Another cause for the overall decline, that's often forgotten, is information.
Blogs, independent review sites, aggregators (Rotten Tomatoe), and other sources are giving moviegoers more information up front about what movies are really worth seeing, and which ones are over-hyped and over-priced.
This as opposed to what we had just a few years ago, when the newspaper and TV reviewers gushed and drooled over every latest "blockbuster" release. Still do in fact, but now we have better sources.
I really don't think Hollywood is producing that many more bad movies... it just seems like it because we've been warned beforehand.
Stealing and theft are general terms in the common venacular, and have a multitude of meanings and shadings and usages that clearly apply. The Dictionary (OED) agrees...
"steal 1a. To take away dishonestly (portable property, cattle, etc., belonging to another); esp. to do this secretly or unobserved by the owner or the person in charge.... d. In wider sense: To take or appropriate dishonestly (anything belonging to another, whether material or immaterial)."
Or from dictionary.com: Theft: "a criminal taking of the property or services of another without consent."
And since you'd probably argue "take", again, from the OED: take V. 30 To get, obtain, or derive by one's own act from some source (something material or non-material); to adopt, copy, 'borrow'.
Also, the oft-quoted Supreme Court Dowling case gives credence to the act of copyright theft as being a form of theft, and the material involved being property.
People who actively and vocally advocate the use of the term "infringement" as an alternative every time the word "theft" is mentioned are attempting to play the propaganda game from the other side, as the connotation of infringement implies that one has done little or nothing of consequence.
Just to be clear, I'm on the side of the artists and those who would create that which we would enjoy.
Unfortunately, having the competitor's name in the ad, and on the landing page, for that matter, directly affects the ad's perceived relevance, ranking, and visibility. GEICO, and/or their agents, could pick off all the top spots by being the only ones with their name in the ad.
"I will foe anybody that puts spam in their slashdot sig... I have nothing against you wanting to make money, but..."
I can understand not wanting spam email, but a link in a sig is a link you don't have to click, and probably takes up less space than half the inane quotes people would otherwise put there.
In fact, with the attitude that the entire world should bow to your wishes I'd say staying off the internet completely would be wise. Wouldn't want you inadvertently seeing a set of Google ads.
"...if I'm not interested in either your product or helping you make money and I ask you to leave me alone, do it."
And out of curiosity, how does one ask if you're interested without asking?
Care to guess how long England and the continent have been burning vast amounts of dirty coal for cooking and heat?
And I really love hearing numbers thrown around like "a thousand times as fast", when our numeric baseline is only a couple of hundred years long. And even then when numbers start being fudged to "compensate" for "heat island" effects and other unknowns.
Or how one model indicates that throwing more heat into the system will shift climates and cause desertification, and another says more heat is more evaporation which is more storms which is cloud cover which leads to heat reflection which leads to an ice age.
While I'm all for reducing pollution, "global warming" is a theory still looking for a proof.
Actually, I'm more concerned about the OTHER side of the security equation. "Oh yes Mr. Inspector. This is the code, number generator, and payout schedule that's actually downloaded from the server to the RAM of each machine."
"No... it is. Really."
I'm sure the the operators can see lots of advantages in loosening up the machines on a slow Tuesday, and screwing them down on a Saturday night.
Precisely. Exactly. Total agreement. They're in business as long as people are willing to pay for their product... e.g. their music.
So people pay to see them live, and pay for discs and tapes to hear them when they're elsewhere, and if they're popular enough people may even buy their posters and t-shirts.
If they don't produce new music however, or generally fail to keep up with the times, people will gradually stop buying their music. They can't force people to buy their work if they don't want it, and they can't drive people into their concerts at gunpoint. Bands disappear all the time. Free market at work.
And your side is nothing more than immoral [sic] rationalization. The movie is crap. It wasn't good enough to watch in the theater, and not good enough to buy on DVD, and not good enough to rent for $3 at blockbuster, and not good enough to watch for free on TV when it gets there... but it IS good enough that you spend your time finding a tracker for it out on the internet, spend another two hours downloading it, and spend another two hours watching it?
The point is that a great many "real" jobs where people work as employees offer benefits such as sick days, health insurance, paid vacations, employee stock options, and retirement/pension plans.
A writer or singer, however, has none of those things and is pretty much a self employed individual. If they produce enough popular "work" during their career, however, the royalty stream can help cover sickness, vacations, and retirement.
"The complaints come from students, who are powerless to develop their own textbooks without the support of established experts."
I'm afriad you lost me with this sentence. At any given level, the students don't know the content. By and large, that's why they're studying the book and attending the class.
Once done, they'd in all likelyhood still lack the overall context in which that information should be placed. For example, something in the book that "seems" useless or irrelevant may in fact be used to setup the material to be covered in the next semester.
As such, I don't quite see how they would develop their own textbooks...
Good points. Take note, however, that I did say "...and so far [sic] I'm tremendously underwhelmed."
So, "at this point in time", I'm still tremendously underwhelmed. Which doesn't mean that the future won't bring the improvements of which you speak. I'll keep watching.
"...when they can simply live off work they have already done."
You're right. Going along with that train of thought, I guess we need to ban paid vacations too. I mean, you weren't working for two weeks, so why should you collect a check?
And employee retirement plans need to be outlawed post haste. I mean, why should someone collect money today for work they did years ago? Hardly seems fair.
Oh. Wait. You're saying that the work they did years ago is still of some value today? Hmmmmmm......
It's often said that with great power comes great responsibility. I prefer to think of the "Do no evil" mantra as an ever present acknowledgement of that fact.
Most of those images don't look like they're going to get the job done. How hard is it going to be to find a yellow late model 'vette with "track" as the last 5 digits of a custom plate?
And yet it keeps cookies. This stores my language preferences...
And content rating preferences and so on. Or would you rather reset them each time? But unless you signed up for an actual account (e.g. gmail), Google had no idea who you were dispite the cookie. All it knew was that someone, somewhere, kept looking for free porn.
And I know how cookies and servers work. It's my job. But read the sentence, "...the same cookies [sic] that store the IP and info of every single search that is done on google."
Given that sentence, is it obvious that the OP understands these things? For that matter, was it not obvious from the tone of the reply that I was being just a little sarcastic?
Please reread the posts before responding to them...
Slashdot Mirror
Blogs, independent review sites, aggregators (Rotten Tomatoe), and other sources are giving moviegoers more information up front about what movies are really worth seeing, and which ones are over-hyped and over-priced.
This as opposed to what we had just a few years ago, when the newspaper and TV reviewers gushed and drooled over every latest "blockbuster" release. Still do in fact, but now we have better sources.
I really don't think Hollywood is producing that many more bad movies... it just seems like it because we've been warned beforehand.
"steal 1a. To take away dishonestly (portable property, cattle, etc., belonging to another); esp. to do this secretly or unobserved by the owner or the person in charge. ... d. In wider sense: To take or appropriate dishonestly (anything belonging to another, whether material or immaterial)."
Or from dictionary.com: Theft: "a criminal taking of the property or services of another without consent."
And since you'd probably argue "take", again, from the OED: take V. 30 To get, obtain, or derive by one's own act from some source (something material or non-material); to adopt, copy, 'borrow'.
Also, the oft-quoted Supreme Court Dowling case gives credence to the act of copyright theft as being a form of theft, and the material involved being property.
People who actively and vocally advocate the use of the term "infringement" as an alternative every time the word "theft" is mentioned are attempting to play the propaganda game from the other side, as the connotation of infringement implies that one has done little or nothing of consequence.
Just to be clear, I'm on the side of the artists and those who would create that which we would enjoy.
Unfortunately, having the competitor's name in the ad, and on the landing page, for that matter, directly affects the ad's perceived relevance, ranking, and visibility. GEICO, and/or their agents, could pick off all the top spots by being the only ones with their name in the ad.
I can understand not wanting spam email, but a link in a sig is a link you don't have to click, and probably takes up less space than half the inane quotes people would otherwise put there.
In fact, with the attitude that the entire world should bow to your wishes I'd say staying off the internet completely would be wise. Wouldn't want you inadvertently seeing a set of Google ads.
"...if I'm not interested in either your product or helping you make money and I ask you to leave me alone, do it."
And out of curiosity, how does one ask if you're interested without asking?
I'm really looking forward to seeing wind-powered semi-tractor trailers.
So am I... and I'm pretty sure YOU are guilty of something. Boys, get the rope!
And I really love hearing numbers thrown around like "a thousand times as fast", when our numeric baseline is only a couple of hundred years long. And even then when numbers start being fudged to "compensate" for "heat island" effects and other unknowns.
Or how one model indicates that throwing more heat into the system will shift climates and cause desertification, and another says more heat is more evaporation which is more storms which is cloud cover which leads to heat reflection which leads to an ice age.
While I'm all for reducing pollution, "global warming" is a theory still looking for a proof.
"No... it is. Really."
I'm sure the the operators can see lots of advantages in loosening up the machines on a slow Tuesday, and screwing them down on a Saturday night.
So people pay to see them live, and pay for discs and tapes to hear them when they're elsewhere, and if they're popular enough people may even buy their posters and t-shirts.
If they don't produce new music however, or generally fail to keep up with the times, people will gradually stop buying their music. They can't force people to buy their work if they don't want it, and they can't drive people into their concerts at gunpoint. Bands disappear all the time. Free market at work.
DVR, watch on the computer, hardware rip to MP4, and ties into TitanTV so there's no monthly Tivo fee.
Yeah, that's a good start, as most "one hour" TV shows are only about 40-45 minutes long sans commercials...
There's never a mod redundant around when you need one. Must EVERY patent article trot out the same lame jokes?
Thanks! Another domain to add to our "automatically deny access" list...
Hypocrite.
A writer or singer, however, has none of those things and is pretty much a self employed individual. If they produce enough popular "work" during their career, however, the royalty stream can help cover sickness, vacations, and retirement.
I'm afriad you lost me with this sentence. At any given level, the students don't know the content. By and large, that's why they're studying the book and attending the class.
Once done, they'd in all likelyhood still lack the overall context in which that information should be placed. For example, something in the book that "seems" useless or irrelevant may in fact be used to setup the material to be covered in the next semester.
As such, I don't quite see how they would develop their own textbooks...
So, "at this point in time", I'm still tremendously underwhelmed. Which doesn't mean that the future won't bring the improvements of which you speak. I'll keep watching.
You're right. Going along with that train of thought, I guess we need to ban paid vacations too. I mean, you weren't working for two weeks, so why should you collect a check?
And employee retirement plans need to be outlawed post haste. I mean, why should someone collect money today for work they did years ago? Hardly seems fair.
Oh. Wait. You're saying that the work they did years ago is still of some value today? Hmmmmmm......
Like their income?
And which doesn't change the fact that the next time you type google.com into the address bar you still have to reset your preferences.
So you're saying the alternative is to stop global warming, at which point we should start building igloos instead?
I'm confused. I thought here on Slashdot everything was Bill Gate's fault?
It's often said that with great power comes great responsibility. I prefer to think of the "Do no evil" mantra as an ever present acknowledgement of that fact.
Most of those images don't look like they're going to get the job done. How hard is it going to be to find a yellow late model 'vette with "track" as the last 5 digits of a custom plate?
And content rating preferences and so on. Or would you rather reset them each time? But unless you signed up for an actual account (e.g. gmail), Google had no idea who you were dispite the cookie. All it knew was that someone, somewhere, kept looking for free porn.
And I know how cookies and servers work. It's my job. But read the sentence, "...the same cookies [sic] that store the IP and info of every single search that is done on google."
Given that sentence, is it obvious that the OP understands these things? For that matter, was it not obvious from the tone of the reply that I was being just a little sarcastic?
Please reread the posts before responding to them...