So far that i know. Rabbits were accidentally introduced into Australia by farmers ( having no predators) they thumped like rabbits. cats were introduced to to control the rabbits , but like native birds better. dogs were introduced to try and control the cats ( dingo's prefer kangaroo though). not sure how the invasive toad species that are all over got there. i think people still go out with bats and gulf clubs to kill rabbits ( they should export the meat , but i believe right now burn it)
Why would an elephant eat the tough grass first , why not the sweet tender native stuff and leave the tough grass alone until all the tender sweet stuff is gone?
well, there were a lot of comments about , and talk about, getting the private sector involved. My point was , either this is a government doing this, with tax payer support, because the public believes it is valuable as science, or it isn't going to happen. All the talk about incentive, and space colonization/ tourism is pretty much just day dreaming , because the cost / benefit will not likely EVER be there.
As an efficient use of tax payer money I think building a living working sea colony might be a good first step in pushing our technology the direction it would have to go to make colonization of stellar bodies possible.
i was once told ( never did verify it) that as many as 40% of the people in the world do not have sufficient IQ to understand the advanced Calculus like deferential equations. If that is the case then what percentage of the population can understand Quantum Mechanics. Or worse yet, is it possible that fully understanding Quantum Mechanics is beyond the IQ of even the most intelligent human being? If so , how would we know?
i was once told ( never did verify it) that as many as 40% of the people in the world do not have sufficient IQ to understand the advanced Calculus like deferential equations. If that is the case then what percentage of the population can understand Quantum Mechanics. Or worse yet, is it possible that fully understanding Quantum Mechanics is beyond the IQ of even the most intelligent human being? If so , how would we know?
Should Android be more efficient, and every app it runs. OF COARSE. There is not such thing as efficient enough, but Google has to decide if it is worth their money right now.
Should the network provide stop wining because their network is running up against the physics of allowing too users on it and just fix the problem. Probably.
Sorry, but don't take on more subscribers then you can service. And if their are devices that you don't like their affect feel free to ban them. If that doesn't make you money , that's called business. It's balance. Either provide what people want , or go out of business.
I think of many good pure science reasons to establish colonies on the moon and beyond. But can you make a case for profitability, beyond , perhaps driving innovation. Tourism is unlikely to cut it , unless the cost can be brought WAY down and the same for any kind of materials, manufacturing or mining. The further away from the mood you go the worse that cost of transport becomes.
Why not drive innovation by colonizing the sea or the antarctica, both of which seem more useful and within our reach at this point.
I've got to ask , why just apple? something like 1/4 of the U.S. economy is run products that come from Chinese slave labor and or Asian "slave labor'. Countries where workers aren't allowed to complain or they can be jailed or killed.
We SHOULD pass a law that says any product imported into this country must have been made under similar OSHA and EPA and FDA , standards as things made here. Including labor laws honoring a 40 hour work week and some kind of adjusted minimum wage.
We won't though. We like , our cheap stuff from , wall-mart, k-mart, and best buy... WAAYY too much for that. Not to mention the fact is would probably tank our economy for a generation.
I think the problem that most people are having is this. There are existing laws, and therefore existing expectations that customers have , about what it means to 'buy' something. You cant just go and change that agreement without making it clear to people what you are doing. Otherwise they have a right to be upset.
It is as simple as this: If I knowingly create a situation , in which you are deceived into thinking you are buying something you are not, they I have lied to you and undermined our , previous, relationship. That is wrong.
I have to question if this use is even legal, ( I'm sure their are corporate lawyers all over this , but there is some grey area here). The reality is the contracts cannot contravene consumer law.
For instance, it makes no difference what kind of contract you agree too. If you employer pays you less then minimum wage , even if you agreed to it in writing. You can turn around and sue you employer for the rest of your wages.
So, i understand why people are upset.
As far as , making money goes. If the game companies need more money for what they sell, they should a) charge it. b) make it easy to know and explicit what they expected to be paid and when.
Anything else is just fraud and there is no reason the consumer should tolerate it.
I don't know anybody who leases a car, I guess somebody must somewhere because I keep hearing about it. But leasing something is NOT owning it. And that is the difference. If I lease it from you, when it breaks down , YOU take it back and fix it , I just lease a different one. Hardware manufactures do leases as well, but that is not the model the XBox or software is using. If software is leased, rather then sold, then you have to actually sign a rental agreement for it.
what is a movie 'worth' ? how much metal does it contain if I melt it down? how long will it keep me alive if i eat it? What kind of protection will it give me from the weather?
There is a significant difference from an economic perspective between 'inherent value' and 'exchange value'.
Art, has an 'exchange value' it varies based on all kinds of things that have nothing to do with the materials it it took to make the movie.
So it is kind of a middle ground between currency and 'goods'. Currency has zero , value unless it is exchanged for something else. Movies , have a production cost, but no measurable material value , only emotional , which is why copyright is such a contentious issue. Otherwise the inherent, value of the copies would be equal to the value of the original and 'copying' a movie would cost as much as 'making' a movie.
I guess i wasn't clear, my point is software vs hardware has nothing to do with the real problem. Both software and hardware are 'things'... they are kinda of a middle ground I suppose because their value is dependent on you first possessing other 'things', what I was saying is we need , more engineer , manufacturing, and production in this economy and relatively fewer 'waiters' 'customer service reps' 'hotel workers' and entertainers. Our economy is unhealthy waited in that direction.
So what if his spirtial guidance turned out to be 'don't do it man'!... you shouldn't punish people for being tempted, because EVERYONE is tempted to do what is wrong from time to time. It is only when they actually DO it that they have DONE something illegal.
Sorry , but the though police should have no place in the modern world, but Europe has never fully had the same ideas as america on that. Our constitution was designed to allow for citizens to actually talk about plan and attempt to carry out a rebellion if the government every stopped listening too them, by people who had just recently done exactly that. So, you are not supposed to be able to arrest people for 'treason speech' or 'intent' in this country ( the kings of Europe routinely did such things.) They expected oaths of loyalty and anyone who wouldn't take them could be punished etc. etc.
1 ) require that any product SOLD in the united states be made under the same EPA and environmental laws we expect from our own manufactures. 2) require that any produce SOLD in the united states be made under similar OSHA and worker safety constraints, including a 40 h work week, medical benefits, unemployment benefits , and minimum wage adjusted by cost of living in that country. 3) if a countries laws do not ensure 2. The the company should bind itself to deliver those benefits to it's employees, using applicable contract law in the country it is in , or it will not be issued an import license.
Here is the reality check, we passed laws about worker safety and pay etc, because it is WRONG to treat your workers like slaves. Why should we permit the sale of things in this country that don't meet that standard.
We passed EPA and environmental laws in this country because it is WRONG to destroy the earth for future generations for nothing other then temporary profit. If it is wrong in the United states is it any less wrong in China ?
Either are laws are good laws because they are morally 'the right thing to do' in which case we have not excuse for buying things from people who do otherwise OR we should repeal those laws in this country.
Either way , if the playing field was equal on labor and cost of production due to regulation , the added shipping cost from a foreign country should make it necessarily to produce many commodity items here. Which would create massive numbers of U.S. jobs.
( it is also likely to have the bad effect in the short term of causing serious price inflation,because all the cheap overseas products will be gone.. so you would have to phase this in slowly enough to allow everyone to adapt.)
economies are based on the exchange of goods / services are only part of the economy if they produce goods, because wealth is a measure of accumulated material possessions. So if we all want to have more 'stuff'... someone needs to do the work to make it.
The problem with our current economy is 70% of our jobs are in service not production. That is BAD, because basically we keep paying each other money ( aka wealth) that we did not create. It just moves around and the actual creation of wealth is being done overseas.
If what you are saying is true , then occupy needs to do a much better job of actually publicizing and promoting solutions. It is one thing to have a 'discussion' it is entirely another thing to get people to all agree on a solution and then present it publicly.
Let me put it this way, because maybe I am simply ill informed, it happens from time to time, and if I am I apologize ahead of time for talking out my naval.
Can you provide me a link, that contains the demands or solutions that are officially supported by the occupy movement Nationally? If not how about for your group ? I want something that is official though, something that if I went and found the group leaders they would recognize and say. Yes we signed and support that , this represents the goals of our movement.
So far all I've seen is unofficial post of different kinds, but nothing a newspaper could publish as the 'official' occupy position.
Of the things I've seen some were good and even practical , some simply not well thought out. For instance I support congressional term limits, I limit of 1 term. I'd have to investigate it a bit further,but to me it seems like there should be no such thing as a professional politician, only people looking to help out the country.
I've also seen suggestions like 'eliminate personal property rights' or forgive all debts owned by everyone in the country.
some of which might seem 'nice' or 'idyllic' but i think are along the same idea as the child who wishes 'it would never rain again' so she/he can play all outside all the time. Bad ideas because of untended consequences.
In short my web search turn up various , demands , but nothing that seems to be official on a large enough level to expect national laws to be passed to support it. The demands are contradictory some reasonable, some senseless.
So which ones are 'offical' and that was my point.
are you talking about occupy UK? I'm talking about occupy wall street , a group that explicited decided not to make demands because they couldn't agree an what they should be and what they would do if anyone met them. I haven't followed 'occupy' in any other country as that is unlikely to affect the politics of my own, unless the group here adopts similar tactics. I'm all for getting corporate money out of politics.
The question is are your action out of Love or Selfishness. Out of concern for the common good , or just being a tool.
If you are actually looking to create a better world around you people will have more respect for your position,even if they don't agree with it, they are still likely to jail, crucify or otherwise attack you, but your actions will have slow effect towards justice and you might have a chance at changing things because, often times people know when they are wrong even if they don't admit it.
If your motivations are selfish than it will show too and no-body will listen to you because you aren't just being a cry baby when you put in jail for doing what you knew was illegal.
That's the real problem with the occupy movement, they don't offer solutions , only complaints, they aren't making any useful demands on what would actually make things better, based on concern for the public good, they are simply saying they don't like the way things are.
News flash, nobody likes the way things are, the world will never be perfect this side of the grave.
The only question is , what are you going to do about it!
Attempting to keep control of a product you sell and prevent it's resale is bad for the economy and should be illegal, as it destroys whole ecosystems of commerce.
I'm sure cloth retailers would love to put used cloths stores out of business. Do you think it would work if they started including a license with their cloth that required the item to be returned to them and not resold? I mean , just because you pay for it , is no excuse to think you own it or have the right to modify it , right?
How about care manufactures, do you think people would put up with having to sign a license agreement for that required you to always have your car serviced at the dealership and return it to the dealer rather then discard it so as to protect 'their engineering' . Not that they haven't tired, there is all kinds of poor engineering that has cost car companies lots of rep and lots of money , in attempts to prevent people from fixing things themselves. Now with all the computers and key fobs etc they are starting to finally have some success. That should also be illegal.
some estimates are that more then 50% of attacks come from inside the firewall.. ( disgruntled employees , corporate espionage , or sometimes people just trying to see things they without permission ( curiosity) ). ( that was what the marketing people at the firewall company I worked for claimed).
Of coarse if you can detect such things , you can always fire those people, part of the problem is most medium and small companies don't have the money it takes to pay some one to act full time as a security officer , which is really what is needed to set up , secure, optimize a network with more then 20 machines and heterogeneous software.
Small business ( under 20 ) probably don't need it because hopefully you can trust everyone , and when you are taking out your own trash probably can't afford full time security. However most medium sized businesses take a long time to move away from that mentality.
Sorta sounds like some people like the old ways. Isn't the point of icons in a list in case i don't remember the name of what I'm looking for. So this is a GUI based command line with command line completion... or in what way is it different ( as i have not seen it yet) .
Gun's would make a better analogy. Their are some types of Guns that are illegal, ( automatic weapons) because it is almost impossible to use them for legal purposes ( other then perhaps target practice if you are someone who enjoys that kind of thing) . But just because something MIGHT be used in an illegal fashion is not justification for preventing it's reasonable legal use.
on the flip side of the argument there are lagitimate legal uses of all kinds of banned weapons.
Target practice is one of them, private security is another, so you have to ask why are they illegal, why not allow the sail of ak47 and anti-aircraft missiles to those could make a profit by having people pay them to do target practice is some empty dessert?
I think part of the answer is the level of possible harm vs good done.
A Handgun _might_ kill 1 person , but an anti-aircraft weapon _might_ kill hundreds i one shot not to mention destroy the perception of safety of flight in the whole country.
I'm not sure if that extends to copyright or not? Each individual infraction is small. And no one is killed, people just loose jobs and livelihood, jobs and livelihood they would not have if the government had not created a legal right for the purpose of supporting the arts.
Slashdot Mirror
So far that i know.
Rabbits were accidentally introduced into Australia by farmers ( having no predators) they thumped like rabbits.
cats were introduced to to control the rabbits , but like native birds better.
dogs were introduced to try and control the cats ( dingo's prefer kangaroo though).
not sure how the invasive toad species that are all over got there.
i think people still go out with bats and gulf clubs to kill rabbits ( they should export the meat , but i believe right now burn it)
Why would an elephant eat the tough grass first , why not the sweet tender native stuff and leave the tough grass alone until all the tender sweet stuff is gone?
well, there were a lot of comments about , and talk about, getting the private sector involved.
My point was , either this is a government doing this, with tax payer support, because the public believes it is valuable as science, or it isn't going to happen. All the talk about incentive, and space colonization/ tourism is pretty much just day dreaming , because the cost / benefit will not likely EVER be there.
As an efficient use of tax payer money I think building a living working sea colony might be a good first step in pushing our technology the direction it would have to go to make colonization of stellar bodies possible.
i was once told ( never did verify it) that as many as 40% of the people in the world do not have sufficient IQ to understand the advanced Calculus like deferential equations. If that is the case then what percentage of the population can understand Quantum Mechanics.
Or worse yet, is it possible that fully understanding Quantum Mechanics is beyond the IQ of even the most intelligent human being?
If so , how would we know?
i was once told ( never did verify it) that as many as 40% of the people in the world do not have sufficient IQ to understand the advanced Calculus like deferential equations. If that is the case then what percentage of the population can understand Quantum Mechanics.
Or worse yet, is it possible that fully understanding Quantum Mechanics is beyond the IQ of even the most intelligent human being?
If so , how would we know?
Should Android be more efficient, and every app it runs. OF COARSE. There is not such thing as efficient enough, but Google has to decide if it is worth
their money right now.
Should the network provide stop wining because their network is running up against the physics of
allowing too users on it and just fix the problem. Probably.
Sorry, but don't take on more subscribers then you can service. And if their are devices that you don't like their affect feel free to ban them.
If that doesn't make you money , that's called business. It's balance. Either provide what people want , or go out of business.
I think of many good pure science reasons to establish colonies on the moon and beyond.
But can you make a case for profitability, beyond , perhaps driving innovation.
Tourism is unlikely to cut it , unless the cost can be brought WAY down and the same for any kind of materials, manufacturing or mining. The further away from the mood you go the worse that cost of transport becomes.
Why not drive innovation by colonizing the sea or the antarctica, both of which seem more useful and within our reach at this point.
This old joke i first heart from the Dean of Chemistry at a Midwestern university.
meaning of degrees:
B.S. == Bull Sh@!T
M.S. == More Sh@!T
PHD == Piled Higher & Deeper.
I've got to ask , why just apple?
something like 1/4 of the U.S. economy is run products that come from Chinese slave labor and or Asian "slave labor'.
Countries where workers aren't allowed to complain or they can be jailed or killed.
We SHOULD pass a law that says any product imported into this country must have been made under similar OSHA and EPA and FDA , standards as things made here. Including labor laws honoring a 40 hour work week and some kind of adjusted minimum wage.
We won't though. We like , our cheap stuff from , wall-mart, k-mart, and best buy ... WAAYY too much for that. Not to mention the fact is would probably tank our economy for a generation.
I think the problem that most people are having is this.
There are existing laws, and therefore existing expectations that customers have , about what it means to 'buy' something.
You cant just go and change that agreement without making it clear to people what you are doing. Otherwise they have a right to be upset.
It is as simple as this:
If I knowingly create a situation , in which you are deceived into thinking you are buying something you are not, they I have lied to you and undermined our , previous, relationship. That is wrong.
I have to question if this use is even legal, ( I'm sure their are corporate lawyers all over this , but there is some grey area here).
The reality is the contracts cannot contravene consumer law.
For instance, it makes no difference what kind of contract you agree too. If you employer pays you less then minimum wage , even if you agreed to it in writing. You can turn around and sue you employer for the rest of your wages.
So, i understand why people are upset.
As far as , making money goes. If the game companies need more money for what they sell, they should
a) charge it.
b) make it easy to know and explicit what they expected to be paid and when.
Anything else is just fraud and there is no reason the consumer should tolerate it.
I don't know anybody who leases a car, I guess somebody must somewhere because I keep hearing about it.
But leasing something is NOT owning it. And that is the difference. If I lease it from you, when it breaks down , YOU take it back and fix it , I just lease a different one. Hardware manufactures do leases as well, but that is not the model the XBox or software is using. If software is leased, rather then sold, then you have to actually sign a rental agreement for it.
Schools are already requiring people to take 'diversity classes' to teach them not to think 'hateful thought' or have 'hateful speech' towards people.
what is a movie 'worth' ? how much metal does it contain if I melt it down? how long will it keep me alive if i eat it? What kind of protection will it give me from the weather?
There is a significant difference from an economic perspective between 'inherent value' and 'exchange value'.
Art, has an 'exchange value' it varies based on all kinds of things that have nothing to do with the materials it it took to make the movie.
So it is kind of a middle ground between currency and 'goods'. Currency has zero , value unless it is exchanged for something else. Movies , have a production cost, but no measurable material value , only emotional , which is why copyright is such a contentious issue. Otherwise the inherent, value of the copies would be equal to the value of the original and 'copying' a movie would cost as much as 'making' a movie.
I guess i wasn't clear, my point is software vs hardware has nothing to do with the real problem. ... they are kinda of a middle ground I suppose because their value is dependent on you first possessing other 'things', what I was saying is we need , more engineer , manufacturing,
Both software and hardware are 'things'
and production in this economy and relatively fewer 'waiters' 'customer service reps' 'hotel workers' and entertainers. Our economy is unhealthy waited in that direction.
So what if his spirtial guidance turned out to be 'don't do it man'! ... you shouldn't punish people for being tempted, because EVERYONE is tempted to do what is wrong from time to time. It is only when they actually DO it that they have DONE something illegal.
Sorry , but the though police should have no place in the modern world, but Europe has never fully had the same ideas as america on that.
Our constitution was designed to allow for citizens to actually talk about plan and attempt to carry out a rebellion if the government every stopped listening too them, by people who had just recently done exactly that.
So, you are not supposed to be able to arrest people for 'treason speech' or 'intent' in this country ( the kings of Europe routinely did such things.) They expected oaths of loyalty and anyone who wouldn't take them could be punished etc. etc.
1 ) require that any product SOLD in the united states be made under the same EPA and environmental laws we expect from our own manufactures.
2) require that any produce SOLD in the united states be made under similar OSHA and worker safety constraints, including a 40 h work week, medical benefits, unemployment benefits , and minimum wage adjusted by cost of living in that country.
3) if a countries laws do not ensure 2. The the company should bind itself to deliver those benefits to it's employees, using applicable contract law in the country it is in , or it will not be issued an import license.
Here is the reality check, we passed laws about worker safety and pay etc, because it is WRONG to treat your workers like slaves. Why should we permit the sale of things in this country that don't meet that standard.
We passed EPA and environmental laws in this country because it is WRONG to destroy the earth for future generations for nothing other then temporary profit. If it is wrong in the United states is it any less wrong in China ?
Either are laws are good laws because they are morally 'the right thing to do' in which case we have not excuse for buying things from people who do otherwise OR we should repeal those laws in this country.
Either way , if the playing field was equal on labor and cost of production due to regulation , the added shipping cost from a foreign country should make it necessarily to produce many commodity items here. Which would create massive numbers of U.S. jobs.
( it is also likely to have the bad effect in the short term of causing serious price inflation ,because all the cheap overseas products will be gone .. so you would have to phase this in slowly enough to allow everyone to adapt.)
economies are based on the exchange of goods / services are only part of the economy if they produce goods, because wealth is a measure of accumulated material possessions. So if we all want to have more 'stuff' ... someone needs to do the work to make it.
The problem with our current economy is 70% of our jobs are in service not production. That is BAD, because basically we keep paying each other money ( aka wealth) that we did not create. It just moves around and the actual creation of wealth is being done overseas.
If what you are saying is true , then occupy needs to do a much better job of actually publicizing and promoting solutions. It is one thing to have a 'discussion' it is entirely another thing to get people to all agree on a solution and then present it publicly.
Let me put it this way, because maybe I am simply ill informed, it happens from time to time, and if I am I apologize ahead of time for talking out my naval.
Can you provide me a link, that contains the demands or solutions that are officially supported by the occupy movement Nationally? If not how about for your group ? I want something that is official though, something that if I went and found the group leaders they would recognize and say. Yes we signed and support that , this represents the goals of our movement.
So far all I've seen is unofficial post of different kinds, but nothing a newspaper could publish as the 'official' occupy position.
Of the things I've seen some were good and even practical , some simply not well thought out. ,but to me it seems like there should be no such thing as a professional politician, only people looking to help out the country.
For instance I support congressional term limits, I limit of 1 term. I'd have to investigate it a bit further
I've also seen suggestions like 'eliminate personal property rights'
or forgive all debts owned by everyone in the country.
some of which might seem 'nice' or 'idyllic' but i think are along the same idea as the child who wishes 'it would never rain again' so she/he can play all outside all the time. Bad ideas because of untended consequences.
In short my web search turn up various , demands , but nothing that seems to be official on a large enough level to expect national laws to be passed to support it. The demands are contradictory some reasonable, some senseless.
So which ones are 'offical' and that was my point.
are you talking about occupy UK? I'm talking about occupy wall street , a group that explicited decided not to make demands because they couldn't agree an what they should be and what they would do if anyone met them. I haven't followed 'occupy' in any other country as that is unlikely to affect the politics of my own, unless the group here adopts similar tactics. I'm all for getting corporate money out of politics.
Are they immoral? If so disobey them.. if not obey them and work to change them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience
The question is are your action out of Love or Selfishness.
Out of concern for the common good , or just being a tool.
If you are actually looking to create a better world around you people will have more respect for your position ,even if they don't agree with it, they are still likely to jail, crucify or otherwise attack you, but your actions will have slow effect towards justice and you might have a chance at changing things because, often times people know when they are wrong even if they don't admit it.
If your motivations are selfish than it will show too and no-body will listen to you because you aren't just being a cry baby when you put in jail for doing what you knew was illegal.
That's the real problem with the occupy movement, they don't offer solutions , only complaints, they aren't making any useful demands on what would actually make things better, based on concern for the public good, they are simply saying they don't like the way things are.
News flash, nobody likes the way things are, the world will never be perfect this side of the grave.
The only question is , what are you going to do about it!
Attempting to keep control of a product you sell and prevent it's resale is bad for the economy and should be illegal, as it destroys whole ecosystems of commerce.
I'm sure cloth retailers would love to put used cloths stores out of business.
Do you think it would work if they started including a license with their cloth that required the item to be returned to them and not resold? I mean , just because you pay for it , is no excuse to think you own it or have the right to modify it , right?
How about care manufactures, do you think people would put up with having to sign a license agreement for that required you to always have your car serviced at the dealership and return it to the dealer rather then discard it so as to protect 'their engineering' .
Not that they haven't tired, there is all kinds of poor engineering that has cost car companies lots of rep and lots of money , in attempts to prevent people from fixing things themselves. Now with all the computers and key fobs etc they are starting to finally have some success. That should also be illegal.
some estimates are that more then 50% of attacks come from inside the firewall.. ( disgruntled employees , corporate espionage , or sometimes people just trying to see things they without permission ( curiosity) ). ( that was what the marketing people at the firewall company I worked for claimed).
Of coarse if you can detect such things , you can always fire those people, part of the problem is most medium and small companies don't have the money it takes to pay some one to act full time as a security officer , which is really what is needed to set up , secure, optimize a network with more then 20 machines and heterogeneous software.
Small business ( under 20 ) probably don't need it because hopefully you can trust everyone , and when you are taking out your own trash probably can't afford full time security. However most medium sized businesses take a long time to move away from that mentality.
you are of coarse correct , unfortunately 90% or so of offices in the U.S are 'doing it wrong'
Sorta sounds like some people like the old ways. Isn't the point of icons in a list in case i don't remember the name of what I'm looking for. ... or in what way is it different ( as i have not seen it yet) .
So this is a GUI based command line with command line completion
any one who makes such an argument should be listened to ... and if they try acting on their belief put in jail.
Don't most people use knives to eat food with?
Gun's would make a better analogy. Their are some types of Guns that are illegal, ( automatic weapons) because it is almost impossible to use them for legal purposes ( other then perhaps target practice if you are someone who enjoys that kind of thing) . But just because something MIGHT be used in an illegal fashion is not justification for preventing it's reasonable legal use.
on the flip side of the argument there are lagitimate legal uses of all kinds of banned weapons.
Target practice is one of them, private security is another, so you have to ask why are they illegal, why not allow the sail of ak47 and anti-aircraft missiles to those could make a profit by having people pay them to do target practice is some empty dessert?
I think part of the answer is the level of possible harm vs good done.
A Handgun _might_ kill 1 person , but an anti-aircraft weapon _might_ kill hundreds i one shot not to mention destroy the perception of safety of flight in the whole country.
I'm not sure if that extends to copyright or not? Each individual infraction is small. And no one is killed, people just loose jobs and livelihood, jobs and livelihood they would not have if the government had not created a legal right for the purpose of supporting the arts.