You'd think that rich kids would always buy music, but I know a bunch of rich kids who pirate music like there's no tommorow. I'm talking about families that have like 4 brand spanking new Mercedes Benz' in the garage. Why doesn't he just buy cds? Because he can show how l337 he is by downloading them instead. Haha
I found it didn't take too much convincing to get my girl and my sister to play counter-strike regularly. We also had a great game of dreamcast Quake 3. I think girls don't even consider "male" games as an option until someone actually points it out to them. After that, they love the games just as much as us guys...
I would've never believed that girls could play more video games then guys until I got my sister and girlfriend into playing Age of Mythology. Now everytime I see either one of them, they are CONSTANTLY playing that game non-stop. It's almost like a crack addiction...
I always think the same thing when people say p2p users are STEALING music. You can listen to the same music on the radio/internet radio, technically for free. A lot of the mp3s you download are ripped from the radio (you can hear dj intros) And I know I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I didn't really buy much music back before p2p either. I listened to the radio and occasional made a copy on tape to listen to. I've known people that made whole mix tapes just from the radio. Since the media was practically given away for free, how can it be stealing? Just my 2 cents.
Doubleclick is a scourge on humanity. Go get 'em! I just spent a good hour of my time removing various spyware from my girl's computer. There should be LAWs against advertising like crazy.
Just because it's better doesn't mean it's going to suceeed. There are those who could've argued that Os/2 Warp was way bettery than windows... but which one is on top today?
In record stores you usually have the option of previewing music (in the kiosks) before you buy. You aren't obligated to buy the cd once you are finished. Downloading an mp3 to sample it is the same thing. If I download a song, check it out, hate it, then delete it. I wouldn't have bought it anyways so what's the problem?
I'm just speaking about the worst-case scenario. You (the victim) lost their money, and now you are poor. The boss could've gone to jail for his crime but that would never get you your money back...
Just because you don't know anyone who's been murdered does not mean it doesn't happen. And i'm not saying suicide because of depression doesn't happen, but that's pure speculation depending on the person who lost the money.
Yeah but I am talking realistically. Is it responsible for you to not take some measure of defending yourself. Sure it may not be YOUR fault that your family got hurt as far as the law is concerned, but now that you didn't do something to protect them, they are dead, the perp is in jail, but now what. The wife and kids are done with, or in a white collar crime, the money is gone, and you are left with nothing for being a pacifist ignoramus who didn't protect himself.
Ignorance of the law is no defense for breaking it.
The point is, lawmakers keep ramping up the sentencing without thinking realistically, that first time offenders rarely know how bad the punishment will be nor do they care. So the idea that making the punishment harsher will DETER crime is idiotic.
In Scenario B.... could result in a suicide, which IMO is far worse than a homicide.
B could also result in a person, being so hard up that the commit A.
Hmmm I'm not sure what you mean that someone who lost money will commit suicide. If you lose a shitload of money I think you will just have to go bankrupt and live super cheaply. But anyways thats a lot of "What Ifs" that has no business being speculated on in court.
No, it isnt ridiculous at all that he face the charges. He knew what he was doing was against the law when he did it. He comitted felony computer fraud, and is being charged with it.
This is a fallicy. On average no one knows the full negative consequences when they break the law. And this is an 11 year old kid for crying out loud. If he even considered the consequences, i'm sure the worst he thought could happen would be he fail the course or get kicked out of school.
If someone breaks into my computer, it is not MY fault the computer was easy to crack.
So using your analogy, if you left your doors and windows open all the time you wouldn't feel that it was SOMEHOW your fault if someone walked right in and hurt you and your family? Computer owners have some responsibility as well.
You are comparing apples to oranges... In scenario A, armed robbery is very serious because it could result in homicide.
In Scenario B, which sounds more like an Enron CEO then a computer criminal, people could lose a lot of money, but in end the company should be responsible for paying customers back. And ensuring that a security situation like this doesn't happen again.
Slashdot Mirror
You'd think that rich kids would always buy music, but I know a bunch of rich kids who pirate music like there's no tommorow. I'm talking about families that have like 4 brand spanking new Mercedes Benz' in the garage. Why doesn't he just buy cds? Because he can show how l337 he is by downloading them instead. Haha
Tell your girlfriend I want to marry her. My girl, who plays a shitload of games, will not go ANYWHERE near GT3. :(
What was wrong with Resident Evil 0?
I think they need a PMS Avenger game for guys...
I found it didn't take too much convincing to get my girl and my sister to play counter-strike regularly. We also had a great game of dreamcast Quake 3. I think girls don't even consider "male" games as an option until someone actually points it out to them. After that, they love the games just as much as us guys...
I would've never believed that girls could play more video games then guys until I got my sister and girlfriend into playing Age of Mythology. Now everytime I see either one of them, they are CONSTANTLY playing that game non-stop. It's almost like a crack addiction...
I always think the same thing when people say p2p users are STEALING music. You can listen to the same music on the radio/internet radio, technically for free. A lot of the mp3s you download are ripped from the radio (you can hear dj intros) And I know I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I didn't really buy much music back before p2p either. I listened to the radio and occasional made a copy on tape to listen to. I've known people that made whole mix tapes just from the radio. Since the media was practically given away for free, how can it be stealing? Just my 2 cents.
Doubleclick is a scourge on humanity. Go get 'em! I just spent a good hour of my time removing various spyware from my girl's computer. There should be LAWs against advertising like crazy.
Just because it's better doesn't mean it's going to suceeed. There are those who could've argued that Os/2 Warp was way bettery than windows... but which one is on top today?
Anyone remember those dalmation mice from the tenebaums. Genetically engineered spots.
Haha that was a great first post.
Hahaahaha that was good. I love that game.
In record stores you usually have the option of previewing music (in the kiosks) before you buy. You aren't obligated to buy the cd once you are finished. Downloading an mp3 to sample it is the same thing. If I download a song, check it out, hate it, then delete it. I wouldn't have bought it anyways so what's the problem?
If anything the ISP should be held accountable because they are the professional network managers. Not joe six pack who had his computer owned.
My point exactly...
You know it's funny that you mention this... In my area I once saw an ATM crash badly... (and it turned out to be OS/2) This was Wellsfargo BTW.
I'm just speaking about the worst-case scenario. You (the victim) lost their money, and now you are poor. The boss could've gone to jail for his crime but that would never get you your money back...
Just because you don't know anyone who's been murdered does not mean it doesn't happen. And i'm not saying suicide because of depression doesn't happen, but that's pure speculation depending on the person who lost the money.
Yeah but I am talking realistically. Is it responsible for you to not take some measure of defending yourself. Sure it may not be YOUR fault that your family got hurt as far as the law is concerned, but now that you didn't do something to protect them, they are dead, the perp is in jail, but now what. The wife and kids are done with, or in a white collar crime, the money is gone, and you are left with nothing for being a pacifist ignoramus who didn't protect himself.
Ignorance of the law is no defense for breaking it.
The point is, lawmakers keep ramping up the sentencing without thinking realistically, that first time offenders rarely know how bad the punishment will be nor do they care. So the idea that making the punishment harsher will DETER crime is idiotic.
In Scenario B.... could result in a suicide, which IMO is far worse than a homicide. B could also result in a person, being so hard up that the commit A.
Hmmm I'm not sure what you mean that someone who lost money will commit suicide. If you lose a shitload of money I think you will just have to go bankrupt and live super cheaply. But anyways thats a lot of "What Ifs" that has no business being speculated on in court.
No, it isnt ridiculous at all that he face the charges. He knew what he was doing was against the law when he did it. He comitted felony computer fraud, and is being charged with it. This is a fallicy. On average no one knows the full negative consequences when they break the law. And this is an 11 year old kid for crying out loud. If he even considered the consequences, i'm sure the worst he thought could happen would be he fail the course or get kicked out of school.
If someone breaks into my computer, it is not MY fault the computer was easy to crack. So using your analogy, if you left your doors and windows open all the time you wouldn't feel that it was SOMEHOW your fault if someone walked right in and hurt you and your family? Computer owners have some responsibility as well.
But that's the exact problem... they didn't get any real punishment for losing craploads of money.
You are comparing apples to oranges... In scenario A, armed robbery is very serious because it could result in homicide. In Scenario B, which sounds more like an Enron CEO then a computer criminal, people could lose a lot of money, but in end the company should be responsible for paying customers back. And ensuring that a security situation like this doesn't happen again.