That's what I've been doing lately in researching the HTC G1 (Android phone).
A lot of the reviews are people just saying "it sucks, my iPhone is the best". I do Google searches for terms like "G1 sucks" etc, then I read other reviews and the general consensus seems to be that it will be a worthwhile purchase.
Look, first thing you learn when reading reviews any product that competes at any level with an Apple Computer product is that owners of Apple products will slam anything that isn't Apple. Doesn't matter whether they're correct or not, doesn't matter whether they've ever used that product or not, it ain't Apple so it sucks. I mean, Jesus H. Christ, Belkin has to pay people for astroturfing that Apple gets for free. Now, I'm not comparing Apple's stuff to Belkin's... don't misunderstand me. Apple makes some way-cool stuff, and much of their reputation is well-earned. Their customers, though, often have difficulty maintaining any semblance of objectivity.
I have little use for Flash and less for Silverlight... and the inauguration will still be on TV (and will be broadcast and re-broadcast ad nauseam anyway) so it's not like we won't get to see it if we don't knuckle under. I wonder what Microsoft will have to give in return for this great boon?
well said. im sick of kiddies on here kissing ray dickheads ass because it makes them feel ok about stealing.
Fuck these ignorant hippies.
he isn't a real lawyer anyway, just a guy that runs an adsense site and spams links to it here.
Damn! I guess Ripley was right... IQs DID drop sharply she was away. That, or ignorance really is bliss.
Just ignore them and focus on the matter at hand rather than going into illogical discussions about stated reasons for actions.
I disagree. There's a substantial amount of logic and reason (not to mention pure black nasty evil) on the part of the RIAA and similar organizations. This deterrence campaign was well-planned, and implemented for a specific purpose. A purpose which, when pressed, they deny vociferously and cry "but we're only protecting the rights of the artists." That they've essentially failed in their quest to make file sharing and wide-scale copyright infringement appear too dangerous is irrelevant. They caused a lot of damage along the way, and are still. That needs to stop (or be stopped) but it will never happen as long as people accept what they're doing, or worse yet, see it as "their rights under the law."
When a group dissembles to such a degree, and with such an utter lack of concern for anyone but themselves and their corporate masters, the difference between what they say and what they do is extremely important. That's particularly true when dealing with those (i.e., the bulk of the American public) who don't follow the issues here, and would naturally be inclined to take their statements at face value. It's vitally important these bastards be shown as the crooks they really are, and if this Webcast helps to do that then it's worth it. People will be able to look at what they've been claiming they're all about, and then see what they're really about, and perhaps draw some correct conclusions.
In the RIAA's case, this absolutely does not include informing the public about their sleazy, if not outright criminal courtroom behavior.
None of which makes copyright infringement any less unlawful.
And that, my friend, has never been the topic of this discussion. Of course it's illegal. So are a lot of things. Some should be, and some shouldn't, but that's a matter for lawmakers to decide.
The issue that the RIAA has done a lot of really horrible (and, yes, probably illegal) things in their quest to put a stop to infringement. They're still doing them, in spite of having claimed that they have stopped. If this outfit had done a bit of due diligence, only sued people that were truly guilty, only asked for a reasonable amount of compensation, nobody would be complaining.
Well, i don't know what you classify as "sexual conservatism", but i sure don't think that we have that now - neither in the US nor here in Europe.
Yes, and our birth rates are leveling off or falling (Germany, for example, and the U.S. population is increasing largely because of the influx of illegals and all their offspring.) Consequently, it seems to me that if you want to have a high birthrate take away all the porn, make masturbation illegal and give people no other sexual outlets other than sex itself. Oh, and don't forget to keep women in the dark as to consequences of their sexual activity, and take all forms of contraception off the market. Guaranteed Baby Boom.
The Tomato firmware lets you scan each channel and identifies all wireless networks (including hidden w/o ssid) before you pick the channel you will use.
Among many other seriously cool features. You didn't see fit to include a link to the Tomato firmware so there it is. Check the list of supported routers to make sure yours is in there, and then flash it in. Blows the stock firmware out of the water.
Find out where the bastard lives and what equipment he has that's causing the interference, and then send a couple of your boys around to help him take it apart.
I can't wait for the RIAA to air out their ridiculous tactics and for the judge to laugh them right out of court. Would it be legal to record this and, say, put it on YouTube?
Good question. Presumably this is a matter of public record.
since the professed aim of the litigations was to 'educate' the public?
The RIAA (and the MPAA) have a stated goal of educating the public about copyright law and the evils of infringement. However, the actual goal is to "re-educate" the public, much as our totalitarian friends around the world "re-educate" those who disagree with them. In the RIAA's case, this absolutely does not include informing the public about their sleazy, if not outright criminal courtroom behavior.
Because it was cheap (only $5) and you could share it with your friends (CC). People like both. People buy both. Are the music labels even listening? It works!
No, and if the current set of creeps continues to stay in charge of the labels, they never will. They still can't get over the fact that they have lost control of distribution. Online distribution is rapidly overtaking CD sales, and they simply don't control the world of online music sales. Apple does that (with Amazon running second) and that torques the labels into a pretzel (especially since it didn't have to be that way, they set themselves up for a fall.) See, it's not just about the money... it's more about control. And the Internet took that away from them at breathtaking speed, and they're still reeling from the blow. They'd best get used to it, though, since it's highly unlikely they'll ever be top dog in content distribution ever again.
This is what is going on here. The media companies decide, beforehand, how much money they should be making in a given period of time, based on voodoo bullshit as far as i can tell, then if they don't make that much money they bitch about the pirates and blame losses on them.
I tend to agree, with the exception that they'll blame the (ahem!) "pirates" anyway whether they exceed their projections or not.
Things look a bit different from the other side of the fence.
Granted. As a software developer myself I understand your feelings. The difference is this: you aren't bribing elected officials, having copyright law rewritten in an unConstitutional manner to serve your needs and your needs only and damn everyone else to hell. Regardless of whether mass copyright infringement is or is not causing them significant economic harm, the reality is that their response is way over the top.
The damage these bloodsucking leeches have done to our legal system and our economy isn't even remotely matched by their losses due to copyright infringement. They should be lined up and stoned, and if any of them survive the stoning they should be waterboarded and shot dead.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what I've been doing lately in researching the HTC G1 (Android phone).
A lot of the reviews are people just saying "it sucks, my iPhone is the best". I do Google searches for terms like "G1 sucks" etc, then I read other reviews and the general consensus seems to be that it will be a worthwhile purchase.
Look, first thing you learn when reading reviews any product that competes at any level with an Apple Computer product is that owners of Apple products will slam anything that isn't Apple. Doesn't matter whether they're correct or not, doesn't matter whether they've ever used that product or not, it ain't Apple so it sucks. I mean, Jesus H. Christ, Belkin has to pay people for astroturfing that Apple gets for free. Now, I'm not comparing Apple's stuff to Belkin's ... don't misunderstand me. Apple makes some way-cool stuff, and much of their reputation is well-earned. Their customers, though, often have difficulty maintaining any semblance of objectivity.
Who is paying you for this ? WHO ?
Doctor ... Who did you say?
They did sue Mike Rowe Soft.
And gave it up. The bad PR wasn't worth it. That will be the case here too, I'm sure.
Still, it does seem that sleaze is in the breeze lately.
I am sure you have this backwards - Micro$oft probably made campaign contributions to Obama and Obama owed M$ the favor....
Wouldn't surprise me. Washington is a complicated, twisted place.
I have little use for Flash and less for Silverlight ... and the inauguration will still be on TV (and will be broadcast and re-broadcast ad nauseam anyway) so it's not like we won't get to see it if we don't knuckle under. I wonder what Microsoft will have to give in return for this great boon?
That certainly didn't take long to have the rhetoric fail and the reality take charge.
Oh, they're plenty tech savvy ... they're just not tech willing. Microsoft now owes the Obama Administration a favor.
well said. im sick of kiddies on here kissing ray dickheads ass because it makes them feel ok about stealing. Fuck these ignorant hippies. he isn't a real lawyer anyway, just a guy that runs an adsense site and spams links to it here.
Damn! I guess Ripley was right ... IQs DID drop sharply she was away. That, or ignorance really is bliss.
Even your own dog hates you.
Okay, now there you went too far.
Just work for the bank that holds my mortgage. Believe me, they suck when it comes to security.
Just ignore them and focus on the matter at hand rather than going into illogical discussions about stated reasons for actions.
I disagree. There's a substantial amount of logic and reason (not to mention pure black nasty evil) on the part of the RIAA and similar organizations. This deterrence campaign was well-planned, and implemented for a specific purpose. A purpose which, when pressed, they deny vociferously and cry "but we're only protecting the rights of the artists." That they've essentially failed in their quest to make file sharing and wide-scale copyright infringement appear too dangerous is irrelevant. They caused a lot of damage along the way, and are still. That needs to stop (or be stopped) but it will never happen as long as people accept what they're doing, or worse yet, see it as "their rights under the law."
When a group dissembles to such a degree, and with such an utter lack of concern for anyone but themselves and their corporate masters, the difference between what they say and what they do is extremely important. That's particularly true when dealing with those (i.e., the bulk of the American public) who don't follow the issues here, and would naturally be inclined to take their statements at face value. It's vitally important these bastards be shown as the crooks they really are, and if this Webcast helps to do that then it's worth it. People will be able to look at what they've been claiming they're all about, and then see what they're really about, and perhaps draw some correct conclusions.
None of which makes copyright infringement any less unlawful.
And that, my friend, has never been the topic of this discussion. Of course it's illegal. So are a lot of things. Some should be, and some shouldn't, but that's a matter for lawmakers to decide.
The issue that the RIAA has done a lot of really horrible (and, yes, probably illegal) things in their quest to put a stop to infringement. They're still doing them, in spite of having claimed that they have stopped. If this outfit had done a bit of due diligence, only sued people that were truly guilty, only asked for a reasonable amount of compensation, nobody would be complaining.
Well, i don't know what you classify as "sexual conservatism", but i sure don't think that we have that now - neither in the US nor here in Europe.
Yes, and our birth rates are leveling off or falling (Germany, for example, and the U.S. population is increasing largely because of the influx of illegals and all their offspring.) Consequently, it seems to me that if you want to have a high birthrate take away all the porn, make masturbation illegal and give people no other sexual outlets other than sex itself. Oh, and don't forget to keep women in the dark as to consequences of their sexual activity, and take all forms of contraception off the market. Guaranteed Baby Boom.
Masturbation *is* sexual conservatism. It doesn't take a billion Chinese to figure this out.
Well, it appears that it does.
The Tomato firmware lets you scan each channel and identifies all wireless networks (including hidden w/o ssid) before you pick the channel you will use.
Among many other seriously cool features. You didn't see fit to include a link to the Tomato firmware so there it is. Check the list of supported routers to make sure yours is in there, and then flash it in. Blows the stock firmware out of the water.
How Best To Deal With WiFi Interference?
Find out where the bastard lives and what equipment he has that's causing the interference, and then send a couple of your boys around to help him take it apart.
Are Slashdotters aware of other examples of other such blatant astroturfing on behalf of a large tech company like Belkin?
Yes.
I can't wait for the RIAA to air out their ridiculous tactics and for the judge to laugh them right out of court. Would it be legal to record this and, say, put it on YouTube?
Good question. Presumably this is a matter of public record.
since the professed aim of the litigations was to 'educate' the public?
The RIAA (and the MPAA) have a stated goal of educating the public about copyright law and the evils of infringement. However, the actual goal is to "re-educate" the public, much as our totalitarian friends around the world "re-educate" those who disagree with them. In the RIAA's case, this absolutely does not include informing the public about their sleazy, if not outright criminal courtroom behavior.
100% of music downloads were illegal.
That probably includes iTunes sales, given the way these people's minds work.
Because it was cheap (only $5) and you could share it with your friends (CC). People like both. People buy both. Are the music labels even listening? It works!
No, and if the current set of creeps continues to stay in charge of the labels, they never will. They still can't get over the fact that they have lost control of distribution. Online distribution is rapidly overtaking CD sales, and they simply don't control the world of online music sales. Apple does that (with Amazon running second) and that torques the labels into a pretzel (especially since it didn't have to be that way, they set themselves up for a fall.) See, it's not just about the money ... it's more about control. And the Internet took that away from them at breathtaking speed, and they're still reeling from the blow. They'd best get used to it, though, since it's highly unlikely they'll ever be top dog in content distribution ever again.
95% of statistics are made up on the spot.
No, you're wrong! Only 33% of statistics are made up on the spot.
This is what is going on here. The media companies decide, beforehand, how much money they should be making in a given period of time, based on voodoo bullshit as far as i can tell, then if they don't make that much money they bitch about the pirates and blame losses on them.
I tend to agree, with the exception that they'll blame the (ahem!) "pirates" anyway whether they exceed their projections or not.
I hate those uppity blobs and take every opportunity to torture them into submission.
You talkin' marshmallows or record company executives?
Things look a bit different from the other side of the fence.
Granted. As a software developer myself I understand your feelings. The difference is this: you aren't bribing elected officials, having copyright law rewritten in an unConstitutional manner to serve your needs and your needs only and damn everyone else to hell. Regardless of whether mass copyright infringement is or is not causing them significant economic harm, the reality is that their response is way over the top.
The damage these bloodsucking leeches have done to our legal system and our economy isn't even remotely matched by their losses due to copyright infringement. They should be lined up and stoned, and if any of them survive the stoning they should be waterboarded and shot dead.
Report Claims 95% of Music Downloads Are Illegal
My report claims that 95% of Music Industry Executives Are Illegal.