You are right, you can and possibly will wait. The policy, however, targets the general public in U.S. and that means people without discipline or distinction between needs and wants. They "have to have it now."
So, if the studios make even $1% more because of the new policy, they have succeeded.
It is more and more obvious that corporations see human beings as kettle, easily scared, directed, milked and slaughtered.
There's a difference between mindlessly twitching about unimportant, blown out of proportion issues and realizing that the human race has already started breathing and eating it's own toxic waste.
Unfortunately, corporations make the laws for you and not the other way around. So soon, you will have no right for free speech, while corporations will (even if it's just because they will own all critical mediums, and if you don't like it then well, just don't use the mediums).
Used a multitouch pad a few years back replacing a mouse. Had multiple gestures and macros. After a while, though, my fingers became oversensitive to the surface and the touch became very uncomfortable.
Or not displaying the size of that important bulge in their pants.
I mean, their wallets, of course.
I think you are right, women find success and confidence attractive, as we find physical beauty and signs of health attractive. And, I think many women feel frustrated about being objects of beauty and eventually blame men for being superficial, similarly to the irony I sense in your remark.
Both genders are programmed to seek what's beneficial for successful procreation.
Feel free to ride without a helmet and not buckle up in your car.
I find your analogy lacking. Addressing high-risk situations with tools improving the chance of surviving accidents is not being being risk-averse. Avoiding the situations is.
Rust or asphalt do not improve the monkey bar experience. Removing the monkey bars, or forbidding children to run in recess is the real issue.
Because, on the general issues of Intellectual Property the general public stays in defense and companies go on offense. This is a land-grab in the dimension of thoughts and ideas, and we are the indians.
I think the only way to approach this is to aggressively pursue limiting the Properti-zation of intellectual "territory."
Given that this territory is boundless, fluid and often takes no or little effort in discovering and re-discovering (ideas popping up simultaneously in different minds), the logical conclusion is that it belongs to everyone.
Google's success do far lies in the value they provide and not in their invention of the search box only page.
Overall, monetization of things seeks to control and make any resource scarce. With IP, this results in the equivalent of closing roads that could lead to even more value if explored, as any successful idea could be a stepping stone to an even better one.
We have agreed to make ourselves and everyone else poorer in the name of the dollar almighty. Well, what will we be left with when we turn everything into dollars?
It is time for us to start paying attention and take serious action in this battle. We are watching the spectacle of corporate giants dividing wealth that belongs to humanity. We know that this wealth belongs to humanity and not a particular person or entity, and yet, they have already bought laws that makes them the "owners" and men with the guns to enforce the laws.
The only way to approach this is to remove such laws and establish a solid process for rewarding proportionally the ones who put their effort in discovery and development. A few years of exclusive rights ought to reciprocate the value brought to everyone.
Lower price ought to come at the expense of lower profit margin, with the benefit of more satisfied customers and higher quality.
The toxic mission of constantly increasing profit is what poisons the well. Something has to give and that's usually the customer. It's cheaper to use doublespeak, propaganda/advertising, and buy twisted legislation than to retain a good service. In other words, if more profit = most good, then everything else deteriorates.
It is possible to focus on profit AND quality. That won't result in the cheapest (an crappiest) product, but so what... there are enough people willing to pay a little more for quality and reliability.
The firm belief that perception is reality which is a pillar in the US market results in most money going into changing the perception instead of offering real goods. Distorted perception is not a substitute for quality.
It is simple, efficient, and the people oppressed by this approach are already painted as "criminals." Would YOU want to stand in defense of "criminals and thieves" ? Didn't think so.
Move along people, nothing to see, RIAA's boot has finally found it's way to your collective ass.
More like the Evil United Nations, if you get the "slight nudge" of the acronym and the all-white "peacekeeper" vehicles and choppers.
It is not a movie about aliens, it is a movie about humans and humanity. Everything you see in it as human-alien attitude and relationships, already has a precedent in human history. It is a social commentary and not a sugar-coated hollywoodcraprollercoasterride. The violence is unglamorized and borders on sickening.
If you want mindless entertainment with satisfying blows and asskicking, look elsewhere.
If you want to be exposed to the gut-wrenching experiences millions of human beings still face as a part of everyday life, this is just the ticket for you.
After seeing this, I can now say, yes, I can imagine how people in fugitive camps / slums feel. And, if you look at laws applied in "urban gentrification" projects, you will see we treat our "poor" in similar ways. The "social services" scene confiscating the child for it's own good was a brilliant example. Not even made up.
Star Wars gave us an attempt at a solid future universe with magic and technology to match our imagination. The (first) Matrix gave us a satisfying universe based on the core omnipresent premise that we live in a dream/virtual world.
District9 gave us a taste of our dark side, the atrocities we cheerfully commit against each other, the worst kind, coming from the "civilized" good citizens with clean desks. It is not a pleasant one, but important.
It is an important, masterfully created document, wrapped as a sci-fi movie.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, important distinction. AND, they get fill out the amount themselves.
You are right, you can and possibly will wait. The policy, however, targets the general public in U.S. and that means people without discipline or distinction between needs and wants. They "have to have it now."
So, if the studios make even $1% more because of the new policy, they have succeeded.
It is more and more obvious that corporations see human beings as kettle, easily scared, directed, milked and slaughtered.
Can't we get rid of the DHS yet? I don't think there's one government organization I like less.
In Capitalist U.S. of A. DHS get rid of YOU!
Raising animals for meat *does* produce more natural resources than a car.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_9184.cfm
Dude, check this out:
http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/
There's a difference between mindlessly twitching about unimportant, blown out of proportion issues and realizing that the human race has already started breathing and eating it's own toxic waste.
France is just the beginning, an experiment. Believe me, RIAA is watching this closely and setting lobbying cash aside for similar laws for YOU.
Will I be able to lend any book available at my library for free (tax dollars and all)? I woudn't mind DRM then.
Unfortunately, corporations make the laws for you and not the other way around. So soon, you will have no right for free speech, while corporations will (even if it's just because they will own all critical mediums, and if you don't like it then well, just don't use the mediums).
Used a multitouch pad a few years back replacing a mouse. Had multiple gestures and macros. After a while, though, my fingers became oversensitive to the surface and the touch became very uncomfortable.
Or not displaying the size of that important bulge in their pants.
I mean, their wallets, of course.
I think you are right, women find success and confidence attractive, as we find physical beauty and signs of health attractive. And, I think many women feel frustrated about being objects of beauty and eventually blame men for being superficial, similarly to the irony I sense in your remark.
Both genders are programmed to seek what's beneficial for successful procreation.
What if they don't profit but put you in jail instead?
I didn't think this needed sarcasm tags. Guess I was wrong.
Yes, a better analogy would be pioneers on life support, dragging lots of machinery that needs to function to keep them alive.
Feel free to ride without a helmet and not buckle up in your car.
I find your analogy lacking. Addressing high-risk situations with tools improving the chance of surviving accidents is not being being risk-averse. Avoiding the situations is.
Rust or asphalt do not improve the monkey bar experience. Removing the monkey bars, or forbidding children to run in recess is the real issue.
Because, on the general issues of Intellectual Property the general public stays in defense and companies go on offense. This is a land-grab in the dimension of thoughts and ideas, and we are the indians.
I think the only way to approach this is to aggressively pursue limiting the Properti-zation of intellectual "territory."
Given that this territory is boundless, fluid and often takes no or little effort in discovering and re-discovering (ideas popping up simultaneously in different minds), the logical conclusion is that it belongs to everyone.
Google's success do far lies in the value they provide and not in their invention of the search box only page.
Overall, monetization of things seeks to control and make any resource scarce. With IP, this results in the equivalent of closing roads that could lead to even more value if explored, as any successful idea could be a stepping stone to an even better one.
We have agreed to make ourselves and everyone else poorer in the name of the dollar almighty. Well, what will we be left with when we turn everything into dollars?
It is time for us to start paying attention and take serious action in this battle. We are watching the spectacle of corporate giants dividing wealth that belongs to humanity. We know that this wealth belongs to humanity and not a particular person or entity, and yet, they have already bought laws that makes them the "owners" and men with the guns to enforce the laws.
The only way to approach this is to remove such laws and establish a solid process for rewarding proportionally the ones who put their effort in discovery and development. A few years of exclusive rights ought to reciprocate the value brought to everyone.
lower cost came at the expense of higher quality?
Lower price ought to come at the expense of lower profit margin, with the benefit of more satisfied customers and higher quality.
The toxic mission of constantly increasing profit is what poisons the well. Something has to give and that's usually the customer. It's cheaper to use doublespeak, propaganda/advertising, and buy twisted legislation than to retain a good service. In other words, if more profit = most good, then everything else deteriorates.
It is possible to focus on profit AND quality. That won't result in the cheapest (an crappiest) product, but so what... there are enough people willing to pay a little more for quality and reliability.
The firm belief that perception is reality which is a pillar in the US market results in most money going into changing the perception instead of offering real goods. Distorted perception is not a substitute for quality.
Dial-up Broadband.
It is simple, efficient, and the people oppressed by this approach are already painted as "criminals." Would YOU want to stand in defense of "criminals and thieves" ? Didn't think so.
Move along people, nothing to see, RIAA's boot has finally found it's way to your collective ass.
Good from customers' or shareholders' point of view.
Corporations don't answer to customers but to shareholders. Customers are merely a part of the process of collecting money.
If coming to your house with a bat was a more efficient method of collecting more money, they'd be doing it.
Divide and conquer is the main reason for having a two-party duopoly.
As long party fans's energy is focused against the other party (and fans), their "teams" can do whatever they want.
Circus for the people, unlimited power for the powerful (true fact: no accountability == unlimited power).
More like the Evil United Nations, if you get the "slight nudge" of the acronym and the all-white "peacekeeper" vehicles and choppers.
It is not a movie about aliens, it is a movie about humans and humanity. Everything you see in it as human-alien attitude and relationships, already has a precedent in human history. It is a social commentary and not a sugar-coated hollywoodcraprollercoasterride. The violence is unglamorized and borders on sickening.
If you want mindless entertainment with satisfying blows and asskicking, look elsewhere.
If you want to be exposed to the gut-wrenching experiences millions of human beings still face as a part of everyday life, this is just the ticket for you.
After seeing this, I can now say, yes, I can imagine how people in fugitive camps / slums feel. And, if you look at laws applied in "urban gentrification" projects, you will see we treat our "poor" in similar ways. The "social services" scene confiscating the child for it's own good was a brilliant example. Not even made up.
Star Wars gave us an attempt at a solid future universe with magic and technology to match our imagination. The (first) Matrix gave us a satisfying universe based on the core omnipresent premise that we live in a dream/virtual world.
District9 gave us a taste of our dark side, the atrocities we cheerfully commit against each other, the worst kind, coming from the "civilized" good citizens with clean desks. It is not a pleasant one, but important.
It is an important, masterfully created document, wrapped as a sci-fi movie.
Not everyone is ready for it.
"Should" & "Shouldn't" describe how we all feel.
The Reality of the prices describes what companies should be doing from their own perspective.
Talking about it changes nothing.
Vote with your dollars.
Infinite greed + legal corruption = undisturbed price fixing.
Voicing opinion would not do anything, the telcos know how we feel when raped by them.
The only vote that counts to them is the vote of your dollar.
Have a nice day.
Also, drug advertising on TV. Like candy for old people.
I wonder if there's a list pharmaceutical company CEOs distribute to their immediate families...
Dear Mom, here's a list of medications made by pfeiser that I wouldn't take, even if my doctor recommended them.
Your loving son, Jeff.
That would be a great read on wikileaks.