All "air ships" (blimp, zeppelin, dirigible) are lighter than air, that is the difference between them and "air planes". Zeppelin's and dirigibles just have a rigid superstructure
This is not a troll, but the truth (BTW checkout that UID and I have karma to burn!)
If you agree with any of this, feel free to repost it in the future.
Song of the piracy apologist:
(1) I don't personally believe in copying CDs illegally-- but I think we should avoid using unkind words like "piracy" to describe those that do -- instead, we should describe it as an "infringement", much like a parking infringement.
(2) I don't believe in the record companies emotively abusing the word "theft," but I do believe in emotively abusing words like "information," "sharing," and "Copyright Enforcement Militia."
(3) I believe that piracy is driven by "overpriced CDs" even though CDs have dropped in price over the years.
(4) I believe that piracy is driven by overly long copyright duration, even though most pirated works are recent releases.
(5) I believe that illegitimately downloading music is giving the author "free advertising". I don't buy any of the music I download, of course--but lots of other people probably do.
(6) I believe that ripping off the artists is wrong. The record companies always rip off the artists. Artists support P2P, except the ones that don't (like Metallica), and they don't agree with me, hence they're greedy or their opinion doesn't count or something.
(7) I believe that selling CDs is not a business model, but giving away things for free on the internet is.
(8) I believe that artists should be compensated for their work -- preferably by someone else. I mean, they can sell concert tickets (which someone else can buy) or sell t-shirts (to someone else) or something. As long as someone else subsidises my free ride, I'm coooooool with it.
(9) I believe in capitalism but only support music business models which involve giving away the fruits of ones labor for free.
(10) I believe that copying someone elses music, and redistributing it to my 1,000,000 "best friends" on the internet is sharing. Music is made for sharing. It's my right.
(11) I believe that record companies cracking down on piracy is "greed", but a mob demanding free entertainment is not.
(12) I believe that it's not really "piracy" unless you charge money for it, because, receiving money is wrong, but taking a free ride is fine.
(13) I believe that disallowing copying and redistributing music over Napster is the same as humming my favourite song in public. Because when I hum my favourite song in public, everyone likes it so much that they run home, get out their tape recorders and once they've got a recording of it, they aren't interested in hearing the original any more.
(14) I believe that when illegal behaviour destroys a business, it's "free enterprise at work".
What I find amusing is that the pirates seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between creative activity and brainless copying.
Since a lot of the people here are GPL/OSS advocates: the "OSS way" applied to this domain is to learn how to play an instrument. Or how to sing or whatever. Then get together with a bunch of other people who can also play music, and make some noise.
One of the unfortunate things that has happened to the OSS movement is that a lot of the loudmouth advocates for it don't understand what it's really about. They view it primarily as a means to get free stuff, and then they turn their eyes from the free stuff to the non-free stuff and think to themselves "maybe I'm entitled to get that one for free too". The noble ideals of grass roots participation in the creative process, and/or supporting it in a principled way (namely, boosting the "free foo" movement by preferring free foo to nonfree foo), or for that matter, any other form of moderately principled codes of ethics, are completely lost on them. I think it's a shame that these leeches use OSS, but there's not a whole lot that can or should be done about that. But I'd be much happier if at the very least, they wouldn't confuse the OSS movement (free as in freedom) with the Napster driven movement (free as in "loader").
Your entire history. In order to serve data about the sites that you are on it needs to know the url. I know people who work for A9 and as far as I know the only things that they use the user trails for are A) finding new pages to craw (they end up in the Internet Archive wayback machine) B) Creating related Links C) timing the speed of sites. the creation of related links is the only thing that they use "trails" for, the others they just use individual urls.
Why hasn't there been a slashdot article about the google toolbar tracking your browsing? you turn on the advanced mode and every url you go to is sent to google.
I love this shit. Since I want it for free, you should get a different job if you want ot feed yourself.
What the fuck do you do? Do you enjoy your work? Do you expect to get paid for the work you do?
Sorry but people do get something when they listen to music, they are entertained, if you are to be entertained by the work of an artist you should compensate them as THEY expect you to, not by your choice. If you don't like it find someone who will entertain you for the price that you want. There is plenty of choices out there for your entertainment dollar, or lack there of.
Last week people here bitched about managers changing time cards, they did it becuase they could, while I think that sucks, by your reasoning the people who's timecard was illegally edited should just get a differnet job.
First of all, not all RIAA bands have the same prices, nor do all RIAA labels, UMG just lowered the wholesale prices on CD's. Not only that they do not have secret meeting where they chose the prices. Also they don't prevent you from making an album or N'Sync cover songs and going down to your local record store and getting them to stock it (that is what microsoft did), you just have to pay the statutory mechanical royalty to the songwriter, and that songwriter has no choice but to let you cover the song for $.10 a song sold.
Bzzz Sorry, there are more record companies and musicians who are not connected to the RIAA than there are that are. Plus the RIAA is nothing more than a lobbying group. MAP pricing was an attempt to make Tower Records and other record only type stores happy. If they where really doing bad things with price fixing, people would have gone to jail, like the ADM execs did with Lysine.
Re:Good for the RIAA. This is capitalism at work.
on
RIAA's Nasty Easter Egg
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Rilo Kiley is on Saddle Creek records, and they have a very good record deal, and are not part of the RIAA. there are plenty of record companies out there that give good deals to their artists, you just would rather bitch or get something for nothing.
How is a single record company, or even record company trade group a monopoly, there are plenty of other record companies, Merge, Touch and Go, Mint, Murder, EMI, 4AD, Epitath, etc....
Re:Good for the RIAA. This is capitalism at work.
on
RIAA's Nasty Easter Egg
·
· Score: 2, Informative
There are other products you can buy. Britney doesn't have a monopoly of being an underaged hottie, you can buy Christina, Mandy Moore, or better yet buy something like Rilo Kiley. While copyright gives a monopoly on a particular song it doesn't prevent competition from making a song in the same style, or someone who looks just like briney from covering the song and selling it for a quarter a track (the mechanical which goes to the songwriter is about a dime). If you don't like people making an album that only has one song on it that you don't like, then buy someone's album that has more songs you like.
If you turn on the pagerank feature, it follows you around feeding the entire URL of every page you browse to google servers. They save that data forever with a cookie which identifies your trail. What they do with that data may be fine, but they are a for profit company that only states they wont do anything evil, but they don't give you any way to remove your data, and they are around to maximize profits. Their privacy policy says they will not give that data to anyone else unless forced to by law, which is exactly what happens when companies are acquired or when they go bankrupt (I forgot the specifics, but a bankrupt company was forced to sell all userdata to pay creditors even though the privacy policy said they would not. That is when Amazon updated thier policy to clarify that that could happen and EPIC went crazy)
Slashdot Mirror
All "air ships" (blimp, zeppelin, dirigible) are lighter than air, that is the difference between them and "air planes". Zeppelin's and dirigibles just have a rigid superstructure
This is not a troll, but the truth (BTW checkout that UID and I have karma to burn!)
If you agree with any of this, feel free to repost it in the future.
Song of the piracy apologist:
(1) I don't personally believe in copying CDs illegally-- but I think we should avoid using unkind words like "piracy" to describe those that do -- instead, we should describe it as an "infringement", much like a parking infringement.
(2) I don't believe in the record companies emotively abusing the word "theft," but I do believe in emotively abusing words like "information," "sharing," and "Copyright Enforcement Militia."
(3) I believe that piracy is driven by "overpriced CDs" even though CDs have dropped in price over the years.
(4) I believe that piracy is driven by overly long copyright duration, even though most pirated works are recent releases.
(5) I believe that illegitimately downloading music is giving the author "free advertising". I don't buy any of the music I download, of course--but lots of other people probably do.
(6) I believe that ripping off the artists is wrong. The record companies always rip off the artists. Artists support P2P, except the ones that don't (like Metallica), and they don't agree with me, hence they're greedy or their opinion doesn't count or something.
(7) I believe that selling CDs is not a business model, but giving away things for free on the internet is.
(8) I believe that artists should be compensated for their work -- preferably by someone else. I mean, they can sell concert tickets (which someone else can buy) or sell t-shirts (to someone else) or something. As long as someone else subsidises my free ride, I'm coooooool with it.
(9) I believe in capitalism but only support music business models which involve giving away the fruits of ones labor for free.
(10) I believe that copying someone elses music, and redistributing it to my 1,000,000 "best friends" on the internet is sharing. Music is made for sharing. It's my right.
(11) I believe that record companies cracking down on piracy is "greed", but a mob demanding free entertainment is not.
(12) I believe that it's not really "piracy" unless you charge money for it, because, receiving money is wrong, but taking a free ride is fine.
(13) I believe that disallowing copying and redistributing music over Napster is the same as humming my favourite song in public. Because when I hum my favourite song in public, everyone likes it so much that they run home, get out their tape
recorders and once they've got a recording of it, they aren't interested in hearing the original any more.
(14) I believe that when illegal behaviour destroys a business, it's "free enterprise at work".
What I find amusing is that the pirates seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between creative activity and brainless copying.
Since a lot of the people here are GPL/OSS advocates: the "OSS way" applied to this domain is to learn how to play an instrument. Or how to sing or whatever. Then get together with a bunch of other people who can also play music, and make some noise.
One of the unfortunate things that has happened to the OSS movement is that a lot of the loudmouth advocates for it don't understand what it's really about. They view it primarily as a means to get free stuff, and then they turn their eyes from the free stuff to the non-free stuff and think to themselves "maybe I'm entitled to get that one for free too". The noble ideals of grass roots participation in the creative process, and/or supporting it in a principled way (namely, boosting the "free foo" movement by preferring free foo to nonfree foo), or for that matter, any other form of moderately principled codes of ethics, are completely lost on them. I think it's a shame that these leeches use OSS, but there's not a whole lot that can or should be done about that. But I'd be much happier if at the very least, they wouldn't confuse the OSS movement (free as in freedom) with the Napster driven movement (free as in "loader").
You can make calls from the cigular network? I can't
But A9 is a completely separate company from amazon and is California based.
And A9/Alexa/Amazon does and always has.
Just like the google toolbar does!
a good popup killer that sends no info to a server, but does have my favorite UI, but is not open source can be found here
Your entire history. In order to serve data about the sites that you are on it needs to know the url. I know people who work for A9 and as far as I know the only things that they use the user trails for are A) finding new pages to craw (they end up in the Internet Archive wayback machine) B) Creating related Links C) timing the speed of sites. the creation of related links is the only thing that they use "trails" for, the others they just use individual urls.
why is that?
Why hasn't there been a slashdot article about the google toolbar tracking your browsing? you turn on the advanced mode and every url you go to is sent to google.
Lessig is no liberal, he clerked for conservative Supreme Court Justice Kennedy.
What the fuck do you do? Do you enjoy your work? Do you expect to get paid for the work you do?
Sorry but people do get something when they listen to music, they are entertained, if you are to be entertained by the work of an artist you should compensate them as THEY expect you to, not by your choice. If you don't like it find someone who will entertain you for the price that you want. There is plenty of choices out there for your entertainment dollar, or lack there of.
Last week people here bitched about managers changing time cards, they did it becuase they could, while I think that sucks, by your reasoning the people who's timecard was illegally edited should just get a differnet job.
Actually they have, it is called copyright. While the printing press did not make reproduction free it did make it virtually free
see History of copyright
And you bitch about $15 for a CD.
Notice I said better yet, I just wanted a hot female singer, and we all know Jenny Lewis is hot, model hot.
First of all, not all RIAA bands have the same prices, nor do all RIAA labels, UMG just lowered the wholesale prices on CD's. Not only that they do not have secret meeting where they chose the prices. Also they don't prevent you from making an album or N'Sync cover songs and going down to your local record store and getting them to stock it (that is what microsoft did), you just have to pay the statutory mechanical royalty to the songwriter, and that songwriter has no choice but to let you cover the song for $.10 a song sold.
Tell that to the guys who wrote the song, and expect to be paid for entertaining you, but can't put food on their table.
These people aren't liberal, they are greedy.
Bzzz Sorry, there are more record companies and musicians who are not connected to the RIAA than there are that are. Plus the RIAA is nothing more than a lobbying group. MAP pricing was an attempt to make Tower Records and other record only type stores happy. If they where really doing bad things with price fixing, people would have gone to jail, like the ADM execs did with Lysine.
Rilo Kiley is on Saddle Creek records, and they have a very good record deal, and are not part of the RIAA. there are plenty of record companies out there that give good deals to their artists, you just would rather bitch or get something for nothing.
How is a single record company, or even record company trade group a monopoly, there are plenty of other record companies, Merge, Touch and Go, Mint, Murder, EMI, 4AD, Epitath, etc....
There are other products you can buy. Britney doesn't have a monopoly of being an underaged hottie, you can buy Christina, Mandy Moore, or better yet buy something like Rilo Kiley. While copyright gives a monopoly on a particular song it doesn't prevent competition from making a song in the same style, or someone who looks just like briney from covering the song and selling it for a quarter a track (the mechanical which goes to the songwriter is about a dime). If you don't like people making an album that only has one song on it that you don't like, then buy someone's album that has more songs you like.
If you turn on the pagerank feature, it follows you around feeding the entire URL of every page you browse to google servers. They save that data forever with a cookie which identifies your trail. What they do with that data may be fine, but they are a for profit company that only states they wont do anything evil, but they don't give you any way to remove your data, and they are around to maximize profits. Their privacy policy says they will not give that data to anyone else unless forced to by law, which is exactly what happens when companies are acquired or when they go bankrupt (I forgot the specifics, but a bankrupt company was forced to sell all userdata to pay creditors even though the privacy policy said they would not. That is when Amazon updated thier policy to clarify that that could happen and EPIC went crazy)
But the google toolbar is itself spyware, as it can track all browser usage. (It does not by default, but people often turn on "advanced features")
How many of these machines have the google toolbar, which trcks users the same way that gain does.