It is not the matter of people wanting to watch stuff on computer (actually I have proper sound system and beam projector to wall), it is not the matter of quality either - it is a matter of old *distribution* methods/channels
------------
No, no. For the FAR MAJORITY of people who download dvd rips and cams and the like of movies, music, games, and software it comes down to one thing:
It's free.
And they don't give a shit else. If they don't have to pay they're happy.
Would they pay otherwise? Who knows.
All they know and care about is that they get everything they want without it costing them a single cent. This isn't about being on the leading edge of technology or industry not moving on to new distribution methods. It's about price, and the majority of people who go for this sort of thing refuse to pay a cent.
I doubt their case would be look upon favorably, themselves being convicted of abusing theirs AND not showing much improvement.
I'd also like to know how you concluded that Google is a monopoly, and why microsoft would have any grounds to sue (since microsoft would be more guilty, what with adding it to their browsers which is forced on almost every desktop sold these days.)
Lastly, I hate that firefox doesn't obey normal unix copy and paste rules. There's no option to right click in a text field and delete everything in it without highlighting the text that is already there.
IIRC, if you click in the address bar and hit Ctrl+L it will select without copying in Linux.
I do believe Firefox is oriented more towards Windows' method of explicit copy instead of *NIX's implicit copy, which really drives me nuts when trying to use Firefox in Linux (I keep wiping out the URL I want to paste.)
The GPL only exists with the support of copyright. If not for copyright, everything would effectively be BSD (if much would truly be written at all, seeng as how there'd be zero incentive.)
It uses its rules to maintain the freedom of something that would not normally be free, and to protect the creators of GPL'd software.
It is not a disrespect of it. It is in fact a fine, effective use of copyright.
However, people distributing works that they have no permission to, now that -is- a disrespect of copyright.
A has been more or less proven false, Apple will tell you that themselves.
C is simply a legitimate push to get names of people who broke a legal contract (and I don't recall the site operator being 15...)
D is something any company can do. I'm not going to carry books in my stores that disparage ME. It's not like they're supressing any and all publication of the information contained therein, and using the government to do it.
I really would like to see the guys behind thepiratebay get taken to court and lose. Someone needs to hurry up and do it.
They're truly assholes like no other. Arrogant to no end, they think they're untouchable or something special that they can assist in copyright violation without getting in trouble.
It's called hubris, people. And it's likely they won't see the edge before the fall.
And that's what it all boils down to. The world is moving towards digital distribution, and the media companies are doing everything in their power to try to stop that from happening. They are refusing to update their business model for a new generation. This SHOULD be death for a company. Instead, they have grown so large that they simply attempt to outlaw the new technology that threatens their 1950s mentality.
No, no.
Digital distribution is what we have. What you want is electronic distribution, and they're trying not to outlaw the technology but protect their copyrights, which the lot of the slashbots mistake as attacking a technology. Not hard when the use of that technology seems to involve mass violation of their copyrights.
This is because slashdots are largely fucking clueless, and only want shit for free. The hypocracy comes in when people shit a brick about a GPL violation, then they make every excuse they can to say "OH NOES ITS NOT THE SAME1!" Which is a fat load of crap. If you can rip off their movie, I can rip off your GPL licensed program. Or neither can be OK and we can all be better off.
They will change in time. They just don't want you ripping their shit off. And I don't blame them. No one else seems willing to respect their copyrights, so they're suing the fuck out of those who don't. More power to them.
Bet you don't have a 16MB Rage 128M running in it though.
This thing can muster up enough to run things like unreal and stuff in 640x480 maybe, but not for long before getting super hot and either fucking up (overheating from 3.5 years of dust?) or suffering a BSOD (which is fully the fault of shitty ATi drivers)
But that's why a new machine is on the way - new drivers, more horsepower, better games:D
It can't run games, but that's not due to excess spyware and crap, but because it's old.
I honestly don't know why someone would want to run anti-spyware, anti-virus software all the time when a tiny bit of awareness about what runs on your system keeps it completely clean, much less buy a dual-core machine just to run the crap on.
But then this is PCMag. I bet they all run IE and Outlook...
They want P2P shut down so SONY/BMG et all are the ONLY way to buy music.
I want proof. Until you can supply me proof that they've actively moved to shut down legitimate distribution outlets that operate outside the RIAA, I can't look upon your (and others) rantings like this as anything but paranoia.
They only see P2P as a threat in the sense that it strips control from them of their works. Apparently eTree is a place where you can download legitimate music torrents. If what you say is true, I expect a lawsuit to be filed against them.
Oops, they haven't, because they know it'd be groundless and they'd get hit hard for it.
It messes up their control of the distribution channel of THEIR titles. No one else's.
The record companies could give a shit less about each other. They're concerned with their own copyrighted works, and how their copyright is being violated.
And hey, bands can sell directly to you now but they're still signing on with Sony, et. al. so I think we've got a way to go before they're truly irrelevant. But once that day comes there'll be nothing they can do.
Until then, don't misconstrue their actions against people violating their copyrights as an all out attack on P2P. If they really hated internet based distribution, they'd file suit against everyone who ever released an audio compression codec.
I've got an unprivileged apache account that has read access to the apache dir, with the ability to execute php and write to a single directory (since I don't have mysql installed at the moment.)
IIRC, you've been able to run services under other accounts since NT4, if you grant the account permission to log in as a service.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not the matter of people wanting to watch stuff on computer (actually I have proper sound system and beam projector to wall), it is not the matter of quality either - it is a matter of old *distribution* methods/channels
------------
No, no. For the FAR MAJORITY of people who download dvd rips and cams and the like of movies, music, games, and software it comes down to one thing:
It's free.
And they don't give a shit else. If they don't have to pay they're happy.
Would they pay otherwise? Who knows.
All they know and care about is that they get everything they want without it costing them a single cent. This isn't about being on the leading edge of technology or industry not moving on to new distribution methods. It's about price, and the majority of people who go for this sort of thing refuse to pay a cent.
I doubt their case would be look upon favorably, themselves being convicted of abusing theirs AND not showing much improvement.
I'd also like to know how you concluded that Google is a monopoly, and why microsoft would have any grounds to sue (since microsoft would be more guilty, what with adding it to their browsers which is forced on almost every desktop sold these days.)
Lastly, I hate that firefox doesn't obey normal unix copy and paste rules. There's no option to right click in a text field and delete everything in it without highlighting the text that is already there.
IIRC, if you click in the address bar and hit Ctrl+L it will select without copying in Linux.
I do believe Firefox is oriented more towards Windows' method of explicit copy instead of *NIX's implicit copy, which really drives me nuts when trying to use Firefox in Linux (I keep wiping out the URL I want to paste.)
Yes, because fancy graphics make a bad game good.
And graphics that aren't ultrasuperfinedetailed make good games UTTERLY HORRIBLE(tm)
Nintendo's biding their time. Sony and Microsoft have shown their hands for this round of poker, and Nintendo's playing it safe.
Oh, you're interested.
You just don't want to pay them for their work.
Or pay the people involved in the creation.
But then you'll just download it and ratings will be completely thrown off!
So SciFi will cancel yet another good show, becuase "ratings are too low"...
The GPL only exists with the support of copyright. If not for copyright, everything would effectively be BSD (if much would truly be written at all, seeng as how there'd be zero incentive.)
It uses its rules to maintain the freedom of something that would not normally be free, and to protect the creators of GPL'd software.
It is not a disrespect of it. It is in fact a fine, effective use of copyright.
However, people distributing works that they have no permission to, now that -is- a disrespect of copyright.
Except that Free Software is distributed freely by the decision of the creator(s).
"freely distributed tv shows" as it stands are being done without respect to the creator(s) wishes.
We all throw a fit when the GPL is violated and, to be honest, it's one in the same.
Sony is right not to, seeing what just happened.
First thing done when "hobbyists" got their code running on the thing?
They ripped games and uploaded them to the internet.
As far as Sony is concerned, hobbyist = warez.
Sad yet true.
Did you report it along with your fix?
----
Oh yes, because everyone is a C/C++ coder with the ability to decipher the gecko code tree.
Bad thing about OSS users: they assume everyone is like them.
Then please, clarify the purpose of ID?
Hey now.
No criticizing their freeloading attempts. Any badspeak about P2P and how ripping off movies and music is bad will get you modded negatively here.
Of course, violate the GPL and you'll get harassed too. Hypocracy.
weeeeeeeeelllll...
A has been more or less proven false, Apple will tell you that themselves.
C is simply a legitimate push to get names of people who broke a legal contract (and I don't recall the site operator being 15...)
D is something any company can do. I'm not going to carry books in my stores that disparage ME. It's not like they're supressing any and all publication of the information contained therein, and using the government to do it.
Do you have any information regarding B?
Yeah, too bad more people didn't ignore copyright.
We could show those copyright whores that making things and expecting to be compensated is JUST WRONG!
Oh wait, now they're selling our GPL program without giving the altered source back out. FUCK US FOR DEMANDING THE GPL BE FOLLOWED!
I really would like to see the guys behind thepiratebay get taken to court and lose. Someone needs to hurry up and do it.
They're truly assholes like no other. Arrogant to no end, they think they're untouchable or something special that they can assist in copyright violation without getting in trouble.
It's called hubris, people. And it's likely they won't see the edge before the fall.
And that's what it all boils down to. The world is moving towards digital distribution, and the media companies are doing everything in their power to try to stop that from happening. They are refusing to update their business model for a new generation. This SHOULD be death for a company. Instead, they have grown so large that they simply attempt to outlaw the new technology that threatens their 1950s mentality.
No, no.
Digital distribution is what we have. What you want is electronic distribution, and they're trying not to outlaw the technology but protect their copyrights, which the lot of the slashbots mistake as attacking a technology. Not hard when the use of that technology seems to involve mass violation of their copyrights.
This is because slashdots are largely fucking clueless, and only want shit for free. The hypocracy comes in when people shit a brick about a GPL violation, then they make every excuse they can to say "OH NOES ITS NOT THE SAME1!" Which is a fat load of crap. If you can rip off their movie, I can rip off your GPL licensed program. Or neither can be OK and we can all be better off.
They will change in time. They just don't want you ripping their shit off. And I don't blame them. No one else seems willing to respect their copyrights, so they're suing the fuck out of those who don't. More power to them.
ust like I hated having to figure out that the power settings for my hard drive were in "Display Settings" under screen saver.
Too bad that's a blatant lie.
Windows very nicely keeps all power settings under the POWER OPTIONS control panel. Go figure!
Bet you don't have a 16MB Rage 128M running in it though.
:D
This thing can muster up enough to run things like unreal and stuff in 640x480 maybe, but not for long before getting super hot and either fucking up (overheating from 3.5 years of dust?) or suffering a BSOD (which is fully the fault of shitty ATi drivers)
But that's why a new machine is on the way - new drivers, more horsepower, better games
I run XP on a 850 MHz P3, with 384MB of RAM.
It can't run games, but that's not due to excess spyware and crap, but because it's old.
I honestly don't know why someone would want to run anti-spyware, anti-virus software all the time when a tiny bit of awareness about what runs on your system keeps it completely clean, much less buy a dual-core machine just to run the crap on.
But then this is PCMag. I bet they all run IE and Outlook...
On how to be funny, and actually have a good april fool's joke.
I can't tell if anything on the page today is serious or not. At least if there was a "no-jokes-past-noon" or jokes-indicated policy it'd be decent...
The tool is not in question here.
The business of the company behind Grokster is.
They want P2P shut down so SONY/BMG et all are the ONLY way to buy music.
I want proof. Until you can supply me proof that they've actively moved to shut down legitimate distribution outlets that operate outside the RIAA, I can't look upon your (and others) rantings like this as anything but paranoia.
They only see P2P as a threat in the sense that it strips control from them of their works. Apparently eTree is a place where you can download legitimate music torrents. If what you say is true, I expect a lawsuit to be filed against them.
Oops, they haven't, because they know it'd be groundless and they'd get hit hard for it.
Stupid paranoid slashbots.
The paranoia here is unbelievable.
It messes up their control of the distribution channel of THEIR titles. No one else's.
The record companies could give a shit less about each other. They're concerned with their own copyrighted works, and how their copyright is being violated.
And hey, bands can sell directly to you now but they're still signing on with Sony, et. al. so I think we've got a way to go before they're truly irrelevant. But once that day comes there'll be nothing they can do.
Until then, don't misconstrue their actions against people violating their copyrights as an all out attack on P2P. If they really hated internet based distribution, they'd file suit against everyone who ever released an audio compression codec.
Let me add that this starts up automatically on boot along with all of the other services, doing exactly what you specified.
I've done this since Win2K. With Apache no less.
I've got an unprivileged apache account that has read access to the apache dir, with the ability to execute php and write to a single directory (since I don't have mysql installed at the moment.)
IIRC, you've been able to run services under other accounts since NT4, if you grant the account permission to log in as a service.