What real use other than nostalgia would this serve? And, personally, I think not too many people will care that much if obsolete software is de-constructed?
...is it even technically legal to record a song from the radio...
I think it is, but remember that mix tapes from radio never had the sound quality of the vinyl, and they sold singles back then also, so if you liked the tune you had a good probability of going out and buying the album or single.
But with almost CD quality sound of mp3 and other digital formats, you no longer NEED to buy the product to get a good quality recording.
This is why record companies say p2p file sharing effects sales. I tend to believe it.
It is VERY clear what the difference is between listening to the radio and downloading a tune is. In one case, a radio station has paid to broadcast the song, in the other case you have NOT paid to download and possess the song on your hard drive.
And, how do you "profit"? By having that song on your hard drive to listen to when ever you wish. You need to go out and buy the CD if you want this privilege.
No, it's not, unless you are trying to justify being a slob, or live in some strange parallel universe. And, your ugly tee shirt with some stupid quote is just as much a "uniform" as my ties.
Fortunately for me, my "uniform" is fun to ware and socially acceptable. I love my ties, I think the look sharp and some are quite fun, like my Jerry Garcia numbers.
This is what happens when you trade in copyrighted material that you have no right to trade. And look you "I Think I'm As Smart As A Lawyer" types, "theft" or not, it's the same thing.
It is unethical for *anyone* including record companies to profit from ill-gotten gains. Sure, the artist may only get a penny on a CD, and you may not like the corporation. But if it's wrong to steal, it's wrong to steal.
I wish to appologize for the previous post, "fat" should not have been linked with "slob". It should not be inferred that over weight people are all automatically slobs. Honestly, sorry 'bout that...
Well then, I suppose when you get downsized, you'll put that on your resume, and shortly there after start learning your GNU tools, the GNU/fry basket.
There's not that much wrong with ties if you like to look sharp and feel sharp, and really, you can have fun with them. I own 20 or 30 fine silk jobbies, myself. No problems.
When it comes time to cut staff, the fat slob in the next office will be top on the list. Look like crap == feel like crap == work like crap.
When you say "Windows", I assume you mean to include products like ISA Server, SQL Server, Exchange Server, and so on, dozens of similar applications... Like it or not, some idiots are happy with these products...
I don't believe you because as has been pointed out here at Slash many times, English *is* the language of tech, and *most * Indian developers speak it fluently. It is not a problem that they are Indian, it is a problem that because of their economy, they work cheaper. I think this discussion can do without the ubiquitous bad jokes, if the services where sub-par, we would not be out-sourcing there. Give it up, Indians are excellent coders. Problem is, the work for cheap.
Music "in the public domain" is not the question here. We are talking about *copyrighted* music. More power to the indies, the bands that want the people to hear their music, and it would be good for *them* if you bought a CD or 7 inch or whatever, so they can go on playing.
RAII is talking about a different animal, the pro, commercial music maker. They have a "product". You want it? Pay for it. I don't expect to be able to walk into a 7-11 and snatch a bottle of Coke and tell them "Soda must be FREE! WooHoo!"
Unless Coke puts a GNU/GPL on the bottle, I guess I'll just have to pony up the buck and a half...
I know this will earn me "flaimbait" or "troll" here at Slash, but honestly it's not meant that way.
I really don't understand why people do not get that it is just dishonest to copy and distrubute copyrighted works without permission.
I know this is the land of "Information Needs To Be Free", but look at it a different way. As a coder, you develope a unique little app. Well you might *like* to give it away, the rent is due. I don't know about you, but I require my employer pay me for my work. So, being in *High Tech* your company allows you to hold the patent (as many do). But then they sell your work to kingdom come and give you nothing... The rent is due, and guess what? You can't pay it because your employer has screwed you, after all, "Information Must Be Free"
Bottom line. Music is *for sale* and if you want it, you must pay for it.
I think you're quite wrong. Evidence or not, SCO is, in fact, suing people..
SCO *is NOT* "suing.people", SCO *is* suing IBM in a contractual dispute. Note that they are not suing Red Hat, nor are they suing Mandrake or SuSE... Nor have they initiated litigation with any end users...
Slashdot Mirror
FLAIMBAIT? It's an honest question!
What real use other than nostalgia would this serve? And, personally, I think not too many people will care that much if obsolete software is de-constructed?
a copy of Windows XP would take the average paddy field worker six months to earn
I seem to recall that Microsoft dumps Windows in countries like Thailand and China at a tiny fraction of the US cost, to discurage Linux and piracy...
Read your own post, you said nothing about "your" company or any other company. You said "I'll continue to hack with 20 billion in the bank..."
Get your story straight.
I think it is, but remember that mix tapes from radio never had the sound quality of the vinyl, and they sold singles back then also, so if you liked the tune you had a good probability of going out and buying the album or single.
But with almost CD quality sound of mp3 and other digital formats, you no longer NEED to buy the product to get a good quality recording.
This is why record companies say p2p file sharing effects sales. I tend to believe it.
...And you're the CTO...
OK, fine Mr. "I make 20 billion". Whatever you say. By the way, are you at work? You spend a lot of time at /.!! Get any work done?
Please don't be stupid.
And, if you record a song off the radio and then make lots of copies and pass them around, I would guess this too is illegal.
It is VERY clear what the difference is between listening to the radio and downloading a tune is. In one case, a radio station has paid to broadcast the song, in the other case you have NOT paid to download and possess the song on your hard drive.
And, how do you "profit"? By having that song on your hard drive to listen to when ever you wish. You need to go out and buy the CD if you want this privilege.
I'll continue to hack with 20 billion in the bank and you can worry about how to include your appearance with your skills on your next resume.
And by the way, you are full of shit
"Looking like crap is highly subjective"
No, it's not, unless you are trying to justify being a slob, or live in some strange parallel universe. And, your ugly tee shirt with some stupid quote is just as much a "uniform" as my ties.
Fortunately for me, my "uniform" is fun to ware and socially acceptable. I love my ties, I think the look sharp and some are quite fun, like my Jerry Garcia numbers.
This is what happens when you trade in copyrighted material that you have no right to trade. And look you "I Think I'm As Smart As A Lawyer" types, "theft" or not, it's the same thing.
It is unethical for *anyone* including record companies to profit from ill-gotten gains. Sure, the artist may only get a penny on a CD, and you may not like the corporation. But if it's wrong to steal, it's wrong to steal.
I wish to appologize for the previous post, "fat" should not have been linked with "slob". It should not be inferred that over weight people are all automatically slobs. Honestly, sorry 'bout that...
Well then, I suppose when you get downsized, you'll put that on your resume, and shortly there after start learning your GNU tools, the GNU/fry basket. There's not that much wrong with ties if you like to look sharp and feel sharp, and really, you can have fun with them. I own 20 or 30 fine silk jobbies, myself. No problems. When it comes time to cut staff, the fat slob in the next office will be top on the list. Look like crap == feel like crap == work like crap.
Damn. I wear a tie AND masturbate a lot so I guess I'm going to need a seeing eye dog soon...
When you say "Windows", I assume you mean to include products like ISA Server, SQL Server, Exchange Server, and so on, dozens of similar applications... Like it or not, some idiots are happy with these products...
It's only a problem if they take my job away, but in a larger sense, no it's not their problem, it's mine.
I don't believe you because as has been pointed out here at Slash many times, English *is* the language of tech, and *most * Indian developers speak it fluently. It is not a problem that they are Indian, it is a problem that because of their economy, they work cheaper. I think this discussion can do without the ubiquitous bad jokes, if the services where sub-par, we would not be out-sourcing there. Give it up, Indians are excellent coders. Problem is, the work for cheap.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with cookies. You don't agree? Turn them off. It's just so simple...
At first, I smelled a Soviet Russia joke here...
Music "in the public domain" is not the question here. We are talking about *copyrighted* music. More power to the indies, the bands that want the people to hear their music, and it would be good for *them* if you bought a CD or 7 inch or whatever, so they can go on playing.
RAII is talking about a different animal, the pro, commercial music maker. They have a "product". You want it? Pay for it. I don't expect to be able to walk into a 7-11 and snatch a bottle of Coke and tell them "Soda must be FREE! WooHoo!"
Unless Coke puts a GNU/GPL on the bottle, I guess I'll just have to pony up the buck and a half...
I know this will earn me "flaimbait" or "troll" here at Slash, but honestly it's not meant that way. I really don't understand why people do not get that it is just dishonest to copy and distrubute copyrighted works without permission. I know this is the land of "Information Needs To Be Free", but look at it a different way. As a coder, you develope a unique little app. Well you might *like* to give it away, the rent is due. I don't know about you, but I require my employer pay me for my work. So, being in *High Tech* your company allows you to hold the patent (as many do). But then they sell your work to kingdom come and give you nothing... The rent is due, and guess what? You can't pay it because your employer has screwed you, after all, "Information Must Be Free" Bottom line. Music is *for sale* and if you want it, you must pay for it.
I think you're quite wrong. Evidence or not, SCO is, in fact, suing people..
SCO *is NOT* "suing.people", SCO *is* suing IBM in a contractual dispute. Note that they are not suing Red Hat, nor are they suing Mandrake or SuSE... Nor have they initiated litigation with any end users...
You are avoiding the fact that there are many many many many people who do *not* fall into your classification. Say it isn't so does not make it true.
Of course, the flip side (?) is that the RIAA is now possibly making the number of people who hate them potentially much larger, if that was possible.
And along with this outcome, they will be pissing off a bunch of people that potentially have deeper pockets to challenge the RAII.