Hopefully the Judge is aware of who he is dealing with here.
It always seems to come down to that, doesn't it? I gather that if more of the judiciary were up to speed on the RIAA's shenanigans more of these cases might never make it to court.
It's going to take a significant number of said shareholders getting their own asses sued off for them to start concerning themselves. Right now, all a studio investor sees is the RIAA helping him to make more money.
So, in other words, the KDE people took care of it, Stallman was willing let the whole matter drop so long as the appropriate legal procedure was followed, and everyone took offense anyway?
Not quite the same thing, and you know it, particularly because the DVDCCA maintains strict control of what players can do and explicitly authorizes that behavior. And Ad-block plugins are a choice to modify content made by the consumer of that content. That's hugely different from the data transport mechanism modifying said content on the fly to suit its own needs... it is not what we pay for when we send our Internet bills every month. You might also want to check on where fair use applies (and where it doesn't) before making any such claim that ISPs could hide behind it. Companies have gotten in hot water for editing DVD movies and redistributing them: that's probably a more apropos comparison to this situation than a simple application of fair use.
In any event, I expect my DVD player to (ahem) "modify" the content of a DVD in specific, expected ways that are strictly to my benefit. I don't expect it to change the plot, reorder scenes, or start presenting advertising while I'm watching the movie.
Seriously, when it becomes acceptable for the phone company to break into my conversation with "Did you know that Geico can save you ton of money on car insurance?" then my ISP can screw around with my Web pages. Otherwise, get your sticky paws OFF me, you damn dirty apes.
I think your point was that they are getting wealthy from trading with you. That is true. And you are getting richer by trading with them. Trade is not zero sum.
You're correct in principle, but dead wrong when it comes to China. I think the GP was getting at this point. Trade enriches both parties, true... but we aren't trading with China. We're buying exclusively from China, to the detriment of our domestic manufacturing. That's a huge difference. Anyone who says that America is being enriched by dealing with China is blind to the facts: we are, in fact, becoming poorer because we've willfully given up our own means of production. It also means that America has given up it's independence, because we can no longer take care of our own. That can not be considered a good thing by any system of measurement.
Where do you think America's wealth came from? Trees? No, it came from manufactured goods, products that we can no longer make for ourselves because we allowed China to wage what is, in effect, a form of economic warfare upon us. They didn't do this by accident, they've done it before (they tried it on the British Empire a long time ago) only this time nobody is fighting back. I cannot say how long it will take for this process of hollowing us out to be completed, but when it is... we will begin to understand just who we have been dealing with.
What's interesting about the GP's post is that he finds nothing wrong with forcing society to go his way (breathing thorium dust, or sitting in the dark) because of course he knows what is best for everyone else. I find that fundamental arrogance to be a hallmark of much of the environmental movement, often accompanied by an equal lack of concern for facts. From my perspective, the idea that a group of people who apparently don't know what the hell they are talking about, and have no problem lying to advance their cause should have the power to set or influence public policy in these matters is unnerving. Pah. Spare me from the people who want to feel good at my expense. You can do what feels right... or you can do what is right. The two are not necessarily the same. Furthermore, sometimes the right course is not without risk. That doesn't make it any less right.
You want to know who the real environmentalists are? It's the engineers and research people that work for industry, the ones who convince their corporate masters to improve their technologies, who speak up and say, "Hey, boss, we can make this process at least as efficient if we invest a little in making it clean, and maybe save some dough besides 'cause we're reducing waste." Kudos also to the suits who have the vision to realize that environmentally sound industrial processes often prove to be the most profitable in the long run. Those are the people who do more for the environment than any number of self-described "environmentalists". You'll never hear about them though. They're too busy solving the real problems the GP only thinks he's solving, rather than worrying about getting enough media exposure to keep the donations rolling in. Put it this way: if you need a solution to a complex technological problem (say, accommodating our exponentially-growing power consumption curve for an indefinite period) who do you call? The environmentalist... or the engineer?
So far as our energy policy is concerned, the reality is that there are very few ways to skin this particular cat. The sooner we realize that the better off we'll all be.
Hey, we figured it out first, bucko. See Tesla and Westinghouse. You guys were still using gaslight. Not our fault if you couldn't copy our efforts properly.
No, but with a computer-controlled system like the cellular network it would be perfectly possible to prioritize traffic in an emergency. It surprises me that they apparently can't do that.
The simplest way would be to make them provide a non-standard output, and make it clear in the news that the generators are completely useless for anything but running a cell tower.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, diplomacy never was Stallman's strong suit anyway.
Have you looked at your reflection lately? Perhaps it is true that you do resemble a bot.
Now why does slashdot eat my tags when I post as Plain Old Text?
Because nobody fed the Trolls today.
On what timeline will AJAX skills become commoditized like HTML skills became?
When you don't need to know fifty languages to make it all work.
Yeah you're right ... don't give them any ideas. Especially bad ideas.
but whoever was responsible for a breach of that magnitude should be also be encrypted, right after he's properly embalmed.
I don't think you can hang that much airfoil between your arms and legs.
Buddy, let me tell you, I've got plenty of airfoil where it counts.
Yes, but if you ran over that person while you were in the process of illegal distributing music ... hoo boy, would you be in trouble.
Hopefully the Judge is aware of who he is dealing with here.
It always seems to come down to that, doesn't it? I gather that if more of the judiciary were up to speed on the RIAA's shenanigans more of these cases might never make it to court.
It's going to take a significant number of said shareholders getting their own asses sued off for them to start concerning themselves. Right now, all a studio investor sees is the RIAA helping him to make more money.
Sure, he's got all those fancy clocks in his "Time Lab", but they only go forward!
He just needs a flux capacitor and a supply of terrorist-grade plutonium.
Why is this so difficult to get right?
Ah doon't noo.
I just want to know if he can turn the clock Baak.
So, in other words, the KDE people took care of it, Stallman was willing let the whole matter drop so long as the appropriate legal procedure was followed, and everyone took offense anyway?
Yeah, but we pretty much know what the "customer response" is going to be in that case.
Not quite the same thing, and you know it, particularly because the DVDCCA maintains strict control of what players can do and explicitly authorizes that behavior. And Ad-block plugins are a choice to modify content made by the consumer of that content. That's hugely different from the data transport mechanism modifying said content on the fly to suit its own needs ... it is not what we pay for when we send our Internet bills every month. You might also want to check on where fair use applies (and where it doesn't) before making any such claim that ISPs could hide behind it. Companies have gotten in hot water for editing DVD movies and redistributing them: that's probably a more apropos comparison to this situation than a simple application of fair use.
In any event, I expect my DVD player to (ahem) "modify" the content of a DVD in specific, expected ways that are strictly to my benefit. I don't expect it to change the plot, reorder scenes, or start presenting advertising while I'm watching the movie.
I got your "customer response" right here.
Seriously, when it becomes acceptable for the phone company to break into my conversation with "Did you know that Geico can save you ton of money on car insurance?" then my ISP can screw around with my Web pages. Otherwise, get your sticky paws OFF me, you damn dirty apes.
I think your point was that they are getting wealthy from trading with you. That is true. And you are getting richer by trading with them. Trade is not zero sum.
... but we aren't trading with China. We're buying exclusively from China, to the detriment of our domestic manufacturing. That's a huge difference. Anyone who says that America is being enriched by dealing with China is blind to the facts: we are, in fact, becoming poorer because we've willfully given up our own means of production. It also means that America has given up it's independence, because we can no longer take care of our own. That can not be considered a good thing by any system of measurement.
... we will begin to understand just who we have been dealing with.
You're correct in principle, but dead wrong when it comes to China. I think the GP was getting at this point. Trade enriches both parties, true
Where do you think America's wealth came from? Trees? No, it came from manufactured goods, products that we can no longer make for ourselves because we allowed China to wage what is, in effect, a form of economic warfare upon us. They didn't do this by accident, they've done it before (they tried it on the British Empire a long time ago) only this time nobody is fighting back. I cannot say how long it will take for this process of hollowing us out to be completed, but when it is
It's only common courtesy to familiarize yourself with the customs, habits, and government of countries you're considering invading.
No, in this case it's called "reconnaissance", and has nothing to do with courtesy.
What's interesting about the GP's post is that he finds nothing wrong with forcing society to go his way (breathing thorium dust, or sitting in the dark) because of course he knows what is best for everyone else. I find that fundamental arrogance to be a hallmark of much of the environmental movement, often accompanied by an equal lack of concern for facts. From my perspective, the idea that a group of people who apparently don't know what the hell they are talking about, and have no problem lying to advance their cause should have the power to set or influence public policy in these matters is unnerving. Pah. Spare me from the people who want to feel good at my expense. You can do what feels right ... or you can do what is right. The two are not necessarily the same. Furthermore, sometimes the right course is not without risk. That doesn't make it any less right.
... or the engineer?
You want to know who the real environmentalists are? It's the engineers and research people that work for industry, the ones who convince their corporate masters to improve their technologies, who speak up and say, "Hey, boss, we can make this process at least as efficient if we invest a little in making it clean, and maybe save some dough besides 'cause we're reducing waste." Kudos also to the suits who have the vision to realize that environmentally sound industrial processes often prove to be the most profitable in the long run. Those are the people who do more for the environment than any number of self-described "environmentalists". You'll never hear about them though. They're too busy solving the real problems the GP only thinks he's solving, rather than worrying about getting enough media exposure to keep the donations rolling in. Put it this way: if you need a solution to a complex technological problem (say, accommodating our exponentially-growing power consumption curve for an indefinite period) who do you call? The environmentalist
So far as our energy policy is concerned, the reality is that there are very few ways to skin this particular cat. The sooner we realize that the better off we'll all be.
Hey, we figured it out first, bucko. See Tesla and Westinghouse. You guys were still using gaslight. Not our fault if you couldn't copy our efforts properly.
I am downright embarrassed by the quality of my code. It is buggy, slow, fragile, and a nightmare to maintain. Do you feel the same way?
... no.
Well
No, but with a computer-controlled system like the cellular network it would be perfectly possible to prioritize traffic in an emergency. It surprises me that they apparently can't do that.
The simplest way would be to make them provide a non-standard output, and make it clear in the news that the generators are completely useless for anything but running a cell tower.
As I type this, I feel like I should be wearing a tin foil hat, but honestly, it seems too cut & dry to be too far off.
Look at this realistically. What you're describing is but a minor extension of the legal tactics the RIAA has been using for years.