Parent post doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. Wing warping is about bending the wings to direct airflow for turning purposes - you'll notice that the wright flyer had NO AILERONS.
the RIAA/MPAA doesn't particularly care who did the infringing. it is likely to cost them much more in their own fees than they will ever recover from individual infringers.
What they do want is two things:
for the infringing activity to stop
for a message to be sent to others that such infringing activity will not be tolerated.
this "gestapo crap" does just that. it protects their rights WITHOUT having to go after individuals. You should be applauding it.
if the RIAA is a monopoly, then it is the weakest monopoly in the history of economics.
and by monopoly im sure whoever wrote that meant oligopolgy, but that's besides the point
i mean, technology has opened up myriads of ways for artists to distribute their music. should we list them?
if you believe that the RIAA is a monopoly then you cannot believe that they are useless middlemen! if they are a monopoly, then they MUST be providing some useful service that is worth the fees that they charge! certainly nobody is forced to sign with an RIAA label... there are hundreds of independent labels out there plus the esteemed "selling CDs out of the back of your trunk" that is spoken of so highly here.
Slashdot is so full of shit sometimes it's not even funny.
explain to me again how a $14 million maglev project has any chance in hell of succeeding where the japanese and germans have pumped hundreds of millions if not billions into this over the decades and have already passed the stage of buildable / deployable, if not yet economically viable prototypes?
I looked at the GNUCash homepage. the exciting new 1.89 vesion features great new features such as:
dump-finance-quote - Be more explicit when a lookup fails.
log-replay - Increase read buffer size.
Make sure to verify that the items in the reconcile hash are still around after a refresh.
Don't test double KVPs, on the theory that they will soon be deprecated.
When "increase read buffer size" of "log replay" is touted as a feature that a typical user would need to read about since it's on the homepage, it does not come close to quikbooks or any other competitively-improved product.
/remembers 1997 when idiot linux zealots were telling me that gimp had photoshop all wrapped up.
Regulation does not prevent crime, it just moves it elsewhere. Crime - like spamming - must be prevented by making it uneconomical.
In the absence of punishment, kidnapping-for-ransom is very economical. You can make a lot of money very quickly! And yet, no rational person goes around saying that we should make kidnapping-for-ransom uneconomical by equipping every human with some technological anti-kidnap getup. Rather, we use regulation - including if needbe police forces and the threat and reality of stiff penalties to mitigate this.
The idea that regulation doesnt prevent crime is pseudo-intellectual philosobabble bullshit.
Slashdot is nominally the home of libertarian rational actor free information blah blah blah.
How quickly those qualities are put aside when microsoft comes into play!
I can't believe how many threads here continue to bash microsoft and wonder why they haven't changed their ways as if by not changing their ways they are doing something wrong.
The people writing such things are idiots. Microsoft is a for-profit corporation, not a child that can be shamed into submission through dirty looks. It's job is to win minorly inconvenient settlesments while maintaining to the maximum extent possible a dominant market position over the long term.
If you have issues with microsoft's behavioral changes (or lack thereof), then your beef is SQUARELY with regulators and governments who have not done what is in your mind an adequate job of reigning them in. Microsoft is BLAMELESS here. It's doing what it's supposed to and what any company would do. Companies cannot have two masters--they can not credibly both work to make themselves successful and to limit themselves. This MUST be done externally.
Or more ominously, 'The same technology also can be used to ensure that content such as music or movies is used in a way dictated by the copyright holder.
only on planet slashdot is ensuring that rightsholders have ability to exercize their rights "ominous."
slashdot definition of "ominous": "interferes with my warez/mp3z/pr0n." no more, no less. no high standards, no overarching vision, no grand ideals. just protect the warez/mp3z/pr0n with any pseudo-intellectual babble about information freedom that you can come up with, full stop.
I've never done any VBA coding, though I know VB quite well. Can anybody tell me how to write a function that would be called every time an email comes in and is passed with the parameters of the subject in body as string? also, how to move an email to "deleted items?"
If i wrote one simple function that looked at content, I'd eliminate 90% of my 1000+ daily spams trivially (all commercial solutions that i have tried have prevented too many of my customer emails from going through).
This submission of mine just got rejected:
Forbes on Linux and RedHat
So rather than wasting your time on silly april fools' articles, how about you read that one that actually brings up serious issues that the OSS community needs to discuss and figure out how to deal with?
if you must, mod me down. i have the karma. but it is an interesting article and it isn't going to be discussed here any other way.
Right. Until, that is, someone figures out a way Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane
to remove those banner ads, leaving a clean near Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Reasonable Reasonable
DVD-quality version for everyone to download. Reasonable Reasonable Resonable Reasonable Reasonable
Then the industry will cry fowl saying it hurts Reasonable Reasonable Resonable Reasonable Reasonable
they're profits, even though the advertising Reasonable Questionable Questionable Questionable
companies have already paid them. Then they'll Questionable Questionable Questionable Speculative
start creating all these DRM schemes to try and Speculative Speculative Speculative Speculative
prevent that from happening, which will only be Speculative Speculative Conspiratorial Conspiratorial
a smokescreen as they use it's failure to press Conspiratorial Conspiratorial Conspiratorial
for laws outlawing all media being downloaded Paranoid Paranoid Paranoid Paranoid Paranoid
from "unauthorized distribution points." At that
point, if they succeed, they will effective control Delusional Delusional Delusional Delusional
all media on the net, because it is illegal to host Tinfoil Beanie Tinfoil Beanie Tinfoil Beanie
and upload any media files to anyone whatsoever, unless Paranoid Delusional Paranoid Delusional Paranoid
you pay a licencing fee. Same story that's been going Delusional Insane and Stupid Insane and Stupid
on in one form or another for decades... Insane and Stupid Insane and Stupid
"They should closely scrutinize the downloading habits, then create an album based on the popularity of certain tracks."
Do you realize how close this sounds to 1998-esque dot-com business plans? "Let's give away free pies so that, we, umm, can see which pies people like so that we can, umm, sell pies!"
However, you do one better, with your inane "create an album" idea. Ignoring the first fundamental fact that you shit on artist ingretiy this way and ignoring for a moment that the RIAA has PLENTY of popularity data already based on record sales, polls, radio monitoring, and a host of other means and they dont need terribly much more, you seem to forget that the RIAA's constituent members want to maximize their profit. If the public is willing to buy 10 individual cds to get 12 songs they like, then why bother putting all 12 songs on 1 cd?
You do one better still by talking about video downloads and ignoring the 10,000 pound gorilla in the room which is to say that as bandwidth increases, in a few years videos and movies are going to be facing the exact same problem that the RIAA has today and you'll bitch about the DVD just as you bitch about physical CDs today.
TiVo's already proven that people will watch ads even with the 30 second skip enabled, you just have to get the viewer's attention during the 2 seconds they see the ad before hitting the skip.
Bullshit. TiVO has only "proven" that people will watch particularly appealing ads. once or twice.
But that misses the point--as anybody who knows anything about advertising will tell you, the "coolness" factor of an ad often is only a minor role in its effectiveness. i could probably watch that doritos commercial with that girl at the laundromat all day, but i still don't buy doritos. rather, factors such as repitition and subconscious awareness building are more important.
You make the classic slashdot mistake though: ignoring issues of scale. Beause people watch commercials without TiVo, and because some people watch some commercials without TiVo, then tivo has no effect on commercials. Bullshit. With TiVo and the 30 second skip feature, fewer commercials are seen. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that's the truth.
The argument is a "foot in the door" argument. That is to say, if Cisco doesn't sell them a filtering blocker, then there is no router at all, and therefore ALL information is censored.
Just as other posts are describing, cracks appear in the wall. Regardless of repression efforts, that there is an internet in china is a Good Thing for long-term prospects of government liberalization and change. Whie to some of you this may sound like a cop-out, normally skeptical me finds this to be a reasonable explanation, and yes, I have spent several years in china.
1. microsoft is not a monopoly in console gaming systems. in fact, it is more or less an underdog.
2. this is not dumping, even if microsoft had a monopoly in consoles, as dumping, as written by congress into law in 1979, is what FOREIGN companies do. You're probably thinking of the Robinson-Patman Act, I'm sure. However, even then it's not clear that this applies, as the RP Act was written with an eye on COMMODITY goods, largely to protect small stores from giant chain stores.
In short, I'm not even sure that there is a law in the US that makes what you suggest at all wrong.
Nb: why is there an anti-dumping law for foreign stuff? Many agree there should not be. But when there is, it is often to counter "costs not so easily seen" such as government subsidies to manufacturers or political maneuverings.
for those arguing for 'accountability' in political donations, consider this.
Jane works in a law firm. Jane likes dennis kucinich. Jane's boss, a partner, likes GW Bush.
Jane's boss can only contribute up to the maximum personal limit of $2000 or whatever it is. But, he can strongly suggest to jane and others that it might be in jane's career interest to do the same.
now, the boss can check up on jane with this handy web site. of course, nobody has forced jane to do anything, but still, the boss can check up to see what kind of 'team player' she is.
this is TRULY scary. do a search of your loal neighborhood and see how many lawyers' names come up.
First of all, fuck off with your statement about that I am cheering for "parmesan labelled muck." Please see my other post regarding the difference between truth-in-labelling issues and GI issues.
Now, more to the point: the classic protectionist argument is this: in our land, there is a certain bird that eats a certain berry that grows in a certain in a certain field. this bird shits, and in the resulting manure there grows a tree. that tree is used to make barrels for our special product which is then aged exactly 7 years and 12 minutes in our special barrel. our product is unique because of the essence of the berry that has passed through the bird to the tree to the product.
Such stories are always invented to justify protectionism--in your case, I am sure that the Reggiano Cheese Control Consortium likewise has a book full of spells and incantations that it uses to divine "pure" cheese from foreign muck. This is known as "design regulation"--that is, there are regulations on how an object is designed or made. This is, in a word, bullshit.
Much better is what is called "output equivalence." It says that if an expert cannot tell the difference, or that there is not unreasonable variance between a product that has essence of bird berry shit and one that does not, then the products are the same. A healthy world economy is one where there is output equivalence one basic levels of design regulation (for example, no child labor) are met.
However, I think you completely missed my point about cheddar and in doing so you also supported my argument! the previous poster said that the definition of Parmesan cheese is that it's from Parmeso (or the surrounding area.. whatever). My cheddar counterexample clearly showed that wrong. You further showed the insanity of the GI system by highlighting the fact that it relies on design regulation in order to sustain itself.
I actually agree with you - industrial muck such as Kraft parmesan should probably not be labelled as parmesan any more than a bagel can be labelled a plain donut. but I don't see any reason why an enterprising young albanian (or whatever) who managed through ingenuity and skill to create in his home country a cheese that was for all practical puroses identical to that made in the parma region to sell it as "parmesan" as that has become the COMMON TERM for that kind of cheese. Otherwise, we'd have the m * n problem.
You are an idiot (or at least, your previous post put you squarely in that camp in my book), but I nevertheless fully admit to keys-before-brain silliness on that one.
Slashdot Mirror
go ahead, push the troll button. It doesn't make it any less true.
Clearly you miss the point COMPLETELY.
the RIAA/MPAA doesn't particularly care who did the infringing. it is likely to cost them much more in their own fees than they will ever recover from individual infringers.
What they do want is two things:
- for the infringing activity to stop
- for a message to be sent to others that such infringing activity will not be tolerated.
this "gestapo crap" does just that. it protects their rights WITHOUT having to go after individuals. You should be applauding it.bifurication.
try don't give a damn.
and by monopoly im sure whoever wrote that meant oligopolgy, but that's besides the point
i mean, technology has opened up myriads of ways for artists to distribute their music. should we list them?
if you believe that the RIAA is a monopoly then you cannot believe that they are useless middlemen! if they are a monopoly, then they MUST be providing some useful service that is worth the fees that they charge! certainly nobody is forced to sign with an RIAA label... there are hundreds of independent labels out there plus the esteemed "selling CDs out of the back of your trunk" that is spoken of so highly here.
Slashdot is so full of shit sometimes it's not even funny.
disagree? reply.
562 kph.
Yamanishi Maglev Overview
(ROFL).
I looked at the GNUCash homepage. the exciting new 1.89 vesion features great new features such as:
When "increase read buffer size" of "log replay" is touted as a feature that a typical user would need to read about since it's on the homepage, it does not come close to quikbooks or any other competitively-improved product.
In the absence of punishment, kidnapping-for-ransom is very economical. You can make a lot of money very quickly! And yet, no rational person goes around saying that we should make kidnapping-for-ransom uneconomical by equipping every human with some technological anti-kidnap getup. Rather, we use regulation - including if needbe police forces and the threat and reality of stiff penalties to mitigate this.
The idea that regulation doesnt prevent crime is pseudo-intellectual philosobabble bullshit.
Slashdot is nominally the home of libertarian rational actor free information blah blah blah.
How quickly those qualities are put aside when microsoft comes into play!
I can't believe how many threads here continue to bash microsoft and wonder why they haven't changed their ways as if by not changing their ways they are doing something wrong.
The people writing such things are idiots. Microsoft is a for-profit corporation, not a child that can be shamed into submission through dirty looks. It's job is to win minorly inconvenient settlesments while maintaining to the maximum extent possible a dominant market position over the long term.
If you have issues with microsoft's behavioral changes (or lack thereof), then your beef is SQUARELY with regulators and governments who have not done what is in your mind an adequate job of reigning them in. Microsoft is BLAMELESS here. It's doing what it's supposed to and what any company would do. Companies cannot have two masters--they can not credibly both work to make themselves successful and to limit themselves. This MUST be done externally.
only on planet slashdot is ensuring that rightsholders have ability to exercize their rights "ominous."
slashdot definition of "ominous": "interferes with my warez/mp3z/pr0n." no more, no less. no high standards, no overarching vision, no grand ideals. just protect the warez/mp3z/pr0n with any pseudo-intellectual babble about information freedom that you can come up with, full stop.
Hey linux--how about you worry about that particular hurdle when it's within a light year away or so?
If i wrote one simple function that looked at content, I'd eliminate 90% of my 1000+ daily spams trivially (all commercial solutions that i have tried have prevented too many of my customer emails from going through).
This 'article' dismisses laws outright. Sure, bad laws, like in the USA, haven't worked. But look at europe! Successful laws, minimal spam.
It never ceases to amaze me what crap articles get accepted while quality ones get rejected.
Forbes on Linux and RedHat
So rather than wasting your time on silly april fools' articles, how about you read that one that actually brings up serious issues that the OSS community needs to discuss and figure out how to deal with?
if you must, mod me down. i have the karma. but it is an interesting article and it isn't going to be discussed here any other way.
Right. Until, that is, someone figures out a way
Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane
to remove those banner ads, leaving a clean near
Sane Sane Sane Sane Sane Reasonable Reasonable
DVD-quality version for everyone to download.
Reasonable Reasonable Resonable Reasonable Reasonable
Then the industry will cry fowl saying it hurts
Reasonable Reasonable Resonable Reasonable Reasonable
they're profits, even though the advertising
Reasonable Questionable Questionable Questionable
companies have already paid them. Then they'll
Questionable Questionable Questionable Speculative
start creating all these DRM schemes to try and
Speculative Speculative Speculative Speculative
prevent that from happening, which will only be
Speculative Speculative Conspiratorial Conspiratorial
a smokescreen as they use it's failure to press
Conspiratorial Conspiratorial Conspiratorial
for laws outlawing all media being downloaded
Paranoid Paranoid Paranoid Paranoid Paranoid
from "unauthorized distribution points." At that
point, if they succeed, they will effective control
Delusional Delusional Delusional Delusional
all media on the net, because it is illegal to host
Tinfoil Beanie Tinfoil Beanie Tinfoil Beanie
and upload any media files to anyone whatsoever, unless
Paranoid Delusional Paranoid Delusional Paranoid
you pay a licencing fee. Same story that's been going
Delusional Insane and Stupid Insane and Stupid
on in one form or another for decades...
Insane and Stupid Insane and Stupid
Do you realize how close this sounds to 1998-esque dot-com business plans? "Let's give away free pies so that, we, umm, can see which pies people like so that we can, umm, sell pies!"
However, you do one better, with your inane "create an album" idea. Ignoring the first fundamental fact that you shit on artist ingretiy this way and ignoring for a moment that the RIAA has PLENTY of popularity data already based on record sales, polls, radio monitoring, and a host of other means and they dont need terribly much more, you seem to forget that the RIAA's constituent members want to maximize their profit. If the public is willing to buy 10 individual cds to get 12 songs they like, then why bother putting all 12 songs on 1 cd?
You do one better still by talking about video downloads and ignoring the 10,000 pound gorilla in the room which is to say that as bandwidth increases, in a few years videos and movies are going to be facing the exact same problem that the RIAA has today and you'll bitch about the DVD just as you bitch about physical CDs today.
I dont know who in hell modded you as insightful.
Bullshit. TiVO has only "proven" that people will watch particularly appealing ads. once or twice.
But that misses the point--as anybody who knows anything about advertising will tell you, the "coolness" factor of an ad often is only a minor role in its effectiveness. i could probably watch that doritos commercial with that girl at the laundromat all day, but i still don't buy doritos. rather, factors such as repitition and subconscious awareness building are more important.
You make the classic slashdot mistake though: ignoring issues of scale. Beause people watch commercials without TiVo, and because some people watch some commercials without TiVo, then tivo has no effect on commercials. Bullshit. With TiVo and the 30 second skip feature, fewer commercials are seen. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that's the truth.
Just as other posts are describing, cracks appear in the wall. Regardless of repression efforts, that there is an internet in china is a Good Thing for long-term prospects of government liberalization and change. Whie to some of you this may sound like a cop-out, normally skeptical me finds this to be a reasonable explanation, and yes, I have spent several years in china.
1. microsoft is not a monopoly in console gaming systems. in fact, it is more or less an underdog.
2. this is not dumping, even if microsoft had a monopoly in consoles, as dumping, as written by congress into law in 1979, is what FOREIGN companies do. You're probably thinking of the Robinson-Patman Act, I'm sure. However, even then it's not clear that this applies, as the RP Act was written with an eye on COMMODITY goods, largely to protect small stores from giant chain stores.
In short, I'm not even sure that there is a law in the US that makes what you suggest at all wrong.
Nb: why is there an anti-dumping law for foreign stuff? Many agree there should not be. But when there is, it is often to counter "costs not so easily seen" such as government subsidies to manufacturers or political maneuverings.
Jane works in a law firm. Jane likes dennis kucinich. Jane's boss, a partner, likes GW Bush.
Jane's boss can only contribute up to the maximum personal limit of $2000 or whatever it is. But, he can strongly suggest to jane and others that it might be in jane's career interest to do the same.
now, the boss can check up on jane with this handy web site. of course, nobody has forced jane to do anything, but still, the boss can check up to see what kind of 'team player' she is.
this is TRULY scary. do a search of your loal neighborhood and see how many lawyers' names come up.
lack of real slashdot moderator accountability sucks.
I thought creative commons idea was a smorgasbord of license subparts that you could pick and choose amongst to create "a" CC license.
Now, more to the point: the classic protectionist argument is this: in our land, there is a certain bird that eats a certain berry that grows in a certain in a certain field. this bird shits, and in the resulting manure there grows a tree. that tree is used to make barrels for our special product which is then aged exactly 7 years and 12 minutes in our special barrel. our product is unique because of the essence of the berry that has passed through the bird to the tree to the product.
Such stories are always invented to justify protectionism--in your case, I am sure that the Reggiano Cheese Control Consortium likewise has a book full of spells and incantations that it uses to divine "pure" cheese from foreign muck. This is known as "design regulation"--that is, there are regulations on how an object is designed or made. This is, in a word, bullshit.
Much better is what is called "output equivalence." It says that if an expert cannot tell the difference, or that there is not unreasonable variance between a product that has essence of bird berry shit and one that does not, then the products are the same. A healthy world economy is one where there is output equivalence one basic levels of design regulation (for example, no child labor) are met.
However, I think you completely missed my point about cheddar and in doing so you also supported my argument! the previous poster said that the definition of Parmesan cheese is that it's from Parmeso (or the surrounding area.. whatever). My cheddar counterexample clearly showed that wrong. You further showed the insanity of the GI system by highlighting the fact that it relies on design regulation in order to sustain itself.
I actually agree with you - industrial muck such as Kraft parmesan should probably not be labelled as parmesan any more than a bagel can be labelled a plain donut. but I don't see any reason why an enterprising young albanian (or whatever) who managed through ingenuity and skill to create in his home country a cheese that was for all practical puroses identical to that made in the parma region to sell it as "parmesan" as that has become the COMMON TERM for that kind of cheese. Otherwise, we'd have the m * n problem.
You are an idiot (or at least, your previous post put you squarely in that camp in my book), but I nevertheless fully admit to keys-before-brain silliness on that one.
mea culpa.