It beats me why an individual taxpayer who knows anything about programming would use tax prep software
Ease of use maybe? Actually following instructions is easy. But it's time consuming. TurboTax does it for you already. For a really simple return, you can be done in 2 minutes. For more complicated returns, it does the thinking and calculations for you: should you itemize? Enter in your deductions and it will determine that for you. Are your medical expenses more than 7.5% of your AGI? TurboTax will automatically determine that and enter the information for you. Do you have to pay AMT? Turbo Tax automatically calculates the AMT once all your data is in.
It's just much faster than doing it by hand. You don't have to worry about making an addition mistake. You won't make a mistake in looking up the tax owed. You can file electronically and get your refund much faster. It will automatically transfer your information to a state tax return. It is more readable than hand-written returns. You can forecast next year's taxes and print out an appropriate W4 (I did this last year. If not for unexpected income, both Federal and state would have been within $50 of what was withheld). If you have your own business, it will do your estimated taxes. It will tell you of your options with basically anything you can think of. I'll never do taxes by hand again.
Of course, if you have to buy and install Windows to do this, you don't save much time. But for a person who has a Windows machine, TurboTax (and the like) have great advantages.
I'm not at 20,000, but I do have dozens of complete albums that I have never listened to. Even more that I have listened to, but not in the past 5 years.
What I hate is when an artist re-releases a CD and puts extra tracks in between the "sides". You expect "side 2" to happen right after "side 1", but instead it plays an unreleased track. Examples: XTC's initial releases on CD; Traffic's John Barleycorn Must Die.
"Personally, and I believe I speak for many old farts here, I appreciate listening to music, be it an opera or a pop album, in the sequence in which the artist decided to present it," he said.
Listening to an opera (or any classical music, for that matter) on shuffle is pretty stupid. How is that relevant to pop music, most of which doesn't have an order?
On a related note, why do 40x CD-burners exist when 12x would be fine?
My first burner was a 4x burner. I thought it was great because it was a lot faster than using cassettes and copying at 1x. Then I got a 24x burner. Wow! I was in heaven. Less than 4 minutes to copy a CD. It can't get any better than this, right? Well, it crapped out on me. So I replaced it with a 48x burner. OMG, 2 minutes to copy a CD is incredible. Unfortunately, the burner is crapping out on me and only burns reliably at 4x. 4x really seems slow now.
Point: others should stop complaining about lack of need of Gigabit networking. Two years from now, when you're ripping out your 100 Mbit network because it is too slow, the original questioner will be fine.
There really isn't anything compelling in HD. Unless you consider every major US sporting event. Oh, and every popular TV show on the networks. And first run movies on HD PPV. And movies and original shows on HBO.
Geez what do you want. There is more programming available in HD now, than there was OTA programming 20 years ago.
Actually, the math is pretty simple. If MS doubles its sales, it will pick up more game purchases also. (Everyone who buys an XBox will also buy a game.) It's the game purchases that make money for MS. Plus, various manufacturing efficiencies most likely have reduced the cost of manufacturing each XBox, so it doesn't cost as much to build each one.
It's kind of silly to complain about the lack of concept albums. Concept albums have always been rare. Probably fewer than 50 major label releases ever.
But if you like concept albums, I will suggest Dream Theater's Scenes from a Memory and Symphony X's V.
What a mess this would be! The poor, who currently pay basically no taxes on their 18K per year suddenly owe $3.600 / year, which is like 4 months rent.
Simple solution to that, suggested above. The first $X aren't collected. E.g., the first $5k aren't collected. People who make less than $25k pay no taxes. You're effectively only taxed for what you make over $25k (or whatever arbitrary figure you choose).
The rich making $1million per year owe 200,000, but that doesn't affect them in the least - 800K is still ashitload of money.
That's BS. People who make $1M still notice $200k. It may not hurt them AS MUCH. But it still hurts them.
If you haven't noticed, they are going after on-line gambling pretty strongly. And more and more places are going smoke-free, including places thought of as "liberal" such as New York city and the entire state of California.
No. Copying and distributing are separate acts. The mere act of making a copy is a violation of a copyright. Distributing it is another violation. The mere act of copying may be fair use, however.
By any sane reading of section 107 Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use an ordinary home backup is obviously fair use. (1) The purpose and character of use is private and non-commercial, (4) it does not compete with the commercial market for the work.
To play Devil's advocate: (4) it certainly does compete with the market for the work. Instead of buying two DVDs, you only buy one. This leads to (1) the purpose of the use is commercial.
Admittedly a strained reading of fair use, but certainly one that Hollywood would make.
The entire copyright "crisis" is purely the result of attempting to force copyright law into areas it was never supposed to apply.
Some would say the problem is that we are applying old law to new technologies. When the law was drafted in the 70s, copying movies was relatively difficult: the VCR wasn't in widespread use. Copying music was not difficult, but it was time consuming. Now, you can copy music and movies with the click of a button.
Actually, $20/month seems about perfect, even if you only play 3-4 hours per week. Think of it this way, $20 per month is $240 per year. New games are $50 each. Therefore, $20/month is the equivalent of 5 games per year. I don't know about you, but I buy a little more than 5 games per year (probably about 6-7) and rarely play them more than two months. Thus, the service would be perfect. I keep the game as long as I want. When I finish a game or get bored of it, I turn it in. No hassles of Ebaying the used game or getting $5-10 for it at Gamestop.
It keeps occuring that the law says I'm not allowed to make a copy of a dvd, except under strict limitations. If I wasn't allowed to make my own toaster or modify it, don't you think I'd want some sort of law providing something in return for that advantage given to toaster makers?
And you can turn that argument around. You are allowed to make a copy of a toaster. But it is too difficult for the average person to do so, which is a natural obstacle. The typical person would rather just spend $20-40 on a new toaster instead of building his own new toaster. Thus, there is an incentive for toaster manufacturers to keep on making toasters.
OTOH, making a copy of a DVD is trivially easy. Shouldn't the manufacturers of DVDs be given an incentive to make DVDs that would otherwise be mass produced and sold from the trunk of a car?
PS. The reason toaster came to my head is because it is a consumer device that can be had for about $20.
PPS. I'm only stating one possible (strict) interpretation of what the law currently is. Not what the law should be.
You can download videos for many games. For SSX 3, it is much easier to watch the demo and see the shortcut, than it is to read the guide and wonder "did they mean shortcut between these sets of trees of those?" I cut my fastest time on the first track by more than 40 seconds merely by watching the demo video.
''Copies'' are material objects, other than phonorecords, in
which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed,
and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or
otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a
machine or device. The term ''copies'' includes the material
object, other than a phonorecord, in which the work is first
fixed.
When you read silently, it is not fixed in a tangible medium.
When I read it aloud, I am making a copy of it in audio form. This is not illegal.
Actually, you're performing the work. If done in public, it is illegal.
Technically speaking, no you can't make a backup copy of a magazine, book, or car manual. Those are all copyrighted materials.
But that wasn't my point. OP said he deserves a free replacement in case it breaks, with no reference as to he deserves it because it is IP. Why does he deserve a free replacement? If my toaster breaks, I buy a new one. If my shirt breaks, I buy a new one. If my DVD breaks . ..?
It is not illegal to make as many backup copies or other fair use copies as you like by using DVD(A).
AFAIK, no US court has ever said a backup copy is fair use. (If I'm wrong, please cit the case. And no, Sony didn't say that. It said time-shifting was OK. The issue of librarying (i.e., backups) was not before the court). Backups may be fair use. Or it may not be fair use. No court has ever ruled on it and no one is likely to ever be pursued for it. Therefore, I think it's wrong for people to just assume that a backup is fair use.
Why do you deserve a replacement? You know that they are breakable. Isn't it your fault if it becomes damaged? Do you expect a replacement warranty for every item you purchase? Should you get a free magazine if you drop your copy in a puddle of water? Should you get a free book if your 2 year old marks up page 23 of your book? Do you expect a free replacement car if your car breaks down outside of warranty?
Slashdot Mirror
Ease of use maybe? Actually following instructions is easy. But it's time consuming. TurboTax does it for you already. For a really simple return, you can be done in 2 minutes. For more complicated returns, it does the thinking and calculations for you: should you itemize? Enter in your deductions and it will determine that for you. Are your medical expenses more than 7.5% of your AGI? TurboTax will automatically determine that and enter the information for you. Do you have to pay AMT? Turbo Tax automatically calculates the AMT once all your data is in.
It's just much faster than doing it by hand. You don't have to worry about making an addition mistake. You won't make a mistake in looking up the tax owed. You can file electronically and get your refund much faster. It will automatically transfer your information to a state tax return. It is more readable than hand-written returns. You can forecast next year's taxes and print out an appropriate W4 (I did this last year. If not for unexpected income, both Federal and state would have been within $50 of what was withheld). If you have your own business, it will do your estimated taxes. It will tell you of your options with basically anything you can think of. I'll never do taxes by hand again.
Of course, if you have to buy and install Windows to do this, you don't save much time. But for a person who has a Windows machine, TurboTax (and the like) have great advantages.
I'm not at 20,000, but I do have dozens of complete albums that I have never listened to. Even more that I have listened to, but not in the past 5 years.
What I hate is when an artist re-releases a CD and puts extra tracks in between the "sides". You expect "side 2" to happen right after "side 1", but instead it plays an unreleased track. Examples: XTC's initial releases on CD; Traffic's John Barleycorn Must Die.
Listening to an opera (or any classical music, for that matter) on shuffle is pretty stupid. How is that relevant to pop music, most of which doesn't have an order?
That's not exactly the point in full-size ATX motherboards, though.
True exchange:
#1: What just happened?
#2: That was a double play and the inning is over because it's the third out.
A few minutes later:
#3: What inning is it?
#1: Double play.
What do you want to watch that is not currently in HD?
My first burner was a 4x burner. I thought it was great because it was a lot faster than using cassettes and copying at 1x. Then I got a 24x burner. Wow! I was in heaven. Less than 4 minutes to copy a CD. It can't get any better than this, right? Well, it crapped out on me. So I replaced it with a 48x burner. OMG, 2 minutes to copy a CD is incredible. Unfortunately, the burner is crapping out on me and only burns reliably at 4x. 4x really seems slow now.
Point: others should stop complaining about lack of need of Gigabit networking. Two years from now, when you're ripping out your 100 Mbit network because it is too slow, the original questioner will be fine.
Geez what do you want. There is more programming available in HD now, than there was OTA programming 20 years ago.
Actually, the math is pretty simple. If MS doubles its sales, it will pick up more game purchases also. (Everyone who buys an XBox will also buy a game.) It's the game purchases that make money for MS. Plus, various manufacturing efficiencies most likely have reduced the cost of manufacturing each XBox, so it doesn't cost as much to build each one.
But if you like concept albums, I will suggest Dream Theater's Scenes from a Memory and Symphony X's V.
Simple solution to that, suggested above. The first $X aren't collected. E.g., the first $5k aren't collected. People who make less than $25k pay no taxes. You're effectively only taxed for what you make over $25k (or whatever arbitrary figure you choose).
The rich making $1million per year owe 200,000, but that doesn't affect them in the least - 800K is still ashitload of money.
That's BS. People who make $1M still notice $200k. It may not hurt them AS MUCH. But it still hurts them.
Pretty obviously, not ALL the code was written in 1962. The IRS didn't direct deposit back then and people didn't file electronically back then.
Maybe because the mark "Red Hat" bears absolutely no similarity to the mark "Windows"?
If you haven't noticed, they are going after on-line gambling pretty strongly. And more and more places are going smoke-free, including places thought of as "liberal" such as New York city and the entire state of California.
No. Copying and distributing are separate acts. The mere act of making a copy is a violation of a copyright. Distributing it is another violation. The mere act of copying may be fair use, however.
To play Devil's advocate: (4) it certainly does compete with the market for the work. Instead of buying two DVDs, you only buy one. This leads to (1) the purpose of the use is commercial.
Admittedly a strained reading of fair use, but certainly one that Hollywood would make.
The entire copyright "crisis" is purely the result of attempting to force copyright law into areas it was never supposed to apply.
Some would say the problem is that we are applying old law to new technologies. When the law was drafted in the 70s, copying movies was relatively difficult: the VCR wasn't in widespread use. Copying music was not difficult, but it was time consuming. Now, you can copy music and movies with the click of a button.
Damn. I think I just convinced myself to sign up.
And you can turn that argument around. You are allowed to make a copy of a toaster. But it is too difficult for the average person to do so, which is a natural obstacle. The typical person would rather just spend $20-40 on a new toaster instead of building his own new toaster. Thus, there is an incentive for toaster manufacturers to keep on making toasters.
OTOH, making a copy of a DVD is trivially easy. Shouldn't the manufacturers of DVDs be given an incentive to make DVDs that would otherwise be mass produced and sold from the trunk of a car?
PS. The reason toaster came to my head is because it is a consumer device that can be had for about $20.
PPS. I'm only stating one possible (strict) interpretation of what the law currently is. Not what the law should be.
You can download videos for many games. For SSX 3, it is much easier to watch the demo and see the shortcut, than it is to read the guide and wonder "did they mean shortcut between these sets of trees of those?" I cut my fastest time on the first track by more than 40 seconds merely by watching the demo video.
No you're not. 17 U.S.C. 101 defines copies thusly,
When you read silently, it is not fixed in a tangible medium.When I read it aloud, I am making a copy of it in audio form. This is not illegal.
Actually, you're performing the work. If done in public, it is illegal.
When you make a copy, you are circumventing copyright.
But that wasn't my point. OP said he deserves a free replacement in case it breaks, with no reference as to he deserves it because it is IP. Why does he deserve a free replacement? If my toaster breaks, I buy a new one. If my shirt breaks, I buy a new one. If my DVD breaks . . .?
AFAIK, no US court has ever said a backup copy is fair use. (If I'm wrong, please cit the case. And no, Sony didn't say that. It said time-shifting was OK. The issue of librarying (i.e., backups) was not before the court). Backups may be fair use. Or it may not be fair use. No court has ever ruled on it and no one is likely to ever be pursued for it. Therefore, I think it's wrong for people to just assume that a backup is fair use.
Why do you deserve a replacement? You know that they are breakable. Isn't it your fault if it becomes damaged? Do you expect a replacement warranty for every item you purchase? Should you get a free magazine if you drop your copy in a puddle of water? Should you get a free book if your 2 year old marks up page 23 of your book? Do you expect a free replacement car if your car breaks down outside of warranty?