Going off topic here but...What's with all of the new logos on the topics page? Matrix and LOTR I understand, but about 6 different ones for computer/console games?
While I agree with the premise of compensating the musicians I think that a flat surcharge on all internet users is the wrong way to go for the obvious reason that not everyone is downlaoding copyrighted material.
Now for my rant...Even if a means is devised for charging a nominal fee to users and compensating the artist for downloading a song, I doubt that it will have much effect on music piracy. While I there are some, many even, who would be more than happy to follow such a system, I think there is a much larger number who, while they pay lip service to the whole "The RIAA is evil and thats why I download music" mantra, are really only interested in getting the music they want for free. Maybe this would be a good first step since at that point the music industry would be on much stronger ground when lobbying for legislation if they could say, "We are providing the service that consumers say want and yet they are still downloading x number of songs a day."
Sure, if it's some kind of Independence Day struggle for survival then maybe. Otherwise every nation will be trying to figure out how to turn the event to their own advantage.
Name another form of transport that hasn't got faster since the sixties?
Cars-perhaps the land speed record has been broken a ouple of times, but passenger cars and trucks still go no faster than they did before.
Ships-again, maybe race boats have gotten faster, but most of the trade around the world is on ships that don't go faster than they did in the 60's.
Passenger trains are about the only form of transportation I can think of that has increased its speeds since the 60's.
I'd rather see faster planes than bigger planes. Airline companies, of course, would rather see bigger than faster. There's a fundemental gap between consumer and provider there
I think most consumers want cheaper travel, not necessarily faster. How many people are willing to spend $6000 (£3,999) to hop on a 3.5 hour flight, have lunch at Central Park, do a little shopping and then hop on another 3.5 hour flight to go back to London. Perhaps there are a few people that are willing to do this, but I hardly think a profitable business could be based on it. the reason the flights are being terminated is that they don't make money.
I don't know if I would call this "mass" access to supersonic travel. Certainly it was comercially available so that potentially anyone could use it. But at a price of over $3000 ticket price one way (NY-London/Paris) it is hardly in the price range of the masses. Besides, the article mentions that the reason they are terminating it is that flights are no longer profitable since no one is using it anymore.
I don't know where you live if you don't think that there is any corruption, patronage, etc. going on in local politics. The local papers here are full of that kind of stuff.
I do agree that it is probably easier at the local level to get stuff like this changed though.
I realize this is a joke but..Hitler was never elected. The Nazi party never won more than about 35% of the vote, even in the few elections after Hitler was appointed Chancellor in 1933.
He was appointed by a coalition of right wing parties whose leaders though that they would have control over him.
You know, that's fine if it doesn't bug you, I think it would bug many other people.
There's a difference between a girlfriend asking who you were talking to on the phone and the government doing. For that matter, in this case the government isn't asking you what you're reading but is getting this info without your knowledge. And there is no way for you to find out about since the librarian is not allowed to tell you or even speak to an attorney before turning over the information, they just have to turn it over if asked for it.
And if you don't think the American government can do anything with this information if you're not breaking the law, go read up on the McCarthy and civil rights eras.
There are certain guns which are obivously offensive weapons or can be changed into offensive weapons with simple changes.
I'm think (but I'm not 100% sure) that lawsuits against gun manufacturers have been for automatic assualt rifle type weapons, not for simple handguns or hunting rifles.
If you watched the movie Double Jeopardy, you would know that the heroine (played by Ashley Judd) could not be retried and convicted for the murder of her husband (who was actually still alive) because she was already convicted (wrongly) and did the time for it. This allowed her to go after him, with lethal force and without fear of repercussions, in the movie. This is (amazingly) an accurate portayal of this concept.
minor spoilers ahead
IANAL...This is not amazingly accurate. She would be committing a different crime since the time and place were not the same, especially since the second murder was in different state from the original. At best she could have hoped for some leniency in the sentencing, time already served or something.
By this movie's logic, if I was (wrongly) convicted of robbing a bank and did my time for the crime then in the future I could go rob this bank for the rest of my life since I had already been convicted of that crime once.
Look, I'm certainly no fan of Bush, but to compare him to Hitler is just idiocy. It's nearly as bad as the people who compare Hussein to Hitler (although this is slightly more justified).
Although many of the comparisons made are superficially similar the differences are overwhelming. This might be somewhat funny as a humor column, but as a serious editorial it does nothing to usefully compare the two situations.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, how did they check their predictions again?
Going off topic here but...What's with all of the new logos on the topics page? Matrix and LOTR I understand, but about 6 different ones for computer/console games?
Now for my rant...Even if a means is devised for charging a nominal fee to users and compensating the artist for downloading a song, I doubt that it will have much effect on music piracy. While I there are some, many even, who would be more than happy to follow such a system, I think there is a much larger number who, while they pay lip service to the whole "The RIAA is evil and thats why I download music" mantra, are really only interested in getting the music they want for free. Maybe this would be a good first step since at that point the music industry would be on much stronger ground when lobbying for legislation if they could say, "We are providing the service that consumers say want and yet they are still downloading x number of songs a day."
Sure, if it's some kind of Independence Day struggle for survival then maybe. Otherwise every nation will be trying to figure out how to turn the event to their own advantage.
While waiting for lap dance to start
Stipper: So what do you do for fun?
Guy #1: Oh, I sometimes play Everquest. I'm Alana, the Dark Sorceress. {part of the that 15%}
Stripper: OK, we're up, where's the $20?
later
Stripper to guy #2: So you're a programmer? I like computer games, I play Alana the Dark Sorceress on Everquest.
Guy #2: Really? Maybe we'll run into each other sometime.
And thus hours of fun and confusion created by a bored stripper.
I think we already have enough tools to dispose of sadistic bastards...oh, you want a tool to dispoase of the packaging.
Cars-perhaps the land speed record has been broken a ouple of times, but passenger cars and trucks still go no faster than they did before.
Ships-again, maybe race boats have gotten faster, but most of the trade around the world is on ships that don't go faster than they did in the 60's.
Passenger trains are about the only form of transportation I can think of that has increased its speeds since the 60's.
I'd rather see faster planes than bigger planes. Airline companies, of course, would rather see bigger than faster. There's a fundemental gap between consumer and provider there
I think most consumers want cheaper travel, not necessarily faster. How many people are willing to spend $6000 (£3,999) to hop on a 3.5 hour flight, have lunch at Central Park, do a little shopping and then hop on another 3.5 hour flight to go back to London. Perhaps there are a few people that are willing to do this, but I hardly think a profitable business could be based on it. the reason the flights are being terminated is that they don't make money.
I don't know if I would call this "mass" access to supersonic travel. Certainly it was comercially available so that potentially anyone could use it. But at a price of over $3000 ticket price one way (NY-London/Paris) it is hardly in the price range of the masses. Besides, the article mentions that the reason they are terminating it is that flights are no longer profitable since no one is using it anymore.
I do agree that it is probably easier at the local level to get stuff like this changed though.
He was appointed by a coalition of right wing parties whose leaders though that they would have control over him.
There's a difference between a girlfriend asking who you were talking to on the phone and the government doing. For that matter, in this case the government isn't asking you what you're reading but is getting this info without your knowledge. And there is no way for you to find out about since the librarian is not allowed to tell you or even speak to an attorney before turning over the information, they just have to turn it over if asked for it.
And if you don't think the American government can do anything with this information if you're not breaking the law, go read up on the McCarthy and civil rights eras.
No, but I've started some off topic threads. Come to think of it...
Answer: Once they try to turn their son to the Dark Side.
Don't be cruel, some parts of the light have special needs.
There are certain guns which are obivously offensive weapons or can be changed into offensive weapons with simple changes.
I'm think (but I'm not 100% sure) that lawsuits against gun manufacturers have been for automatic assualt rifle type weapons, not for simple handguns or hunting rifles.
minor spoilers ahead
IANAL...This is not amazingly accurate. She would be committing a different crime since the time and place were not the same, especially since the second murder was in different state from the original. At best she could have hoped for some leniency in the sentencing, time already served or something.
By this movie's logic, if I was (wrongly) convicted of robbing a bank and did my time for the crime then in the future I could go rob this bank for the rest of my life since I had already been convicted of that crime once.
1. Wrongful conviction.
2. ???
3. Profit.
Maybe I have something here.
Are you sure about this?
It's funny that about 90% of the comments are about VW bugs and have nothing to do with the article (no I didn't read the article either).
'God Is Dead ...Nietzsche'. ...God'.
'Nietzsche is Dead
Does this mean Nietzsche is God?
and you couldn't even write your own article summary. tsk, tsk.
I don't know about Malkovich. It was a blast the first time, but it doesn't stand up to repeated viewings.
Yes, and Adam Sandler movies are hilarious. I mean they call them comedies so they must be funny, right? Little Nicky was a riot.
Although many of the comparisons made are superficially similar the differences are overwhelming. This might be somewhat funny as a humor column, but as a serious editorial it does nothing to usefully compare the two situations.
In Soviet Russia, spelling corrects you.
I'm not sure this is always true since it seems that alot of the money made in spamming is selling the email lists themselves to other spammers.