This post is in anticipation of all the Tux Racer flames etc....so for the nay sayers who mock OS games, I invite you to try NetHack.
If you've never played this game before you will notice that the graphics are a bit...dated...but just try it for a few hours. You might very be surprised.
"Heave to me hearties an' I'll regale ye with a tale o' sweet trade in the South Seas. But ye be revealing these secrets to some scurvy dog, like a landlubbin' lawyer from the MPAA or RIAA, and you'll have a taste of the cat, if'n I don't have the black spot put on ya, for dead men tell no tales.
Look smartly there! Seems t'were some marooners what were doin' some interlopin' on the fair shores of Malaysia. But the guv'nor's soldiers was strong on the discipline. In a fortnight, many o' these buccaneers were clapped in irons and meetin' rope's end. Now the rest o' their mates t'weren't no squiffies or sprogs. They could use their deadlights. So, seein' as they didn't want to dance with Mr. Jack Ketch, they came about handsomely, took up with a sea artist and went on the account.
Now these corsairs made full sail 'til they be several leagues to sea, in international waters, where Jack Valenti's letters o' reprisal aren't nothing but bilgewater. There all hands turn to, copying chanteys, with no quarter given for DRM. Blimey if this doesn't have the gov'nor's soldiers bilged on their own anchor. Already the soldiers be tryin' to bring in the ol' Guarda Coasta, but they'll have no luck, says I. "
I think you miss the point...why fight fair if you don't have to? All it does is level the playing field to your oponents advantage(I.e. the dual analogy). The RIAA has absolutely zero incentive to agree to this debate.
...the debate should be recorded, mp3 encoded and distributed all over the Internet...
Yes, but it still hasn't happened..and probably never will. The RIAA board will put this to a vote, and elect not to participate. They know thier position is unpopular(and fundamentally flawed), and that the debate would only bring them negative publicity.
It will be a lot like Bush's response to the recent Iraqi VP's suggestion of a duel between Bush and Saddamn.
but Linux is not an Operating System. It's a kernel.
Linux by itself doesn't do much.
Yes, and not to troll...but this is why Linux won't replace windows on the desktop. For whatever reason, usability doesn't attract open source developers.
There are plenty of people volunteering thier time to improve scheduling routines, journaling filesystems, etc...and these are good features...but almost noone is lining up to do the kind of work that will make Linux useable. It's almost as if there's a mutual exclusivity, the more passionate the OSS developer is...the closer to the hardware the programming is...there are a few rare exceptions like Gnome, or Enlightenment...but who's volunteering to update stuff like that?
It's too bad there aren't more people out there who like to solve useability problems. But it's as Linus said:
"Most people don't want to change. They may hate Windows but they run it despite that because, quite frankly, they don't care about computers,"
Too bad it's equally true that people who care about computers don't care about human useability. It pretty much ensures that Linux will never be a "household" word.
What's the use of consumer rights after industry is hindered to the point that no one has any money left to spend?
Ya, but it works both ways. Over the last two years the spending power(and the very existence) of the middle class has been decimated. You've heard the economists worry about will happen if consumer spending falls? Well it's happening, wallstreet is scared because quarterly earnings are dismal, because noone can afford to buy stuff anymore. Unless consumers have spending power, private industry doesn't work.
Henry Ford was sensible enough to pay his workers well so that they could afford to buy cars. They were happy, and he was happy. Until this country can go back to some semblance of balance, noone will be happy. Except people like Bill Gates.
What does Slashdot and Nazi Germany have in common? A bunch of white, removed, heartless rupublican trouser stains.
You guys made fun of Jon Katz(I'm not a fan) and now...hmm...where's Katz? Now Michael's next? Who's next after him, Taco? Maybe we can start a moderaters club to throw out the users we don't like? Let's call it the Slashdot youth!
Both articles are arguing from the faulty premise that there is such a thing as a geek political agenda.
This is the most absurd thing I've read in a mod 5 post yet.
The first article seems to make the case that all geeks demand open source exclusively, because if you don't make such demands, you're not a geek
The author is a good journalist, and he's very impartial...but he doesn't understand the basis of the problem.
This article is a warning about a dangerous monoculture of beliefs I see starting to form in the world of geeks, and a plea for more variety.
He started the article by saying that in the "good ol days" like the 1980's geeks disagreed on many things, but they all had one common characteristic...a love, a fascination with technology. The author seems to think that we've fallen from our true cause...and now are just a bunch of whining 2nd rate hippies.
My response to the author is this: There is no way to have a geek world with DRM. It is fundamentally impossible. There is no happy median, there is no compromise, it is impossible. Why? Because being a geek is about taking a general purpose set of tools(wires, capacitors, an instruction set, a programming language, etc) and casting those tools into something new. Show me one good classical geek "hack" that wasn't about doing something new and creative with ordinary hardware? That's the whole point; that was always the whole point.
DRM will only be effective by removing this capabilty from all technologies...not just computers, but all of them. There is no such thing as 99% DRM, or 50% DRM. If I find a way to hack my toaster's MPU to resonate the heating coils at sonic frequencies, and then play MP3's with it, then the DMCA has failed. What that means is that every microchip must be crippled into a "special purpose" device. There is no longer any need for a programming language...just hardwires "allowing" the appropriate functionality for the consumer. And ultimately excluding any other function.
If this happens, everything any of us have ever loved about technology will be finished...done. Sure you can still microwave your popcorn, check your e-mail, and order your pay-per-view...but that is all you will ever be able to do(and it's all your grandchildren will ever be able to do). It's the end of technological progress, period.
The poster is correct, there has been some confusion among Democrats as to what they were really doing. From the article:
"``Lofgren's bill aims to restore what Congress thought it was doing -- preserving fair use for people who have lawful rights to use stuff,'' "
Senators are some of the slowest people on the planet to "get" technology. It's my opinion that Democrats who've supported the DMCA in the past have been largely misinformed by the likes of the RIAA and MPAA.
Oh, and to the original poster: Is it OK if I hope Democrats don't win a majority this year?
Sure, it's ok if your trust-fund is still going strong. But for the rest of us who actually need our jobs, maybe you'll reconsider?
1) supply crypto products to South Africans (and the government defines crypto as almost anything) 2) register with the appropriate agency and pay a ZAR2000 fee (US$200). 3)Or, Fail to supply South Africans without being registered and get potential jail time 4) ??? 5) PROFIT!!!!
More like:
1) Monopolize the diamond industry, and lie about the scarcity of diamonds to artificially inflate thier value. 2) Strongarm the SA government into enforcing strict crypto law(so DeBeers' secret will never get out) 3) PROFIT!!!(for many many more years to come)
A. It's a moment. A defining moment when you know that your favorite television program has reached its peak. That instant that you know from now on...it's all downhill. Some call it the climax. We call it "Jumping the Shark." From that moment on, the program will simply never be the same.
The term "jump the shark" was coined by my college roommate for 4 years, Sean J. Connolly, in Ann Arbor, Michigan back in 1985. This web site, book, film, and all other material surrounding shark jumping, are hereby dedicated to "the Colonel."
The aforementioned expression refers to the telltale sign of the demise of Happy Days, our favorite example, when Fonzie actually "jumped the shark." The rest is history.
Jumping the shark applies not only to TV, but also music, film, even everyday life. "Did you see her boyfriend? She definitely jumped the shark." You get the idea.
We have begun by chronicling the history of television. We are incorporating shows from the new season slowly but surely. Some shows are not listed...yet!
It -may- be the longest bear market, but it certain is -not- the worst, job wise. We're still under 7% unemployment (or is it still under 6?). That -by itself- tells me that while it's hanging on, it certainly isn't nearly as sever as it could have been.
For those of you who don't know what the unemployment indicator means(like this poster) it represents the current number of unemployment claims being made. Republicans like my father love this number, because they think it means that 7 out of 100 people in the US don't have jobs...and if the other 93 people can work, so can I. Here's a quote from the.gov unemployment website:
"Benefits can be paid for a maximum of 26 weeks in most States. "
26 weeks is approximately 6 months. What that means is, if you get laid off you have 6 months to find another job. If you don't manage to find another job in 6 months, you are no longer eligible for unemployment. Now, the "IT depression" has been around for...about 2 years now give or take. So anyone who didn't manage to find work in 6 months(and I know many) is not included in this indicator. Potentially 75% of the people fired since 2000 could still be out of work...and this would not be reflected in the often quoted unemployment figures.
Additionally, the market is -now- at about the levels it should have been if the tech bubble hadn't existed. As an investor, I'd be buying
Ya, but you're not an investor anymore are you? Why? Because you're living from pay-check to pay-check just like everyone else.
How many other "techies" have you worked with that didn't have a clue, and only had the job because some manager needed a body to put in that seat?
Yes during the dot-com era there was a lot of miss-distribution of personelle. Many people were in positions they weren't qualified for...does that mean that anyone in that category doesn't deserve to have a job? You're worse than my parents.
And don't let that lack of a degree get you down
I have a BS in Computer Science from a top 20 engineering school.
"What economy are they referring to? Certainly not the American economy...
No kidding.
1) Interest rates are the lowest they've been in over 40 years. 2) We're in the longest bear market in 60 years.
Those are two things that not even my parents have lived through. My grandfather was 7 years old during the depression, but he thinks he's some kind of expert on hardship. Being unemployed in a righteous republican family makes me wonder how I'm still alive. They have absolutlely no experience with something like this. I'm tired of hearing about how it'll pass too. Especially when the IT sector has been by far the hardest hit.
Music wasn't always about business. Many of the great composers were independantly wealthy, or they had a single wealthy patron. Songs and stories are even older, oftentimes they were sung by just ordinary people...in bars, at public events, etc. The lineage of music is as old as humanity itself, but only in the last 100 years or so has it transitioned into a commodity.
Up until recently the commodity way was fine because the distribution system was so costly...music was recorded onto a magnetic tape, or a record, or a CD using expensive recording equipment...then put on an airplane or a boat...and shipped overseas...those things cost money. Consumers were willing to pay because the value outwieghed the cost. But now that we have the medium to communicate music to almost anywhere in the world cheaply and quickly. We really have no reason to maintain this infrastructure any more.
If some guy vacationing in Indonesia wants to record a native island song, and then release it onto a P2P network, that's great. The whole world just benefitted from that single individual's contribution. Forever. Millions of people doing this produces an incredible amount of content. We have so much music on record now, that it would take several lifetimes to listen to it all anyway.
There are also plenty of amateur musicians(I.e. people with jobs who play during thier off time because they enjoy music) who sound better than any of todays "new" music. But nobody gets to hear them, why?
You and many others are looking for ways of salvaging the old model. But there really is no value-added benefit in the old system. Paying people's salaries costs money, and that means revenue...but why would anyone pay them? What for?
1) Anyone with a PC can create/record music quality that was unheard of as recently has 1970. 2) "Professional" musicians sound worse than many amateurs. 3) Music can be trasported anywhere instantly for almost zero cost. 4) It would take several lifetimes to listen to all the music out there now.
Slashdot Mirror
This post is in anticipation of all the Tux Racer flames etc....so for the nay sayers who mock OS games, I invite you to try NetHack.
If you've never played this game before you will notice that the graphics are a bit...dated...but just try it for a few hours. You might very be surprised.
Hopefully it's starting to look at lot more like this.
"Heave to me hearties an' I'll regale ye with a tale o' sweet trade in the South Seas. But ye be revealing these secrets to some scurvy dog, like a landlubbin' lawyer from the MPAA or RIAA, and you'll have a taste of the cat, if'n I don't have the black spot put on ya, for dead men tell no tales.
Look smartly there! Seems t'were some marooners what were doin' some interlopin' on the fair shores of Malaysia. But the guv'nor's soldiers was strong on the discipline. In a fortnight, many o' these buccaneers were clapped in irons and meetin' rope's end. Now the rest o' their mates t'weren't no squiffies or sprogs. They could use their deadlights. So, seein' as they didn't want to dance with Mr. Jack Ketch, they came about handsomely, took up with a sea artist and went on the account.
Now these corsairs made full sail 'til they be several leagues to sea, in international waters, where Jack Valenti's letters o' reprisal aren't nothing but bilgewater. There all hands turn to, copying chanteys, with no quarter given for DRM. Blimey if this doesn't have the gov'nor's soldiers bilged on their own anchor. Already the soldiers be tryin' to bring in the ol' Guarda Coasta, but they'll have no luck, says I.
"
*sigh's fondly* Good ol' ASCII porn.
I think you miss the point...why fight fair if you don't have to? All it does is level the playing field to your oponents advantage(I.e. the dual analogy). The RIAA has absolutely zero incentive to agree to this debate.
...the debate should be recorded, mp3 encoded and distributed all over the Internet...
Yes, but it still hasn't happened..and probably never will. The RIAA board will put this to a vote, and elect not to participate. They know thier position is unpopular(and fundamentally flawed), and that the debate would only bring them negative publicity.
It will be a lot like Bush's response to the recent Iraqi VP's suggestion of a duel between Bush and Saddamn.
but Linux is not an Operating System. It's a kernel.
Linux by itself doesn't do much.
Yes, and not to troll...but this is why Linux won't replace windows on the desktop. For whatever reason, usability doesn't attract open source developers.
There are plenty of people volunteering thier time to improve scheduling routines, journaling filesystems, etc...and these are good features...but almost noone is lining up to do the kind of work that will make Linux useable. It's almost as if there's a mutual exclusivity, the more passionate the OSS developer is...the closer to the hardware the programming is...there are a few rare exceptions like Gnome, or Enlightenment...but who's volunteering to update stuff like that?
It's too bad there aren't more people out there who like to solve useability problems. But it's as Linus said:
"Most people don't want to change. They may hate Windows but they run it despite that because, quite frankly, they don't care about computers,"
Too bad it's equally true that people who care about computers don't care about human useability. It pretty much ensures that Linux will never be a "household" word.
What's the use of consumer rights after industry is hindered to the point that no one has any money left to spend?
Ya, but it works both ways. Over the last two years the spending power(and the very existence) of the middle class has been decimated. You've heard the economists worry about will happen if consumer spending falls? Well it's happening, wallstreet is scared because quarterly earnings are dismal, because noone can afford to buy stuff anymore. Unless consumers have spending power, private industry doesn't work.
Henry Ford was sensible enough to pay his workers well so that they could afford to buy cars. They were happy, and he was happy. Until this country can go back to some semblance of balance, noone will be happy. Except people like Bill Gates.
Unfortunately, we've got one thing making "geekdom" feel polluted, and that's the cram-away certification crowd.
Both geek types are unemployed, what's the difference?
What does Slashdot and Nazi Germany have in common? A bunch of white, removed, heartless rupublican trouser stains.
You guys made fun of Jon Katz(I'm not a fan) and now...hmm...where's Katz? Now Michael's next? Who's next after him, Taco? Maybe we can start a moderaters club to throw out the users we don't like? Let's call it the Slashdot youth!
This is the most absurd thing I've read in a mod 5 post yet.
The first article seems to make the case that all geeks demand open source exclusively, because if you don't make such demands, you're not a geek
The author is a good journalist, and he's very impartial...but he doesn't understand the basis of the problem.
He started the article by saying that in the "good ol days" like the 1980's geeks disagreed on many things, but they all had one common characteristic...a love, a fascination with technology. The author seems to think that we've fallen from our true cause...and now are just a bunch of whining 2nd rate hippies.
My response to the author is this: There is no way to have a geek world with DRM. It is fundamentally impossible. There is no happy median, there is no compromise, it is impossible. Why? Because being a geek is about taking a general purpose set of tools(wires, capacitors, an instruction set, a programming language, etc) and casting those tools into something new. Show me one good classical geek "hack" that wasn't about doing something new and creative with ordinary hardware? That's the whole point; that was always the whole point.
DRM will only be effective by removing this capabilty from all technologies...not just computers, but all of them. There is no such thing as 99% DRM, or 50% DRM. If I find a way to hack my toaster's MPU to resonate the heating coils at sonic frequencies, and then play MP3's with it, then the DMCA has failed. What that means is that every microchip must be crippled into a "special purpose" device. There is no longer any need for a programming language...just hardwires "allowing" the appropriate functionality for the consumer. And ultimately excluding any other function.
If this happens, everything any of us have ever loved about technology will be finished...done. Sure you can still microwave your popcorn, check your e-mail, and order your pay-per-view...but that is all you will ever be able to do(and it's all your grandchildren will ever be able to do). It's the end of technological progress, period.
There is no middle ground on this issue.
Look, either pay us well and let us keep our jobs, or we're gonna pirate the shit out of you.
You can't have both.
Actually, if you had voted Gore the World Trade Center would probably still be standing.
Prove it, link your website.
The poster is correct, there has been some confusion among Democrats as to what they were really doing. From the article:
"``Lofgren's bill aims to restore what Congress thought it was doing -- preserving fair use for people who have lawful rights to use stuff,'' "
Senators are some of the slowest people on the planet to "get" technology. It's my opinion that Democrats who've supported the DMCA in the past have been largely misinformed by the likes of the RIAA and MPAA.
Oh, and to the original poster:
Is it OK if I hope Democrats don't win a majority this year?
Sure, it's ok if your trust-fund is still going strong. But for the rest of us who actually need our jobs, maybe you'll reconsider?
I literally laughed my ass off when I read this comment
Not to worry, happens to the best of us. lost-ass.com
The best place to put your data if you want immunity from prosecution would be the servers of the NSA
Nah, security through ubiquity. If every PC has 60Gigs of unused disk space, that's a lot of real-estate. Thus the beauty of P2P.
Here's another DEMOCRAT liberal Senator from South Carolina attempting to restrict your freedoms.
Hmmm...can it be he is pro big business, pro censorship, and anti citizen rights/freedoms.
You democrats get what you voted for.
Ya, we're as surpised...and depressed as you are =(.
Unfortunately it's the case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. The DMCA is well intentioned in its spirit...but disastrous in its effect.
1) supply crypto products to South Africans (and the government defines crypto as almost anything)
2) register with the appropriate agency and pay a ZAR2000 fee (US$200).
3)Or, Fail to supply South Africans without being registered and get potential jail time
4) ???
5) PROFIT!!!!
More like:
1) Monopolize the diamond industry, and lie about the scarcity of diamonds to artificially inflate thier value.
2) Strongarm the SA government into enforcing strict crypto law(so DeBeers' secret will never get out)
3) PROFIT!!!(for many many more years to come)
Hmm spend $60/month for spotty access to slow, unreliable data networks? No thanks.
I hear a clearance and 5 years experience gets you 60-100k in the DC area.
That's some very positive news for us recent graduates. Know where I can borrow 5 years of experience?
It -may- be the longest bear market, but it certain is -not- the worst, job wise.
.gov unemployment website:
We're still under 7% unemployment (or is it still under 6?). That -by itself- tells me that while it's hanging on, it certainly isn't nearly as sever as it could have been.
For those of you who don't know what the unemployment indicator means(like this poster) it represents the current number of unemployment claims being made. Republicans like my father love this number, because they think it means that 7 out of 100 people in the US don't have jobs...and if the other 93 people can work, so can I. Here's a quote from the
"Benefits can be paid for a maximum of 26 weeks in most States. "
26 weeks is approximately 6 months. What that means is, if you get laid off you have 6 months to find another job. If you don't manage to find another job in 6 months, you are no longer eligible for unemployment. Now, the "IT depression" has been around for...about 2 years now give or take. So anyone who didn't manage to find work in 6 months(and I know many) is not included in this indicator. Potentially 75% of the people fired since 2000 could still be out of work...and this would not be reflected in the often quoted unemployment figures.
Additionally, the market is -now- at about the levels it should have been if the tech bubble hadn't existed.
As an investor, I'd be buying
Ya, but you're not an investor anymore are you? Why? Because you're living from pay-check to pay-check just like everyone else.
How many other "techies" have you worked with that didn't have a clue, and only had the job because some manager needed a body to put in that seat?
Yes during the dot-com era there was a lot of miss-distribution of personelle. Many people were in positions they weren't qualified for...does that mean that anyone in that category doesn't deserve to have a job? You're worse than my parents.
And don't let that lack of a degree get you down
I have a BS in Computer Science from a top 20 engineering school.
"What economy are they referring to? Certainly not the American economy...
No kidding.
1) Interest rates are the lowest they've been in over 40 years.
2) We're in the longest bear market in 60 years.
Those are two things that not even my parents have lived through. My grandfather was 7 years old during the depression, but he thinks he's some kind of expert on hardship. Being unemployed in a righteous republican family makes me wonder how I'm still alive. They have absolutlely no experience with something like this. I'm tired of hearing about how it'll pass too. Especially when the IT sector has been by far the hardest hit.
Music wasn't always about business. Many of the great composers were independantly wealthy, or they had a single wealthy patron. Songs and stories are even older, oftentimes they were sung by just ordinary people...in bars, at public events, etc. The lineage of music is as old as humanity itself, but only in the last 100 years or so has it transitioned into a commodity.
Up until recently the commodity way was fine because the distribution system was so costly...music was recorded onto a magnetic tape, or a record, or a CD using expensive recording equipment...then put on an airplane or a boat...and shipped overseas...those things cost money. Consumers were willing to pay because the value outwieghed the cost. But now that we have the medium to communicate music to almost anywhere in the world cheaply and quickly. We really have no reason to maintain this infrastructure any more.
If some guy vacationing in Indonesia wants to record a native island song, and then release it onto a P2P network, that's great. The whole world just benefitted from that single individual's contribution. Forever. Millions of people doing this produces an incredible amount of content. We have so much music on record now, that it would take several lifetimes to listen to it all anyway.
There are also plenty of amateur musicians(I.e. people with jobs who play during thier off time because they enjoy music) who sound better than any of todays "new" music. But nobody gets to hear them, why?
You and many others are looking for ways of salvaging the old model. But there really is no value-added benefit in the old system. Paying people's salaries costs money, and that means revenue...but why would anyone pay them? What for?
1) Anyone with a PC can create/record music quality that was unheard of as recently has 1970.
2) "Professional" musicians sound worse than many amateurs.
3) Music can be trasported anywhere instantly for almost zero cost.
4) It would take several lifetimes to listen to all the music out there now.