Music and movies are completely subjective to the audience. Posters above have claimed that other areas produce "better" of whatever, but that's just a matter of taste.
For example, I think anyone can make it in European Pop as long as they have a Casio BeatMaster and a 4 word catch phrase that they can say repeat until even they are sick of it.
Movies are even more subjective than that. Other than so called "artsy" films, most popular films abroad are no different than ones made in the USA in that some movie makers have found a format/storyline that appeals to lots of their market and 90% of the movies are just rehashes of that plot.
Basically, the whole world is dumbing down, IMO. There's very little creativity anymore - almost all entertainment is just cookie cutter now. Just change the shape of the cutter to reflect your region's tastes.
Yeah... as others have said, you must live in a really crappy place and/or go to a really crappy theatre. Where I usually go, if someone has a laser pointer, we just go tell the usher and they get a half dozen people to sit in the movie and throw the bastards out who use it. Same with someone being loud, etc.
The advantage of going to a midnight/opening-night showing of something on a week night like RotS is that the people who go to those movies are usually fans and they aren't going to be stupid like that. Plus, after midnight on a week night, not many cell phone calls are being made (I turned mine off anyway).
Not being able to paus a movie in a theatre isn't a big deal for me... I watch movies from start to finish because pausing them completely ruins the immersion. Even at home, I don't like to pause a movie I'm watching. Tricks: Don't buy the big honkin drink when you get into the theatre. Go to the restroom BEFORE the movie starts. Etc. It's really not that difficult to have a pleasurable movie theatre experience.
I guess the thing is, go to a crappy theatre, you get what you deserve.
Most people here, at least who argue for GPL/FOSS, agree with OBEYING copyright. They disagree with evil companies ABUSING copyright.
The RIAA, for example, is:
stupid - for not recognizing the ability to make money from P2P
And this is abuse.... how exactly?
greedy - because, well, they are
And this is abuse.... how exactly?
arrogant - because they think that they should be working against, rather than with, their customers
And this is abuse.... how exactly?
abusive - even this week there was an instance of the RIAA suing someone for downloading music they already owned
Let's see the outcome of this. Did the fact that they already owned it came *after* the suit or before it? If "after", then where is the abuse if the case is dropped? If before it, then I might agree with you on this.
All of these make the RIAA objects of wrath and disgust and much blogging against them. None of this means "therefore we should make unauthorized copies".
So.... two wrongs make a right...
I actually think that if you really look into it, you find much less hypocrasy in the F/OSS world than in the proprietary world. F/OSS came about because people wanted a legal way to share with each other. People in the proprietary world often steal software and music because they don't care if it's legal or not. That's the fundamental difference -- F/OSS was wanting the freedom and wanting to do so within a legal framework.
The F/OSS zealots are no different from any other religion. They have it and are blinded by it. They won't budge.
I have a friend who is a business owner, who uses unauthorized copies of software. When I pointed to the fact it was illegal, he didn't care. He didn't want to use F/OSS software because he didn't care about the legality. If he had cared, then his choice would either be to pay (but he didn't have the money) or use F/OSS. F/OSS thrives because it is a legal and ethical way to do what we always wanted to do with software -- share.
Well... as long as he's ready to step up to the plate when the boom comes down, no problem here. If he's willing to accept the consequences of his actions in this case if he gets caught, then I don't have any beef with him.
OK... so... if I can ignore the copyrights of the MPAA/RIAA/EULA and use their material as I see fit, then by the same token, I should be able to ignore the GPL and use the code any way I see fit, including using it in a piece of commercial code without making my code GPL as well.
Because the MPAA/RIAA/EULA defines in which ways that you are allowed to copy copyrighted material is not logic to claim that they "remove rights". Removing rights would most likely be an actionable offense. Suppose they said that you weren't allowed to make a backup copy (fair use), then you could do something about that because they are trying to remove a right that you have. That isn't the case though. They are defining (under terms of their copyright rights) what you can and cannot do with their 'stuff'. If any of this violated consumer rights or the like, it would quickly be brought up.
Compared to the GPL, it doesn't "give" you anything. They are defining (under terms of their copyright rights) what you can and cannot do with their 'stuff'.
Copyright holders have kind of a dial to dial in how much of their rights as copyright holders that they can claim. MPAA/RIAA dials their in tight (they want to reserve all their rights that they can under the copyright laws). GPL dials theirs more lose and give up some of their rights that they are otherwise entitled to. They don't "give" YOU anything. They simply forgo some of the rights that they have which ALLOW you to do certain other things with their stuff.
Also, the FSF have not been found guilty of price fixing and collusion for the same end. RIAA have.
This is neither here nor there. Claiming (or not claiming) rights as a copyright holder is independent of then going off and doing activities like you mention. You are ALLOWED to retain your copyrights (or not, as you choose) regardless of whether or not you then go off and price fix or whatever.
Yeah, you cannot argue with zealots. They are stuck in their mode and will not budge.
BTW, patents are kind of designed to stifle competition... why else would they exist? They give the patent holder rights to something and time to attempt to make money off the ideas. That is kind of the definition of stifling competition.
Besides, with all the hypocracy over copyrights - you MUST obey the GPL copyright agreement but MUST NOT obey the RIAA/MPAA/Software copyright agreements - pretty much most of the F/OSS folks aren't worth the time to talk to about it. A bunch of hypocritical zealots who are no different from the Christians (because you can't say anything bad about Zionists, Muslims, or other religious groups because that's either anti-semitism and/or not politically correct) that they frequently deride so heavily. Christians believe in a diety that you have to have faith in but you can't see and a book they call the Bible to read about it. F/OSS Hypocrits believe in a diety that they call Linus (but at least you can touch him) and a book they call the GPL. Other than that, there isn't much difference.
Actually, many/most end-users use the vanilla kernel. Most of us have more important things to do than recompile the kernel 10 times a day hoping for a 0.0001% performance increase over the last time we recompiled it.
I would suggest that if Linux were to ever get serious traction on the desktop, nearly all end-users will use the vanilla kernel.
I don't know how you stretched that far since the two things you mention aren't even remotely related.
First, murder has nothing to do with prostitution. Second, there are organizations (not the government) that interfere with prostitution all the time and are considered "ok". For example, in areas where prostitution is high and the locals don't like it, they organize groups to take pictures of cars of potential "Johns" (or pictures of Johns themselves) and post them publicly as well as give the information to the police.
Neighborhood watches (common all over the USA and other places) are similar to this. Non-government employees volunteer to walk around and watch the neighborhood and notify the police of anything suspicious. The presence of this interference of the local crime network normally causes crime to decrease.
In both of the above situations, it is arguably invading the right to privacy of individuals (the potential Johns and/or the potential robbers) by civilians to disrupt this (unwanted) behavior.
So, there are at least two examples of this already out there.
The word "network" can be used a number of ways. I'm not talking about a bunch of wires and switches (hardware). I'm talking about a system of interconnected services (software and protocols). You can have a network of P2P running over an Ethernet network, for example.
I wonder if this can be considered illegal because it causes destruction and harm to an illegal computer network. I mean tall those 9/11 related computer laws have to be good for something.
Probably the biggest hurdle that Linux has to overcome in the educational world is... lack of educational software.
Who cares if Linux is better/faster/uglier/more-mauve if it turns a computer into a doorstop because you can't do anything with it. Get educational software on Linux (with comparative or better quality than Windows), *then* start evangelicising. Until then, you might as well evengelicise replacing their computers with rocks.
So... do you define what they can/can't use as well? Most IT people I know have to balance between deciding some things themselves for whatever reasons (stability, ease of maintenance, etc.) and what is handed down to them as requirements. I know that if an IT person who worked for me ever were handed requirements for something specific and unilaterally decided to go with something else because of, well, any reason without going through some process to make sure it would satisfy all the requirements (some may be political, not just technical) then he'd find himself out of a job.
It's not the responsibility of those schools to do this. They have the responsibility to prepare students for the world. They *could* teach all their computer classes on DOS 3.1, but that would be equally irrelevant to what is going on in the world. When/if Linux starts to make serious inroads on the desktop (and thus being relevant to the state of the world), you can rest assured that schools will start offering Linux education as well.
Great... all we need is even *more* confusion. It's already hard enough to try to figure out if you're going to get a mob of angry nerds with torches and PDAs storming your doors... it's only going to get worse.
Yes, but each context MUST have its own register set or it makes no sense at all. Perhaps the attack comes through the rename registers or somesuch. Each SMT (or HyperThread) context has its own set of registers and they don't share.
And if you come up with the "Universal Cure for all things that ail Humans, including age" and don't share it with people who can't afford to pay your salary, then you sir, are a scumbag.
I didn't say I'd charge a lot:) Actually, I think I'd probably sell it to someone who could manufacture it for enough to let me live comfortably with modest investment along with the stipulation that I would always have access to it when I wanted it.
But... then again... I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that life is fair, either.
I find it hard to believe that Linux folks still claim that Windows is hard to administer because I *know* a group of people, 14 of them in fact, who manage a total of around 3000 Unix/Linux boxes and about twice that many (about 6000) Windows boxes... with just their organization of 14 people.
I also find it funny that to get my nvidia card working flawlessly in Linux, I had to spend an hour of time researching the issue on the web and then go into and modify a configuration file using VI or else my machine would lock up within 10 seconds of kicking off X (used another machine to do all the research and ssh to get into this machine to avoid X) but all I had to do was double click an icon and then a couple of "next" buttons on Windows and it worked flawlessly.
Annecdotes are USELESS. As soon as you people start to understand that you cannot prove ANYTHING by annecdotal evidence, the better off you'll be. I don't care if your nvidia card came wrapped in $100 bills and delivered into your hands personally by all of the Victoria's Secret supermodels. It is ONE datapoint and cannot possibly reflect anything conclusive about the norm.
Main Entry: commodity Pronunciation: k&-'mä-d&-tE Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -ties Etymology: Middle English commoditee, from Middle French commodité, from Latin commoditat-, commoditas, from commodus 1 : an economic good: as a : a product of agriculture or mining b : an article of commerce especially when delivered for shipment c : a mass-produced unspecialized product 2 a : something useful or valued b : CONVENIENCE, ADVANTAGE 3 obsolete : QUANTITY, LOT 4 : one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market
If you don't have it, you want it. If you need it, you'll go through a lot to get it. It *is* valuable and the people who have it may want to be compensated for their efforts in getting it. That is their right. They have no obligation (but your morals aside) to give out anything that they've discovered except under their own terms. In extreme cases, what you hope is that someone else will develop the same knowledge and be a little more nicer about making it available.
All this "knowledge wants to be free!" stuff is just emotional, moralistic slants on the holders' own beliefs and what they wish it would be. They want it to be free so they can take advantage of it and use it (for free), that is all.
If I discover the "Universal Cure for all things that ail Humans, including age", you can bet damn well that I'm going to want to be compensated for it and I'll laugh at anyone who tells me that it "wants to be free!". Live in the real world with me instead of your idealistic, emotionally and morally defined world.
Yup. If you look down the Intel product timelines, they show an MCM (multiple chips in a single package) processor in there. Since Microsoft (and others) are licensing per-socket, MCMs and multi-cores in one socket are all treated as one processor.
Slashdot Mirror
Music and movies are completely subjective to the audience. Posters above have claimed that other areas produce "better" of whatever, but that's just a matter of taste.
For example, I think anyone can make it in European Pop as long as they have a Casio BeatMaster and a 4 word catch phrase that they can say repeat until even they are sick of it.
Movies are even more subjective than that. Other than so called "artsy" films, most popular films abroad are no different than ones made in the USA in that some movie makers have found a format/storyline that appeals to lots of their market and 90% of the movies are just rehashes of that plot.
Basically, the whole world is dumbing down, IMO. There's very little creativity anymore - almost all entertainment is just cookie cutter now. Just change the shape of the cutter to reflect your region's tastes.
Yeah... as others have said, you must live in a really crappy place and/or go to a really crappy theatre. Where I usually go, if someone has a laser pointer, we just go tell the usher and they get a half dozen people to sit in the movie and throw the bastards out who use it. Same with someone being loud, etc.
The advantage of going to a midnight/opening-night showing of something on a week night like RotS is that the people who go to those movies are usually fans and they aren't going to be stupid like that. Plus, after midnight on a week night, not many cell phone calls are being made (I turned mine off anyway).
Not being able to paus a movie in a theatre isn't a big deal for me... I watch movies from start to finish because pausing them completely ruins the immersion. Even at home, I don't like to pause a movie I'm watching. Tricks: Don't buy the big honkin drink when you get into the theatre. Go to the restroom BEFORE the movie starts. Etc. It's really not that difficult to have a pleasurable movie theatre experience.
I guess the thing is, go to a crappy theatre, you get what you deserve.
I guess it sucks to be you if you just spent the last several months of your life trying to do this and just got beat.
I think you are confusing things.
Most people here, at least who argue for GPL/FOSS, agree with OBEYING copyright. They disagree with evil companies ABUSING copyright.
The RIAA, for example, is:
stupid - for not recognizing the ability to make money from P2P
And this is abuse.... how exactly?
greedy - because, well, they are
And this is abuse.... how exactly?
arrogant - because they think that they should be working against, rather than with, their customers
And this is abuse.... how exactly?
abusive - even this week there was an instance of the RIAA suing someone for downloading music they already owned
Let's see the outcome of this. Did the fact that they already owned it came *after* the suit or before it? If "after", then where is the abuse if the case is dropped? If before it, then I might agree with you on this.
All of these make the RIAA objects of wrath and disgust and much blogging against them. None of this means "therefore we should make unauthorized copies".
So.... two wrongs make a right...
I actually think that if you really look into it, you find much less hypocrasy in the F/OSS world than in the proprietary world. F/OSS came about because people wanted a legal way to share with each other. People in the proprietary world often steal software and music because they don't care if it's legal or not. That's the fundamental difference -- F/OSS was wanting the freedom and wanting to do so within a legal framework.
The F/OSS zealots are no different from any other religion. They have it and are blinded by it. They won't budge.
I have a friend who is a business owner, who uses unauthorized copies of software. When I pointed to the fact it was illegal, he didn't care. He didn't want to use F/OSS software because he didn't care about the legality. If he had cared, then his choice would either be to pay (but he didn't have the money) or use F/OSS. F/OSS thrives because it is a legal and ethical way to do what we always wanted to do with software -- share.
Well... as long as he's ready to step up to the plate when the boom comes down, no problem here. If he's willing to accept the consequences of his actions in this case if he gets caught, then I don't have any beef with him.
OK. Good point. I guess the term "default" kernel for your distribution would have been better for me to use.
OK... so... if I can ignore the copyrights of the MPAA/RIAA/EULA and use their material as I see fit, then by the same token, I should be able to ignore the GPL and use the code any way I see fit, including using it in a piece of commercial code without making my code GPL as well.
Because the MPAA/RIAA/EULA defines in which ways that you are allowed to copy copyrighted material is not logic to claim that they "remove rights". Removing rights would most likely be an actionable offense. Suppose they said that you weren't allowed to make a backup copy (fair use), then you could do something about that because they are trying to remove a right that you have. That isn't the case though. They are defining (under terms of their copyright rights) what you can and cannot do with their 'stuff'. If any of this violated consumer rights or the like, it would quickly be brought up.
Compared to the GPL, it doesn't "give" you anything. They are defining (under terms of their copyright rights) what you can and cannot do with their 'stuff'.
Copyright holders have kind of a dial to dial in how much of their rights as copyright holders that they can claim. MPAA/RIAA dials their in tight (they want to reserve all their rights that they can under the copyright laws). GPL dials theirs more lose and give up some of their rights that they are otherwise entitled to. They don't "give" YOU anything. They simply forgo some of the rights that they have which ALLOW you to do certain other things with their stuff.
Also, the FSF have not been found guilty of price fixing and collusion for the same end. RIAA have.
This is neither here nor there. Claiming (or not claiming) rights as a copyright holder is independent of then going off and doing activities like you mention. You are ALLOWED to retain your copyrights (or not, as you choose) regardless of whether or not you then go off and price fix or whatever.
Yeah, you cannot argue with zealots. They are stuck in their mode and will not budge.
BTW, patents are kind of designed to stifle competition... why else would they exist? They give the patent holder rights to something and time to attempt to make money off the ideas. That is kind of the definition of stifling competition.
Besides, with all the hypocracy over copyrights - you MUST obey the GPL copyright agreement but MUST NOT obey the RIAA/MPAA/Software copyright agreements - pretty much most of the F/OSS folks aren't worth the time to talk to about it. A bunch of hypocritical zealots who are no different from the Christians (because you can't say anything bad about Zionists, Muslims, or other religious groups because that's either anti-semitism and/or not politically correct) that they frequently deride so heavily. Christians believe in a diety that you have to have faith in but you can't see and a book they call the Bible to read about it. F/OSS Hypocrits believe in a diety that they call Linus (but at least you can touch him) and a book they call the GPL. Other than that, there isn't much difference.
Actually, many/most end-users use the vanilla kernel. Most of us have more important things to do than recompile the kernel 10 times a day hoping for a 0.0001% performance increase over the last time we recompiled it.
I would suggest that if Linux were to ever get serious traction on the desktop, nearly all end-users will use the vanilla kernel.
Heh heh... :)
Doesn't always work when applications have dependencies that aren't a part of the standard distro.
I don't know how you stretched that far since the two things you mention aren't even remotely related.
First, murder has nothing to do with prostitution. Second, there are organizations (not the government) that interfere with prostitution all the time and are considered "ok". For example, in areas where prostitution is high and the locals don't like it, they organize groups to take pictures of cars of potential "Johns" (or pictures of Johns themselves) and post them publicly as well as give the information to the police.
Neighborhood watches (common all over the USA and other places) are similar to this. Non-government employees volunteer to walk around and watch the neighborhood and notify the police of anything suspicious. The presence of this interference of the local crime network normally causes crime to decrease.
In both of the above situations, it is arguably invading the right to privacy of individuals (the potential Johns and/or the potential robbers) by civilians to disrupt this (unwanted) behavior.
So, there are at least two examples of this already out there.
The word "network" can be used a number of ways. I'm not talking about a bunch of wires and switches (hardware). I'm talking about a system of interconnected services (software and protocols). You can have a network of P2P running over an Ethernet network, for example.
I wonder if this can be considered illegal because it causes destruction and harm to an illegal computer network. I mean tall those 9/11 related computer laws have to be good for something.
T, FTFY
Probably the biggest hurdle that Linux has to overcome in the educational world is... lack of educational software.
Who cares if Linux is better/faster/uglier/more-mauve if it turns a computer into a doorstop because you can't do anything with it. Get educational software on Linux (with comparative or better quality than Windows), *then* start evangelicising. Until then, you might as well evengelicise replacing their computers with rocks.
So... do you define what they can/can't use as well? Most IT people I know have to balance between deciding some things themselves for whatever reasons (stability, ease of maintenance, etc.) and what is handed down to them as requirements. I know that if an IT person who worked for me ever were handed requirements for something specific and unilaterally decided to go with something else because of, well, any reason without going through some process to make sure it would satisfy all the requirements (some may be political, not just technical) then he'd find himself out of a job.
It's not the responsibility of those schools to do this. They have the responsibility to prepare students for the world. They *could* teach all their computer classes on DOS 3.1, but that would be equally irrelevant to what is going on in the world. When/if Linux starts to make serious inroads on the desktop (and thus being relevant to the state of the world), you can rest assured that schools will start offering Linux education as well.
Spotted Owl, of course.
...and most rodents wouldn't lower themselves to associate with any of them.
Great... all we need is even *more* confusion. It's already hard enough to try to figure out if you're going to get a mob of angry nerds with torches and PDAs storming your doors... it's only going to get worse.
Yes, but each context MUST have its own register set or it makes no sense at all. Perhaps the attack comes through the rename registers or somesuch. Each SMT (or HyperThread) context has its own set of registers and they don't share.
This is where Borland needs to step in by giving the patent (or providing a legal exception) to the OSS community
Why should they? Why would they want to?
"Because you really, really, really, pretty-please with sugar on top" want them to is not sufficient reason.
And if you come up with the "Universal Cure for all things that ail Humans, including age" and don't share it with people who can't afford to pay your salary, then you sir, are a scumbag.
:) Actually, I think I'd probably sell it to someone who could manufacture it for enough to let me live comfortably with modest investment along with the stipulation that I would always have access to it when I wanted it.
I didn't say I'd charge a lot
But... then again... I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that life is fair, either.
I find it hard to believe that Linux folks still claim that Windows is hard to administer because I *know* a group of people, 14 of them in fact, who manage a total of around 3000 Unix/Linux boxes and about twice that many (about 6000) Windows boxes... with just their organization of 14 people.
I also find it funny that to get my nvidia card working flawlessly in Linux, I had to spend an hour of time researching the issue on the web and then go into and modify a configuration file using VI or else my machine would lock up within 10 seconds of kicking off X (used another machine to do all the research and ssh to get into this machine to avoid X) but all I had to do was double click an icon and then a couple of "next" buttons on Windows and it worked flawlessly.
Annecdotes are USELESS. As soon as you people start to understand that you cannot prove ANYTHING by annecdotal evidence, the better off you'll be. I don't care if your nvidia card came wrapped in $100 bills and delivered into your hands personally by all of the Victoria's Secret supermodels. It is ONE datapoint and cannot possibly reflect anything conclusive about the norm.
From http://www.m-w.com/
Main Entry: commodity
Pronunciation: k&-'mä-d&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Etymology: Middle English commoditee, from Middle French commodité, from Latin commoditat-, commoditas, from commodus
1 : an economic good: as a : a product of agriculture or mining b : an article of commerce especially when delivered for shipment c : a mass-produced unspecialized product
2 a : something useful or valued b : CONVENIENCE, ADVANTAGE
3 obsolete : QUANTITY, LOT
4 : one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market
If you don't have it, you want it. If you need it, you'll go through a lot to get it. It *is* valuable and the people who have it may want to be compensated for their efforts in getting it. That is their right. They have no obligation (but your morals aside) to give out anything that they've discovered except under their own terms. In extreme cases, what you hope is that someone else will develop the same knowledge and be a little more nicer about making it available.
All this "knowledge wants to be free!" stuff is just emotional, moralistic slants on the holders' own beliefs and what they wish it would be. They want it to be free so they can take advantage of it and use it (for free), that is all.
If I discover the "Universal Cure for all things that ail Humans, including age", you can bet damn well that I'm going to want to be compensated for it and I'll laugh at anyone who tells me that it "wants to be free!". Live in the real world with me instead of your idealistic, emotionally and morally defined world.
Yup. If you look down the Intel product timelines, they show an MCM (multiple chips in a single package) processor in there. Since Microsoft (and others) are licensing per-socket, MCMs and multi-cores in one socket are all treated as one processor.