The site now says "based on open source products". If you look at the old versions of the site they all say "an open source remote PC access implementation". Seems they were deliberately misleading people to me, and now they've just changed it.
Check it out
"It isn't the fact that I have to be monitored that bothers me, it is the fact that I have [to] restructure my life (different OS, different software on that OS)"
In jail for 5 months and he thinks changing Operating System needs more of a life restructuring.
Perhaps, this sentence will give him the perfect opportunity to finally find a life outside of his linux box.
This is what I like about slashdot. I can get my stories on the front page just by doing sexual favours for the administrators. No need to spend my hard earned geek money.
...and goodbye to democracy. How can a country remain remotely democratic when AT LEAST 48% of people are completely ignorant of basic natural realities.
This kind of ignorance makes it possible for once again, the same few to control the many.
There are literally hundreds of DVD players out there that can be converted to multi region and there are many on the market already that play discs from anywhere. Maybe your wife should do a little basic research first or ask some simple questions at the store.
There's also a very good economic reason that multi region DVDs exist, namely the high cost of making a film print vs its short term lifespan, so of course movies have to be distributed gradually from region to region, and hence DVD release reflects that.
Lol thats true, I did forget that one. Not that any of the people who use that argument actually know or interact with anybody who's livelihood or business relies on the industry. Though I suspect, the people who make that argument a lot on the internet don't really interact with anybody at all, but that's another issue. It seems its enough these days to work for a corporation to be a "capitalist pig"
A common defense of piracy is: "music is terrible today, look at the Beyoncé album, etc etc so therefore its their own fault"
Well I have news for you - old classic award winning albums are pirated too. Also, there's a psychological principle from Cialdini: that in any market, people value what they worked to get. If it was free they'll take it for granted or certainly value it much less. Performances of works by Beethoven, Mozart, et al are pirated like crazy. If their music is "terrible enough to pirate", then does anybody have a chance at selling anything without mass piracy?
Another fallacious, illogical (and stupid) argument is the "I pirated X album and then went out and bought their entire back catalogue I liked it so much, therefore piracy is making them more money". Questions to ask these people are: Have you done the same with other works you pirated yet enjoyed? Do you only buy stuff you really really liked? What about stuff you pirated and listen to occassionally but are not interested in buying the authors other works? Do you honestly believe that enough people who pirated an album and enjoyed will then buy from the artist to an extent that makes up for their piracy? If so, do you have a fully functioning brain? If so, do you know how to read? If so, go read a primer on basic human psychology.
I know a lot of people who enjoyed the Dreamgirls soundtrack. I haven't heard it myself personally to make a sweeping judgement as to its "garbage" content as you have, but that's not the point. (Though I suspect you never even listened to it in the first place). The point is people like it. They don't care about the opinion of Ctrl-Z from Slashdot, whos opinion is irrelevant to the world, and always will be. Just because you think something is garbage does not mean its an explanation as to why CD sales are falling. The Dreamgirls soundtrack is also heavily pirated. What does that tell you?
This argument that the record industry is turning out more and more garbage than before is such a stupid one, since music is so subjective, and the majority of people with this opinion know very little about music outside of their own little genre of choice. Read reviews, opinion articles by modern music critics. They don't have this sky is falling attitude to music at all.
The GCP "results" suffer from the same problems the other so called shifts in random data suffer from. Namely, the analysis is poor and doesn't take into account standard statistical deviation.
As Bill Hicks said, doing a commercial makes you a sell-out. That's not so bad if you are an actor, particularly one who is short of cash, but it is bad if you are a comedian
Woody Allen and John Cleese must be sell-out hacks then... I love Bill Hicks, but he also genuinely believed he was abducted by aliens. His word isn't scripture.
If, as a fan (allegedly) you no longer think their work is valid simply because they've done a commercial then you're more than welcome to find some new obscure comedy group (or indie band) and worship them so that you can thump your chest (as all snobs like to do) some years from now and say how they were "much better before they went commercial".
Robert Webb (on the right) usually plays the more fashion conscious but much dumber character, and David Mitchell always plays the sensible, educated intelligent character.
Is it just me, or is my country going to the dogs? Or is it just that there is no such thing as an honest politician?
Maybe it's your Chicken Little attitude, and your tarring of all politicians with the same brush. No-one was charged or convicted with anything here, yet you've already jumped on a bandwagon and declared them guilty. Even if they are guilty that doesn't mean there aren't many more local politicians and MPs, etc who are really trying to make life better for their constituants.
In a democratic society the politicans are the employees of the people. They are a reflection of the people's own strengths and weaknesses. If an employee in your company is suspected of stealing you don't declare all of your employees to be thieves, or would you? Politics is no different even if you're of the opinion that you're helpless and can do nothing.
The fact that the police have no problem going to these measures to investigate possible criminal actions within the government is a sign that this country is far from "going to the dogs", and is exactly how a democratic country should be run, where the politicians live in fear of the people's disapproval, and not the other way around. I'm not afraid of anyone in Parliament - are you? We put them there, we can get rid of them. If they break the law, we'll deal with them. That's democracy.
This article forces you to believe the crap it's not telling you before it doesn't tell you it. The headline is entirely misleading. Hollywood hasn't admitted anything of the sort, and his source for this information is a reference to another journalist's unnamed source! What kind of journalism is that? From the following quote he extrapolated far too much:
"His user rules just scare the heck out of us"
Now, it's entirely possible that DRM is about exactly what they say it's about. What's not true however is that Hollywood is admitting this. The article is forcing you to accept the journalists bias hoping you don't exercise your critical thinking skills and question it. Whether it's true or not - the journalist needs to get his act together and get better sources than some other journalists dodgy source.
Now somebody might argue: "well we know they're doing it, what does it matter if the journalist exaggerates a quote from an unnamed source". I think it matters a great deal. When you're right you should be able to prove it very easily. Otherwise you have to accept that no matter how you feel on the matter you may be wrong, or there's just not enough evidence to imply anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Why was this marked as flamebait? It's helpful information. I don't understand...
The site now says "based on open source products". If you look at the old versions of the site they all say "an open source remote PC access implementation". Seems they were deliberately misleading people to me, and now they've just changed it. Check it out
Confined to his house, and confined to Windows. Looks like the AOL chatrooms are his only hope!
"Next on To Catch A Predator..."
In jail for 5 months and he thinks changing Operating System needs more of a life restructuring.
Perhaps, this sentence will give him the perfect opportunity to finally find a life outside of his linux box.
It's only a matter of time which comes first for The Pirate Bay
This is what I like about slashdot. I can get my stories on the front page just by doing sexual favours for the administrators. No need to spend my hard earned geek money.
The nature of statistics means that just because we find an "Earthlike" planet it doesn't mean we're any closer to finding another "earth".
I'm 26!
I break into fits of giggles when tickled!
I recognise myself in the mirror!
What does this make me!??
April Fools Day jokes just get worse and worse...
This kind of ignorance makes it possible for once again, the same few to control the many.
There's also a very good economic reason that multi region DVDs exist, namely the high cost of making a film print vs its short term lifespan, so of course movies have to be distributed gradually from region to region, and hence DVD release reflects that.
Lol thats true, I did forget that one. Not that any of the people who use that argument actually know or interact with anybody who's livelihood or business relies on the industry. Though I suspect, the people who make that argument a lot on the internet don't really interact with anybody at all, but that's another issue. It seems its enough these days to work for a corporation to be a "capitalist pig"
A common defense of piracy is: "music is terrible today, look at the Beyoncé album, etc etc so therefore its their own fault"
Well I have news for you - old classic award winning albums are pirated too. Also, there's a psychological principle from Cialdini: that in any market, people value what they worked to get. If it was free they'll take it for granted or certainly value it much less. Performances of works by Beethoven, Mozart, et al are pirated like crazy. If their music is "terrible enough to pirate", then does anybody have a chance at selling anything without mass piracy?
Another fallacious, illogical (and stupid) argument is the "I pirated X album and then went out and bought their entire back catalogue I liked it so much, therefore piracy is making them more money". Questions to ask these people are: Have you done the same with other works you pirated yet enjoyed? Do you only buy stuff you really really liked? What about stuff you pirated and listen to occassionally but are not interested in buying the authors other works? Do you honestly believe that enough people who pirated an album and enjoyed will then buy from the artist to an extent that makes up for their piracy? If so, do you have a fully functioning brain? If so, do you know how to read? If so, go read a primer on basic human psychology.
This argument that the record industry is turning out more and more garbage than before is such a stupid one, since music is so subjective, and the majority of people with this opinion know very little about music outside of their own little genre of choice. Read reviews, opinion articles by modern music critics. They don't have this sky is falling attitude to music at all.
Good luck!
will the quantum computer be able to smell it?
From: Steve Ballmer
Subject: Pwned
Body:
Microsoft:1 - Unix: NIL LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!111
Love Steviepoo
GCP is in the words of Penn&Teller: Bullshit
Woody Allen and John Cleese must be sell-out hacks then... I love Bill Hicks, but he also genuinely believed he was abducted by aliens. His word isn't scripture.
If, as a fan (allegedly) you no longer think their work is valid simply because they've done a commercial then you're more than welcome to find some new obscure comedy group (or indie band) and worship them so that you can thump your chest (as all snobs like to do) some years from now and say how they were "much better before they went commercial".
Sigh.
Heard it.
Robert Webb (on the right) usually plays the more fashion conscious but much dumber character, and David Mitchell always plays the sensible, educated intelligent character.
No wonder he likes PCs!
Maybe it's your Chicken Little attitude, and your tarring of all politicians with the same brush. No-one was charged or convicted with anything here, yet you've already jumped on a bandwagon and declared them guilty. Even if they are guilty that doesn't mean there aren't many more local politicians and MPs, etc who are really trying to make life better for their constituants.
In a democratic society the politicans are the employees of the people. They are a reflection of the people's own strengths and weaknesses. If an employee in your company is suspected of stealing you don't declare all of your employees to be thieves, or would you? Politics is no different even if you're of the opinion that you're helpless and can do nothing.
The fact that the police have no problem going to these measures to investigate possible criminal actions within the government is a sign that this country is far from "going to the dogs", and is exactly how a democratic country should be run, where the politicians live in fear of the people's disapproval, and not the other way around. I'm not afraid of anyone in Parliament - are you? We put them there, we can get rid of them. If they break the law, we'll deal with them. That's democracy.
What is the solution? No MPAA\piracy bashing... just some constructive ideas. Anyone have any?
"His user rules just scare the heck out of us"
Now, it's entirely possible that DRM is about exactly what they say it's about. What's not true however is that Hollywood is admitting this. The article is forcing you to accept the journalists bias hoping you don't exercise your critical thinking skills and question it. Whether it's true or not - the journalist needs to get his act together and get better sources than some other journalists dodgy source.
Now somebody might argue: "well we know they're doing it, what does it matter if the journalist exaggerates a quote from an unnamed source". I think it matters a great deal. When you're right you should be able to prove it very easily. Otherwise you have to accept that no matter how you feel on the matter you may be wrong, or there's just not enough evidence to imply anything.
Someone had to say it.
The funny thing about double entendre's is that they only ever mean one thing.