the USAF. I thought you took an oath to protect our freedoms. Weren't you paying attention?
Igor
The libraries are provided FREE of charge by the government.
Well, not exactly. My property tax bill breaks out the amount that goes towards paying for the county libraries. In this way, nothing the government does for me is free.
By having the FBI have access to your reading habits, it could save you from being in a building that gets hit by a plane.
No, it can't. Giving law enforcement access to my reading habits won't save me from being in a building that gets hit by a plane.
everyone in the trade towers and on the flights would have definitely traded this for their lives.
How many of my rights are you willing to give away? These are my rights we're talking about. What gives you the right to decide which of my rights are to be lost? I really don't care how many of your rights you don't care about, but it's wrong of you to be so cavalier about mine. You don't see me going around saying, "Let's take some rights away from jsonmez, he won't care. It's for his own good anyway." That's just wrong.
You have to know what battles to pick, and which ones not to.
I'm a big fan of freedom of speech. Maybe you haven't thought this one through, though. Do you realize the freedom of speech is meaningless if there's no freedom to listen?
Igor
money = root of all evil
You have the quote wrong.
The love of money is the root of all evil.
Igor
At the very least, *you* decided to rip illegal CDs with Media Player, not Microsoft.
Where the heck did this come from? How long has it been illegal to copy a CD to another format? Silly me, I just thought "piracy" was a distribution thing, not a personal preference thing.
Sounds like you might be confusing "right to privacy" with "right to pirate", which is quite different.
How long have you worked for the RIAA? Just curious. It's sad when an industry assumes all its customers are criminals. You have a major problem with logic if the following makes sense to you:
WMA and MP3 files can be used for piracy, therefore all users of WMA and MP3 files are pirates.
How sad.
Igor
>>The consumer has the power to not buy it.
Is this where I say, "You clearly didn't read the article"?
Let's say I do as you suggest. I quit going to movies, I cancel my cable subscription, I quit renting movies. Does this protect me from the bad legislation? How does that ensure that I will be able to do as I please with my own content?
Igor
Mod parent up!
It isn't war unless it's declared. Otherwise you can say we've been in a continuous state of war for over 50 years. We've had the Cold War, the War on Drugs, and now the War on Terrorism.
We've also had various "hot" wars that weren't legally wars: the Korean conflict, the Vietnam war, Desert Shield/Desert Storm, Somalia, Boznia, Afganistan. But *none* of these were wars in the legal sense.
If it's important and real, why don't our "leaders" make it legal? Are they above the law?
Igor
However, beta video players did not allow you to record. VHS did.
Wrong. I've never seen a Betamax that couldn't record. I have seen some VHS machines that were play only though.
Igor
You guys with these high-tech pasts. I remember when I first used a computer back in 1975. We used paper tape on our TTY33 terminals. Connected to the HP2000C' via acoustic coupler and a dial phone (no pushbuttons for us). 300 baud.
Igor
We're not merely trying to secure justice, what we're really fighting is the future massive terrorist attacks.
You need more qualifiers on this. We're not concerned with all terrorist attacks, just those perpetrated against us. If we really believed "if you support terrorists, you are a terrorist" we'd be bombing New York ourselves. Unless, of course, you feel the Irish Republican Army aren't a bunch of terrorists or that they don't get some of their support (money) from New York.
Bush's policies are, for the most part, ineffectual and nonsensical and amount mainly to providing illusions to the US population and shifting power around in Washington.
Just ask yourself a couple questions: Do you really think security measures enacted in the last 10 months would have prevented the 9/11 attacks? Do you really think establishing a cabinet position for Homeland Security will make the various Federal law enforcement agencies work together better? (Note: they worked very closely together for the Atlanta Olympics.)
Igor
I suppose it depends on what you call "viable". If you mean they can support themselves and their families for, say, a decade or more, there are thousands. I'll start you off with a short list.
Trey Gunn
Bert Lams
Hideyo Moriya
Paul Richards
Matt Seattle
Fernando Kabusacki
Curt Golden
Now, if by "viable" you mean "earning millions and retiring by age 30" or "so famous everybody recognizes their names" this would be the wrong list.
Igor
Maybe _my_ opinion is skewed because I happen to know how to use a PC with a CD burner attached to it, and I am not fanatical about the after quality of the audio.
And you're not interested in the art work, the lyrics, or any other information that might be on the CD or the inserts. One of my CDs even has an entire concert video on it. Not just a song, but an entire concert.
All I'm saying is that for someone who reads slashdot, unless they have a REALLY overactive conscience or can't get broadband or are a serious audiophile, it makes no sense that you would actually buy music when you can get it for free!
Your sample is too small. First, what percentage of the American population buys CDs? What percentage of the CD buying population uses a file sharing service? What percentage of file sharing users have CD burners and know how to use them? What percentage of that group are not bothered by the audio quality or lack of additional content in the package? Is the number of people represented by the last figure a tiny, tiny portion of the number of people represented by the first? This is how file sharing has had little to no negative impact on CD sales.
What the RIAA is concerned with is all those numbers going up. But they've decided that instead of using these trends to leverage their business it's easier to fight the trend through legislation. Just the same way the movie industry tried to fight VCRs.
Igor
during the many other recessions that have occured, CD sales didn't even slowdown (the growth rate in sales continued to increase, in fact.)
I don't quite know how to respond to this. Can you tell me how the recession of the early 1970's impacted CD sales?
All this time I've been thinking this is the *first* recession since the CD has gained market penetration exceeding other forms of music distribution. Silly me.
Igor
Pay $19 for a CD we paid $2 to create.
Somebody else talked about the "$2 to create" bit, now lets hit the other side.
Are you completely deficient in shopping skillz? If you're paying more than about $13 you're either using Canadian or Aussie dollars, or you're, well, a moron.
Igor
Clear Channel is a pretty ugly company. You probably listen to them now and don't even know it.
I'm positive I haven't listened to a CCC station in at least 8 years. For the last 5 years I haven't listened to the radio at all. For at least 3 years before that it was KUVO radio Denver (NPR jazz).
Oh no! I'm starting to sound like one of those "I don't own a TV and that makes me better than you" people! Aaack!
Igor
Hmmm. U2 at the Rainbow Music Hall in Denver, 1981: $4.20. Add Select-A-Seat charge and 20 cents Rainbow parking fee and you're nearly at $5.
Igor
Hehhehe.. Record a commercial? I don't even do that now. that's what the "Pause" button is for.
You and I are clearly from different planets. I think it is quite strange to record the program you're watching. What's the point? I record things I can't watch for one reason or another.
For example, I record things when my wife watches something on a different channel. Or I record things that are broadcast when I'm asleep or at work or having a squirt-gun fight with my 6-year-old.
If I'm sitting there watching the thing, why on Earth would I record it? So I can watch that sporting event again, knowing exactly what's going to happen? So I can amaze my friends by identifying the murderer at the beginning of the program (assuming they don't already know because they watched it when it was broadcast)?
Well, whatever melts your butter.
Igor
I'm surprised that everyone on /. thinks G-force limits is a stupid law. Think about it the theme park (large multimillion dollar corporation) makes a ride without thinking about the safety of people riding it.
I haven't heard of any theme park (or corporate owner thereof) making a ride without consideration of their customers. (Perhaps you can name one for me.)
Roller coasters are huge investments and are not taken lightly by those spending the money. Remember, the point is to attract people to the park, not kill them. And it's hard to attract people to the park if the owners are sued out of business, or the national news is constantly running stories on people getting injured or killed.
But you probably know much more about this than I do. I've only ridden about 30 different coasters and my ownership role in Cedar Fair was quite small.
Igor
First of all, there's the fact that a lightsaber...
Very funny! Mentioning "fact" in the same breath as Star Wars is a riot! Even ignoring that, it's still very amusing.
"Defensive weapon" is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
The light saber was used so they could rip off old Errol Flynn pirate movies.
The light saber works well in deflecting laser bolts because the laser bolts they're deflecting are moving at about 1/100000000000th the speed of light. Any decent particle beam weapon would cut a Jedi off at the knees.
I'd like to see them try to defend themselves with a light saber against, say, napalm.
Star Wars isn't sci-fi so much as fantasy.
Igor
Arguing that people who get their philosophy from movies are shallow is like arm wrestling a quadriplegic. *Of course* you're going to come out on top.
I went to junior high school with a quadriplegic. He lost both legs above the knees, his left arm just below the elbow and his right arm just above the wrist. He was a bit of a chubnik, since he couldn't really exercise. But he did like to arm wrestle.
To arm wrestle him, we'd both lie down on the ground, and I'd grasp his right stump, trying not to think about how weird this was. He definitely had the psychological advantage. He was also quite strong, and beat me handily. (Sorry about the bad pun, I couldn't resist).
I forget his name and haven't really given him much thought since then. But he was one of the most determined people I've ever met. I saw him several years later in a pool hall playing a video game. I don't recall the game, but it had simple push button controls. He kicked ass at that game, too.
I never would have guessed I'd be beaten at arm wrestling by a quadriplegic, and you probably don't think a man with no hands could beat you at a video game, but then again life is full of surprises.
Oh, and there's nothing wrong with getting your philosophy from movies. Just as long as you're careful which movies to get it from!
Igor
FUBAR math? Eye of the beholder.
/. community is happy to have somebody tracking all their downloads. Yup, this will work.
My first question is "What's a customer?"
Clearly, the article talks about customers, not people. How the heck can you compare the population of the US to the number of customers they're talking about? My ISP sure as hell doesn't know how many people live in my household, and not all members of my household use the internet.
In order to get to that $2B they're talking about, you'll more likely see $4 or $5 per month per household.
My second question is "How do you divvy up the $2B?"
Assuming all eligible artists sign up with some central clearinghouse first...
Do you give them all equal shares? If so, I'll register with them and record a song. Sure, even I won't want to listen to it, but if I can tap into that revenue stream that'd be great!
Do you base it on radio play? That would mean somebody like ClearChannel communications gets to decide who gets the $2B. That doesn't sound right to me.
Do you base it on album sales? That might work today but not for long if such a scheme takes off.
Do you base it on web page hits? Nobody has ever rigged that before.
Do you require all eligible songs to be somehow marked and each download counted? I'm sure most of the
Heck, aside from those two silly questions, I say "Let'er rip!"
Igor
Try buying a case of beer with a "non-driver identification card" some time. Or god forbid, a passport.
Really? I haven't been asked for an ID when buying beer in at least 15 years.
Igor
Well, judging by the language of the press release, these wouldn't be affected. Unless you call any of these things "intimate" situations.
Igor
Gee, you missed the boat on so many levels it's amazing.
First you should understand the simple things, like the difference between a retailer and a wholesaler. Given that you didn't get that right, I'm not surprised you didn't understand anything else.
The sticker on the album doesn't proclaim the album to be a best seller, but that the album contains a smash hit single. See, the album has eight or ten or twelve songs on it. A single is one song. It's not surprising that these artists would have hit albums and not surprising that one or more of the songs on the album would be a smash hit. What is surprising is the record labels uncanny ability to predict it on the sticker they put on the album cover weeks before wholesalers, retailers, and radio stations have even seen the thing. Capische?
Do you even know what stickers I'm talking about? Probably not. This was back in the "olden days" before CDs. Many hot selling "records" (those 12" vinyl things) had stickers on the outside letting you know this was the album with the hit song you'd heard a million times on the radio. It listed the actual names of the hit songs. Amazing, really, considering they were printed and shipped before any radio station played them.
Everybody's got the right to be stupid, why do you feel the need to abuse it?
Igor
I used to work for a music wholesaler. I always found it amusing that the new record by the big acts (Rolling Stones, Michael Jackson, the Eagles) had stickers on them proclaiming "Contains the smash hit single [whatever]". The neat part was the labels were always correct even though no radio station had ever played any of the songs and it was days or weeks before the albums and singles ever hit the street.
For the longest time I figured it was all part of the machine; payola to radio programmers, advertising co-payments to record stores, additional marketing to recoup big advances.
But you've shown me the light. I was silly to think like a "conspiracy theorist". The real truth is the record companies can tell in advance what people want to hear. Thanks for clearing that up!
But wait... if they know what everybody wants, why do sign all those bands that aren't successful?
Igor
Several years back I tried to buy beer in Ohio. The clerk looked at my Colorado DL and said, "Nope, can't buy beer here. How can I know you're really from Colorado?" I pointed at my car, with the Colorado license plate clearly visible. "Nope, could still be a fake ID."
I didn't get the beer, but I was successful buying liqour at the state store. Go figure.
Igor