No. A person does not have the right to steal another person's property. That infringes on the rights of the property owner, and is therefore morally wrong, despite the opinions of the framers of the constitution. Beware of the phrase "for the good of society". Usually someone is getting screwed by the govt. when they use this phrase.
The issue is, is Apple growing or declining?Since they're not compatible with Windows, they need to at least maintain their market share, or 3rd party sw will ignore them even more, making Apple even less attractive for new buyers.
If his PDA is causing his Macto crash, that's a serious problem with Apple's software. Certainly won't put them out of business though. His commnets about how crappy PowerMacs were is right on the mone. Those machines were really unreliable. I was using MacOS 9 at school and NT4 at home. NT blew MacOS away.
This story is just some guy's personal rant against his computer and his inability to get it to link with his pda. I suspect the only reason it was posted is that it is an easy target for the poster to discredit, thereby making Apple look good.
Sure these companies get breaks from the govt., but that is miniscule compared to the money risked by investors. Saying that the govt paid for the telcom infrastructure is incorrect. I work in the telcom industry. Deployment of 40G network equipment has been pushed out at least 3 years. It's not the govt. that pays for this stuff.
What gives you the right to dictate other's motives for making music? People should have the right to profit from their work. Otherwise, you're saying their work is worthless. By priating a song you are saying to the artist, your song is owrthless, so I am taking it and giving you nothing. In capitalist systems, this is theft. Trade occurs only when the producer and consumer reach mutually agreed upon terms for the exchange of goods and services.
Leave it to slashdot to try to put a positive spin on an anti-piracy article. Musicians and record labels shouldn't have to struggle because people pirate their music. Of course this is ok in China. That's the nature of socialism. History and reason both show that socialism is doomed to fail. Let's not take cues from societies that steal the freedom of the individual for the good of society.
"So how is this different from the U.S? The RIAA keeps all the money from album sales."
The slashdot-speak is getting old. Artists get paid for selling records. Music publishers do get the lion's share though, and they deserve it. They're the ones taking all the risks.
What you're saying doesn't make sense. distributing code that violates a patent is infringing behavior. Therefore, if MySQL uses this patented technology, that code must be removed or royalties paid. If MySQL is under GPL, they must remove code relating to patented technology according to GPL licensing terms. Microsoft licensed the patented technology, so they aren't in trouble. Only companies that write custom code for SQL, and sell it as a specialized package, in which the written code violates the patented technology need to worry.
I'd send myself a list of all the disasters I could find, and tell myself to contact the appropriate people before it's too late. E.G. 9/11, Challenger o-ring problem, Bay bridge collapse during earthquake, etc.
Once again MS has shown they are ahead of the curve when it comes to introducing new features. This is a great feature. For instance, now I can distribute documents under NDA to customers and partners without worrying about them casually distributing the info to whomever they feel like. Of course there are ways to get by the security if someone really wants to. But it stops unintentional distribution of sensitive material into the wrong hands. In a few year OSS will realize this is a good h]feature and put it in Open Office. People will still be saying that Microsoft is not innovative then too, I'm sure.
If you're going to throttle bandwidth, it's better to do it in an intelligent fashion. A university isn't paying for a computer network for students to swap entertainment media, so, legal or otherwise, it makes sense to block that content. By blocking p2p, you could prevent useful transfers such as linux ISOs.
For a phone network, there are clear guidelines about expectation of privacy. The issue is not so clear on computer networks. Employers routinely monitor web traffic and fire people for looking at pr0n, for instance.
Your assumption that multiple companies cannot run their own redundant networks is false. The only reason they don't is because the govt is preventing them.
The best solution is to drop all regulation, including regulating who can lay cable, fiber, copper, etc. Once the decision is made to legislate a monopoly, regulation is needed to maintain it fairly. At that point, it's essentially a govt run industry. With little incentive to improve in infrastructure due to lack of competition, this solution generally isn't very good. In this particular instance deregulation is not a bad solution for DSL only since, even though the Bells have a govt mandated monopoly on copper, they still have competition from cable and satellite, giving them market competition to bring down costs and improve quality if they want to have any customers.
My guess is that this is a ploy by the FCC to give the appearance that the Bells own their own DSL networks. Now they will upgrade them, looking to be able to compete solely with cable instead of other leech DSL providers. After a few years, when the infrastructure is in place, the FCC will change the rules again and screw the Bells, allowing others once again to use the lines. In the end however, this technology is obsolete, and will eventually be replaced by fiber to the home. The govt. will no doubt regulate this pipe as well.
Bullshit. Why do you think the telcom industry is doing so badly now? They can't make up for the huge infrastructure upgrades during the internet bubble. They paid to lay the fiber, not the public. This is not the 1st time I've seen this sort of comment, but it's just completely wrong.
"Government has to step in and set a wholesale price that in the end is arbitrary and probably has a greater corelation to which company funded which campaign than to how much the line costs to install & maintain."
That is a recipe for failure. DSL is not a broadband monopoly. The govt. should stay out of it. The FCC move is a step in the right direction.
There are broadband alternatives to DSL, which is why the deregulation is fair. It's not a monopoly on broadband. Therefore it is against the principles of the US to regulate this industry. Regulation reduces the incentive to improve one's network. It's a valid economic point, not extortion as you claim. If you can't make enough money because of competition that can use your own network, you can't pay for costly infrastructure upgrades. Therefore the obvious decision is not to make the upgrades. The consumer, therefore, loses. So your regulated scenario is no good for the consumer either.
Slashdot Mirror
No. A person does not have the right to steal another person's property. That infringes on the rights of the property owner, and is therefore morally wrong, despite the opinions of the framers of the constitution. Beware of the phrase "for the good of society". Usually someone is getting screwed by the govt. when they use this phrase.
"Yeah, nobody is gunna take away my rights as an individual to randomly murder people just because it might harm "society"."
In a free society, an individual does not have the right to infringe on the rights of another individual, including murder and piracy.
The issue is, is Apple growing or declining?Since they're not compatible with Windows, they need to at least maintain their market share, or 3rd party sw will ignore them even more, making Apple even less attractive for new buyers.
If his PDA is causing his Macto crash, that's a serious problem with Apple's software. Certainly won't put them out of business though. His commnets about how crappy PowerMacs were is right on the mone. Those machines were really unreliable. I was using MacOS 9 at school and NT4 at home. NT blew MacOS away.
Yes. They seem to have figured out their SW developers suck, and now borrow all their mission critical sw from open-source.
"I'll gladly pay the premium for a better OS, better hardware software integration, and an almost complete lack of viruses and security problems."
Except that Macs aren't better by any objective standard. So you're just paying more for the same thing.
This story is just some guy's personal rant against his computer and his inability to get it to link with his pda. I suspect the only reason it was posted is that it is an easy target for the poster to discredit, thereby making Apple look good.
Sure these companies get breaks from the govt., but that is miniscule compared to the money risked by investors. Saying that the govt paid for the telcom infrastructure is incorrect. I work in the telcom industry. Deployment of 40G network equipment has been pushed out at least 3 years. It's not the govt. that pays for this stuff.
What gives you the right to dictate other's motives for making music? People should have the right to profit from their work. Otherwise, you're saying their work is worthless. By priating a song you are saying to the artist, your song is owrthless, so I am taking it and giving you nothing. In capitalist systems, this is theft. Trade occurs only when the producer and consumer reach mutually agreed upon terms for the exchange of goods and services.
Leave it to slashdot to try to put a positive spin on an anti-piracy article. Musicians and record labels shouldn't have to struggle because people pirate their music. Of course this is ok in China. That's the nature of socialism. History and reason both show that socialism is doomed to fail. Let's not take cues from societies that steal the freedom of the individual for the good of society.
What are you smoking? The US was blacklisting communists in the 50s (MCarthyism). China was as socialist as it gets back then too.
Yeah, we should make talented musicians work day jobs rather than rewarding them for their effort. You belong in China with an attitude like that.
"So how is this different from the U.S? The RIAA keeps all the money from album sales."
The slashdot-speak is getting old. Artists get paid for selling records. Music publishers do get the lion's share though, and they deserve it. They're the ones taking all the risks.
What you're saying doesn't make sense. distributing code that violates a patent is infringing behavior. Therefore, if MySQL uses this patented technology, that code must be removed or royalties paid. If MySQL is under GPL, they must remove code relating to patented technology according to GPL licensing terms. Microsoft licensed the patented technology, so they aren't in trouble. Only companies that write custom code for SQL, and sell it as a specialized package, in which the written code violates the patented technology need to worry.
I'd send myself a list of all the disasters I could find, and tell myself to contact the appropriate people before it's too late. E.G. 9/11, Challenger o-ring problem, Bay bridge collapse during earthquake, etc.
Once again MS has shown they are ahead of the curve when it comes to introducing new features. This is a great feature. For instance, now I can distribute documents under NDA to customers and partners without worrying about them casually distributing the info to whomever they feel like. Of course there are ways to get by the security if someone really wants to. But it stops unintentional distribution of sensitive material into the wrong hands. In a few year OSS will realize this is a good h]feature and put it in Open Office. People will still be saying that Microsoft is not innovative then too, I'm sure.
If you're going to throttle bandwidth, it's better to do it in an intelligent fashion. A university isn't paying for a computer network for students to swap entertainment media, so, legal or otherwise, it makes sense to block that content. By blocking p2p, you could prevent useful transfers such as linux ISOs.
For a phone network, there are clear guidelines about expectation of privacy. The issue is not so clear on computer networks. Employers routinely monitor web traffic and fire people for looking at pr0n, for instance.
I think he meant hi-res video by good quality. No one's disputing the poor quality of Friends, I think.
Your assumption that multiple companies cannot run their own redundant networks is false. The only reason they don't is because the govt is preventing them.
The best solution is to drop all regulation, including regulating who can lay cable, fiber, copper, etc. Once the decision is made to legislate a monopoly, regulation is needed to maintain it fairly. At that point, it's essentially a govt run industry. With little incentive to improve in infrastructure due to lack of competition, this solution generally isn't very good. In this particular instance deregulation is not a bad solution for DSL only since, even though the Bells have a govt mandated monopoly on copper, they still have competition from cable and satellite, giving them market competition to bring down costs and improve quality if they want to have any customers.
My guess is that this is a ploy by the FCC to give the appearance that the Bells own their own DSL networks. Now they will upgrade them, looking to be able to compete solely with cable instead of other leech DSL providers. After a few years, when the infrastructure is in place, the FCC will change the rules again and screw the Bells, allowing others once again to use the lines. In the end however, this technology is obsolete, and will eventually be replaced by fiber to the home. The govt. will no doubt regulate this pipe as well.
Bullshit. Why do you think the telcom industry is doing so badly now? They can't make up for the huge infrastructure upgrades during the internet bubble. They paid to lay the fiber, not the public. This is not the 1st time I've seen this sort of comment, but it's just completely wrong.
"Government has to step in and set a wholesale price that in the end is arbitrary and probably has a greater corelation to which company funded which campaign than to how much the line costs to install & maintain."
That is a recipe for failure. DSL is not a broadband monopoly. The govt. should stay out of it. The FCC move is a step in the right direction.
There are broadband alternatives to DSL, which is why the deregulation is fair. It's not a monopoly on broadband. Therefore it is against the principles of the US to regulate this industry. Regulation reduces the incentive to improve one's network. It's a valid economic point, not extortion as you claim. If you can't make enough money because of competition that can use your own network, you can't pay for costly infrastructure upgrades. Therefore the obvious decision is not to make the upgrades. The consumer, therefore, loses. So your regulated scenario is no good for the consumer either.