Games lose because to be fair you have to subtract the costs of the gaming consoles. They should never have been included in the first place.
If you add console costs to the gamer total, than it's only fair to add the costs of all those DVD players and VCRs to the movie total. And let's not forget the costs to subscribe to those movie channels, e.g., HBO. And what about the costs for pay-per-view movies?! Heck, why not add the costs of building theaters to the movie total?! And don't forget the price of all that overpriced popcorn and soda.
I don't find the "small yellow div" to be annoying at all. With IE, each and every time you came across a site using Flash (for example) a pop-up would stop you in your tracks and ask you to choose. THAT was annoying.
Although I admit that an option to "never bother me again" would be great, the small yellow div doesn't keep me awake at night.
You don't get it. The article spoke of the harm to musicans but doesn't metion even one. Can you imagine an artcile about the impact of a factory closing on its workers, without mentioning even one actual worker who was impacted? I think it's bullshit.
I just want one bit of proof from one musican that he gets this money. Just one.
That doesn't tell me anything about how much money actual musicians and songwriters have been given. In the US the record companies hold the copyrights, I'm guessing it's no different in Canada.
I find it funny that the article stated, as a matter of fact, that the ruling would erode revenue to muscians. But even though there are probably tens of thousands of musicans in Canada, the journalist couldn't find even one to interview about the alleged hardship?
Does anyone have any real evidence that musicans actually get this money? Everything I've read about the music industry says they get zero.
"For an avid movie watcher (and I consider 6 movies a month avid) I can't see the need to pay a monthly fee EVERY MONTH when I might not be receiving enough movies for it to be worth it."
You don't have to watch them, you store them until you want to watch them.
"I refuse to support a company that I find annoying."
Since I find all commericals annoying, if I followed your rule, I wouldn't be able to buy anything.
"Usually because they take up too much room and I don't need them."
Hard drives are cheap, you can get 160 gb drives for about $80 or less. There really is no such thing as "too much room" any more.
"Might want to stick with the more "reputable" sources."
I didn't know there was such a thing as reputable pirates!
"It takes an hour or two to download and a day or two to get in the mail. You don't consider that?"
No I don't consider that waiting. Because when the movie is being sent I don't have to do anything. My bandwidth is not being tied up. That's like saying I'm "waiting" for tomorrow's lunch. Sure, I'll have lunch tomorrow, sure I'll want lunch tomorrow, and sure my lunch won't get here until tomorrow, but I'm certainly not waiting for it now.
I used to do that, but hard drives are so cheap I just rip the whole thing. I use PowerDVD 6 to play them via the VIDEO_TS.ifo file from every computer in the house. One of which is a PVR connected to the living room's TV.
I have no problem paying a monthly payment plan as long as I'm getting movies that I want. 66 cents per movie is cheap whether it is paid monthly or not.
"Netflix's commercials annoy me."
All commercials annoy me. But I still buy products regardless.
"Downloading movies is free. 66 cents each still costs more than downloading them."
But you're downloading crap. I'm getting the actual movie and can rip it myself, with all the menus, audio tracks, and bonus material intact. You never know what you're getting when you've wasted the time to download.
"They come in a format that is all ready to be played on your computer (if you so desire) instead of having to wait to convert the 4GB to that format yourself."
You don't consider the time spent downloading it waiting?! It' takes me about ten minutes to rip the DVD to my hard drive. Can you really download an entire movie in ten minutes?!
The moron behind you who feels he has to explain the movie point-by-point to his girlfriend. And the parents who feel it's appropriate to bring a crying baby to an R rated movie. And the over-priced popcorn and soda.
I love movies but I hate seeing them in the theater.
I've been using that sig for quite a while without any complaints. Exactly what is the problem?
There is a joke, maybe a maxim better describes it, that Linux will not succeed on the desktop until it is easy enough for a grandma to use.
One day I realized that every time I use Google I "use" an entire bank of Linux servers. And quite ironically, I also realized that since most people use Internet Explorer, Microsoft provides the biggest front-end for Linux, when you combine Google with all the sites running Linux/Apache.
If you don't find it funny, that's fine. I'm generally the only person who finds my jokes humorous (which should give me a clue to keep my mouth shut!). But you cannot deny the truth either, no matter how you try to mess with the semantics.
It's as simple as this: When someone uses Google they use Linux. It's impossible to use Google WITHOUT using Linux. The fact that Linux is on a server somewhere doesn't change the fact that you're using Linux.
And yes, if your home's power is supplied by a nuclear power plant, then you use nuclear power. Duh!
Slashdot Mirror
Games lose because to be fair you have to subtract the costs of the gaming consoles. They should never have been included in the first place.
If you add console costs to the gamer total, than it's only fair to add the costs of all those DVD players and VCRs to the movie total. And let's not forget the costs to subscribe to those movie channels, e.g., HBO. And what about the costs for pay-per-view movies?! Heck, why not add the costs of building theaters to the movie total?! And don't forget the price of all that overpriced popcorn and soda.
"American Presidential debates are rigged [opendebates.org]."
Yeah, big deal. So are the elections.
Yeah, but Democrats used "free speech zones" too. So they're no better.
I don't find the "small yellow div" to be annoying at all. With IE, each and every time you came across a site using Flash (for example) a pop-up would stop you in your tracks and ask you to choose. THAT was annoying.
Although I admit that an option to "never bother me again" would be great, the small yellow div doesn't keep me awake at night.
So basically in the US you have to pay extra to get the right to free speech.
...who need hard drive space. Hard drives are VERY cheap nowadays! My god. How many movies did this guy have?!
Could you please post your address, I'd like to show you how clever I could be at breaking into your house.
You don't get it. The article spoke of the harm to musicans but doesn't metion even one. Can you imagine an artcile about the impact of a factory closing on its workers, without mentioning even one actual worker who was impacted? I think it's bullshit.
I just want one bit of proof from one musican that he gets this money. Just one.
This bit of satire seems appropriate.
That doesn't tell me anything about how much money actual musicians and songwriters have been given. In the US the record companies hold the copyrights, I'm guessing it's no different in Canada.
This is really old news.
I find it funny that the article stated, as a matter of fact, that the ruling would erode revenue to muscians. But even though there are probably tens of thousands of musicans in Canada, the journalist couldn't find even one to interview about the alleged hardship?
Does anyone have any real evidence that musicans actually get this money? Everything I've read about the music industry says they get zero.
Or do you expect me to believe that a judge actually made a fair decision in an IP case?!
And I missed it! Does anyone know when they're re-airing it?! Thanks!
"For an avid movie watcher (and I consider 6 movies a month avid) I can't see the need to pay a monthly fee EVERY MONTH when I might not be receiving enough movies for it to be worth it."
You don't have to watch them, you store them until you want to watch them.
"I refuse to support a company that I find annoying."
Since I find all commericals annoying, if I followed your rule, I wouldn't be able to buy anything.
"Usually because they take up too much room and I don't need them."
Hard drives are cheap, you can get 160 gb drives for about $80 or less. There really is no such thing as "too much room" any more.
"Might want to stick with the more "reputable" sources."
I didn't know there was such a thing as reputable pirates!
"It takes an hour or two to download and a day or two to get in the mail. You don't consider that?"
No I don't consider that waiting. Because when the movie is being sent I don't have to do anything. My bandwidth is not being tied up. That's like saying I'm "waiting" for tomorrow's lunch. Sure, I'll have lunch tomorrow, sure I'll want lunch tomorrow, and sure my lunch won't get here until tomorrow, but I'm certainly not waiting for it now.
I used to do that, but hard drives are so cheap I just rip the whole thing. I use PowerDVD 6 to play them via the VIDEO_TS.ifo file from every computer in the house. One of which is a PVR connected to the living room's TV.
"I don't want to be on a monthly payment plan"
I have no problem paying a monthly payment plan as long as I'm getting movies that I want. 66 cents per movie is cheap whether it is paid monthly or not.
"Netflix's commercials annoy me."
All commercials annoy me. But I still buy products regardless.
"Downloading movies is free. 66 cents each still costs more than downloading them."
But you're downloading crap. I'm getting the actual movie and can rip it myself, with all the menus, audio tracks, and bonus material intact. You never know what you're getting when you've wasted the time to download.
"They come in a format that is all ready to be played on your computer (if you so desire) instead of having to wait to convert the 4GB to that format yourself."
You don't consider the time spent downloading it waiting?! It' takes me about ten minutes to rip the DVD to my hard drive. Can you really download an entire movie in ten minutes?!
When you can sign up for Netflix and get them delivered to your home for about 66 cents each!
Maybe I'm just lucky, but where I live I can get 14 movies delivered a week with Netflix's 8 movies at a time plan.
The moron behind you who feels he has to explain the movie point-by-point to his girlfriend. And the parents who feel it's appropriate to bring a crying baby to an R rated movie. And the over-priced popcorn and soda.
I love movies but I hate seeing them in the theater.
Of course I mess with semantics. I'm a lawyer with a philosophy degree.
I've been using that sig for quite a while without any complaints. Exactly what is the problem?
There is a joke, maybe a maxim better describes it, that Linux will not succeed on the desktop until it is easy enough for a grandma to use.
One day I realized that every time I use Google I "use" an entire bank of Linux servers. And quite ironically, I also realized that since most people use Internet Explorer, Microsoft provides the biggest front-end for Linux, when you combine Google with all the sites running Linux/Apache.
If you don't find it funny, that's fine. I'm generally the only person who finds my jokes humorous (which should give me a clue to keep my mouth shut!). But you cannot deny the truth either, no matter how you try to mess with the semantics.
Who said anything about her using Linux "as her desktop"?! Can you even read?!
I wish I knew you personally, because I'd bet you otherwise and I'd win. Remember this: Europe WILL get software patents within the decade.
It's as simple as this: When someone uses Google they use Linux. It's impossible to use Google WITHOUT using Linux. The fact that Linux is on a server somewhere doesn't change the fact that you're using Linux.
And yes, if your home's power is supplied by a nuclear power plant, then you use nuclear power. Duh!
Gee, I think Apple would disagree.