Its not, so why is it under the free-speech topic?
Sounds like bad business practice to me. Offer a service people want and pay for, then yank the rug out from under them when they get what they want. And, if they are refusing to cancel subscriptions, sounds like a class action lawsuit. Putting them out of business would make a good point.
The majority wins? That is how we got the Salem witch trials. That is how we got WWII started.. and millions of the 'minority' were gassed in Germany as a result.
god's morals are absolute? No, you will find that even that changes as time goes on, since religion is a scam and every sect re-invents themselves often to keep the revenue stream going.
Most things dealing with people, when you get down to it, are grey. Sure it might be 'simpler' if the world was more concrete and absolute, but its not how the world really works.
If they are line drawings, sure it would be ok. That would be considerd ( sick ) art.
And dont forget, in some countries its a right to do things that isnt ok here ( whereever 'here' happens to be ). So who's 'rights' and 'morals' should prevail? Mine? Yours? How about the guy that thinks cows are his reincarnated relatives and is sacred so eating them is immoral? Or the guy that has a right to carry a firearm?
Nothing is black and white, unless we all end up living under ONE government at some point.
However, perhaps they have some ad revenue lined up to pay for the extra hardware/bandwidth they are going to need? They are doing ads now so its not that far fetched.
So its battery powerd and has wifi ( like pretty much everything else on the planet it seems ) am i supposed to be impresed? Sounds like natural evolution to me, not worthy of being called 'news'.
I really doubt anyone was lying on the commission. Their analysis might have been flawed ( remember we are talking 40 year old technology here ) but lying? Thats a bit of a stretch.
They are 'online enablers' at the most. We can debate all day long if its right to 'copy', but all these people are doing are offering LINKS... nothing more, nothing less.
Thats like holding Ford liable beacuse they sell cars, that could be used in a hold up, or to run someone over.
Slashdot Mirror
I totally agree.
Thanks Steve, for screwing things up for us and giving us 'yet another PC'. I will be keeping my G5 until it melts down.
"What's next, restricting every piece of programming on television?""
Well, of course. Isn't this being mandated by the FCC and adopted by the media? Why act so surprised, this wasnt a secret.
If you are stuck in the boat that you cant do anything to curb the child, then send them off to jail themselves.
Its not like the current system is abused at all. Why would extending it hurt any?
geesh.
Its not, so why is it under the free-speech topic?
Sounds like bad business practice to me. Offer a service people want and pay for, then yank the rug out from under them when they get what they want. And, if they are refusing to cancel subscriptions, sounds like a class action lawsuit. Putting them out of business would make a good point.
Because people sometimes goof, and its always good to test test test test.
The majority wins? That is how we got the Salem witch trials. That is how we got WWII started .. and millions of the 'minority' were gassed in Germany as a result.
god's morals are absolute? No, you will find that even that changes as time goes on, since religion is a scam and every sect re-invents themselves often to keep the revenue stream going.
Most things dealing with people, when you get down to it, are grey. Sure it might be 'simpler' if the world was more concrete and absolute, but its not how the world really works.
Ummm no thanks unless it also has a built in nanoATX + bluetooth/wifi or something.
If they are line drawings, sure it would be ok. That would be considerd ( sick ) art.
And dont forget, in some countries its a right to do things that isnt ok here ( whereever 'here' happens to be ). So who's 'rights' and 'morals' should prevail? Mine? Yours? How about the guy that thinks cows are his reincarnated relatives and is sacred so eating them is immoral? Or the guy that has a right to carry a firearm?
Nothing is black and white, unless we all end up living under ONE government at some point.
That was my first thought as well.
However, perhaps they have some ad revenue lined up to pay for the extra hardware/bandwidth they are going to need? They are doing ads now so its not that far fetched.
Not sure id consider them a 'product' in the spirit of the discussion.
Itunes was DRMized from day one, and MP3 was only offered as a suppored format as no one would buy it otherwise.
Try again?
But would we really want to?
Has any digital product in the last 10 years been designed to be 'consumer-friendly'?
Did you just beam in from outerspace or something?
Its their network, they can make any rule they want for you to connect. Not much to see here.
Now, if they start remotely disabling the console that you bought and paid for, then we have some news.
Governmental control of the populace.
Anything else is just an excuse to get public support in turning in their rights.
Have been around a long time..
So its battery powerd and has wifi ( like pretty much everything else on the planet it seems ) am i supposed to be impresed? Sounds like natural evolution to me, not worthy of being called 'news'.
I really doubt anyone was lying on the commission. Their analysis might have been flawed ( remember we are talking 40 year old technology here ) but lying? Thats a bit of a stretch.
They are 'online enablers' at the most. We can debate all day long if its right to 'copy', but all these people are doing are offering LINKS... nothing more, nothing less.
Thats like holding Ford liable beacuse they sell cars, that could be used in a hold up, or to run someone over.
No, they know the average Joe copying an occasional song or movie isn't making money off it, nor are they actually losing much, if anything.
They just use that as the excuse to get uninformed people ( and the government ) to support their actions.
Did they pay up yet? Or will microsoft sue the stock exchange and piss them off.
See how fast their value goes down if they try it.
Step 2 will be to restrict booting unless the board has TPM enabled.
Some jobs pose more of a risk if they are compromised than others.
The investigation level should equate to that threat level.
No, *security concerns* caused it.
Bush just happens to be president at the moment.
Geesh.
Id like to see some proof of actual sales, not some estimated value.