Good reference, but note the decision simply ruled that the framing/inline images (which doesn't really apply here since Fudd's pops up the original site in its own window, and notably the games copyright info seems to be visible) portion of the case should not have received "summary judgement". So the only precedent the court created in this case was that "thumbnails" are fair use.
It isn't necessarily stealing but causing unwanted use of bandwidth (or CPU time) will be accepted as "damage" in court.
I think that's far fetched, do you have any precedents you can cite? To the best of my knowledge all cases have been settled out of court. He made the content available to the public, I find it difficult to believe a court would award damages because he didn't want those users. If he were to put up a racist site promoting genocide, could he sue a human rights organization that refered people to the site because I didn't want minorities to see what he wrote?
First, keep in mind the this is the work of an individual within the company (or more likely a third party web design firm) that made a dumb mistake, not some "the corporations are out to screw the little guy" story. Thanks to his actions, somebody (if not an entire web design firm) is losing a job, whereas he could have resolved this amicably. But it was more fun and would gather him more fame to traumatize hundreds, and whats a few nights of a kid's nightmares compared to brief net fame?
Seriously, does anybody here really believe they did this to save on bandwidth? The solution Mr Briggster offers IS illegal, downloading the content and hosting it themselves. They could have asked permission to do so, and quite arguably should have. But the bandwidth he's talking about is maybe 5% of the site's traffic being generated by hotlinking, and his email and website are still clearly visible in the game, so I would argue that noody was trying to pass the game as their own (and I would question the legality of Mr Briggster attempting to charge for his unauthorized port of Data East's game.
Seriously. The fact that Slashdot editors don't comprehend the difference between an "embedded device" and a laptop shouldn't shock me. If you want to embed Flash in your embedded device, you have to arange for a license. This is neither shocking nor new.
This coming from the "gentleman" who dispensed gems such as "you stupid git" and "holier then thou jackass" as an opening salvo. I am afraid that you forfeited any expectations of civility at that point.
Yes, I apologize to donkeys and mucous of the world for comparing them to you; I'm unaware of any people beyond the british "foolish and worthless person". And I'm sorry for varying my insults, clearly a man of your dazzling intelect can be easily confused. Wheras you opted for a slur against the handicaped, a sure sign I've met my better.
However I do realise that there are other costs then license costs, but why don't you realize that these costs are independent of the platform?
The fact that the costs exist are independant on the platform, however the amount of those costs are not. It willcost money to operate and manage a web server no matter what, true, but the amount of those costs will vary with the platform.
And yes for equally trained people setting up an integrated (mail/web)environment in MS,Solaris, BSD or Linux is the same effort.
No, I don't buy this. Maybe thats where we differ.
Maybe that's a clue that the number of people willing to pay for that feature set is inadequate to support the production at that price point. That the exact combination of features you want in an MP3 player is no longer available does not mean capitalism is broken.
Apple tried one thing after another until something stuck. They could afford it.
Because their first product was successful. Do you think giant corporations just magically appear? That they stay on top by idly standing around with their old products? Innovate or die has been the mantra for ages. The point was, marketing muscle alone isn't enough to make a product successful.
In a true free market where consumers are educated, there are hundreds of choices and no dominant players. That is what the theory of capitalism claims
Claims no such thing. Read up, it actually says some companies will have a small advantage that they can leverage against their competitors to steal marketshare. Its quite fascinating. Modern communications and distribution will work to increase this effect, which makes the overall system even mor efficient.
how many Rio ads did you see versus the iPod ones?
Rio had piss-poor marketing, so? This feeds into the "Rio had bad management" arguement. Marketing is supposed to pay for itself, I spend $1 million advertising my product, it generates sufficient sales to earn $1.3 million. If all it took was advertising, then Rio should have paid for it.
There is nothing technologically superior about an iPod.
Is this what bothers you? that Apple had the insight to realize something other than technology might motivate buyers? Because Sony realized this too, as did Nike, and dozens of others.
First of all, I never claimed that I was somehow "better" then all iPod users.
No, you never said those exact words. What you said is "Their reasons are stoopid and mine are intelligent". Can't imagine how anyone might make the leap to "I'm better than you". Yep, I'm guilty of a Strawman arguement. And occaisonal typos and spelling errors, which you have helpfully pointed out because you are no better than me.
I fully understand that you are one.
Ahhh! I wilt under the onslaut of your "I'm rubber and you're glue" attack! You're right, the Rio Rulez!
Well that is rather curious because if I scroll back this thread it is me responding to someone claiming that "iPod pwn3d Rio" as if the people buying Rios were somehow stupid and iPod lovers enlightened.
Ah, you were using the "two wrongs make a right" arguement. That because they are foolish and childish, you should be too. And you might want to wise up to the fact that I'm not the original poster you responded to, nor am I they guy who first accused you of acting as a holier than thou snot.
An illiterate retard
Nice. Open minded and compasionate. If only all the world thought like you the world would be a better place.
Last time I checked, MS billed me for about $350 for a couple of support calls (which I didn't have to pay because it was a bug after all).
So your TCO over that incident was just your time troubleshooting, just as it would have been for Linux. Quite compelling counter arguement.
I'm bloody well payed for installing MS software at my work,
I never said MS software magically installed itself. just that anyone who only looked at the acquisition price and thought that was the only consideration has a lot to learn.
You are using arguments that hold up for both side because in software, there is not much difference when the functionality is the same.
Really? So if I designed an OSS web server that required you to translate all the config statements into Sanscrit, there would not be much difference in the time and effort required to set it up? Level of effort to manage and maintain Postfix, Sendmail, Qmail, and Exchange are all about equal?
My point isn't that Linux is cheaper to operate than Windows, or that Windows is cheaper to operate than Linux. Its that Acquisition cost is far from the only cost involved. The original claim was along the lines that "only a manager could think something that was free could cost more than something you paid for". I simply tried to point out that there are other costs involved, and that going to you boss with the claim that because you can download Linux for Free it will be cheaper is going to get you treated as as a dolt. If you don't understand what the real costs are, you'll never be able to convince anyone who is actually paying the bills to switch. Use of Linux is expanding at my company because I understand this.
My co-workers get the same amount of money payed whether they are doing nothing with openoffice or nothing with MS-Office, there productivity for 99% of the time is the same.
Then your company has problems much deeper than what OS they are using.
Of course it's targeted at managers, these are the only kind of people that can be convinced that somethinge essential free cost more then something what you have to buy.
Because people like you don't realize that something that's "free" can cost a small fortune? That the managers realize that they have to pay someone to install the free software, pay someone to manage and maintain the free software. Pay someone to use the free software.
And don't come with the training bs, training is a mandatory if it is buy-ware or not.
Great. Except that I can easily find people with the skills on the Windows side, finding linux skills can be much harder (too many morons who think they understand but don't). And finding the training can be difficult again, especially since there are multiple distributions with different ways of doing the same thing. Take a look at something that should be easy, setting up a secure central authentication scheme. Building a Windows AD system is fairly simple. Even earning my RHCE I still don't know how to do this in Linux (NIS, what they did teach, is not secure by a long shot).
I am a fan of open source (I do have an RHCE), but also know Windows (I also have an MSCE). I use Linux where appropriate, and I use Windows where appropriate. The TCO arguement depends a LOT on what you are trying to accomplish and how you structure your environment, but arguing that Linux MUST be cheaper because the OS license is free but the Windows license is $700 won't stand up for long.
Heck, the value of most entertainment companies would be peanuts to a company like IBM or Microsoft.
That's it! Maybe a big consumer electronics company, like say, Sanyo? That would change their tune!
The thing I find comical about this proposal by the "music industry" ist that its the exact opposite of what they've been doing for the last 10 to 20 years. Walk into you favorite record store, and genrally the cheapest music is whats new. The latest hits are all on sale, at some Minimum Advertized Price the record companies have set, say $14. Go check out a CD from 10 years ago, say G&R Lies, its $20. I guess they never finished paying for the studio time back then...
It is not question of being better, it is a question of having a mass-hyped "trend" smother alternative choices in the marketplace and create a culture of lemming-like conformism and deep dislike for alternatives
Right, because now that Rio's gone, we'll all have to buy iPods. No alternatives left. Crushed by the marketing machine that made the MacOS #1. If only they had a few year lead on Apple when they introduced the Rio, or perhaps if the iPod had be restricted to a computer platform that had only 3% market penetration when it was released, then maybe poor Rio would have had a chance against the marketing machine that made the Newton the king of the PDA market.
I for one support increasing taxes to prop up Rio. And making successful products like the iPod and sliced bread illegal. Trendy bastards and their sliced bread! Maybe I don't want my bread sliced? Maybe I don't want to pick one of the numerous loaves of bread that are still available unsliced. Maybe I just want to stamp my feet and cry a river into my diapers!
Understand this you stupid git. They fact that you beleive YOUR reasons for buying the RIO are legitimate, but the 1000 people buying an iPod for every 1 buying the RIO are just lemmings does in fact make you a holier than thou jackass who thinks he's better than them. Take your head our of your ass and you might realize that people might value things differently than you do, and that does not automatically make them stupid. Maybe they see the ready existance of accessories as a plus. Maybe they see the fact they know how the interface works because their freind has one as a plus. Maybe they don't know jack about "plain USB storage" and don't feel like spending days researching the subject so they can be their first on their block to try something that might turn out to be a piece of junk whose manufacturer is going to stop manufacturing tomorrow.
Oops, I thought he was refering to a new IBM system vs the old VAX. Sad part is I remember those days. I even recall the day of the first internet worm. I mostly worked on the Vax and hated the IBM ("worst CLI ever!").
Or what about a decent set of manuals? Way back in my VAX days, I got assigned to work on an IBM midrange system. The VAX had an entire library of manuals (remember the orange books?) while this piece of crap, overpriced IBM system came with something like two manuals.
Thing is, there is an amazing new peice of technology called the "Internet". Using this, that roomfull of books can be made available "online" allowing it to be "electronically searched" quickly. Without destroying an acre of trees. Perhaps you should investigate it.
But your right, after all, the last Windows PC I received came with, well, a warranty disclaimer and that was it. Clearly much better than what you received.
The beauty of the hack job is that I've created a technique that allows me to hack the GPU, completely bypassing the system you are running. Better still, this method allows me to completely hide all the warnings your computer is generating:)
I'll be producing a documentary about it later this year, in the style of Chinese Martial arts movies, complete with bad lipsyncing to protect the guilty!
with phishing scams, we can blame the users who fall for the scheme
While there are always some who fall for the most obvious scam, theses attacks are becoming more professional by the day, and no company can afford to absentmindedly blame their users (yes, I work for a company that sells anti-abuse services, we've been on the cutting edge of this for a while).
The article writer references the term "Pharming"; while DNS cache poisoning is a form of Pharming, its much bigger than that. Its basically a variation of Phishing, where instead of actively sending enticements to vist your site, you place a site out there (usually a mispelling of a Brand) and wait for victims to stroll by. Since its passive, its harder to detect than Phishing (we have a solution of course). But not all Pharming is evil, some is just irritating. Some sites are just out there to collect a wee bit o' ad revenue from every typo that hits them, just 100 hits a month can make a no content site profitable when done on a grand scale...
How many people in love with their iPods have tried other MP3 players?
My First digital Music player was a Sony unit. Very tiny, making it ideal for workouts, and it was a display unit going for 1/3 price, so I bought. Discovered looks cool != works well. Software sucked, and everything had to be converted to ATRAC3, a huge pain, esp. on my P166MMX. I through 1 set of music on and never tried to change it.
Few years later, Dell sent me a DJ player for free. It was immediately clear why it was cheaper, bigger, heavier, and a lousy interface. It felt very ghetto, didn't fit into my pocket, etc. Abandoned quickly, since I hadn't wasted any $$ on it.
So earlier this year I got an iPod Photo as a gift. It works well, is small enough, etc. I've very happy with it, and actually use it. So no, its not that consumers are too gullible, too influenced by the peer group, etc. Just checking off the option list doesn't make a good player...
I much prefer having a real book to electronic formats, its easier to markup, easier to bookmark, no annoying window switching (I use dual monitors these days for this), etc.
Of course, electronic versions are easier to search and updatable/correctable. Problem is, once an author writes the book, they are usually on to the next title. They aren't spending their time updating/correcting published work (Excepting George Lucas:)
The mouse is also far more accurate when used as a weapon. The wing-like shape of the Keyboard tend to prevent anything approaching an accurate strike.
First off, I was not ripping on the movie, but contrasting the social message it presented. I am surprised to learn its autobiographical nature, since I thought the protaganist died in the end.
The message was not "Conform and be miserable!", I'm sorry thats all you got out of it.
Conjuction error! I said "Conform OR be miserable", which would certainly mesh with his blaming himself for his sisters death. That message was very clearly communicated in the film, she was malnourished because they ran away from home, he ran away because he did not wish to work in the factory at age 13 (ie did not want to do his duty to country), accused his aunt of only taking them in for the improved rations they got because his father was a soldier at war for the nation (ie did not do his duty to family). The message of the movie is clearly that had he respected his family and his nation and done what was asked/respected of him, his sister would not have died. Instead he ran away and lived a miserable existance with his sister (it was made clear that this was a miserable existance, my initial reaction was "dried frogs must be cultural thing, like pigs feet or head cheese", until the movie made it clear that it was food of desparation).
All of which fits with the culture at the time (I've studied Japanese history), and wether intentional or not came at a time (1988) when those values were under attack by the flood of western culture. It could also be that the movie was simply reflecting the message he recieved at the time given its autobiogrphical nature, this is the period where the nations military leaders were encouraging everyone over the age of three to grab a sharp stick and attack any foriegner they saw, children his age were being strapped into aircraft and knowingly used as suicide bombers.
The review at IMDB is an interesting take. From what you've said I think I saw the creators true intent, the story of a boy who's stubboness led his sister, who cared for him deeply, to her death. He was ultimately blind to her plight until years after her death.
It was very enlightening look into a radically different culture.
They could give the money back, but it would probably take days to locate individual donors
Sounds like a lot came from a Credit Card affinity program. Giving it back isn't really a reasonable alternative, since the costs to service could quickly surmount the cost being refunded.
Perhaps the money could be used to set up a trust for a scholarship fund.
Using the money for a purpose other than the one the fund was set up for is borderline criminal. Whatever the Linux Fund's intent was, that intent should be caried out by whomever takes over.
Die Hard as well as Revenge of the Sith was written mediocre at best.
Given the quality of writing in your post, you're clearly an expert in the English language. But I digress
Die hard was well written. It understood its medium and its audience, there were no painful moments of dialog where our hero broke into long winded speeches about man's inhumanity to man, no oddly placed iambic pentameter. It had a simple but classic plot, a NY cop trying to come to grips with his wife's success, goes through an ordeal where he learns how much he really loves his wife.
I've actually seen quite a bit of foreign cinema, and seen very little to make me non US movies are better written than our in general. Are you judging it based on the.05% of foreign films that make it to the US general release? The cream of teh cream of the crop? Or perhaps you are judging based on the fact that they follow different cultural norms? I was a bit shocked to watch a Japanese film whose moral lesson was "Its the kids fault, had he listened to his adoptive family and done what the state wanted hime to do he and his sister would be alive and happy to day. Conform or be miserable!" But I've also seen horrible French, Italian, Soviet, Polish, and Korean cinema.
Or perhaps you're refering to outside Hollywood projects such as "In the Bedroom", a dull, painfully slow moving work that rivals the infamous "Manos: Hands of Fate" for five minute riding in cars peering out the windows segements. Its bad when the high point of a movie is watch the toll bridge guy run around in circles again to move the bridge, punctuated by self-indulgent lines like "It comes in waves, and then nothing... like a rest in music - no sound, but so loud."
Is "Die Hard" superlative writing, like Shakespere's Saint Crispin's Day speech in Henry V? Heck no. It neither tries to be nor should it be.
Slashdot Mirror
Good reference, but note the decision simply ruled that the framing/inline images (which doesn't really apply here since Fudd's pops up the original site in its own window, and notably the games copyright info seems to be visible) portion of the case should not have received "summary judgement". So the only precedent the court created in this case was that "thumbnails" are fair use.
Except there was no DOS, and the "offender" only pushed 5% of the traffic
I think that's far fetched, do you have any precedents you can cite? To the best of my knowledge all cases have been settled out of court. He made the content available to the public, I find it difficult to believe a court would award damages because he didn't want those users. If he were to put up a racist site promoting genocide, could he sue a human rights organization that refered people to the site because I didn't want minorities to see what he wrote?
First, keep in mind the this is the work of an individual within the company (or more likely a third party web design firm) that made a dumb mistake, not some "the corporations are out to screw the little guy" story. Thanks to his actions, somebody (if not an entire web design firm) is losing a job, whereas he could have resolved this amicably. But it was more fun and would gather him more fame to traumatize hundreds, and whats a few nights of a kid's nightmares compared to brief net fame?
Seriously, does anybody here really believe they did this to save on bandwidth? The solution Mr Briggster offers IS illegal, downloading the content and hosting it themselves. They could have asked permission to do so, and quite arguably should have. But the bandwidth he's talking about is maybe 5% of the site's traffic being generated by hotlinking, and his email and website are still clearly visible in the game, so I would argue that noody was trying to pass the game as their own (and I would question the legality of Mr Briggster attempting to charge for his unauthorized port of Data East's game.
Seriously. The fact that Slashdot editors don't comprehend the difference between an "embedded device" and a laptop shouldn't shock me. If you want to embed Flash in your embedded device, you have to arange for a license. This is neither shocking nor new.
Yes, I apologize to donkeys and mucous of the world for comparing them to you; I'm unaware of any people beyond the british "foolish and worthless person". And I'm sorry for varying my insults, clearly a man of your dazzling intelect can be easily confused. Wheras you opted for a slur against the handicaped, a sure sign I've met my better.
No go away, or I shall taunt you a second time.
The fact that the costs exist are independant on the platform, however the amount of those costs are not. It willcost money to operate and manage a web server no matter what, true, but the amount of those costs will vary with the platform.
And yes for equally trained people setting up an integrated (mail/web)environment in MS,Solaris, BSD or Linux is the same effort.
No, I don't buy this. Maybe thats where we differ.
Maybe that's a clue that the number of people willing to pay for that feature set is inadequate to support the production at that price point. That the exact combination of features you want in an MP3 player is no longer available does not mean capitalism is broken.
Apple tried one thing after another until something stuck. They could afford it.
Because their first product was successful. Do you think giant corporations just magically appear? That they stay on top by idly standing around with their old products? Innovate or die has been the mantra for ages. The point was, marketing muscle alone isn't enough to make a product successful.
In a true free market where consumers are educated, there are hundreds of choices and no dominant players. That is what the theory of capitalism claims
Claims no such thing. Read up, it actually says some companies will have a small advantage that they can leverage against their competitors to steal marketshare. Its quite fascinating. Modern communications and distribution will work to increase this effect, which makes the overall system even mor efficient.
how many Rio ads did you see versus the iPod ones?
Rio had piss-poor marketing, so? This feeds into the "Rio had bad management" arguement. Marketing is supposed to pay for itself, I spend $1 million advertising my product, it generates sufficient sales to earn $1.3 million. If all it took was advertising, then Rio should have paid for it.
There is nothing technologically superior about an iPod.
Is this what bothers you? that Apple had the insight to realize something other than technology might motivate buyers? Because Sony realized this too, as did Nike, and dozens of others.
First of all, I never claimed that I was somehow "better" then all iPod users.
No, you never said those exact words. What you said is "Their reasons are stoopid and mine are intelligent". Can't imagine how anyone might make the leap to "I'm better than you". Yep, I'm guilty of a Strawman arguement. And occaisonal typos and spelling errors, which you have helpfully pointed out because you are no better than me.
I fully understand that you are one.
Ahhh! I wilt under the onslaut of your "I'm rubber and you're glue" attack! You're right, the Rio Rulez!
Well that is rather curious because if I scroll back this thread it is me responding to someone claiming that "iPod pwn3d Rio" as if the people buying Rios were somehow stupid and iPod lovers enlightened.
Ah, you were using the "two wrongs make a right" arguement. That because they are foolish and childish, you should be too. And you might want to wise up to the fact that I'm not the original poster you responded to, nor am I they guy who first accused you of acting as a holier than thou snot.
An illiterate retard
Nice. Open minded and compasionate. If only all the world thought like you the world would be a better place.
So your TCO over that incident was just your time troubleshooting, just as it would have been for Linux. Quite compelling counter arguement.
I'm bloody well payed for installing MS software at my work,
I never said MS software magically installed itself. just that anyone who only looked at the acquisition price and thought that was the only consideration has a lot to learn.
You are using arguments that hold up for both side because in software, there is not much difference when the functionality is the same.
Really? So if I designed an OSS web server that required you to translate all the config statements into Sanscrit, there would not be much difference in the time and effort required to set it up? Level of effort to manage and maintain Postfix, Sendmail, Qmail, and Exchange are all about equal?
My point isn't that Linux is cheaper to operate than Windows, or that Windows is cheaper to operate than Linux. Its that Acquisition cost is far from the only cost involved. The original claim was along the lines that "only a manager could think something that was free could cost more than something you paid for". I simply tried to point out that there are other costs involved, and that going to you boss with the claim that because you can download Linux for Free it will be cheaper is going to get you treated as as a dolt. If you don't understand what the real costs are, you'll never be able to convince anyone who is actually paying the bills to switch. Use of Linux is expanding at my company because I understand this.
My co-workers get the same amount of money payed whether they are doing nothing with openoffice or nothing with MS-Office, there productivity for 99% of the time is the same.
Then your company has problems much deeper than what OS they are using.
Because people like you don't realize that something that's "free" can cost a small fortune? That the managers realize that they have to pay someone to install the free software, pay someone to manage and maintain the free software. Pay someone to use the free software.
And don't come with the training bs, training is a mandatory if it is buy-ware or not.
Great. Except that I can easily find people with the skills on the Windows side, finding linux skills can be much harder (too many morons who think they understand but don't). And finding the training can be difficult again, especially since there are multiple distributions with different ways of doing the same thing. Take a look at something that should be easy, setting up a secure central authentication scheme. Building a Windows AD system is fairly simple. Even earning my RHCE I still don't know how to do this in Linux (NIS, what they did teach, is not secure by a long shot).
I am a fan of open source (I do have an RHCE), but also know Windows (I also have an MSCE). I use Linux where appropriate, and I use Windows where appropriate. The TCO arguement depends a LOT on what you are trying to accomplish and how you structure your environment, but arguing that Linux MUST be cheaper because the OS license is free but the Windows license is $700 won't stand up for long.
That's it! Maybe a big consumer electronics company, like say, Sanyo? That would change their tune!
The thing I find comical about this proposal by the "music industry" ist that its the exact opposite of what they've been doing for the last 10 to 20 years. Walk into you favorite record store, and genrally the cheapest music is whats new. The latest hits are all on sale, at some Minimum Advertized Price the record companies have set, say $14. Go check out a CD from 10 years ago, say G&R Lies, its $20. I guess they never finished paying for the studio time back then...
Right, because now that Rio's gone, we'll all have to buy iPods. No alternatives left. Crushed by the marketing machine that made the MacOS #1. If only they had a few year lead on Apple when they introduced the Rio, or perhaps if the iPod had be restricted to a computer platform that had only 3% market penetration when it was released, then maybe poor Rio would have had a chance against the marketing machine that made the Newton the king of the PDA market.
I for one support increasing taxes to prop up Rio. And making successful products like the iPod and sliced bread illegal. Trendy bastards and their sliced bread! Maybe I don't want my bread sliced? Maybe I don't want to pick one of the numerous loaves of bread that are still available unsliced. Maybe I just want to stamp my feet and cry a river into my diapers!
Understand this you stupid git. They fact that you beleive YOUR reasons for buying the RIO are legitimate, but the 1000 people buying an iPod for every 1 buying the RIO are just lemmings does in fact make you a holier than thou jackass who thinks he's better than them. Take your head our of your ass and you might realize that people might value things differently than you do, and that does not automatically make them stupid. Maybe they see the ready existance of accessories as a plus. Maybe they see the fact they know how the interface works because their freind has one as a plus. Maybe they don't know jack about "plain USB storage" and don't feel like spending days researching the subject so they can be their first on their block to try something that might turn out to be a piece of junk whose manufacturer is going to stop manufacturing tomorrow.
Oops, I thought he was refering to a new IBM system vs the old VAX. Sad part is I remember those days. I even recall the day of the first internet worm. I mostly worked on the Vax and hated the IBM ("worst CLI ever!").
Thing is, there is an amazing new peice of technology called the "Internet". Using this, that roomfull of books can be made available "online" allowing it to be "electronically searched" quickly. Without destroying an acre of trees. Perhaps you should investigate it.
But your right, after all, the last Windows PC I received came with, well, a warranty disclaimer and that was it. Clearly much better than what you received.
I'll be producing a documentary about it later this year, in the style of Chinese Martial arts movies, complete with bad lipsyncing to protect the guilty!
While there are always some who fall for the most obvious scam, theses attacks are becoming more professional by the day, and no company can afford to absentmindedly blame their users (yes, I work for a company that sells anti-abuse services, we've been on the cutting edge of this for a while).
The article writer references the term "Pharming"; while DNS cache poisoning is a form of Pharming, its much bigger than that. Its basically a variation of Phishing, where instead of actively sending enticements to vist your site, you place a site out there (usually a mispelling of a Brand) and wait for victims to stroll by. Since its passive, its harder to detect than Phishing (we have a solution of course). But not all Pharming is evil, some is just irritating. Some sites are just out there to collect a wee bit o' ad revenue from every typo that hits them, just 100 hits a month can make a no content site profitable when done on a grand scale...
Good to see restraint in the discussion. We wouldn't want to lose our heads over this issue!
I pity the sould who has never been offered a beer that did not require payment...
My First digital Music player was a Sony unit. Very tiny, making it ideal for workouts, and it was a display unit going for 1/3 price, so I bought. Discovered looks cool != works well. Software sucked, and everything had to be converted to ATRAC3, a huge pain, esp. on my P166MMX. I through 1 set of music on and never tried to change it.
Few years later, Dell sent me a DJ player for free. It was immediately clear why it was cheaper, bigger, heavier, and a lousy interface. It felt very ghetto, didn't fit into my pocket, etc. Abandoned quickly, since I hadn't wasted any $$ on it.
So earlier this year I got an iPod Photo as a gift. It works well, is small enough, etc. I've very happy with it, and actually use it. So no, its not that consumers are too gullible, too influenced by the peer group, etc. Just checking off the option list doesn't make a good player...
Squid is on the dinner plate, fried a delicious golden brown.
Of course, electronic versions are easier to search and updatable/correctable. Problem is, once an author writes the book, they are usually on to the next title. They aren't spending their time updating/correcting published work (Excepting George Lucas :)
The mouse is also far more accurate when used as a weapon. The wing-like shape of the Keyboard tend to prevent anything approaching an accurate strike.
The message was not "Conform and be miserable!", I'm sorry thats all you got out of it.
Conjuction error! I said "Conform OR be miserable", which would certainly mesh with his blaming himself for his sisters death. That message was very clearly communicated in the film, she was malnourished because they ran away from home, he ran away because he did not wish to work in the factory at age 13 (ie did not want to do his duty to country), accused his aunt of only taking them in for the improved rations they got because his father was a soldier at war for the nation (ie did not do his duty to family). The message of the movie is clearly that had he respected his family and his nation and done what was asked/respected of him, his sister would not have died. Instead he ran away and lived a miserable existance with his sister (it was made clear that this was a miserable existance, my initial reaction was "dried frogs must be cultural thing, like pigs feet or head cheese", until the movie made it clear that it was food of desparation).
All of which fits with the culture at the time (I've studied Japanese history), and wether intentional or not came at a time (1988) when those values were under attack by the flood of western culture. It could also be that the movie was simply reflecting the message he recieved at the time given its autobiogrphical nature, this is the period where the nations military leaders were encouraging everyone over the age of three to grab a sharp stick and attack any foriegner they saw, children his age were being strapped into aircraft and knowingly used as suicide bombers.
The review at IMDB is an interesting take. From what you've said I think I saw the creators true intent, the story of a boy who's stubboness led his sister, who cared for him deeply, to her death. He was ultimately blind to her plight until years after her death.
It was very enlightening look into a radically different culture.
Sounds like a lot came from a Credit Card affinity program. Giving it back isn't really a reasonable alternative, since the costs to service could quickly surmount the cost being refunded. Perhaps the money could be used to set up a trust for a scholarship fund.
Using the money for a purpose other than the one the fund was set up for is borderline criminal. Whatever the Linux Fund's intent was, that intent should be caried out by whomever takes over.
Given the quality of writing in your post, you're clearly an expert in the English language. But I digress
Die hard was well written. It understood its medium and its audience, there were no painful moments of dialog where our hero broke into long winded speeches about man's inhumanity to man, no oddly placed iambic pentameter. It had a simple but classic plot, a NY cop trying to come to grips with his wife's success, goes through an ordeal where he learns how much he really loves his wife.
I've actually seen quite a bit of foreign cinema, and seen very little to make me non US movies are better written than our in general. Are you judging it based on the .05% of foreign films that make it to the US general release? The cream of teh cream of the crop? Or perhaps you are judging based on the fact that they follow different cultural norms? I was a bit shocked to watch a Japanese film whose moral lesson was "Its the kids fault, had he listened to his adoptive family and done what the state wanted hime to do he and his sister would be alive and happy to day. Conform or be miserable!" But I've also seen horrible French, Italian, Soviet, Polish, and Korean cinema.
Or perhaps you're refering to outside Hollywood projects such as "In the Bedroom", a dull, painfully slow moving work that rivals the infamous "Manos: Hands of Fate" for five minute riding in cars peering out the windows segements. Its bad when the high point of a movie is watch the toll bridge guy run around in circles again to move the bridge, punctuated by self-indulgent lines like "It comes in waves, and then nothing... like a rest in music - no sound, but so loud."
Is "Die Hard" superlative writing, like Shakespere's Saint Crispin's Day speech in Henry V? Heck no. It neither tries to be nor should it be.
He hasn't heard of a lot of things. Nobody ever has before