to me, teenager always meant 10 and up. I don't know. Maybe the definition is different in Australia.
No, it's not. I'm Australian too. Teen is thirTEEN to nineTEEN in every English-speaking country. And if you RTFA, that just says "two girls". It was the twat who submitted it who added "teenagers", as well as the idiotic "000 (Australia's 911)" explanation.
WTF? 000 is Australia's EMERGENCY number. Would you also say "they drive on the left side of the road (Australia's right)"? In China thay use chopsticks (Chinese knives and forks)?".
There is a point at which explaining by Yankie analogies just makes it more confusing. Try to realise that everyone in the world does not speak English, play baseball, use Fahrenheit.... I'm sure most of the readers here actually can cope with that, and you won't bamboozle the ones who AREN'T American either.
How can everyone be so supportive of what very obviously amounts to theft?
I don't know about "everyone", but IN FACT, copyright infringement IS NOT THEFT. Despite all the "You wouldn't steal a car..." crap that is pushed to try to equate the concepts.
And yes, copyright infringenment is illegal, but it does not "obviously" amount to theft. Because NOTHING IS STOLEN for a start.
So could someone please explain *why* is it a questionable research.
Someone did. RTFA, not just the summary. (Actually, the whole problem is people not bothering to read where information comes from.)
Aside from the source being a survey commissioned by a partisan body, with no auditing, though presented with the authority of the government; even if it were totally accurate, several "assumptions" and "adjustments" were then made that served to double the figure originally found.
If the BPI-commissioned Jupiter research had used the Government's online population figures, the total number of file sharers would be 5.6m. If the researchers hadn't adjusted their figures upwards, the total number of file sharers would be only 3.9m - or just over half the figure being bandied about by the Government.
The heroin user kills the person who surprised him when he entered his house looking for something to steal.
Taking heroin doesn't cause murder; its high price does.
Seriously, if you don't think heroin addiction affects others, you are as deluded than the texter.
I've had close friends who were addicts. Taking it just made them happy and sleepy. But they weren't driving, and they didn't murder anyone that I know of. They were always "borrowing" money, of course. There are legal addictions that have much worse effects.
Heroin users' problems are mostly due to having to pay a very high price and deal with criminals to get it.
Your post reminds me a Usenet post I read about 15 years ago by a guy who did heroin "safely" because he did nice acid/base extractions
The big difference is that the heroin user is taking a risk with his own life, and if he's wrong he's not going to kill anyone else. So I wouldn't criticise his choice. Also, heroin actually is rather beign in its side effects, well-off users, who get pure heroin, can live long and reasonably healthy lives. Eg, William S. Burroughs a life-long user, who lived to 83.
I'm not an American, don't know what it's really like there. It seemed a bit unlikely to me that a typical office would be so colour coordinated (except of course for white) but I didn't know. So I asked. Sorry if that offended you.
The issue isn't that they felt having white guys in their ad would be more appropriate for their intended audience, the issue is that they whitewashed a black guy out of an existing image (poorly)
Well, that issue is pennypinching. Ads are completely manufactured images, fake before during and after the actual photos are taken. In this case the faking was rather too obvious. For instance, it looks rather like the (formerly) black guy has an Apple laptop, though the logo seems to have disappeared....
I can't see how it's not insulting
98% of ads are insulting. Even more so the ones I see online. It's only because it's Microsoft that it's even slightly newsworthy -- that a large American company would do something bound to piss off people like yourself if it came to light.
Some of the more obnoxious cheapskate ad campaigns like the "Adult Friendfinder" that presents me photos of skanky blonde bimbos with their legs gaping, while telling me that they live in my neighbourhood (determined by my IP). A neighbourhood where 99.5% of the people are Chinese. Those ads insulted me in so many different ways that it motivated me to set up an effective ad blocker on my PCs. That's all you can do with stupid ads, block them.
A picture like the one from MS (but with younger people) would be spot-on in a meeting from any department in the company, including accounting, customer service, and tech.
The original showed an Asian guy, a black guy and a white woman. How tediously politically correct. Also completely unrealistic for Poland. (Is it even realistic for the US?)
I'm reminded of the original Mission Impossible series in the 60s. One agent, Barney, was black. He often was sent "undercover" to various (fictional) "Eastern Bloc" countries, and no one noticed, despite him being the only black guy in the whole city (well, we never saw any others).
I am becoming more in favor of making everyone use their real name, all the time
says "Cragen".
Put up (your real name) or shut up.
I've said some things here that I wouldn't want linked to my professional or personal life. I don't feel ashamed of these, but sometimes it's nice to lash back at someone who's being a jerk without having to bite my tongue as I do in contexts when my real name is attached. And I'd have to spellcheck every post too.
Media companies are typically the last to fall; it's the independent artists who really suffer. They don't have fat profit margins to bear that kind of strain.
What strain? You've just assumed all that: cause, effect, the lot is all just your unsupported claim.
. If you're talking about the cost of producing new artists,
Of course not. I SAID "by which I meant the marginal cost: of physical duplication and distribution" which you actually quoted, so I don't know how you could have missed it.
Put it this way: with copyright holders (companies or independent artists) having to compete against free copies of their own work, it's amazing to see that any of them have survived as long as they have.
You're just trying to pull on heartstrings without producing any actual facts. I'm sure you're sincere but you're not actually answering any of my points, just attaching your own statements to mine. Please just make an independent post rather than replying.
However, with that drop in price comes a drop in something else, be it quality, quantity, risky business such as inventive/innovative works and/or security for the company.
In this case, I think it's a drop in the fat profit margins of the media companies, where they were charging more for a product that cost less to make every year (by which I meant the marginal copst: of physical duplication and distribution).
In any case, that's a diferent issue to that I was addressing. The prices to conusmers certainly HAS come down in many cases due to "piracy" changing the marketplace. Whether the producers (not simply the distributors) are harmed is a much larger question.
It's more than that. "Stealing" IP drives up prices of IP for legitimate customers.
Rubbish. In Hong Kong, for example, video piracy was rife several years ago. While a legit release might cost HK$100, the bootleg was about HK$30. To compete, the retail prices came down. Some even to $30 or so. Pirate versions went down a bit, but it wasn't so lucrative and now while they're still around there are much fewer bootlegs on sale. But the legit customers DID see a reduced prices because of piracy.
And how about the very cheap version of Windpws Microsoft offers in Asia? Partly to forestall government schemes to promote Linux, but also certainly a response to the effectively free bootleg versions PCs came with as matter of course.
I'm also, as Star Wars orThe Matrix are nice junk entertainment. If you want speak about science fiction classics, I would start out by mentioning Blade Runner and Alien. Of course, it is a matter of taste but to raise The Matrix to prestige is just barbarism.
Blade Runner, sure. Alien? A great film, but not great SF, basically a slasher movie. The Matrix and Star Wars were both great -- despite the crappiness of theor respective sequels. Matrix had some actual ideas in it (again, subverted by the sequels), Star Wars was a great mashup of all kinds of pulp fiction.
What happens if you get "the rest of the word" up to speed economically to the level where they can compete with us - and note that economic competitiveness implies military capability - and it turns out that their morals are diametrically opposite to ours (e.g., "Behead all those who insult Islam!", as written on the sign of one Muslim protester)?
Same thing that happened to medieval Christianity's "morals" (witch burning, the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc) when Europeans got richer, educated and middle class. Fundamentalism is most appealing to the poor (though exploited by the rich). Extrapolating a sign held by "one Muslim protester" to the entire population is unsound statistically to say the least.
Yeah, the ISPs were big. That wasn't the point, as I explained. And thanks for the capitals, that really helps my comprehension. Of what a pompous ass you are, that is.
The statements were about the legitimacy of the results. Since Optus "refused to comment", saying they were "used for the trial" is true, but irrelevant to the issue. It's also misleading to cite the size of the ISPs without noting they only used a very small, self-selected group of "testers".
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's not. I'm Australian too. Teen is thirTEEN to nineTEEN in every English-speaking country. And if you RTFA, that just says "two girls". It was the twat who submitted it who added "teenagers", as well as the idiotic "000 (Australia's 911)" explanation.
WTF? 000 is Australia's EMERGENCY number. Would you also say "they drive on the left side of the road (Australia's right)"? In China thay use chopsticks (Chinese knives and forks)?".
There is a point at which explaining by Yankie analogies just makes it more confusing. Try to realise that everyone in the world does not speak English, play baseball, use Fahrenheit.... I'm sure most of the readers here actually can cope with that, and you won't bamboozle the ones who AREN'T American either.
I don't know about "everyone", but IN FACT, copyright infringement IS NOT THEFT. Despite all the "You wouldn't steal a car..." crap that is pushed to try to equate the concepts.
And yes, copyright infringenment is illegal, but it does not "obviously" amount to theft. Because NOTHING IS STOLEN for a start.
Someone did. RTFA, not just the summary. (Actually, the whole problem is people not bothering to read where information comes from.)
Aside from the source being a survey commissioned by a partisan body, with no auditing, though presented with the authority of the government; even if it were totally accurate, several "assumptions" and "adjustments" were then made that served to double the figure originally found.
Taking heroin doesn't cause murder; its high price does.
Seriously, if you don't think heroin addiction affects others, you are as deluded than the texter.
I've had close friends who were addicts. Taking it just made them happy and sleepy. But they weren't driving, and they didn't murder anyone that I know of. They were always "borrowing" money, of course. There are legal addictions that have much worse effects.
Heroin users' problems are mostly due to having to pay a very high price and deal with criminals to get it.
The big difference is that the heroin user is taking a risk with his own life, and if he's wrong he's not going to kill anyone else. So I wouldn't criticise his choice. Also, heroin actually is rather beign in its side effects, well-off users, who get pure heroin, can live long and reasonably healthy lives. Eg, William S. Burroughs a life-long user, who lived to 83.
I'm not an American, don't know what it's really like there. It seemed a bit unlikely to me that a typical office would be so colour coordinated (except of course for white) but I didn't know. So I asked. Sorry if that offended you.
The issue isn't that they felt having white guys in their ad would be more appropriate for their intended audience, the issue is that they whitewashed a black guy out of an existing image (poorly)
Well, that issue is pennypinching. Ads are completely manufactured images, fake before during and after the actual photos are taken. In this case the faking was rather too obvious. For instance, it looks rather like the (formerly) black guy has an Apple laptop, though the logo seems to have disappeared....
I can't see how it's not insulting
98% of ads are insulting. Even more so the ones I see online. It's only because it's Microsoft that it's even slightly newsworthy -- that a large American company would do something bound to piss off people like yourself if it came to light.
Some of the more obnoxious cheapskate ad campaigns like the "Adult Friendfinder" that presents me photos of skanky blonde bimbos with their legs gaping, while telling me that they live in my neighbourhood (determined by my IP). A neighbourhood where 99.5% of the people are Chinese. Those ads insulted me in so many different ways that it motivated me to set up an effective ad blocker on my PCs. That's all you can do with stupid ads, block them.
Yes.
But if someone decides to change someone's colour with Photoshop, giving a false and unrealistic representation of the scene, that's okay?
No, that was even more stupid. (Though the "scene" is entirely staged and unrealistic whatever version you choose.)
If they are really so concerned with being "completely realistic for Poland", perhaps they could, I dunno, get some actual Poles
Yes.
So there aren't any white males in your company?
I'm reminded of the original Mission Impossible series in the 60s. One agent, Barney, was black. He often was sent "undercover" to various (fictional) "Eastern Bloc" countries, and no one noticed, despite him being the only black guy in the whole city (well, we never saw any others).
As an editor myself, one of the editor's jobs is to fix errors made by writers BEFORE PUBLISHING THEM.
assimilate: To consume and incorporate (nutrients) into the body after digestion.
simulate: ... 2. To make a pretense of; feign: simulate interest.
kdawson: illiterate who pretends to be an editor.
says "Cragen".
Put up (your real name) or shut up.
I've said some things here that I wouldn't want linked to my professional or personal life. I don't feel ashamed of these, but sometimes it's nice to lash back at someone who's being a jerk without having to bite my tongue as I do in contexts when my real name is attached. And I'd have to spellcheck every post too.
Again, you're just loudly stating your opinions. I'm out of this thread.
What strain? You've just assumed all that: cause, effect, the lot is all just your unsupported claim.
. If you're talking about the cost of producing new artists,
Of course not. I SAID "by which I meant the marginal cost: of physical duplication and distribution" which you actually quoted, so I don't know how you could have missed it.
Put it this way: with copyright holders (companies or independent artists) having to compete against free copies of their own work, it's amazing to see that any of them have survived as long as they have.
You're just trying to pull on heartstrings without producing any actual facts. I'm sure you're sincere but you're not actually answering any of my points, just attaching your own statements to mine. Please just make an independent post rather than replying.
In this case, I think it's a drop in the fat profit margins of the media companies, where they were charging more for a product that cost less to make every year (by which I meant the marginal copst: of physical duplication and distribution).
In any case, that's a diferent issue to that I was addressing. The prices to conusmers certainly HAS come down in many cases due to "piracy" changing the marketplace. Whether the producers (not simply the distributors) are harmed is a much larger question.
Rubbish. In Hong Kong, for example, video piracy was rife several years ago. While a legit release might cost HK$100, the bootleg was about HK$30. To compete, the retail prices came down. Some even to $30 or so. Pirate versions went down a bit, but it wasn't so lucrative and now while they're still around there are much fewer bootlegs on sale. But the legit customers DID see a reduced prices because of piracy.
And how about the very cheap version of Windpws Microsoft offers in Asia? Partly to forestall government schemes to promote Linux, but also certainly a response to the effectively free bootleg versions PCs came with as matter of course.
Why waste your own ammunition? Put "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" cartoons on them and leave them under a bridge in Boston.
Blade Runner, sure. Alien? A great film, but not great SF, basically a slasher movie. The Matrix and Star Wars were both great -- despite the crappiness of theor respective sequels. Matrix had some actual ideas in it (again, subverted by the sequels), Star Wars was a great mashup of all kinds of pulp fiction.
Same thing that happened to medieval Christianity's "morals" (witch burning, the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc) when Europeans got richer, educated and middle class. Fundamentalism is most appealing to the poor (though exploited by the rich). Extrapolating a sign held by "one Muslim protester" to the entire population is unsound statistically to say the least.
Why would any porn site pay a cent for millions of low res snapshots of nobodies, almost all fully clothed, overweight, pimply etc?
Yeah, the ISPs were big. That wasn't the point, as I explained. And thanks for the capitals, that really helps my comprehension. Of what a pompous ass you are, that is.
Times likes this one really misses an "edit" button.
Asshole
The statements were about the legitimacy of the results. Since Optus "refused to comment", saying they were "used for the trial" is true, but irrelevant to the issue. It's also misleading to cite the size of the ISPs without noting they only used a very small, self-selected group of "testers".