A friend of mine got a DMCA letter from NBC regarding a torrent he was on for a movie owned by them. The torrent was listed on isohunt.com. This came three days ago.
The site is a torrent search engine. That's all. It is stupid and wasteful for the RIAA or MPAA to go after a site like this. Google provides the same information, you don't see them getting shut down. I'd guess that it has something to do with how much Google is worth.
I wonder if recording artists and movie makers are losing more money from people pirating their stuff or from all the wasteful legal battles the MPAA and RIAA keep losing?
...and every time I set foot in Walmart to buy a $10 item I end up getting at least $100 worth of crap. Same thing with Youtube. I go there to watch one video and end up wasting 2 hours watching other crap. Your analogy was better than you first thought.
Exactly. This fictional trickling intrigues me. Some exec gets rich by outsourcing. He has a daughter who inherits his money. She spends thousands on dresses which were made in Italy and France and goes out partying with her celebrity friends every night drinking liquor from Scandinavia. They show off their lack of undies to some cameras made in Asia. American women everywhere buy the magazine that publishes the censored pictures. By this time however all the magazine companies have outsourced their jobs too and even moved their company offshore.
Sending money out of the country is SENDING MONEY OUT OF THE COUNTRY. No matter how you cut it. Now unless they are going to spend their money back here in the US, we as a country are losing money.
It's great for the top execs of the companies until they make the cost of living go up so high and the value of the dollar go down so low that even they are no longer considered rich. You could consider this sharing the wealth with the rest of the world. Theoretically it should eventually wash itself out. Because after we outsource all these jobs, eventually those countries will be outsourcing their jobs to us once we are as dirt poor as they are right now.
I wouldn't think of it as lazy either. I'm about as lazy as they come. Well that's what it seems like. I'm physically lazy but mentally hyperactive. I'm very motivated to learn but not motivated enough to get up and drive to class. So I take classes online.
There are plenty of people who are motivated to learn. Now they have more opportunity than ever to expand their minds. Sure the web is full of porn, but it's also full of sites like OCW. I read constantly and still don't get my fill of it.
Oh I hope you don't mean shareware. Everything was shareware. There were very few Open Source projects for Windows. Pirating doesn't count either. Just because you got it for free doesn't mean it was supposed to be free.
Great, then don't use Linux, and don't put people down who like it. Is it ready for the desktop? I don't know anyone who uses any of the software you mentioned. You are more of a special case than I am. Maybe I'm not asking much of it, but damned if I don't get my money's worth out of it.
Excellent, I'll try that next time I boot to Windows. You just made me realize something too. The popularity of open source has spurred a lot of free software for Windows. Windows users actually have something to thank OSS and Linux for, if you think about it.
Well I haven't seen a Linux user forcing Linux down a Windows user's throat in a long time, but I see complaints of it daily. It's getting to the point that by just having a thread that's talking about Linux we are forcing it down people's throats.
It seems like every discussion I read....where Linux is the topic, there are at least 20 posts putting down Linux and Linux users. To make things worse, these comments are usually +5 insightful. Yet people still complain that Slashdot is full of Linux Zealots. Maybe it's because I don't read many Windows discussions. I follow my own advice and only read the discussions that pertain to me. Though I wouldn't be in the wrong if I did, because I use both.
Maybe there should be a slashdot poll to find out just how the community is divided. If I had to guess, I would say that slashdot is 75% Windows lovers these days at least.
OH Man, you're right. I just tried to copy a few spreadsheet cells to the Gimp and it did nothing. Whatever am I going to do without that important spreadsheet information in my pron? /sarcasm
How often do you need spreadsheet information in an image? If I really want to do this in Linux I could just do a quick screenshot, cut that part out, and paste it into the image program. Sure this is something that Linux should have but who exactly needs this functionality? Obviously you....but why. Notice my sarcasm ended early. This is an honest question. There are a lot UI functionality traits that I don't understand. For instance, in an earlier post I talked about the ability of most Linux desktop environments to keep a specific window on top of all others no matter what. I'm not sure if this is build into OS X, but I know Windows doesn't do this. Granted some programs in Windows do this if you set an option, like Windows Media Player. I would like to see that functionality in Windows, because that's something I would actually use.
I'll tell you a feature I like in most Linux desktop environments that I'd like to have in Windows when I'm using it. "Always on top"! I can right click the title bar and make any windows stay on top. I'm not bashing or pulling shit out of my ass because I'm a linux user. I watch a lot of TV episodes while I do other things on the computer. There are other uses for this though. It comes in handy.
Try Arch...Gentoo is only faster if you optimize your machines compiler settings. Most everything has to be compiled from source in Gentoo. Arch is compiled optimized for 686 and up. It's a lot faster than Ubuntu on my machine. I use Ubuntu currently but Arch is impressive for speed. It's not as easy to set up for most people. I'm not advocating my distro of choice here. I'm just saying that you'll notice a speed difference between Arch and Ubuntu. Ubuntu isn't bad but the mainstream distros you are talking about are probably Fedora, SuSE and the like. Arch is not as mainstream as those but it's still pretty popular.
The most popular distros are those that are easy to setup up out of the box. They recognize your hardware for you and use a generic kernel that supports a lot of things. Meaning it supports stuff you don't need it to support usually. These distros are easier to use but they get there by sacrificing resources and speed usually.
For the love of whatever you hold holy, just shut up already. Is there a webpage that has messages like yours on it so you can just copy and paste it to a slashdot thread about Linux????
There are just as many Slashdot users out there saying "Linux users need to realize that if they want their OS to survive blah blah blah" like you. Could you muster up an original thought? I've seen your post thousands of times on Slashdot. Funny that you are reading a LINUX thread and you are bitching about Slashdot's Linux users always talking about how amazing Linux is. Perhaps it's because you are READING A LINUX THREAD...
If you don't like Linux that's fine, but don't assume you know what Linux needs to survive. You're obviously retarded if you can't figure out how to click on "Applications" instead of a "Start" button, so why are you assuming you know what Linux needs to survive.
This article is stupid none-the-less because it's basically flamebait in itself. There are many people who have been using Ubuntu as their desktop OS for at least a year. It does everything I want it to do, so YES it's definitely ready for MY desktop. If it's not ready for yours, fine....don't use it. Stop pretending you know something that no one has thought of or said before though. Linux users don't need to realize anything. You need to realize something. We don't care if you use Linux or not. We aren't going to make a dime off it if you decide to use it. We like it. We've got the right to say we like it. You have the right to say you hate it, but realize that the things you may want from a desktop OS is not exactly what everyone else wants. For some people, Linux has been ready for the desktop for years. For some of us it's the perfect OS. Why would we want to change it so it's perfect for you. You already have your perfect OS that you love. Should we make Linux more like what you want? Blah this flamewar has been going back and forth for years. Just get over yourself and realize that You don't realize what Linux needs to survive. You know what your OS needs to survive. So just STFU, and read something other than a thread completely about Linux.
For me I found out I pretty much always have to boot to safe graphics mode on the live-cd. On my system I think it's my use of DVI-to-VGA adapters. You may want to try safe graphics mode if you haven't already.
My problem with the parent post was the attempt to reverse the onus of explaination from "tell us why you hate it" to "tell me why I shouldn't hate it."
Parent poster here. I just want to clarify what you have skewed. I never said or even implied "tell me why I shouldn't hate it." My point was "Why do I have to hate Microsoft in order to not use it?" You missed it. Another point was "Why should I defend my use of free software?" This whole "ask slashdot" article was exactly that though. I have to give reason why I use free software instead of using the greatest, most awesome software available(sarcasm in case you missed it). I mean the fact that the software is free isn't reason enough. It has to be because I hate Microsoft right?
I believe in free market myself but I would say MS limits free market if anything. Being a libertarian I don't think I would support a monopoly of any sort.
I agree with your proposal. The only kink in it would be that it would probably run on a virtual machine and that would tax the machine a lot more than a native port. This would allow people more freedom of choice in their OS at least though. Maybe you're on to something.
You just described how a monarchy is better than a democracy. Sure everyone works together to conquer the world but hey they don't have a choice.
It could just as easily be done with industrial standards but it's probably too late for that. Microsoft is at the point where they make the standards, and they don't have to adhere to standards other create.
Think about what you are saying. You are saying Microsoft DOS united the computer world. You are wrong. Hardware has, since 1977, became more and more standard. Low cost IBM clone hardware is what catapulted the PC industry, not MSDOS. MSDOS wasn't the only DOS available. Microsoft's business practices made it seem so, but there were a few choices. With Windows 95 Microsoft required MSDOS. So if you were a DRDOS user you were S.O.L. if you wanted Windows 95.
You obviously haven't tried and have no desire to try Linux, which is fine. Don't. Your comment represents your belief in what you've heard not in what you know. My first computer was a Tandy Color Computer 2. My first PC was an 8088. Did I like DOS? I loved it. Why? Because it was something I spent some time figuring out and even though it worked pretty shitty, I was used to it, and I was proud to be familiar with it. I've used every version of Windows from Windows 286 to Vista. Looking back I would consider Windows 2000 their version 1 release. I would consider NT 4.0 a release candidate. Windows today isn't too bad, but innovation is created through competition. The consumer only benefits from competition. A lot of us were using the beta versions of Windows during the 90's because we didn't know of an alternative. We were stuck in a product that we didn't like. This is not good for consumers at all.
You totally missed my point. I agree with most of what you say, but the point I was trying get across was that the article is specifically asking why we hate Microsoft. I just pointed out that I shouldn't have to explain why I prefer a free OS to Windows. It should be the reverse. The Windows fans should explain really why I should fork over money to use their OS. Microsoft should be running the sales pitch instead of us.
As a side note. I have a Geforce 7800 GT, that I do us for gaming in Windows, and I triple boot between Ubuntu, XP, and Vista. I spend most of my time in Ubuntu. Vista's visual effects are very sluggish on my AMD64 3500+ with 2gb of RAM. My wacom graphics tablet which works great in XP is choppy and unusable in Vista. I use Beryl/XGL in Ubuntu which gives much better performance and lot more effects than Vista.
Visual Studio is a great IDE but you must have missed my post about Visual Studio's install in Vista giving me errors because there were known issues with it. This was the 2005 version. Their new OS isn't even fully compatible with their latest release of VS.NET? I sure hit a nerve with you but you should really go back and read some of my other points that I've made since the original post.
Slashdot Mirror
A friend of mine got a DMCA letter from NBC regarding a torrent he was on for a movie owned by them. The torrent was listed on isohunt.com. This came three days ago. The site is a torrent search engine. That's all. It is stupid and wasteful for the RIAA or MPAA to go after a site like this. Google provides the same information, you don't see them getting shut down. I'd guess that it has something to do with how much Google is worth. I wonder if recording artists and movie makers are losing more money from people pirating their stuff or from all the wasteful legal battles the MPAA and RIAA keep losing?
I'm 1338!
The requirements for being 1337 must have dropped considerably for 2007. Knowing how to use bittorrent, is enough to make you 1337 now?
...and every time I set foot in Walmart to buy a $10 item I end up getting at least $100 worth of crap. Same thing with Youtube. I go there to watch one video and end up wasting 2 hours watching other crap. Your analogy was better than you first thought.
I wonder if the streaming videos will have virtual scratches that cause them to skip like the real netflix dvd's do......
Exactly. This fictional trickling intrigues me. Some exec gets rich by outsourcing. He has a daughter who inherits his money. She spends thousands on dresses which were made in Italy and France and goes out partying with her celebrity friends every night drinking liquor from Scandinavia. They show off their lack of undies to some cameras made in Asia. American women everywhere buy the magazine that publishes the censored pictures. By this time however all the magazine companies have outsourced their jobs too and even moved their company offshore. Sending money out of the country is SENDING MONEY OUT OF THE COUNTRY. No matter how you cut it. Now unless they are going to spend their money back here in the US, we as a country are losing money. It's great for the top execs of the companies until they make the cost of living go up so high and the value of the dollar go down so low that even they are no longer considered rich. You could consider this sharing the wealth with the rest of the world. Theoretically it should eventually wash itself out. Because after we outsource all these jobs, eventually those countries will be outsourcing their jobs to us once we are as dirt poor as they are right now.
I wouldn't think of it as lazy either. I'm about as lazy as they come. Well that's what it seems like. I'm physically lazy but mentally hyperactive. I'm very motivated to learn but not motivated enough to get up and drive to class. So I take classes online. There are plenty of people who are motivated to learn. Now they have more opportunity than ever to expand their minds. Sure the web is full of porn, but it's also full of sites like OCW. I read constantly and still don't get my fill of it.
Just for shits and giggles make it web based and force them to use lynx to interface with it.
Oh I hope you don't mean shareware. Everything was shareware. There were very few Open Source projects for Windows. Pirating doesn't count either. Just because you got it for free doesn't mean it was supposed to be free.
It flew right over your head that I said that for a reason. Way to catch on.
Great, then don't use Linux, and don't put people down who like it. Is it ready for the desktop? I don't know anyone who uses any of the software you mentioned. You are more of a special case than I am. Maybe I'm not asking much of it, but damned if I don't get my money's worth out of it.
Excellent, I'll try that next time I boot to Windows. You just made me realize something too. The popularity of open source has spurred a lot of free software for Windows. Windows users actually have something to thank OSS and Linux for, if you think about it.
Well I haven't seen a Linux user forcing Linux down a Windows user's throat in a long time, but I see complaints of it daily. It's getting to the point that by just having a thread that's talking about Linux we are forcing it down people's throats.
It seems like every discussion I read....where Linux is the topic, there are at least 20 posts putting down Linux and Linux users. To make things worse, these comments are usually +5 insightful. Yet people still complain that Slashdot is full of Linux Zealots. Maybe it's because I don't read many Windows discussions. I follow my own advice and only read the discussions that pertain to me. Though I wouldn't be in the wrong if I did, because I use both. Maybe there should be a slashdot poll to find out just how the community is divided. If I had to guess, I would say that slashdot is 75% Windows lovers these days at least.
OH Man, you're right. I just tried to copy a few spreadsheet cells to the Gimp and it did nothing. Whatever am I going to do without that important spreadsheet information in my pron?
/sarcasm
How often do you need spreadsheet information in an image? If I really want to do this in Linux I could just do a quick screenshot, cut that part out, and paste it into the image program. Sure this is something that Linux should have but who exactly needs this functionality? Obviously you....but why. Notice my sarcasm ended early. This is an honest question. There are a lot UI functionality traits that I don't understand. For instance, in an earlier post I talked about the ability of most Linux desktop environments to keep a specific window on top of all others no matter what. I'm not sure if this is build into OS X, but I know Windows doesn't do this. Granted some programs in Windows do this if you set an option, like Windows Media Player. I would like to see that functionality in Windows, because that's something I would actually use.
I'll tell you a feature I like in most Linux desktop environments that I'd like to have in Windows when I'm using it. "Always on top"! I can right click the title bar and make any windows stay on top. I'm not bashing or pulling shit out of my ass because I'm a linux user. I watch a lot of TV episodes while I do other things on the computer. There are other uses for this though. It comes in handy.
Try Arch...Gentoo is only faster if you optimize your machines compiler settings. Most everything has to be compiled from source in Gentoo. Arch is compiled optimized for 686 and up. It's a lot faster than Ubuntu on my machine. I use Ubuntu currently but Arch is impressive for speed. It's not as easy to set up for most people. I'm not advocating my distro of choice here. I'm just saying that you'll notice a speed difference between Arch and Ubuntu. Ubuntu isn't bad but the mainstream distros you are talking about are probably Fedora, SuSE and the like. Arch is not as mainstream as those but it's still pretty popular.
The most popular distros are those that are easy to setup up out of the box. They recognize your hardware for you and use a generic kernel that supports a lot of things. Meaning it supports stuff you don't need it to support usually. These distros are easier to use but they get there by sacrificing resources and speed usually.
For the love of whatever you hold holy, just shut up already. Is there a webpage that has messages like yours on it so you can just copy and paste it to a slashdot thread about Linux????
There are just as many Slashdot users out there saying "Linux users need to realize that if they want their OS to survive blah blah blah" like you. Could you muster up an original thought? I've seen your post thousands of times on Slashdot. Funny that you are reading a LINUX thread and you are bitching about Slashdot's Linux users always talking about how amazing Linux is. Perhaps it's because you are READING A LINUX THREAD...
If you don't like Linux that's fine, but don't assume you know what Linux needs to survive. You're obviously retarded if you can't figure out how to click on "Applications" instead of a "Start" button, so why are you assuming you know what Linux needs to survive.
This article is stupid none-the-less because it's basically flamebait in itself. There are many people who have been using Ubuntu as their desktop OS for at least a year. It does everything I want it to do, so YES it's definitely ready for MY desktop. If it's not ready for yours, fine....don't use it. Stop pretending you know something that no one has thought of or said before though. Linux users don't need to realize anything. You need to realize something. We don't care if you use Linux or not. We aren't going to make a dime off it if you decide to use it. We like it. We've got the right to say we like it. You have the right to say you hate it, but realize that the things you may want from a desktop OS is not exactly what everyone else wants. For some people, Linux has been ready for the desktop for years. For some of us it's the perfect OS. Why would we want to change it so it's perfect for you. You already have your perfect OS that you love. Should we make Linux more like what you want? Blah this flamewar has been going back and forth for years. Just get over yourself and realize that You don't realize what Linux needs to survive. You know what your OS needs to survive. So just STFU, and read something other than a thread completely about Linux.
For me I found out I pretty much always have to boot to safe graphics mode on the live-cd. On my system I think it's my use of DVI-to-VGA adapters. You may want to try safe graphics mode if you haven't already.
LFS would be much better for a newbie!
Thanks for proving my point.
Parent poster here. I just want to clarify what you have skewed. I never said or even implied "tell me why I shouldn't hate it." My point was "Why do I have to hate Microsoft in order to not use it?" You missed it. Another point was "Why should I defend my use of free software?" This whole "ask slashdot" article was exactly that though. I have to give reason why I use free software instead of using the greatest, most awesome software available(sarcasm in case you missed it). I mean the fact that the software is free isn't reason enough. It has to be because I hate Microsoft right?
I believe in free market myself but I would say MS limits free market if anything. Being a libertarian I don't think I would support a monopoly of any sort.
I agree with your proposal. The only kink in it would be that it would probably run on a virtual machine and that would tax the machine a lot more than a native port. This would allow people more freedom of choice in their OS at least though. Maybe you're on to something.
You just described how a monarchy is better than a democracy. Sure everyone works together to conquer the world but hey they don't have a choice.
It could just as easily be done with industrial standards but it's probably too late for that. Microsoft is at the point where they make the standards, and they don't have to adhere to standards other create.
Think about what you are saying. You are saying Microsoft DOS united the computer world. You are wrong. Hardware has, since 1977, became more and more standard. Low cost IBM clone hardware is what catapulted the PC industry, not MSDOS. MSDOS wasn't the only DOS available. Microsoft's business practices made it seem so, but there were a few choices. With Windows 95 Microsoft required MSDOS. So if you were a DRDOS user you were S.O.L. if you wanted Windows 95.
You obviously haven't tried and have no desire to try Linux, which is fine. Don't. Your comment represents your belief in what you've heard not in what you know. My first computer was a Tandy Color Computer 2. My first PC was an 8088. Did I like DOS? I loved it. Why? Because it was something I spent some time figuring out and even though it worked pretty shitty, I was used to it, and I was proud to be familiar with it. I've used every version of Windows from Windows 286 to Vista. Looking back I would consider Windows 2000 their version 1 release. I would consider NT 4.0 a release candidate. Windows today isn't too bad, but innovation is created through competition. The consumer only benefits from competition. A lot of us were using the beta versions of Windows during the 90's because we didn't know of an alternative. We were stuck in a product that we didn't like. This is not good for consumers at all.
You totally missed my point. I agree with most of what you say, but the point I was trying get across was that the article is specifically asking why we hate Microsoft. I just pointed out that I shouldn't have to explain why I prefer a free OS to Windows. It should be the reverse. The Windows fans should explain really why I should fork over money to use their OS. Microsoft should be running the sales pitch instead of us.
As a side note. I have a Geforce 7800 GT, that I do us for gaming in Windows, and I triple boot between Ubuntu, XP, and Vista. I spend most of my time in Ubuntu. Vista's visual effects are very sluggish on my AMD64 3500+ with 2gb of RAM. My wacom graphics tablet which works great in XP is choppy and unusable in Vista. I use Beryl/XGL in Ubuntu which gives much better performance and lot more effects than Vista.
Visual Studio is a great IDE but you must have missed my post about Visual Studio's install in Vista giving me errors because there were known issues with it. This was the 2005 version. Their new OS isn't even fully compatible with their latest release of VS.NET? I sure hit a nerve with you but you should really go back and read some of my other points that I've made since the original post.