Again, I wouldn't have gone out to purchase a $25 DVD, whether it could be had for free or not, just like I wouldn't have gone out and purchased a $1200 stereo when my $150 Aiwa that I already bought works great.
Yes, but if you hadn't already bought that $150 Aiwa, would you still buy it when you could just 'burn' a functionally equivalent clone of the much better $1200 system for a lot less money? And even if you had already bought it, will you still replace it when it (and/or your fancy clone) wears out or becomes obsolete? Or will you just make another cheap clone of another expensive system at that time?
The above isn't a very good analogy for DVD's or music for several reasons. But it is a pretty good analogy for software. I really think that illegal copying of software is a major contributor to the extreme single-vendor dominance that we see today in many categories of software.
I agree that it isn't the same thing as stealing. But it does have ethical problems.
I would even agree that the "the publisher didn't lose anything because the sale would not have happened anyway" argument is valid. It just doesn't tell the whole story.
There goes the case for preferring Windows over other OSes
because of the superior IP idemnification offered by Microsoft.
How so? It isn't Microsoft's customers who are getting sued. I don't buy MS's fud about IP liability, but this particular situation is not a counterexample.
The workaround is to write the flash movie using javascript.
Way to cut out the middle man. Now Eolas can sue web developers or web site owners directly, instead of harming them indirectly by attacking Microsoft. Those without deep pockets may be safe other than a few token cases to strike fear into the rest. But medium to large companies might be at risk for using such a workaround.
Heh. That reminds me of when I was trusted with all the admin passwords, alarm codes, and keys (both physical keys and keyless entry codes) for every room in the building. Except one. The office supplies closet.
It doesn't make me feel like a criminal. But it does help to clarify what the true nature of the relationship is. The company is not my friend, because clearly, it does not consider me one.
After many years of having my misplaced loyalty abused, I have developed a much different perspective than the one I started with. My present employer is one of the best I've ever worked for. Decent pay, relatively low stress, competent co-workers, recognition for accomplishments, occasional extra little perks to keep it fun, and vastly less office BS than I've seen elsewhere. But due to several painful learning experiences in the past, my loyalty to this company is much more conditional than it has been with any other. It's a sweet deal, and I go out of my way to do a good job for them. But the moment it stops being sweet is the moment my loyalty gets a new "for sale" sign.
I am now acutely aware that the individuals I work for or with are not the corporation. So, despite whatever goodness those folks have, and whatever little perks, bonuses, recognition, fun events, or whatever else the company gives me, I know that it's still just a souless corporation underneath.
Corportations change hands. Executives come and go. Managers and co-workers come and go. Don't misplace your loyalty.
Sounds like lag to me which is just a cruel joke. The best thing to help me concentrate is... hey look boobies! Maybe if there was a chick in the game who walked by and randomly flashed here and there... PROFIT!
I recognize that was probably meant as humor, but...
I think the idea is to encourage willful focus. The kind of focus that is required for completing a project, or solving a complex problem. "Oh look, boobies!" does nothing at all to help with that, and may well reinforce the tendency to have one's attention driven primarily by outside distraction, tranferring focus from one shiny thing to the next, with no ability to stay on task unless the series of shiny things was specifically designed to coincide with the steps of the task.
This applies also to another poster's comment about his focus being encouraged by not getting fragged. The "focus" developed that way does nothing to help one's ability to, for example, study mathematics, or to accomplish pretty much any other useful thing in the real world. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that kind of focus is a bad thing. It's just that the ability to react quickly to a rapidly changing situation is useful in a very limited set of circumstances compared to the ability to ignore distractions and stay on task.
As a Canadian, I'm pissed that this has happened. Why? Because let's take this to its logical conclusion, if a patron of a restruant, a university student, or even someone on a bus, says something out of line and the owner of a "public" place does not object, then they might be penalized for it.
What does this lead to? Censorship by citizens, censorship by the government is bad enough, but this could lead to a disaster.
Exactly.
A human rights group made this happen? Just what human right has benefitted from this?
137 to 0 -- ouch!!
Diebold has gotten itself into a quagmire and they don't seem to be able to pull themselves out.
Maybe, but not everyone has turned against them. The State of Florida, for example, would much rather harrass and sue whistleblowers and assist the crooks than to protect the integrity of democracy. Diebold et al are catching a lot of flack, but they obviously still have some powerful friends. I've never been much of a conspiracy theorist, but I can't help wondering if some of those friends owe them a favor.
Invest in information campaigns about not using home electronics in stand-by mode
Why? Because standby mode uses more energy than when fully turned off? Does it not occur to anyone that without standby mode, people would be much more likely to just leave some things fully on? And does it also not occur to anyone that because standby mode for most devices uses very little power, just a little bit of leaving things on can outweigh a whole bunch of standby mode. I really think this "stop using standby mode" stuff is very misguided. If you have the discipline to not just leave things on more, then go for it. But to evangelize it far and wide, or to persuade manufacturers to stop making thigs that way, will almost certainly do more harm than good. Standby mode is a good thing.
In 7th grade I had a wooden belt buckle that once served that function for me. I was a Kiss fan back then, but couldn't afford a Kiss belt buckle that I wanted. So I made my own by burning the Kiss logo into a piece of wood with a soldering iron, then stained and varnished it and put the necessary hardware on the back to make it functional. I did a fairly nice job on it, actually, though that didn't make it any less dorky. But dorky or not, I was glad to be wearing it when a bully took a swing at me and ended up cradling his knuckles in pain.
Economics 101: even if I have a monopoly on, say, pineapples, I can not arbitrarily set the price of pineapples to whatever the heck I want and expect people to pay for it.
Ah. So because there is a practical upper limit to what a monopoly can charge, monopolies aren't really a problem. Is that what you're arguing? That anything short of infinite gouging potential is just fine?
Hmm.. maybe that's not what you meant at all (though it certainly sounded like it). If not, then exactly what monopolistic or anti-competitive practices would you consider problematic?
Those who believe in intelligent design do not dismiss current scientific evidence they just believe that current scientific models do not completely explain biology, astronomy, geology, etc...
That much is a correct assessment. There is much that science does not explain. Many gaps remain unfilled, and some may be inherently unfillable. One can deal with those gaps either by simply acknowleging that we don't have all the answers and continuing to try to find them, or by filling those gaps with untestable assertions like "god did it" that superficially answer everything, but because of that, really answer nothing. The two approaches are equally ignorant. But only one is honest.
if you can't lay a 4x8 sheet flat in the back, it's NOT a work truck
I once had a station wagon that met that requirement (1975 Plymouth Gran Fury). The first time I drove it to the lumber yard to get some plywood, I expected to have to prop one side on a wheel well, or leave the tailgate open or some such. But much to my amazement, it fit flat between the wheel wells with all doors properly closed. I loved that big old car. Yeah, I know there were bigger wagons, but still it was huge by current standards. Gas mileage sucked, but it made a pretty fair truck when there was work to be done. It had a low hanging and very sturdy tow hitch receptacle that would occasionally hit the top of a speed bump. This never did any noticeable damage to the car, but it carved notches in a few speed bumps.
I haven't tried any of the Linux ports, but I completely agree that Intellicad, whether from Bricscad or one of the others, is a very competent alternative to AutoCAD. Especially for old guys like me who started with AutoCAD back in the 80's and are comfortable with AutoCAD's command line and AutoLisp. Intellicad duplicates AutoCAD's command line beautifully as well as autolisp. The first time I tried it, I was able to use it immediately with no training or studying whatsoever. It isn't bad outside of the command line either. The menus and toolbars are different, but easy enough to figure out without dragging out the manual. I've know of no other CAD program that I can just run with like that.
Slashdot Mirror
The above isn't a very good analogy for DVD's or music for several reasons. But it is a pretty good analogy for software. I really think that illegal copying of software is a major contributor to the extreme single-vendor dominance that we see today in many categories of software.
I agree that it isn't the same thing as stealing. But it does have ethical problems.
I would even agree that the "the publisher didn't lose anything because the sale would not have happened anyway" argument is valid. It just doesn't tell the whole story.
Not all, certainly. But I'm sure that applies to many.
Asteroids? Isn't that what Jimmy Carter had problems with?
Heh. That reminds me of when I was trusted with all the admin passwords, alarm codes, and keys (both physical keys and keyless entry codes) for every room in the building. Except one. The office supplies closet.
After many years of having my misplaced loyalty abused, I have developed a much different perspective than the one I started with. My present employer is one of the best I've ever worked for. Decent pay, relatively low stress, competent co-workers, recognition for accomplishments, occasional extra little perks to keep it fun, and vastly less office BS than I've seen elsewhere. But due to several painful learning experiences in the past, my loyalty to this company is much more conditional than it has been with any other. It's a sweet deal, and I go out of my way to do a good job for them. But the moment it stops being sweet is the moment my loyalty gets a new "for sale" sign.
I am now acutely aware that the individuals I work for or with are not the corporation. So, despite whatever goodness those folks have, and whatever little perks, bonuses, recognition, fun events, or whatever else the company gives me, I know that it's still just a souless corporation underneath.
Corportations change hands. Executives come and go. Managers and co-workers come and go. Don't misplace your loyalty.
I think the idea is to encourage willful focus. The kind of focus that is required for completing a project, or solving a complex problem. "Oh look, boobies!" does nothing at all to help with that, and may well reinforce the tendency to have one's attention driven primarily by outside distraction, tranferring focus from one shiny thing to the next, with no ability to stay on task unless the series of shiny things was specifically designed to coincide with the steps of the task.
This applies also to another poster's comment about his focus being encouraged by not getting fragged. The "focus" developed that way does nothing to help one's ability to, for example, study mathematics, or to accomplish pretty much any other useful thing in the real world. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that kind of focus is a bad thing. It's just that the ability to react quickly to a rapidly changing situation is useful in a very limited set of circumstances compared to the ability to ignore distractions and stay on task.
A human rights group made this happen? Just what human right has benefitted from this?
Bah. Why should anyone care what this "Thomas Jefferson" character thinks? He sounds like some kind of slashdot hippie.
In 7th grade I had a wooden belt buckle that once served that function for me. I was a Kiss fan back then, but couldn't afford a Kiss belt buckle that I wanted. So I made my own by burning the Kiss logo into a piece of wood with a soldering iron, then stained and varnished it and put the necessary hardware on the back to make it functional. I did a fairly nice job on it, actually, though that didn't make it any less dorky. But dorky or not, I was glad to be wearing it when a bully took a swing at me and ended up cradling his knuckles in pain.
Hmm.. maybe that's not what you meant at all (though it certainly sounded like it). If not, then exactly what monopolistic or anti-competitive practices would you consider problematic?
Better honest ignorance than false knowlege.
Link no longer working ("Server error"). Here's a Google cache.
I haven't tried any of the Linux ports, but I completely agree that Intellicad, whether from Bricscad or one of the others, is a very competent alternative to AutoCAD. Especially for old guys like me who started with AutoCAD back in the 80's and are comfortable with AutoCAD's command line and AutoLisp. Intellicad duplicates AutoCAD's command line beautifully as well as autolisp. The first time I tried it, I was able to use it immediately with no training or studying whatsoever. It isn't bad outside of the command line either. The menus and toolbars are different, but easy enough to figure out without dragging out the manual. I've know of no other CAD program that I can just run with like that.