1) I run Linux and therefore it is illegal to have a FLOSS piece that can playback some DVD's and most Bluray discs. Ripping takes too much time so... Well then, you fscking retarted industry... If you don't like me to have legal playback so I can become a customer than I'll just FSCKING DOWNLOAD IT FOR FREE?!?!
The stupidity of this statement is beyond the pale but I'll tackle it anyway.
You run Linux, therefore you don't use the commercial system that their product was designed to support. Ok this is a fact and indisputable.
There is no FLOSS(sic) program that lets you use the product that wasn't designed for your non commercial operating system. Also fact.
You are apparently too lazy to perform the first required illegal operation to enable you to use the aforementioned product. Not a fact but my assertion based on your statement.
There is no legal way to accomplish what you want given the three previous statements. Also fact
So in order to accommodate your laziness and refusal to buy the required products that would allow you to legally use the product you break the law. Also fact
At what point here do we develop sympathy for your plight. You sound like a lazy law breaking criminal to me. Since enforcement of the laws you are breaking is hard to accomplish you get away with it. We are supposed to infer from this that you are somehow rebelling against something that is an injustice?
What?
What? That post made no sense whatsoever.
What has advent got to do with this whole subject, we aren't having a religious argument, oh wait maybe we are!
Without a major sea change in the way that society thinks and acts it would indeed grind to a halt. The education required to change our societies that much would require the entire world to first accept communism and socialism as the norm. Then when no production is required and no one needs to produce raw materials and no one needs to worry about being sued you might get to the point that you could make these replicators work. This ain't the Star Trek universe sadly.
Yeah, I wouldn't get in that thing until it was safety tested (That will cost a pretty penny). You can use open source designs for anything but the liability problem is uncertain. At least you could only sue the guy that built it, oh wait no you could sue anyone that put his name on the design. And then possibly tie the whole thing up in some kind of litigation until it was no longer relevant.
You assume that energy is also free and easy to get. Unless you think that the raw materials mine and gather themselves. Somebody somewhere needs to get paid. TANSTAFL
assuming you paid for the energy, the designer of the car etc. for his time and the company for their safety testing and advertising you would be welcome to do just that.
If you don't think it's very good, don't watch it period. If you watch it anyway and say, wow I'm glad I didn't pay for that you are still in the wrong.
This is ludicrous. You think that no harm has been done simply because you make a copy rather than take the original. Please explain exactly why this is so.
There are devices running Android that are not phones as well. However, the fact that because it is a special version of Android means almost certainly you need to compile for that specific version unless you can get SDKs from the vendor guaranteed to handle version differences. On the iPhone you can make choices during run time about what OS version you are running and adjust your functionality to accommodate that, it's just not that easy on Android.
Um what?
which proprietary standard only works on one vendors hardware?
All of this HTML5 nonsense is just a distraction.
distraction from what?
This is all about replacing a web experience that is largely cross platform with one that is Apple only.
Last time I looked HTML was far from Apple only. H.264 is not Apple only.
Now who's the fanboy?
please supply the missing content from YOUR post.
If there was anything close to technically accurate in your rant it might make it a proper rant as it is it's confusing. What exactly is it that you are complaining about?
Android is now a bigger market to shoot for anyway.
Android is a bigger market, I suppose, but which Android is the bigger market within the bigger market? Fragmentation of the versions and the not so backwards / forwards compatibility is making it hard to target.
clearly, Apple is intentionally "losing" these phones
Please, I'd like to see your sources for this assertion. Clearly you are just jumping to conclusions. Clearly you do not know anything about the law.
I can support my assertions, how about you?
No, Android OS was more prevalent than iPhone OS. Yes More phones run Android, so what. There are more cockroaches than people, but I wouldn't want to have lots of them around all the time.
Karma, who cares. Don't post and moderate. Use a name!
Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple.
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
It is licensed under the Adobe Flex SDK license because it contains a mixture of open and closed source components. You mean this one. It doesn't seem to enable you to produce swf files (only RIA files) or to write and compile working applications. It does however enable you to deploy properly precompiled applications. But no explanation on how to precompile them. Flash (Flex) builder 4 however does cost near $700. So how exactly is it possible to produce these applications using tools that came with the OS for free?
Slashdot Mirror
1) I run Linux and therefore it is illegal to have a FLOSS piece that can playback some DVD's and most Bluray discs. Ripping takes too much time so... Well then, you fscking retarted industry... If you don't like me to have legal playback so I can become a customer than I'll just FSCKING DOWNLOAD IT FOR FREE?!?!
The stupidity of this statement is beyond the pale but I'll tackle it anyway.
You run Linux, therefore you don't use the commercial system that their product was designed to support. Ok this is a fact and indisputable.
There is no FLOSS(sic) program that lets you use the product that wasn't designed for your non commercial operating system. Also fact.
You are apparently too lazy to perform the first required illegal operation to enable you to use the aforementioned product. Not a fact but my assertion based on your statement.
There is no legal way to accomplish what you want given the three previous statements. Also fact
So in order to accommodate your laziness and refusal to buy the required products that would allow you to legally use the product you break the law. Also fact
At what point here do we develop sympathy for your plight. You sound like a lazy law breaking criminal to me. Since enforcement of the laws you are breaking is hard to accomplish you get away with it. We are supposed to infer from this that you are somehow rebelling against something that is an injustice?
What?
What? That post made no sense whatsoever. What has advent got to do with this whole subject, we aren't having a religious argument, oh wait maybe we are!
Without a major sea change in the way that society thinks and acts it would indeed grind to a halt. The education required to change our societies that much would require the entire world to first accept communism and socialism as the norm. Then when no production is required and no one needs to produce raw materials and no one needs to worry about being sued you might get to the point that you could make these replicators work. This ain't the Star Trek universe sadly.
Yeah, I wouldn't get in that thing until it was safety tested (That will cost a pretty penny). You can use open source designs for anything but the liability problem is uncertain. At least you could only sue the guy that built it, oh wait no you could sue anyone that put his name on the design. And then possibly tie the whole thing up in some kind of litigation until it was no longer relevant.
You assume that energy is also free and easy to get. Unless you think that the raw materials mine and gather themselves. Somebody somewhere needs to get paid. TANSTAFL
assuming you paid for the energy, the designer of the car etc. for his time and the company for their safety testing and advertising you would be welcome to do just that.
If you don't think it's very good, don't watch it period. If you watch it anyway and say, wow I'm glad I didn't pay for that you are still in the wrong.
This is ludicrous. You think that no harm has been done simply because you make a copy rather than take the original. Please explain exactly why this is so.
Yes perhaps but can you also detect the variation in hardware?
There are devices running Android that are not phones as well. However, the fact that because it is a special version of Android means almost certainly you need to compile for that specific version unless you can get SDKs from the vendor guaranteed to handle version differences. On the iPhone you can make choices during run time about what OS version you are running and adjust your functionality to accommodate that, it's just not that easy on Android.
You can't saturate something you can't nail down long enough to write code for.
Um what?
which proprietary standard only works on one vendors hardware?
All of this HTML5 nonsense is just a distraction.
distraction from what?
This is all about replacing a web experience that is largely cross platform with one that is Apple only.
Last time I looked HTML was far from Apple only. H.264 is not Apple only.
Now who's the fanboy?
please supply the missing content from YOUR post.
You obviously weren't around for the IE vs Netscape wars. When MS would release updates to the OS that caused any browser but IE to crash on launch.
If there was anything close to technically accurate in your rant it might make it a proper rant as it is it's confusing. What exactly is it that you are complaining about?
Android is now a bigger market to shoot for anyway.
Android is a bigger market, I suppose, but which Android is the bigger market within the bigger market? Fragmentation of the versions and the not so backwards / forwards compatibility is making it hard to target.
I personally can't stand it anymore
I personally can stand it much more. Good riddance!
clearly, Apple is intentionally "losing" these phones
Please, I'd like to see your sources for this assertion.
Clearly you are just jumping to conclusions.
Clearly you do not know anything about the law.
I can support my assertions, how about you?
No, Android OS was more prevalent than iPhone OS. Yes More phones run Android, so what. There are more cockroaches than people, but I wouldn't want to have lots of them around all the time.
Says a guy with Bing in his name?
I'm sorry there doesn't seem to be any way to mark an entire story as a troll. Ah well, it would just get it talked about anyway.
I haven't actually found a good solid T-Mobile coverage area in Los Angeles.
whooosh!
Not quite what I meant but thanks for playing...
Karma, who cares. Don't post and moderate. Use a name!
It is licensed under the Adobe Flex SDK license because it contains a mixture of open and closed source components. You mean this one. It doesn't seem to enable you to produce swf files (only RIA files) or to write and compile working applications. It does however enable you to deploy properly precompiled applications. But no explanation on how to precompile them. Flash (Flex) builder 4 however does cost near $700. So how exactly is it possible to produce these applications using tools that came with the OS for free?