Actually I was just pointing out that politics in general is a dirty game, and both groups are good at dishing out crap, and that neither group is good at receiving it.
Except of course that you only have half of that right. A Dem calls Republicans assholes before he takes a job, and he gets canned for it after the fact. A vice president tells a senator to "go fuck yourself" on the Senate floor, and it's business as usual. The GOP dishes out on a regular basis, and the Dems bend over and take it.
By the way, you're right: nowhere does it say "their version." Of course I don't see how that's EVEN REMOTELY FUCKING RELEVANT you illiterate hack.
LOL. You harp on someone for "reading comprehension" while spouting on about something not in the summary, and you call me an illiterate hack? Question: do you use a cannon or a howitzer for your projection?
My truck may weigh more but uses wider tires than your average lighter car, so it's probably about the same per square inch of contact surface.
Nope. See Geiger below.
Because it's a pickup, I'm already assessed commercial weight fees with my annual license tags, so I already pay more (FOUR TIMES more than a CAR of the same weight)
On registration only.
Explain to me how we could build the whole freakin' Interstate system during the 1960s, with WAY less tax revenue, but now with taxes way up we somehow can't pay to maintain it, let alone build anew? Right......
Wow. To quote Brzezinski: you know, you have such a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on that it's almost embarrassing to listen to you. We had a 91% marginal income tax rate in the 50's and early 60's, and a 70% marginal rate until Reagan blew up the budget with his tax cuts for the rich. There's a reason why we built the Interstate Highway System and went to the moon, and it's not because of supply side economics.
The fact remains that if you do something simple like googling "aslr linux vista osx" you get a pile of articles on the subject. So asking me for a citation is just fucking lazy, and you are just fucking whiny. Go away, or I shall taunt you a second time.
So drinky, why do you like to sleep with little boys so much and start neighborhood cats on fire?
The crutch does not prevent education, teaching them to think, it simply makes it less likely they'll FAIL to think.
And that sort of thinking will serve them well as far as staying in your good graces until they turn 18. After they turn 18, not so much.
Again, I AM NOT SAYING THEY CAN"T HAVE A LIFE, I'm just saying they need BOUNDARIES AND RULES aside from the CONSEQUENCES OF LIFE that are FAR more often permanently scaring, and completely avoidable.
All of which were possible long before it was possible to strap people with GPS navigation. Another question for you: do you put your kids in crash helmets and flame retardant suits before taking them anywhere in a car? Because that would do FAR more to increase their real-world safety than lowjacking them.
I believe he did state that the new wall would continue to improve the value of the property - which is true. It is an investment in the property itself - not a furnishing.
You're still comparing a wall vs many copies of a copyrighted work. No matter how much you massage this analogy, it still sucks.
Neither does a copyrighted work - it *transfers* money from one person to another.
Did you read past that sentence? You know, where I said "so long as there are customers to buy them?" You're arguing a distinction without a difference based on a hyper-literal, selective interpretation of an offhand statement.
You were complaining about arguments he wasn't making - the very definition of a straw man.
He literally said "most musicians would do better by givimng away music and making their money from gigs and t-shirts".
Because the music industry is literally one of the worst for ripping people off, that's why. Royalties are tiny, costs are pushed onto bands as loans, and the money from lawsuits (Napster, mp3.com) has gone entirely to the labels. Toni Braxton and TLC famously made their labels $150 million apiece, and both ended up declaring bankruptcy.
And most of those are decades old. Disney got into a rut after Little Mermaid and Beauty in the Beast: movie would be a fairy tale musical, with highly annoying side kicks. So lets hope they don't fuck up Pixar.
I would contend something different. Inheritance is garbage IMNSOH - these kids did nothing to create this work, their father did. Why should they benefit from it? In fact, why should anyone receive many millions in inheritance?
And you'd have a great point if the heirs were keeping the characters out of the public domain, but that's not the case. If they don't repo the rights, they'll just be used by Disney for their next hundred copyright extensions.
To paraphrase Buffett, the children of the rich deserve to be rich as much as the children of Olympic athletes deserve to be gold medalists.
No doubt. But this isn't a case of do-nothing heirs vs the public, it's a case of do-nothing heirs vs a famously greedy conglomerate.
Too bad your analogy sucks in 18 different ways. First, a brick wall doesn't continually generate money. Copyrighted works do, as long as there are customers to buy them. Second, you might have a point if it was a matter of an author's heirs holding onto the rights vs them sliding into the public domain. But that's not the case - it's heirs vs a famously greedy conglomerate.
The "watchful eye" trains them into thinking before they do things, which is an internal control.
It also means they'll think about responsibility in terms of "grounding" and "guilt" instead of how actions affect them as individuals. Which is kind important for when they turn 18 and you no longer own them.
When my oldest was born we thought the same way you expressed in this post. She's 12 now, and with school buses, field trips and wanting to go to the stores by herself and trotting off with friends you damn well bet I am going to have one for each child I have. Injected under the skin if I thought it would work. I take every effort to secure the safety of my blond haired blue-eyed gems, and that also means utilizing every resource available to my advantage. You also assume that every nation is safe for young girls or boys.
Do you also put crash helmets and flame retardant suits on your kids whenever you take them somewhere by car? Methinks not, but that would do far more to enhance their real-world safety than being a helicopter parent.
Overprotective? No.
Massively over-protective. You're the sort of parent who's 18 year old kid goes off to her first year of college, and drinks herself to death because 1) you've been working on a baaaaacklaaaaaash for 18 years and 2) she has no self-reliance because you've had one hand on her shoulder her entire life.
Do you put your kid in flame retardant suits and crash helmets when you take them somewhere in your car? Because that would do far more to increase their real-world safety than preparing for a kidnapping that has a.00000001% chance of happening.
And besides, if these devices actually become common, actual nazi-baby-raping kidnappers will just start stripping kids of all clothing and electronics before leaving town.
Project much? The vast majority of police action isn't investigating murders or pulling over drunk drivers, it's busting pot smokers and meeting their quota for revenue generation (traffic tickets).
Two problems with your holier-than-thou shpeel: speed limits are set by zoning, not by how fast it is to safely drive on any given road. And most traffic tickets have nothing to do with enforcing safety, but revenue generation.
The arguments were covered more than exhaustively in the Slashdot discussion which resulted from Charlie Miller pwn2owning the MacBook in two minutes because it was "easiest" of the machines in the competition and I should not have to hold anyone's hand in this case.
Do you also hang out in USENET forums and snottily tell people "this was discussed in alt.os.system.v.3.1 in 1991, fuck off"? It's not other people's jobs to read your mind or have read every relevant Slashdot discussion. It's your job to offer evidence for your assertions - anything else is pure laziness.
And as proof of that, drinky, why do you like to sleep with little boys and start neighborhood cats on fire? You know, since it's your job to disprove my assertion and all...
Then his job of refuting the OP's claims should have been easy
I allege that you like to sleep with little boys and set neighborhood cats on fire. Now, is it my job to prove that assertion, or your job to disprove it?
"Citation needed" simply doesn't progress the conversation to anything useful
As opposed to random statements with nothing to back them up?
I have long thought Apple did not take security seriously or at least did not devote the resources they should on security matters.
Based on what, exactly.
Worse, I absolutely do not want to go through a decade of painful and annoying security problems (like the windows users went through) before Apple begins to put real effort into security.
And why would that happen? Apple doesn't have a scripting language tied into a web browser that's tied into the operating system. Apple doesn't leave services running all over the place. Apple doesn't have an email client that automatically previews emails while running the aforementioned scripting language.
Slashdot Mirror
As I said below:
You're still comparing a wall vs many copies of a copyrighted work. No matter how much you massage this analogy, it still sucks.
Oh, wait...what?
Oh, duh? Realities' well known liberal bias raises it's head yet again.
or even harmless things like removing the W from all the keyboards
Or myths that have no basis in reality?
Actually I was just pointing out that politics in general is a dirty game, and both groups are good at dishing out crap, and that neither group is good at receiving it.
Except of course that you only have half of that right. A Dem calls Republicans assholes before he takes a job, and he gets canned for it after the fact. A vice president tells a senator to "go fuck yourself" on the Senate floor, and it's business as usual. The GOP dishes out on a regular basis, and the Dems bend over and take it.
By the way, you're right: nowhere does it say "their version." Of course I don't see how that's EVEN REMOTELY FUCKING RELEVANT you illiterate hack.
LOL. You harp on someone for "reading comprehension" while spouting on about something not in the summary, and you call me an illiterate hack? Question: do you use a cannon or a howitzer for your projection?
My truck may weigh more but uses wider tires than your average lighter car, so it's probably about the same per square inch of contact surface.
Nope. See Geiger below.
Because it's a pickup, I'm already assessed commercial weight fees with my annual license tags, so I already pay more (FOUR TIMES more than a CAR of the same weight)
On registration only.
Explain to me how we could build the whole freakin' Interstate system during the 1960s, with WAY less tax revenue, but now with taxes way up we somehow can't pay to maintain it, let alone build anew? Right......
Wow. To quote Brzezinski: you know, you have such a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on that it's almost embarrassing to listen to you. We had a 91% marginal income tax rate in the 50's and early 60's, and a 70% marginal rate until Reagan blew up the budget with his tax cuts for the rich. There's a reason why we built the Interstate Highway System and went to the moon, and it's not because of supply side economics.
No, most incompetent, petulant children
You're projecting. Again.
The fact remains that if you do something simple like googling "aslr linux vista osx" you get a pile of articles on the subject. So asking me for a citation is just fucking lazy, and you are just fucking whiny. Go away, or I shall taunt you a second time.
So drinky, why do you like to sleep with little boys so much and start neighborhood cats on fire?
The crutch does not prevent education, teaching them to think, it simply makes it less likely they'll FAIL to think.
And that sort of thinking will serve them well as far as staying in your good graces until they turn 18. After they turn 18, not so much.
Again, I AM NOT SAYING THEY CAN"T HAVE A LIFE, I'm just saying they need BOUNDARIES AND RULES aside from the CONSEQUENCES OF LIFE that are FAR more often permanently scaring, and completely avoidable.
All of which were possible long before it was possible to strap people with GPS navigation. Another question for you: do you put your kids in crash helmets and flame retardant suits before taking them anywhere in a car? Because that would do FAR more to increase their real-world safety than lowjacking them.
SO your argument has a good flaw as well....
No, it doesn't.
I believe he did state that the new wall would continue to improve the value of the property - which is true. It is an investment in the property itself - not a furnishing.
You're still comparing a wall vs many copies of a copyrighted work. No matter how much you massage this analogy, it still sucks.
only because they are *copyrighted* - if walls had the same protection
they would generate revenue forever too (cause walls are damn useful)
No, they wouldn't. You're still comparing a wall vs many copies of something being sold.
Put as many candle sprinkles on as you want, but this analogy is still a turd sandwich.
Neither does a copyrighted work - it *transfers* money from one person to another.
Did you read past that sentence? You know, where I said "so long as there are customers to buy them?" You're arguing a distinction without a difference based on a hyper-literal, selective interpretation of an offhand statement.
Try taking some Colon Blow lighten up.
Ooo, nitpicking fail. Are you also one of those grammar nazis with bad grammar?
Straw man? Care to explain?
You were complaining about arguments he wasn't making - the very definition of a straw man.
He literally said "most musicians would do better by givimng away music and making their money from gigs and t-shirts".
Because the music industry is literally one of the worst for ripping people off, that's why. Royalties are tiny, costs are pushed onto bands as loans, and the money from lawsuits (Napster, mp3.com) has gone entirely to the labels. Toni Braxton and TLC famously made their labels $150 million apiece, and both ended up declaring bankruptcy.
There are exceptions
And most of those are decades old. Disney got into a rut after Little Mermaid and Beauty in the Beast: movie would be a fairy tale musical, with highly annoying side kicks. So lets hope they don't fuck up Pixar.
I would contend something different. Inheritance is garbage IMNSOH - these kids did nothing to create this work, their father did. Why should they benefit from it? In fact, why should anyone receive many millions in inheritance?
And you'd have a great point if the heirs were keeping the characters out of the public domain, but that's not the case. If they don't repo the rights, they'll just be used by Disney for their next hundred copyright extensions.
To paraphrase Buffett, the children of the rich deserve to be rich as much as the children of Olympic athletes deserve to be gold medalists.
No doubt. But this isn't a case of do-nothing heirs vs the public, it's a case of do-nothing heirs vs a famously greedy conglomerate.
Too bad your analogy sucks in 18 different ways. First, a brick wall doesn't continually generate money. Copyrighted works do, as long as there are customers to buy them. Second, you might have a point if it was a matter of an author's heirs holding onto the rights vs them sliding into the public domain. But that's not the case - it's heirs vs a famously greedy conglomerate.
The watch is a crutch, for you.
The "watchful eye" trains them into thinking before they do things, which is an internal control.
It also means they'll think about responsibility in terms of "grounding" and "guilt" instead of how actions affect them as individuals. Which is kind important for when they turn 18 and you no longer own them.
Do you also put crash helmets and flame retardant suits on your kids whenever you take them somewhere by car? Methinks not, but that would do far more to enhance their real-world safety than being a helicopter parent.
Massively over-protective. You're the sort of parent who's 18 year old kid goes off to her first year of college, and drinks herself to death because 1) you've been working on a baaaaacklaaaaaash for 18 years and 2) she has no self-reliance because you've had one hand on her shoulder her entire life.
Do you put your kid in flame retardant suits and crash helmets when you take them somewhere in your car? Because that would do far more to increase their real-world safety than preparing for a kidnapping that has a .00000001% chance of happening.
And besides, if these devices actually become common, actual nazi-baby-raping kidnappers will just start stripping kids of all clothing and electronics before leaving town.
Project much? The vast majority of police action isn't investigating murders or pulling over drunk drivers, it's busting pot smokers and meeting their quota for revenue generation (traffic tickets).
Two problems with your holier-than-thou shpeel: speed limits are set by zoning, not by how fast it is to safely drive on any given road. And most traffic tickets have nothing to do with enforcing safety, but revenue generation.
But it's not really fair to say that musicians should just give their work away and make money through another (although related) avenue
Straw man.
That's like saying all programmers should just program in their spare time and become IP lawyers because they'll make way more money.
That's like saying that Bernie Madoff's embezzlement of billions from investors is okay because you aren't calling it baby-raping-cannibalism.
Just like how you're far more likely to meet a kool aid drinking PETA hater than a kool aid drinking member of PETA.
The arguments were covered more than exhaustively in the Slashdot discussion which resulted from Charlie Miller pwn2owning the MacBook in two minutes because it was "easiest" of the machines in the competition and I should not have to hold anyone's hand in this case.
Do you also hang out in USENET forums and snottily tell people "this was discussed in alt.os.system.v.3.1 in 1991, fuck off"? It's not other people's jobs to read your mind or have read every relevant Slashdot discussion. It's your job to offer evidence for your assertions - anything else is pure laziness.
And as proof of that, drinky, why do you like to sleep with little boys and start neighborhood cats on fire? You know, since it's your job to disprove my assertion and all...
Then his job of refuting the OP's claims should have been easy
I allege that you like to sleep with little boys and set neighborhood cats on fire. Now, is it my job to prove that assertion, or your job to disprove it?
"Citation needed" simply doesn't progress the conversation to anything useful
As opposed to random statements with nothing to back them up?
I have long thought Apple did not take security seriously or at least did not devote the resources they should on security matters.
Based on what, exactly.
Worse, I absolutely do not want to go through a decade of painful and annoying security problems (like the windows users went through) before Apple begins to put real effort into security.
And why would that happen? Apple doesn't have a scripting language tied into a web browser that's tied into the operating system. Apple doesn't leave services running all over the place. Apple doesn't have an email client that automatically previews emails while running the aforementioned scripting language.