During wartime, a President has expanded powers. So it's convenient to pick a war against an enemy that can never surrender or offer terms, since they have no central government. Terrorism is an idea, not a government. It's not possible to bomb an idea into submission.
So in effect, we have entered a permanent state of war. Therefore any expanded wartime powers have become permanent, at least until we say we're not at war anymore. And that will pretty much depend on how things go Nov. 4.
Wow, you really have no clue what you're talking about, do you? You think you're so clever for nitpicking Goedel's ontological argument.
To be more precise, I did not nitpick Godel's argument. I paralleled it, substituting God with sex. You'll find I posted no counterargument to Godel in my original post. And I also used it to reach a true conclusion: Women Exist.
So yeah, I actually do have a clue what I'm talking about.
Let me ask you this: is there any role in your life for spirituality, whatsoever? I'm not talking about any one conception of God, just your spirituality. If you don't, I really feel sorry for you.
I might ask if you have any clue what a straw man argument is. There is nothing you can deduce about my spirituality from my original post. I can however deduce that you seem to be a fan of Godel, and that I've stepped on your toes by using his argument as the basis of a joke.
Which somewhat ironically, under my definition of spirituality is a blessing of sorts. Nothing tastes quite so delicious as hamburgers made from sacred cows.
If people took spirituality more seriously, we wouldn't have all these problems. People would be more moral and generally pleasant to one another. And maybe you wouldn't talk about sex so much.
Hah! *snort*
It's called a joke. Don't be such an automaton. I don't think about sex any more or less than any average human being.
And for what it's worth, I think taking spirituality seriously to be a HUGE error. It's what gets people burnt at the stake. People need to take it less seriously. Less planes will wind up embedded into skyscrapers that way. I think the world would be a more moral and happy place if they took things less seriously, and approached things with the happiness and wisdom that children have.
The Creator created all - that means humor as well. I don't think this was all made so we could sit around and make sour faces at each other, and the most dour person gets to go to the highest cloud in Heaven.
1) Nothing is more awesome than sex with women.
2) We can imagine sex with women. And frequently do.
3) If we can imagine sex with women, the only thing that would be more awesome would be actually having sex with women. For that, women would have to exist.
4) Since point 1 says that nothing is more awesome than sex with women, they must exist, that being the most awesome thing possible.
Who says my philosophy class was a waste of time? =)
I thought nerds preferred the cold dark of their parents basements or garages, to any kind of socialization?
Not entirely true. Geeks love to be around geeks, and only get awkward in the general population. We nerds are highly gregarious whenever we're in friendly company.
As an example go check out a gaming convention.
BTW, I think this town sounds like a lot of fun. I'm probably not bright/geeky enough to be invited to live there, but it would be cool to visit. I'm betting it would be worth it just for all the little inside jokes you'd see around. I'll bet the graffiti alone would be worth it.
See, that's not how I read it. It sounded more to me like the OP would hire in a coder, and then was surprised to find that coders are vastly different than the guys over in sales. Then getting upset about it.
I can see how it might be the other way though. Maybe this guy hired in a couple of kids with Comp Sci degrees that still had damp ink on them and was disappointed that they couldn't do anything.
But still, OP said this: "It's very hard to find decent programmers no matter what we are willing to pay."
I find that very very difficult to believe. If the sky is the limit with your pay, you absolutely can find some amazing talent. That's why I was thinking that maybe this guy is simply unhappy no matter who he hired because programmers are going to be vastly different from other office types. Especially the alpha-geeks who can quote RFCs and tell you what compiler you used by looking at the assembly it generates that are worth that top dollar.
All that time and effort spent learning that stuff is time not spent gathering small talk about sports teams to use around the office cooler and knowing how to tie a tie properly.
That's what it seemed like to me. A classic case of unrealistic expectations.
This was all in 1986 as sophomores (likewise, get off *my* lawn).
Hah! I was a senior in 86. So you get of *my* lawn, kid! =)
Sorry for the rant.
Hey, no problem. You've actually just verified a career decision I made some years ago. I have a BSEE but wound up doing programming for a living. I write a lot of low level code in C for embedded systems.
So I thought, well...since I'm a coder by trade now, why not go back to college and get a degree in Comp Sci? Might make my resume look better. And who knows? I might learn something as well.
So I go back to my U and study the curriculum guide. And something catches my eye. My local U has switched from C being their main language, to Java.
Now don't get me wrong. I like Java. In fact, I love Java. The libraries are massive, garbage collection is fantastic, it's just a dream to write in Java.
And that's exactly why it shouldn't be the main language for a Comp Sci degree. Too much is done for you. Since this is Slashdot a car analogy is obligatory. "If you learn how to drive on an automatic transmission vehicle, if you ever have to drive stick you're going to be screwed."
People graduating with that Comp Sci degree are going to be at an absolute loss if they have to perform in an environment devoid of Java. What if they have to do their own malloc/free stuff? They'll think that all happens "by magic". Or any other manual task closer to the hardware than Java. Man - they'll be screwed. Give any one of these kids the task of writing an interrupt handler and their heads would probably explode.
So I didn't go for it. I'm glad, looking back on it.
They talked well and seemed to have the skills but all had poor attitudes and didn't display even rudimentary professional behavior.
Yeah, I'm sure a game written by you guys would be a blast. It's impossible to write a fun game in an environment devoid of it. You have to know what fun is first before you can manufacture it.
And I've got more bad news for you, AC. Programmers are all oddballs. And the more talented the programmer tends to be, the more of an oddball they'll tend to be.
If you're looking for something that wears a suit and says "Yes, sir" and "No, sir" on cue, then you're looking in the wrong place. I think the problem is more likely your hiring practices. Again, if you're looking for someone with impeccable office manners and who looks sharp in a suit - well, that isn't us. All of the time you spend in your early years acquiring social graces, we spent learning assembly.
Change your hiring practices, change your expectations, and lighten up, and I'll bet you start having successes.
My first real programming was done for gaming purposes. I wrote a zork-like thing in Apple Pascal on an Apple IIe in high school (yes I know, get off my lawn). And tried to write Cosmic Encounter for the C64. Running out of room is what moved me to buy an Amiga and my first real C compiler, Aztec C. And my first hard drive once I got sick of programming off of floppies. Which I hardware hacked onto the 86 pin expansion port to make it a full 100 pin ZorroII port.
Anything that gets your butt in the chair and writing code is good. I had no idea what I was getting into when I stared down this path, but it was gaming that was the beginning. And now it's put a roof over my head.
YMMV of course, but for me it's hardly been a waste of time.
And as for the cost of copyright violation, that is also a myth. The people who demand their content for free, who are unwilling to pay for it regardless, would never be a sale in the first place. The industry loses nothing when they download something for free.
Also, it's *very* questionable accounting to count a future sale from a potential customer as cash you already have in hand. It may be a missed opportunity, but it cannot be a loss.
To illustrate, let's say someone gives me a Ferrari for free. I'd drive the daylights out of it - you bet. I'd drive it everywhere. But you know what? Even though I'd love to have one, I'd never buy one. Someone giving me a Ferrari would not deprive them from a sale.
It's much the same with copyright violation. These cannot count as losses. At best, they are a missed opportunity. But you cannot assume that because someone will take something for free, use it, and even enjoy the daylights out of it - that they would also be willing to pay for it.
DRM works "well enough" to thwart casual piracy and if it's done right it's not too onerous on the buyer.
So tell me, what exactly is casual piracy?
Back in the 80's it was copy protection on floppy disks, usually a bad sector or something thrown in so that a block copy of the disk would fail. You'd throw in your disk, hit copy, and it would fail. Joe User would then give up. This is the casual copying that the industry was trying to prevent. And it worked pretty well, back then.
But today? Everyone has a cablemodem. And all it takes is one clever kid in the Netherlands and it's all over the net five minutes later with millions of people downloading it.
The casual copying myth is something that should be put to bed. It's an ancient ghost twenty years dead at this point, useless to any modern discussion about copyright. It's all casual these days.
To prove that point, think of a digital good. Any one, just go ahead. Anything at all. Now do a google search for it, and add in the word 'torrent'.
I think you'll find that I'm making a valid point.
Oh, I know, in this wonderful utopian world they can sell T-shirts! And concerts! And people will give them money over paypal! Whoohoo! What a joke. You can make the same retarded argument about expensive commercial software. They should have software concerts and T-shirts to pay for the tens or hundreds of millions+ it costs to develop! Information wants to be free, like, maaan! Since software _can_ be copied, it should be copied and any attempt to thwart this is wrong!
Repeating your straw man argument won't make it true the second time, either.
The simple fact is that no matter how well you protect something, fifteen minutes later some kid will crack your uber DRM scheme and release it as a torrent. Every single time, no exceptions, deal with it.
So given the choice between DRM encumbered goods and digital media with no restrictions for sale in Best Buy...what's the damn difference? No matter what you do it's already on P2P. And that's a fact. The business model you propose in your straw man happens to be the way it already is. If I buy a digital good, DRM or not, it's already out there for free. So why bother with the DRM in the first place? Just to provide some teenager with a disassembler fifteen minutes of glory? Get real. It doesn't work. It will never work.
So I would say that it is your argument that is the more retarded of the two. Every single thing on a disc for sale in Best Buy is available for free. Every. Single. Thing. By your logic that means that Best Buy should sell zero discs. But you know what? They don't. Half the store is shelves and shelves of CDs and DVDs. I wonder why?
Could it be that your argument holds absolutely no water at all?
Error the first - when you rent a car you do not own it. It's not yours to do with as you please. Buy the car, pay cash for it - and you can enter it in that derby all you like. It's yours. Do whatever you want with it. That's what ownership means.
Error the second - if you buy a copy of Photoshop you own that one copy. Putting it up on your website is copyright violation. You can sell your copy on eBay however. You can do whatever you want with your one copy. Install it, sell it, set it on fire. It's yours.
DRM? Not the same at all. You can't download a DRM crippled movie or album of music and then resell it when you are done with it. The seller sets the terms of the ownership. The seller can say ridiculous things like "It's yours, but only for a year in which case you have to buy it again. And pay us a nickel every time you open the file. And you can't resell it either." Or any other bizarre restriction that pops into their minds.
See the difference yet?
With DRM, you never actually own anything. All purchases become rentals of a sort, with the implicit notion that the original seller can change the terms any time they wish to anything they want.
What a wonderful world you all think you live in where you can just release digital content for all the wonderful people to share out for free and where apparently content is free to produce and content owners shouldn't worry about getting money for their work because they happen to work in a field where there's no perfect distribution model.
Nobody is saying artists shouldn't be paid. What we are saying is that DRM isn't the way to go about it.
Refute that point instead.
There are other ways to get paid. It's been discussed here on/. millions of times, so I'm not going to rehash them. Go and search and find them yourself.
"It works in a way that doesn't hold consumers hostage"
But that's the point of DRM - the content distributor gets to decide what happens to the content, not the consumer. Your purchased content is held hostage to the whims of the distributor. That's the point of DRM.
For an encore this guy will sell airplanes without wings that keep you safely on the ground, bladless knifes without handles, and a bucket of jumbo shrimp.
Agreed, not-so AC. McMaster-Carr's website is a beautiful economy of design. It's so uncluttered when you first go there you think "this can't possibly be it." Their search engine actually works, too. And they don't just farm out the query to Google. It's their search engine.
I'm a hobbyist metalworker, and I buy from those guys regularly. Clean, easy to search catalog. Massive inventory of truly hard to locate stuff. Fast delivery. It's like the hammer-and-anvil version of Digi-Key. Love 'em.
Yeah, that's the worst problem we face in America today.
It is. Not bogus phone calls, mind you. But governmental apathy. The system doesn't care about the so called "little people" anymore.
If it was the mayor of a big town, or a chief of police, or a congressman that was being harassed in this way the FBI would be all over it - and you know it.
I believe there is about a 1 in ten chance, sure. Not trolling, not flamebait. I don't engage in either. The lottery ticket example was a parable.
I don't think it would be total chaos either. You won't find anywhere in this thread where I make that conclusion, so that would be a strawman argument you've constructed.
And you still haven't told me what you think a reasonable precaution would be.
I do not read Kos, or any other political blog. I find leftist ranting to be as unpalatable as conservative ranting. I make up my own mind on issues. I do not engage in partisan hackery. I decided, all on my own, that I am not fond of my country's current administration. If I say something that the left agrees with, it is coincidence. If I say something that the right agrees with, it is coincidence.
Thinking for yourself is refreshing.
As for the rest, I'm not doing anything to prepare because I do not believe it has much of a chance of happening. To paraphrase, I will occasionally buy a lottery ticket - but I make no plans on how I'll spend my winnings. Too far fetched to make any plans.
But you seem to be making them. Might I ask what reasonable precautions I should be taking in the event of a coup? I'm genuinely curious.
The difference is that people are, for whatever reason, absolutely terrified of W. A Democratic congress refused to even censure him for anything he's done. And he's done a lot that's wrong - just ask Dennis Kucinich. You'd think after the whole Bill Clinton impeachment fiasco they'd be dying for some payback. But they didn't go for it. Why?
Dick Cheney can shoot someone in the face, and what happens? The victim goes on TV and makes a public apology. For being shot in the face.
This administration is absolutely terrifying. And everyone is afraid of them. That makes a coup possible. Improbable, sure. But not impossible.
Again, I'm pretty certain I'm worrying over nothing, as you suggest. However I'm not 100% certain. I just want 1/20 to come and go as quickly as possible so I don't have to worry about it anymore.
The republicans are enthusiastic about law and order at the expense of liberty, and the democrats have yet to become vertebrates.
This describes the problem perfectly. I can't mod you up, I can only agree profusely with you.
Watching the Democrats fold on the telcom issue after they won a congressional majority is one of the single most disappointing things I've seen in my entire life. I've never felt more betrayed by politicians in my life ever.
If we're even that lucky. I'd give 1 in 10 odds that if Obama wins the election W doesn't step down.
Sound ridiculous? I hope it is. But with all the other crazy non-American stuff W has done...I can't discount it. He's proven time and again that he thinks he's immune to precedent and proper procedure. And that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are more hindrances than blessings.
I'll bet it's been discussed as an option at least. I really don't put anything past this administration. W scares the absolute living crap out of me. 1/20/09 can't come and go too quickly as far as I'm concerned.
Slashdot Mirror
During wartime, a President has expanded powers. So it's convenient to pick a war against an enemy that can never surrender or offer terms, since they have no central government. Terrorism is an idea, not a government. It's not possible to bomb an idea into submission.
So in effect, we have entered a permanent state of war. Therefore any expanded wartime powers have become permanent, at least until we say we're not at war anymore. And that will pretty much depend on how things go Nov. 4.
Wow, you really have no clue what you're talking about, do you? You think you're so clever for nitpicking Goedel's ontological argument.
To be more precise, I did not nitpick Godel's argument. I paralleled it, substituting God with sex. You'll find I posted no counterargument to Godel in my original post. And I also used it to reach a true conclusion: Women Exist.
So yeah, I actually do have a clue what I'm talking about.
Let me ask you this: is there any role in your life for spirituality, whatsoever? I'm not talking about any one conception of God, just your spirituality. If you don't, I really feel sorry for you.
I might ask if you have any clue what a straw man argument is. There is nothing you can deduce about my spirituality from my original post. I can however deduce that you seem to be a fan of Godel, and that I've stepped on your toes by using his argument as the basis of a joke.
Which somewhat ironically, under my definition of spirituality is a blessing of sorts. Nothing tastes quite so delicious as hamburgers made from sacred cows.
If people took spirituality more seriously, we wouldn't have all these problems. People would be more moral and generally pleasant to one another. And maybe you wouldn't talk about sex so much.
Hah! *snort*
It's called a joke. Don't be such an automaton. I don't think about sex any more or less than any average human being.
And for what it's worth, I think taking spirituality seriously to be a HUGE error. It's what gets people burnt at the stake. People need to take it less seriously. Less planes will wind up embedded into skyscrapers that way. I think the world would be a more moral and happy place if they took things less seriously, and approached things with the happiness and wisdom that children have.
The Creator created all - that means humor as well. I don't think this was all made so we could sit around and make sour faces at each other, and the most dour person gets to go to the highest cloud in Heaven.
Something for you to think about. Hopefully.
Fnord.
I submit that Godel solved this a long time ago.
1) Nothing is more awesome than sex with women.
2) We can imagine sex with women. And frequently do.
3) If we can imagine sex with women, the only thing that would be more awesome would be actually having sex with women. For that, women would have to exist.
4) Since point 1 says that nothing is more awesome than sex with women, they must exist, that being the most awesome thing possible.
Who says my philosophy class was a waste of time? =)
I thought nerds preferred the cold dark of their parents basements or garages, to any kind of socialization?
Not entirely true. Geeks love to be around geeks, and only get awkward in the general population. We nerds are highly gregarious whenever we're in friendly company.
As an example go check out a gaming convention.
BTW, I think this town sounds like a lot of fun. I'm probably not bright/geeky enough to be invited to live there, but it would be cool to visit. I'm betting it would be worth it just for all the little inside jokes you'd see around. I'll bet the graffiti alone would be worth it.
See, that's not how I read it. It sounded more to me like the OP would hire in a coder, and then was surprised to find that coders are vastly different than the guys over in sales. Then getting upset about it.
I can see how it might be the other way though. Maybe this guy hired in a couple of kids with Comp Sci degrees that still had damp ink on them and was disappointed that they couldn't do anything.
But still, OP said this: "It's very hard to find decent programmers no matter what we are willing to pay."
I find that very very difficult to believe. If the sky is the limit with your pay, you absolutely can find some amazing talent. That's why I was thinking that maybe this guy is simply unhappy no matter who he hired because programmers are going to be vastly different from other office types. Especially the alpha-geeks who can quote RFCs and tell you what compiler you used by looking at the assembly it generates that are worth that top dollar.
All that time and effort spent learning that stuff is time not spent gathering small talk about sports teams to use around the office cooler and knowing how to tie a tie properly.
That's what it seemed like to me. A classic case of unrealistic expectations.
This was all in 1986 as sophomores (likewise, get off *my* lawn).
Hah! I was a senior in 86. So you get of *my* lawn, kid! =)
Sorry for the rant.
Hey, no problem. You've actually just verified a career decision I made some years ago. I have a BSEE but wound up doing programming for a living. I write a lot of low level code in C for embedded systems.
So I thought, well...since I'm a coder by trade now, why not go back to college and get a degree in Comp Sci? Might make my resume look better. And who knows? I might learn something as well.
So I go back to my U and study the curriculum guide. And something catches my eye. My local U has switched from C being their main language, to Java.
Now don't get me wrong. I like Java. In fact, I love Java. The libraries are massive, garbage collection is fantastic, it's just a dream to write in Java.
And that's exactly why it shouldn't be the main language for a Comp Sci degree. Too much is done for you. Since this is Slashdot a car analogy is obligatory. "If you learn how to drive on an automatic transmission vehicle, if you ever have to drive stick you're going to be screwed."
People graduating with that Comp Sci degree are going to be at an absolute loss if they have to perform in an environment devoid of Java. What if they have to do their own malloc/free stuff? They'll think that all happens "by magic". Or any other manual task closer to the hardware than Java. Man - they'll be screwed. Give any one of these kids the task of writing an interrupt handler and their heads would probably explode.
So I didn't go for it. I'm glad, looking back on it.
They talked well and seemed to have the skills but all had poor attitudes and didn't display even rudimentary professional behavior.
Yeah, I'm sure a game written by you guys would be a blast. It's impossible to write a fun game in an environment devoid of it. You have to know what fun is first before you can manufacture it.
And I've got more bad news for you, AC. Programmers are all oddballs. And the more talented the programmer tends to be, the more of an oddball they'll tend to be.
If you're looking for something that wears a suit and says "Yes, sir" and "No, sir" on cue, then you're looking in the wrong place. I think the problem is more likely your hiring practices. Again, if you're looking for someone with impeccable office manners and who looks sharp in a suit - well, that isn't us. All of the time you spend in your early years acquiring social graces, we spent learning assembly.
Change your hiring practices, change your expectations, and lighten up, and I'll bet you start having successes.
My first real programming was done for gaming purposes. I wrote a zork-like thing in Apple Pascal on an Apple IIe in high school (yes I know, get off my lawn). And tried to write Cosmic Encounter for the C64. Running out of room is what moved me to buy an Amiga and my first real C compiler, Aztec C. And my first hard drive once I got sick of programming off of floppies. Which I hardware hacked onto the 86 pin expansion port to make it a full 100 pin ZorroII port.
Anything that gets your butt in the chair and writing code is good. I had no idea what I was getting into when I stared down this path, but it was gaming that was the beginning. And now it's put a roof over my head.
YMMV of course, but for me it's hardly been a waste of time.
At home, my internet connection is limited to 1GB / month before I have to pay extra.
"Well there's your problem."
And you've precisely missed my point. DRM does not grant limited rights, it restricts rights already given to you during the sale.
And as for the cost of copyright violation, that is also a myth. The people who demand their content for free, who are unwilling to pay for it regardless, would never be a sale in the first place. The industry loses nothing when they download something for free.
Also, it's *very* questionable accounting to count a future sale from a potential customer as cash you already have in hand. It may be a missed opportunity, but it cannot be a loss.
To illustrate, let's say someone gives me a Ferrari for free. I'd drive the daylights out of it - you bet. I'd drive it everywhere. But you know what? Even though I'd love to have one, I'd never buy one. Someone giving me a Ferrari would not deprive them from a sale.
It's much the same with copyright violation. These cannot count as losses. At best, they are a missed opportunity. But you cannot assume that because someone will take something for free, use it, and even enjoy the daylights out of it - that they would also be willing to pay for it.
DRM works "well enough" to thwart casual piracy and if it's done right it's not too onerous on the buyer.
So tell me, what exactly is casual piracy?
Back in the 80's it was copy protection on floppy disks, usually a bad sector or something thrown in so that a block copy of the disk would fail. You'd throw in your disk, hit copy, and it would fail. Joe User would then give up. This is the casual copying that the industry was trying to prevent. And it worked pretty well, back then.
But today? Everyone has a cablemodem. And all it takes is one clever kid in the Netherlands and it's all over the net five minutes later with millions of people downloading it.
The casual copying myth is something that should be put to bed. It's an ancient ghost twenty years dead at this point, useless to any modern discussion about copyright. It's all casual these days.
To prove that point, think of a digital good. Any one, just go ahead. Anything at all. Now do a google search for it, and add in the word 'torrent'.
I think you'll find that I'm making a valid point.
Oh, I know, in this wonderful utopian world they can sell T-shirts! And concerts! And people will give them money over paypal! Whoohoo! What a joke. You can make the same retarded argument about expensive commercial software. They should have software concerts and T-shirts to pay for the tens or hundreds of millions+ it costs to develop! Information wants to be free, like, maaan! Since software _can_ be copied, it should be copied and any attempt to thwart this is wrong!
Repeating your straw man argument won't make it true the second time, either.
The simple fact is that no matter how well you protect something, fifteen minutes later some kid will crack your uber DRM scheme and release it as a torrent. Every single time, no exceptions, deal with it.
So given the choice between DRM encumbered goods and digital media with no restrictions for sale in Best Buy...what's the damn difference? No matter what you do it's already on P2P. And that's a fact. The business model you propose in your straw man happens to be the way it already is. If I buy a digital good, DRM or not, it's already out there for free. So why bother with the DRM in the first place? Just to provide some teenager with a disassembler fifteen minutes of glory? Get real. It doesn't work. It will never work.
So I would say that it is your argument that is the more retarded of the two. Every single thing on a disc for sale in Best Buy is available for free. Every. Single. Thing. By your logic that means that Best Buy should sell zero discs. But you know what? They don't. Half the store is shelves and shelves of CDs and DVDs. I wonder why?
Could it be that your argument holds absolutely no water at all?
Two swings, two misses.
Error the first - when you rent a car you do not own it. It's not yours to do with as you please. Buy the car, pay cash for it - and you can enter it in that derby all you like. It's yours. Do whatever you want with it. That's what ownership means.
Error the second - if you buy a copy of Photoshop you own that one copy. Putting it up on your website is copyright violation. You can sell your copy on eBay however. You can do whatever you want with your one copy. Install it, sell it, set it on fire. It's yours.
DRM? Not the same at all. You can't download a DRM crippled movie or album of music and then resell it when you are done with it. The seller sets the terms of the ownership. The seller can say ridiculous things like "It's yours, but only for a year in which case you have to buy it again. And pay us a nickel every time you open the file. And you can't resell it either." Or any other bizarre restriction that pops into their minds.
See the difference yet?
With DRM, you never actually own anything. All purchases become rentals of a sort, with the implicit notion that the original seller can change the terms any time they wish to anything they want.
What a wonderful world you all think you live in where you can just release digital content for all the wonderful people to share out for free and where apparently content is free to produce and content owners shouldn't worry about getting money for their work because they happen to work in a field where there's no perfect distribution model.
Nobody is saying artists shouldn't be paid. What we are saying is that DRM isn't the way to go about it.
Refute that point instead.
There are other ways to get paid. It's been discussed here on /. millions of times, so I'm not going to rehash them. Go and search and find them yourself.
Yeah, that could only happen in Russia. Our elected officials would never do such a thing.
"It works in a way that doesn't hold consumers hostage"
But that's the point of DRM - the content distributor gets to decide what happens to the content, not the consumer. Your purchased content is held hostage to the whims of the distributor. That's the point of DRM.
For an encore this guy will sell airplanes without wings that keep you safely on the ground, bladless knifes without handles, and a bucket of jumbo shrimp.
Agreed, not-so AC. McMaster-Carr's website is a beautiful economy of design. It's so uncluttered when you first go there you think "this can't possibly be it." Their search engine actually works, too. And they don't just farm out the query to Google. It's their search engine.
I'm a hobbyist metalworker, and I buy from those guys regularly. Clean, easy to search catalog. Massive inventory of truly hard to locate stuff. Fast delivery. It's like the hammer-and-anvil version of Digi-Key. Love 'em.
A perfect example. Hacking a Yahoo account is fairly trivial. It was some 20 year old kid that just did some simple password guessing.
And of course, the FBI came down on him like a ton of bricks.
I wonder if someone illegally gained access to my email account if they would even notice. I'm guessing not.
Yeah, that's the worst problem we face in America today.
It is. Not bogus phone calls, mind you. But governmental apathy. The system doesn't care about the so called "little people" anymore.
If it was the mayor of a big town, or a chief of police, or a congressman that was being harassed in this way the FBI would be all over it - and you know it.
Here you go.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092099/
I believe there is about a 1 in ten chance, sure. Not trolling, not flamebait. I don't engage in either. The lottery ticket example was a parable.
I don't think it would be total chaos either. You won't find anywhere in this thread where I make that conclusion, so that would be a strawman argument you've constructed.
And you still haven't told me what you think a reasonable precaution would be.
I do not read Kos, or any other political blog. I find leftist ranting to be as unpalatable as conservative ranting. I make up my own mind on issues. I do not engage in partisan hackery. I decided, all on my own, that I am not fond of my country's current administration. If I say something that the left agrees with, it is coincidence. If I say something that the right agrees with, it is coincidence.
Thinking for yourself is refreshing.
As for the rest, I'm not doing anything to prepare because I do not believe it has much of a chance of happening. To paraphrase, I will occasionally buy a lottery ticket - but I make no plans on how I'll spend my winnings. Too far fetched to make any plans.
But you seem to be making them. Might I ask what reasonable precautions I should be taking in the event of a coup? I'm genuinely curious.
The difference is that people are, for whatever reason, absolutely terrified of W. A Democratic congress refused to even censure him for anything he's done. And he's done a lot that's wrong - just ask Dennis Kucinich. You'd think after the whole Bill Clinton impeachment fiasco they'd be dying for some payback. But they didn't go for it. Why?
Dick Cheney can shoot someone in the face, and what happens? The victim goes on TV and makes a public apology. For being shot in the face.
This administration is absolutely terrifying. And everyone is afraid of them. That makes a coup possible. Improbable, sure. But not impossible.
Again, I'm pretty certain I'm worrying over nothing, as you suggest. However I'm not 100% certain. I just want 1/20 to come and go as quickly as possible so I don't have to worry about it anymore.
This is Slashdot, and you did work in a car analogy.
The republicans are enthusiastic about law and order at the expense of liberty, and the democrats have yet to become vertebrates.
This describes the problem perfectly. I can't mod you up, I can only agree profusely with you.
Watching the Democrats fold on the telcom issue after they won a congressional majority is one of the single most disappointing things I've seen in my entire life. I've never felt more betrayed by politicians in my life ever.
If we're even that lucky. I'd give 1 in 10 odds that if Obama wins the election W doesn't step down.
Sound ridiculous? I hope it is. But with all the other crazy non-American stuff W has done...I can't discount it. He's proven time and again that he thinks he's immune to precedent and proper procedure. And that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are more hindrances than blessings.
I'll bet it's been discussed as an option at least. I really don't put anything past this administration. W scares the absolute living crap out of me. 1/20/09 can't come and go too quickly as far as I'm concerned.