"'The country needs it for development and access to contemporary science.'"
What if they don't want development or contemporary science? They cannot live their lives as they please without us pressuring them to be like us? I guess most people are all for individuality until push comes to shove--in the end, individuality is mostly lip service paid by those who are anything but individual.
While I sympathize with you, it is also important to consider that terrorist attacks may be counterbalanced by their much higher potential for mass casualties (e.g. nukes, chemical weapons, etc.). Dying from a car wreck may be more likely, but dying in a WMD terrorist attack is potentially much more severe (perhaps hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of casualties).
Oh people will definitely pay it. I've found that the more CEOs spend to make sure they're stuff is "legal" or "legitimate," the better they feel. So Microsoft could probably charge them full price every month and most would happily pay it.
All children need to undergo the Ludovico technique. Then we won't have to worry about giving people a choice to be moral--they can just be moral machines. Excellent...
"In a few weeks, our school will be hosting a panel on DRM with several respected individuals. In advance of the panel, I have been doing some research on the topic and thinking about it in my free time. In economics, we learn that the price of a product is determined essentially by supply and demand. Without a DRM in place, we are capable of making as many copies of a piece of content as we want and seeding it onto the net. How do you create a market for a product, and make money of a product that has a huge initial creative investment, but then no manufacturing cost, and is in infinite supply?"
The problem is you're assuming that content is something to which supply and demand are applicable. Supply and demand are inextricably linked to actual physical things. Content is basically ideas, and ideas can't be owned or bought or sold--they aren't tangible, and the only way for someone else to get an idea from you is through a physical representation of the idea (which is not the idea itself). Technology is testing the extremes of intellectual property, and the absurdities of IP are becoming clear to its victims, and probably even to those wielding it. In the case of digital music, the Internet provides an almost free and limitless physical medium with which to represent ideas (the music itself), and that is helping expose the absurdity of ownership of ideas or processes (in this case, sounds arranged in a certain order).
The article does point out that Google is not alone in this practice.
Yes, and as a matter of fact, the article points out that Google takes a very minimalistic approach towards information collection (especially compared to MSN and Yahoo), and has explicit agreements with its users that information will remain private.
The guy jumped the ticket barriers, ran from the police, and then tried to board the train. Do you think the police should just say, "oh well..."? Was this guy completely out of his fucking mind? Of course he was going to be gunned down.
Are you completely indifferent that more than 50 people died because the police didn't stop any suspicious looking people?
I would like to take this wonderful opportunity to recruit for the iPod Linux crew...if they could get some more hackers, perhaps we could see video playing of ALL video files, not just DRMed videos.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be such weenies. Read the assembly. ;)
I don't think we'll see peace until we stop focusing our energies on new ways to wage war...
They use Pounds in Alabama???
<_<
>_>
Ahh, it's interesting to hear all the nationalism coming from so many critics of nationalism.
What if they don't want development or contemporary science? They cannot live their lives as they please without us pressuring them to be like us? I guess most people are all for individuality until push comes to shove--in the end, individuality is mostly lip service paid by those who are anything but individual.
While I sympathize with you, it is also important to consider that terrorist attacks may be counterbalanced by their much higher potential for mass casualties (e.g. nukes, chemical weapons, etc.). Dying from a car wreck may be more likely, but dying in a WMD terrorist attack is potentially much more severe (perhaps hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of casualties).
Oh people will definitely pay it. I've found that the more CEOs spend to make sure they're stuff is "legal" or "legitimate," the better they feel. So Microsoft could probably charge them full price every month and most would happily pay it.
All children need to undergo the Ludovico technique. Then we won't have to worry about giving people a choice to be moral--they can just be moral machines. Excellent...
What? Obviously Apple and Wall Street are not expecting iPods to sell during July as well as they do during Christmas.
I doubt Wall Street is worried about summer sales being lower than Christmas sales...
"In a few weeks, our school will be hosting a panel on DRM with several respected individuals. In advance of the panel, I have been doing some research on the topic and thinking about it in my free time. In economics, we learn that the price of a product is determined essentially by supply and demand. Without a DRM in place, we are capable of making as many copies of a piece of content as we want and seeding it onto the net. How do you create a market for a product, and make money of a product that has a huge initial creative investment, but then no manufacturing cost, and is in infinite supply?"
The problem is you're assuming that content is something to which supply and demand are applicable. Supply and demand are inextricably linked to actual physical things. Content is basically ideas, and ideas can't be owned or bought or sold--they aren't tangible, and the only way for someone else to get an idea from you is through a physical representation of the idea (which is not the idea itself). Technology is testing the extremes of intellectual property, and the absurdities of IP are becoming clear to its victims, and probably even to those wielding it. In the case of digital music, the Internet provides an almost free and limitless physical medium with which to represent ideas (the music itself), and that is helping expose the absurdity of ownership of ideas or processes (in this case, sounds arranged in a certain order).
Of course, nevermind the rights of the companies to censor what they want. Free speech, anyone?
"We believe the commonly accepted practice of reporting vulnerabilities directly to a vendor serves everyone's best interests."
Microsoft knows exactly what everyone's best interest is, right?
No...in this case Microsoft only knows what is in their own best interest.
Do they need a warrant and/or probable cause? Nope. Surveillance from the air does not require a warrant.
"Telling people how to gamble online, where to do it, giving a link to it -- that's all obviously enabling something that is illegal."
Gambling is enabled by living...seriously, do these people even think anymore?
The only people in the US who will benefit are the owners of the companies who do are successful doing this.
The entire economy benefits through lower prices.
Apple said the Nano is made of the same polycarbonate plastic as the fourth-generation iPod
Then why don't the 4G iPods have cracking problems, too?
Free speech does not give the right to libel.
Then it's not free speech. Duh.
Does your IT manager read Slashdot? :o
According to Procter, the chips can also be used for financial transactions.
The article does point out that Google is not alone in this practice.
Yes, and as a matter of fact, the article points out that Google takes a very minimalistic approach towards information collection (especially compared to MSN and Yahoo), and has explicit agreements with its users that information will remain private.
The guy jumped the ticket barriers, ran from the police, and then tried to board the train. Do you think the police should just say, "oh well..."? Was this guy completely out of his fucking mind? Of course he was going to be gunned down.
Are you completely indifferent that more than 50 people died because the police didn't stop any suspicious looking people?
The end does not justify the means.
Where are the new operating systems likely to come from?
They aren't going to come until we get past "old" technology like monitors, keyboards, and mice.
I would like to take this wonderful opportunity to recruit for the iPod Linux crew...if they could get some more hackers, perhaps we could see video playing of ALL video files, not just DRMed videos.