The term star system is also misused a lot in the case when people mean planetary system. Generally star system refers to a system of stars, e.g. a binary star system.
I don't think nitpicking my hyperbolic use of everywhere is terribly useful. What's important is that you miss out on a very significant amount of culture and/or utility in both examples.
If you avoid cities to avoid smoking pedestrians, you miss out on all that cities have to offer. If you avoid software with DRM, you miss out on all that that software has to offer.
And in certain cases, you miss out on a great deal just to avoid a relatively minor inconvenience. Most people would rather just put up with the inconvenience than engage in a militant boycott, and since boycotts are toothless without a critical mass behind you, nothing changes when only a small minority engages in one.
That's why it's incumbent on us to use public policy to prohibit such anti-social behaviors rather than just let individuals and the market sort it out. That's why I feel there is a moral imperative to legally prohibit the use of DRM in most software contexts. The government must regulate what the market won't correct on its own.
DRM is everywhere. It's extremely difficult to avoid. All mainstream game consoles have it. Most useful commercial software has it.
Saying nobody is forcing it on you is like saying "nobody is forcing you to breathe secondhand smoke when you take a walk down a city street." In most large cities it's inevitable. Something like one out of ten people smoke, so you're gonna get a waft of it in your face the moment you pass by one or two dozen other pedestrians. The only way to avoid that completely is to move to the countryside and avoid cities and people entirely.
I'd rather not have to avoid entire classes of software just because the vendors stubbornly refuse to find a business model compatible with the 21st century.
I want an ad blocker that whitelists everything by default, so I can block sites I consider abusive. I tried them all, none do this.
To me, blocking everything by default is a reflexive overreaction. I agree that ads have gotten out of hand, but penalizing sites that use them responsibly is horrible.
Can someone point me in the direction of an ad blocker that lets me whitelist everything by default and has a simple "block ads on this site" button for the bad actors? (I'm looking at you, wikia!)
It is possible to play games that are only free software on PCs powered only by free software. There just aren't many of them. We seem to be getting closer being able to replicate that niche with Android game consoles, but we're obviously not there yet, both because most Android set top boxes available aren't sufficiently open and because of the lack of console games that are free software.
It's long been possible to run entirely free software on a PC, but the world of game consoles has been a proprietary hellscape for many years.
In recent years there's been an attempt to open it up in some very modest ways, mainly through the proliferation of Android "microconsoles" and other Android-based set top boxes.
Do you find these new developments to be a step in the right direction and are you worried as I am that they're not catching on very well?
if a tab dies, you'll still close the browser and reopen it, [...] So why bother implementing something useless, just to make some people feel better.
Not me. It's pretty much the only feature keeping me from switching to Firefox. When a tab goes haywire either by crashing or eating too much CPU, I kill the process with the task manager and the rest of the browser survives. Granted, most users probably are the way you describe, but power users do what I do. If Google wants Chrome's meteoric rise to survive, they'd better not alienate power users.
When Jimi Hendrix covered Bob Dylan's "All Along the Watchtower," the artist was Jimi Hendrix because he performed the song. The composer was Bob Dylan because he created the original.
No, the original artist is the original artist (ID3v2.2 tag TOA, ID3v2.3 tag TOPE). They may also be the composer, but that is by no means certain.
There is no "original artist" tag, AFAIK. What I'm referring to is the "artist" tag which properly should refer to whoever actually made the song. If it's a remix or a cover, the artist is whoever made the remix or the cover, not the author of the original song. The author of the original is the composer.
No, ID3v2.2 and ID3v2.3 specify that multiple artists should be separated with a / character.
I was unaware of the "/" syntax being codified by the spec. But that does beg the question why don't they just allow multiple artist tags instead of a single tag as a long string separated by an awkward character? You'd think the spec authors would come up with something less stupid than that.
No, the ID3v2.2 and ID3v2.3 specs let you select multiple genres, or even mix multiple pre-defined ones with a custom one. One thing they do fall down on is defining how to tag a song with multiple custom genres.
Why not just use the "/" separator like with artists?
It may be that the vendors don't follow the spec, but you're being very unjust in blaming the authors of a spec with you obviously haven't read.
The spec is long, poorly written, and has obviously been updated since I last read it. I may have been unaware of the "/" separator thing, but it's not exactly the best idea to begin with and you might wanna hold off on the insults until you get composer vs. artist straight. Or, you know, just avoid being a jerk in general even if you are right.
The majority of tags from legit music I've bought have been incorrect.
The most common problems are:
1. Confusing composer with artist. If the song is a remix, the artist is the remixer. The original artist is the composer.
2. Genres are fuzzy. Lots of songs fit into many genres. Picking a single genre is inaccurate at best. Sadly the id3 spec only lets us pick one, so I comma separate them out of protest. Wikipedia does this too. Look up an album, see many genres, not one.
3. The infamous "Various Artists" artist. Likewise with genres, I comma separate artists because the id3 spec doesn't let us add multiple artists. Although this is actually becoming more common with legit purchased music too.
4. Bad metadata. Even legit purchased music sometimes has errors, typos, bad punctuation, etc. It always enrages me when legally purchased music has these kinds of metadata errors.
5. Quality of downloaded music. Lossless or GTFO. This is very rare. I usually have to buy actual CDs and rip them to get that kind of quality when doing it legally.
I tried switching back last year and had issues with it. I'm the sort of person who likes to keep like 3 browser windows open, each with 20 tabs. So I'm at high risk for one tab going haywire.
This release also comes with massively improved support for blu ray menus! (It existed before, but didn't work very well.)
This is exciting to me because it makes full support for (unencrypted) blu ray disk playback including blu ray menus finally possible on Linux and OS X. No more transcoding required!
It will also free Windows users from having to use all those terrible proprietary blu ray players.
Slashdot Mirror
That is not correct.
That's a popular colloquial usage, but the astronomy community doesn't (yet?) accept "solar system" as a generic term like it does with "moon."
For the time being, the correct term is planetary system. Usage of "solar system" as a generic term is wrong.
The term star system is also misused a lot in the case when people mean planetary system. Generally star system refers to a system of stars, e.g. a binary star system.
"Solar systems" like ours are rare indeed, because there is only one Solar System.
It's a proper noun.
The term the article was looking for was planetary system.
I don't think nitpicking my hyperbolic use of everywhere is terribly useful. What's important is that you miss out on a very significant amount of culture and/or utility in both examples.
If you avoid cities to avoid smoking pedestrians, you miss out on all that cities have to offer. If you avoid software with DRM, you miss out on all that that software has to offer.
And in certain cases, you miss out on a great deal just to avoid a relatively minor inconvenience. Most people would rather just put up with the inconvenience than engage in a militant boycott, and since boycotts are toothless without a critical mass behind you, nothing changes when only a small minority engages in one.
That's why it's incumbent on us to use public policy to prohibit such anti-social behaviors rather than just let individuals and the market sort it out. That's why I feel there is a moral imperative to legally prohibit the use of DRM in most software contexts. The government must regulate what the market won't correct on its own.
DRM is everywhere. It's extremely difficult to avoid. All mainstream game consoles have it. Most useful commercial software has it.
Saying nobody is forcing it on you is like saying "nobody is forcing you to breathe secondhand smoke when you take a walk down a city street." In most large cities it's inevitable. Something like one out of ten people smoke, so you're gonna get a waft of it in your face the moment you pass by one or two dozen other pedestrians. The only way to avoid that completely is to move to the countryside and avoid cities and people entirely.
I'd rather not have to avoid entire classes of software just because the vendors stubbornly refuse to find a business model compatible with the 21st century.
I would go even further than that. There are good arguments to be made for legally prohibiting the use of DRM entirely.
It amazes me that we're supposed to feel grateful that the LoC has given us permission to circumvent some DRM.
But sure, I guess I'll go ahead and be grateful that the thing which shouldn't exist to begin with is now slightly less shitty.
I want an ad blocker that whitelists everything by default, so I can block sites I consider abusive. I tried them all, none do this.
To me, blocking everything by default is a reflexive overreaction. I agree that ads have gotten out of hand, but penalizing sites that use them responsibly is horrible.
Can someone point me in the direction of an ad blocker that lets me whitelist everything by default and has a simple "block ads on this site" button for the bad actors? (I'm looking at you, wikia!)
It is possible to play games that are only free software on PCs powered only by free software. There just aren't many of them. We seem to be getting closer being able to replicate that niche with Android game consoles, but we're obviously not there yet, both because most Android set top boxes available aren't sufficiently open and because of the lack of console games that are free software.
It's long been possible to run entirely free software on a PC, but the world of game consoles has been a proprietary hellscape for many years.
In recent years there's been an attempt to open it up in some very modest ways, mainly through the proliferation of Android "microconsoles" and other Android-based set top boxes.
Do you find these new developments to be a step in the right direction and are you worried as I am that they're not catching on very well?
Not me. It's pretty much the only feature keeping me from switching to Firefox. When a tab goes haywire either by crashing or eating too much CPU, I kill the process with the task manager and the rest of the browser survives. Granted, most users probably are the way you describe, but power users do what I do. If Google wants Chrome's meteoric rise to survive, they'd better not alienate power users.
There is no ID3 tag called "original artist."
When Jimi Hendrix covered Bob Dylan's "All Along the Watchtower," the artist was Jimi Hendrix because he performed the song. The composer was Bob Dylan because he created the original.
There is no "original artist" tag, AFAIK. What I'm referring to is the "artist" tag which properly should refer to whoever actually made the song. If it's a remix or a cover, the artist is whoever made the remix or the cover, not the author of the original song. The author of the original is the composer.
I was unaware of the "/" syntax being codified by the spec. But that does beg the question why don't they just allow multiple artist tags instead of a single tag as a long string separated by an awkward character? You'd think the spec authors would come up with something less stupid than that.
Why not just use the "/" separator like with artists?
The spec is long, poorly written, and has obviously been updated since I last read it. I may have been unaware of the "/" separator thing, but it's not exactly the best idea to begin with and you might wanna hold off on the insults until you get composer vs. artist straight. Or, you know, just avoid being a jerk in general even if you are right.
The majority of tags from legit music I've bought have been incorrect.
The most common problems are:
1. Confusing composer with artist. If the song is a remix, the artist is the remixer. The original artist is the composer.
2. Genres are fuzzy. Lots of songs fit into many genres. Picking a single genre is inaccurate at best. Sadly the id3 spec only lets us pick one, so I comma separate them out of protest. Wikipedia does this too. Look up an album, see many genres, not one.
3. The infamous "Various Artists" artist. Likewise with genres, I comma separate artists because the id3 spec doesn't let us add multiple artists. Although this is actually becoming more common with legit purchased music too.
4. Bad metadata. Even legit purchased music sometimes has errors, typos, bad punctuation, etc. It always enrages me when legally purchased music has these kinds of metadata errors.
5. Quality of downloaded music. Lossless or GTFO. This is very rare. I usually have to buy actual CDs and rip them to get that kind of quality when doing it legally.
I tried switching back last year and had issues with it. I'm the sort of person who likes to keep like 3 browser windows open, each with 20 tabs. So I'm at high risk for one tab going haywire.
I abandoned Firefox for Chrome long ago for one reason: I can kill individual tabs with runaway CPU usage without fscking the whole browser.
Mozilla's been working on adding this feature for years, but AFAIK it hasn't yet made it into a stable release: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Elect...
Once that makes it into a stable release of Firefox, I'll give it another spin.
Plus it has its own song!
Where do you get a Nexus 4 battery replaced?
I know, right? It would be so much funnier if they did pinkdot again. That. Was. Awesome.
You can if the BRD lacks DRM.
Rip them with decrypter like AnyDVD into BD50 1:1 disk images to strip the DRM, then you can play them with VLC.
This release also comes with massively improved support for blu ray menus! (It existed before, but didn't work very well.)
This is exciting to me because it makes full support for (unencrypted) blu ray disk playback including blu ray menus finally possible on Linux and OS X. No more transcoding required!
It will also free Windows users from having to use all those terrible proprietary blu ray players.
This is a terrific release!
"Don't smoke. I did. Wish I never had. LLAP"
At least his washing machines will sing you a song when they're done! That's gotta count for something, right? Right?
This, apparently, is the library.