It's even better than DAT because the distrubtion is not only easier/faster you also lose the possibility of DAT noise if it was occuring in a generation along the chain.
He also mentions that it doesn't have a DVD writer which will *not* allow for the "off-loading of files".
Well, I know plenty of people that don't have 40GB HDs and no DVD writer. Some people don't even have a DVD-ROM drive. Most people interested in the eMac line are probably low end users that aren't going to be "off-loading" great amounts of data to permanent backup anyway.
This sounds just completely insane. Fraud by downloading GPL software? Why would SCO post it if they were just going to claim fraud? It sounds like entrapment, or bait and switch, to me.
Actually from my limited understanding of the essay, SCO is trying to say that they weren't really allowing you to download the GPL software and that IBM's access to it was unauthorized.
Basically IBM hacked SCO.
I'm waiting for missing track #17 - Silent night!
on
Automatic Christmas Music
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Hmm, I don't know if any of you will be able to actually listen to this "music" but it certainly isn't worth wasting your time and bandwith to try. Expecting something more like "music" I downloaded it at work and at home before the story posted to the front page for everyone...
To my surprise it is quite "infantile". What I mean when I say "infantile" is that it sounds like a 9 month old baby banging on the keys randomly until you want to duct tape their hands together (see 02 - Mountain noel for an example of this).
03 - Faithful clear is certainly "clear" as it is basically the same tone for 2:31. Really holidayish, thanks! Expecting 13 - Cherry misfortune to perhaps be exactly the opposite I listened intently three times hoping to catch a glimpse of the artistry that would cause this story to be posted to Slashdot. I didn't find it.
Needless to say it won't exactly be a Merry Christmas for Brian Whitman and his computers and I doubt they will be making any money anytime soon if they continue to put out work of this "caliber"...
Brian, perhaps "17 - Silent night" should just be a blank MP3 that goes on for 2:34. I think that one would be the most popular.
Canada's Copyright Act gives the federal board the authority to apply levies on blank media such as compact discs and audio cassettes. But the wording of the act has not kept up with the new technology of MP3 players, represented by the wildly popular iPod, which use an embedded memory rather than discs or cassettes, to store digital copies of songs.
Exactly! All they have to do is change the Act to include digital media players (and any possible future devices/media) so that this won't happen again.
Buy 'em now while you don't have to pay the extra tax.
People that have seizures have seizures because they have another problem. They don't have them because of video games.
The people who died from exhaustion in Asia again had other problems. They could have died from exhaustion when they were masturbating in a toilet closet.
How do you give *that* child a good shot for a good future? If both parents work, who is there to look out for the kids?? Companies certainly don't care about the wellbeing of the kid, they just want to make money.
I don't see how a TV and Playstation in a blue collar home (mind you your words) limits the child's future? The child has the ability to do well in school and to make something of himself without direct supervision.
Sure, they have less of a chance but they can still do it. It certainly isn't up to the Government to step in and make sure that happens though.
Most killings in school shootings are indicative of video-game style killings -- ie, head-shots and 'sure-kill' shots -- something that is learned, not inherently known.
You know, I read a book that was set in the West after the civil war. It was from a series of books about a sharpshooter that was wandering around searching for the relatives of people lost in a war camp during the war. He constantly talked about killing people with head shots.
Maybe they read that book and took his advice being that he was a sharpshooter and all? Personally, even though I have played 1000s of hours of Quake I am fairly certain I couldn't hold a rifle and get an accurate head-shot. Maybe if I practiced with a real gun.
So what, pray tell - if not violent video games - is teaching our children to do this?
Again, I'm not educated enough on the topic to respond with facts but I have my own theories including violent acts by others and violent acts by parents.
It's certainly not going to stop if we don't allow them to buy "rated M" games.
First, Blagojavic is a democrat. You should have some facts before posting.
I wasn't aware that I listed a political affiliation? Democrats can propose conservative bills can't they? Hmm, perhaps you should have your facts straight before you reply.
Yep, you can die from video games. Games influance people just like anything else. Have enough apathy? Feeling easily irritable? Think it is cool to take a gun to school? These are the attributes to video games.
You can attribute drinking milk to causing cancer. Doesn't mean that's what caused it. Alcohol kills as does tobacco. Direct causes. Not indirect as you list.
We never had people bringing guns to school before video games became popular. So I would tell you to get your facts straight.
Right and I'm the one without facts. You really shouldn't draw at straws when trying to find explanations for events when you are blaming someone else for not having any "facts".
And I expect some will say "It must be the parents who decide what their kids can do". To them I would say, check out the lower middle class where both parents work, and the kid has nothing but a tv set and playstation.
I'm sorry but it isn't up to the Government to decide how a child is raised. If the blue collar family that you so *ignorantly* described wants to babysit their children in that manner, so be it.
It isn't society's place to dictate to individuals how they should raise their children. It certainly isn't up to the whims of a single political entity to do so either.
"We already place limits on alcohol, tobacco, even adult movies. It's just logical that video games, which are so heavily marketed to young kids but many of which contain adult images, should not be available to young people or to minors," Ottenhoff said.
Ok, I see the connection with adult movies (and I'm talking about porn, not R rated movies) but I cannot see how they think this can cross over into alcohol and tobacco territory!
Alcohol and tobacco are PHYSICALLY HARMFUL. You can die from alcohol and tobacco. You *cannot* die from abuse of video games... Explicit or otherwise.
On a personal note: Yes, video games showing full frontal nudity or realistic depictions of death (and when I say this I mean watching actual video clips of people being tortured, decapitated, etc) should be looked into as we do with movies... But video games showing a completely unrealistic depiction of human characters (as real as video games are looking they are still not 100% on) in a fantasy world should be treated as such.
I thought that as we matured as a society that this type of conservative bullshit would cease. Perhaps we are regressing?
I realize you value your privacy, but keep in mind that public places are by definition not private, and that the government won't be putting cameras in private spaces anytime soon, as it would pretty much require the constitution to be gutted first.
The current administration has already proven that they have both the desire and the ability to drastically change our laws while keeping the public thinking that it is in their best interests for the government to do so.
Just wait for the terrorists to begin living right in a middle-class neighborhood acting as any other family. Then the government will want to curb the ability for "terrorists" to create cells right in our own backyards by slowing inching cameras closer and closer to our homes.
Remember, the government is just watching out for us. Right?
Even if you stand in line at a post office, there is a camera trained right on your face at the counter. This happens at practically every bank and government institute already. Nothing new here except a new tool for law enforcement. Of course if you're into mail fraud or anthrax then this just might affect you, sorry.
I am supposed to tolerate something just because it's already been done? Thanks but no thanks. Just because we have been taught that we have no privacy in public doesn't mean we should have cameras trained on us at every turn.
Soon the cameras will be inside your house but it will be ok because they are everywhere else.
No, but as michael keeps posting paranoid left-wing drivel as commentary to each story to the front page of slashdot, it's inevitable that I and a lot of other people will stop reading it.
Why can't I just send a fucking package without having my picture taken especially without the kiosk having a 5'x5' sign in blinking neon that it is doing so?
Personally I want to be able to send a vibrating, two headed dildo, in the USPS mail to a random recipient without having the Post Office opening the packaging thinking it is a bomb because of the way I look.
Honestly, I steer completely clear of the "new" TLDs as they are mostly just redirects to the "standard" TLDs (.net/.com/.org) or they are blatant trash sites.
To me this seems like nothing more than an attempt to make money revenue for all parties involved.
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.
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.
All commercials annoy me. But I still buy products regardless.
That's your problem. I refuse to support a company that I find annoying.
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.
Anytime I have ripped a movie I have removed all the extras anyway. Usually because they take up too much room and I don't need them. Downloading a movie in one of the various formats usually has already done that for me.
You never know what you're getting when you've wasted the time to download.
I have never downloaded a movie (in the past two years+) that has been anything other than what it was labelled as. Might want to stick with the more "reputable" sources.
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?!
It takes an hour or two to download and a day or two to get in the mail. You don't consider that?
A recent example is that a friend of mine missed last week's episode of her favorite show, ER. I got a torrent the next day and burned her a DVD.
I haven't been downloading much lately just because I have DirecTV and Tivo now but I downloaded this week's Simpsons' and Arrested Development episodes because they were both preempted by Survivor's off-night finale bullshit.
Fox should be fucking thrilled that I am watching their shows and would go so far as to download the episodes to keep current.
I really don't see the difference between me Tivoing it and downloading it. I wouldn't have seen the commercials w/the 30s skip feature anyway nor would I have watched the commercials even if I didn't use Tivo.
When you can sign up for Netflix and get them delivered to your home for about 66 cents each!
I have a couple reasons why:
1. I don't want to be on a monthly payment plan ($17.99 or something) where I have to get 7 movies in that month in order to be paying less than renting the movies at the video store.
2. Netflix's commercials annoy me. Standing in line at a store? Who the fuck does that? I have never waited to rent a movie and honestly, putting them into the mail takes longer for me than does going to the video store that's less than two miles away.
3. Downloading movies is free. 66 cents each still costs more than downloading them.
4. 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.
RealNeworks said in a statement that it remains "fully committed to providing consumers with the freedom to use the music libraries they purchase from us on different portable audio devices they acquire, both now and in the future--including the iPod Photo."
I know the popular opinion here is typically pro-Apple/iTMS/iPod but honestly I just don't see why we can be pro-reverse engineering on everything else and not this.
I applaud Real for working to give their customers the most choice and I really don't approve of Apple *refusing* to support their customers the best way that they can.
rather pay even higher ticket prices. See, the advertisers defer some of the cost of the movie, be it at the production level, distribution or showing.
I pay a monthly fee to Tivo so I don't have to watch TV with ads. I'd be willing to spend even more money to remove the fucking things from movies too. Why not?
Don't want to sit through some commercials, tough tittie, still doesn't give you the right to steal it.
They also shouldn't be allowed to FORCE you to watch them when you buy the movie later either. If you buy a DVD from say Disney... Depending on your DVD player you may be literally FORCED to wait for the commercials before the movie starts.
I think that if they can do that we should be allowed to know exactly when the movie will start after those fucking ads.
Look at your list: No tabs. This is considered by most to be basic functionality.
Sorry but "most"? No. "Most" don't use a browser with tabs. "Most" use IE. Wrong.
No bookmarks! Come one here. Nobody is forcing you to use them, but bookmark code might take up 10K, if that. I would hardly consider bookmarks to be consideree bloat.
Searching bookmarks being essential? No. Bookmarks aren't essential either. Just because they are "comfortable" and you are used to them does not mean you need them. Hell, I haven't used a bookmark since the late 1990s when you couldn't search for something you forgot.
The only solution for you is to become your own tailor. You will need to get down'n'dirty with a compiler and write your own (or hack something that already exists, but you don't like firefox, so I am assuming that anything Mozilla is out also).
Why? Why can't Firefox just have these things as options you can remove? Why do we have to have them as static parts of the browser?
Slashdot Mirror
Mmm, "forbidden donut." :)
It's even better than DAT because the distrubtion is not only easier/faster you also lose the possibility of DAT noise if it was occuring in a generation along the chain.
bt.etree.org for distributing legally traded music via torrents? Along with various other P2P protocols for doing the same thing (FurthurNET, etc).
He also mentions that it doesn't have a DVD writer which will *not* allow for the "off-loading of files".
Well, I know plenty of people that don't have 40GB HDs and no DVD writer. Some people don't even have a DVD-ROM drive. Most people interested in the eMac line are probably low end users that aren't going to be "off-loading" great amounts of data to permanent backup anyway.
This sounds just completely insane. Fraud by downloading GPL software? Why would SCO post it if they were just going to claim fraud? It sounds like entrapment, or bait and switch, to me.
Actually from my limited understanding of the essay, SCO is trying to say that they weren't really allowing you to download the GPL software and that IBM's access to it was unauthorized.
Basically IBM hacked SCO.
Hmm, I don't know if any of you will be able to actually listen to this "music" but it certainly isn't worth wasting your time and bandwith to try. Expecting something more like "music" I downloaded it at work and at home before the story posted to the front page for everyone...
To my surprise it is quite "infantile". What I mean when I say "infantile" is that it sounds like a 9 month old baby banging on the keys randomly until you want to duct tape their hands together (see 02 - Mountain noel for an example of this).
03 - Faithful clear is certainly "clear" as it is basically the same tone for 2:31. Really holidayish, thanks! Expecting 13 - Cherry misfortune to perhaps be exactly the opposite I listened intently three times hoping to catch a glimpse of the artistry that would cause this story to be posted to Slashdot. I didn't find it.
Needless to say it won't exactly be a Merry Christmas for Brian Whitman and his computers and I doubt they will be making any money anytime soon if they continue to put out work of this "caliber"...
Brian, perhaps "17 - Silent night" should just be a blank MP3 that goes on for 2:34. I think that one would be the most popular.
What does this have to do w/promoting research? I took this as something to do for fun.
TJPGGNCJJOTJPMZTZJPOFDY (yeah it's encrypted, enjoy the easy answer).
Canada's Copyright Act gives the federal board the authority to apply levies on blank media such as compact discs and audio cassettes. But the wording of the act has not kept up with the new technology of MP3 players, represented by the wildly popular iPod, which use an embedded memory rather than discs or cassettes, to store digital copies of songs.
Exactly! All they have to do is change the Act to include digital media players (and any possible future devices/media) so that this won't happen again.
Buy 'em now while you don't have to pay the extra tax.
People that have seizures have seizures because they have another problem. They don't have them because of video games.
The people who died from exhaustion in Asia again had other problems. They could have died from exhaustion when they were masturbating in a toilet closet.
Give me a break.
How do you give *that* child a good shot for a good future? If both parents work, who is there to look out for the kids?? Companies certainly don't care about the wellbeing of the kid, they just want to make money.
I don't see how a TV and Playstation in a blue collar home (mind you your words) limits the child's future? The child has the ability to do well in school and to make something of himself without direct supervision.
Sure, they have less of a chance but they can still do it. It certainly isn't up to the Government to step in and make sure that happens though.
Most killings in school shootings are indicative of video-game style killings -- ie, head-shots and 'sure-kill' shots -- something that is learned, not inherently known.
You know, I read a book that was set in the West after the civil war. It was from a series of books about a sharpshooter that was wandering around searching for the relatives of people lost in a war camp during the war. He constantly talked about killing people with head shots.
Maybe they read that book and took his advice being that he was a sharpshooter and all? Personally, even though I have played 1000s of hours of Quake I am fairly certain I couldn't hold a rifle and get an accurate head-shot. Maybe if I practiced with a real gun.
So what, pray tell - if not violent video games - is teaching our children to do this?
Again, I'm not educated enough on the topic to respond with facts but I have my own theories including violent acts by others and violent acts by parents.
It's certainly not going to stop if we don't allow them to buy "rated M" games.
First, Blagojavic is a democrat. You should have some facts before posting.
I wasn't aware that I listed a political affiliation? Democrats can propose conservative bills can't they? Hmm, perhaps you should have your facts straight before you reply.
Yep, you can die from video games. Games influance people just like anything else. Have enough apathy? Feeling easily irritable? Think it is cool to take a gun to school? These are the attributes to video games.
You can attribute drinking milk to causing cancer. Doesn't mean that's what caused it. Alcohol kills as does tobacco. Direct causes. Not indirect as you list.
We never had people bringing guns to school before video games became popular. So I would tell you to get your facts straight.
Right and I'm the one without facts. You really shouldn't draw at straws when trying to find explanations for events when you are blaming someone else for not having any "facts".
And I expect some will say "It must be the parents who decide what their kids can do". To them I would say, check out the lower middle class where both parents work, and the kid has nothing but a tv set and playstation.
I'm sorry but it isn't up to the Government to decide how a child is raised. If the blue collar family that you so *ignorantly* described wants to babysit their children in that manner, so be it.
It isn't society's place to dictate to individuals how they should raise their children. It certainly isn't up to the whims of a single political entity to do so either.
"We already place limits on alcohol, tobacco, even adult movies. It's just logical that video games, which are so heavily marketed to young kids but many of which contain adult images, should not be available to young people or to minors," Ottenhoff said.
Ok, I see the connection with adult movies (and I'm talking about porn, not R rated movies) but I cannot see how they think this can cross over into alcohol and tobacco territory!
Alcohol and tobacco are PHYSICALLY HARMFUL. You can die from alcohol and tobacco. You *cannot* die from abuse of video games... Explicit or otherwise.
On a personal note: Yes, video games showing full frontal nudity or realistic depictions of death (and when I say this I mean watching actual video clips of people being tortured, decapitated, etc) should be looked into as we do with movies... But video games showing a completely unrealistic depiction of human characters (as real as video games are looking they are still not 100% on) in a fantasy world should be treated as such.
I thought that as we matured as a society that this type of conservative bullshit would cease. Perhaps we are regressing?
I realize you value your privacy, but keep in mind that public places are by definition not private, and that the government won't be putting cameras in private spaces anytime soon, as it would pretty much require the constitution to be gutted first.
The current administration has already proven that they have both the desire and the ability to drastically change our laws while keeping the public thinking that it is in their best interests for the government to do so.
Just wait for the terrorists to begin living right in a middle-class neighborhood acting as any other family. Then the government will want to curb the ability for "terrorists" to create cells right in our own backyards by slowing inching cameras closer and closer to our homes.
Remember, the government is just watching out for us. Right?
Even if you stand in line at a post office, there is a camera trained right on your face at the counter. This happens at practically every bank and government institute already. Nothing new here except a new tool for law enforcement.
Of course if you're into mail fraud or anthrax then this just might affect you, sorry.
I am supposed to tolerate something just because it's already been done? Thanks but no thanks. Just because we have been taught that we have no privacy in public doesn't mean we should have cameras trained on us at every turn.
Soon the cameras will be inside your house but it will be ok because they are everywhere else.
No, but as michael keeps posting paranoid left-wing drivel as commentary to each story to the front page of slashdot, it's inevitable that I and a lot of other people will stop reading it.
Why can't I just send a fucking package without having my picture taken especially without the kiosk having a 5'x5' sign in blinking neon that it is doing so?
Personally I want to be able to send a vibrating, two headed dildo, in the USPS mail to a random recipient without having the Post Office opening the packaging thinking it is a bomb because of the way I look.
Honestly, I steer completely clear of the "new" TLDs as they are mostly just redirects to the "standard" TLDs (.net/.com/.org) or they are blatant trash sites.
To me this seems like nothing more than an attempt to make money revenue for all parties involved.
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.
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.
All commercials annoy me. But I still buy products regardless.
That's your problem. I refuse to support a company that I find annoying.
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.
Anytime I have ripped a movie I have removed all the extras anyway. Usually because they take up too much room and I don't need them. Downloading a movie in one of the various formats usually has already done that for me.
You never know what you're getting when you've wasted the time to download.
I have never downloaded a movie (in the past two years+) that has been anything other than what it was labelled as. Might want to stick with the more "reputable" sources.
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?!
It takes an hour or two to download and a day or two to get in the mail. You don't consider that?
A recent example is that a friend of mine missed last week's episode of her favorite show, ER. I got a torrent the next day and burned her a DVD.
I haven't been downloading much lately just because I have DirecTV and Tivo now but I downloaded this week's Simpsons' and Arrested Development episodes because they were both preempted by Survivor's off-night finale bullshit.
Fox should be fucking thrilled that I am watching their shows and would go so far as to download the episodes to keep current.
I really don't see the difference between me Tivoing it and downloading it. I wouldn't have seen the commercials w/the 30s skip feature anyway nor would I have watched the commercials even if I didn't use Tivo.
When you can sign up for Netflix and get them delivered to your home for about 66 cents each!
I have a couple reasons why:
1. I don't want to be on a monthly payment plan ($17.99 or something) where I have to get 7 movies in that month in order to be paying less than renting the movies at the video store.
2. Netflix's commercials annoy me. Standing in line at a store? Who the fuck does that? I have never waited to rent a movie and honestly, putting them into the mail takes longer for me than does going to the video store that's less than two miles away.
3. Downloading movies is free. 66 cents each still costs more than downloading them.
4. 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.
RealNeworks said in a statement that it remains "fully committed to providing consumers with the freedom to use the music libraries they purchase from us on different portable audio devices they acquire, both now and in the future--including the iPod Photo."
I know the popular opinion here is typically pro-Apple/iTMS/iPod but honestly I just don't see why we can be pro-reverse engineering on everything else and not this.
I applaud Real for working to give their customers the most choice and I really don't approve of Apple *refusing* to support their customers the best way that they can.
rather pay even higher ticket prices. See, the advertisers defer some of the cost of the movie, be it at the production level, distribution or showing.
I pay a monthly fee to Tivo so I don't have to watch TV with ads. I'd be willing to spend even more money to remove the fucking things from movies too. Why not?
Don't want to sit through some commercials, tough tittie, still doesn't give you the right to steal it.
They also shouldn't be allowed to FORCE you to watch them when you buy the movie later either. If you buy a DVD from say Disney... Depending on your DVD player you may be literally FORCED to wait for the commercials before the movie starts.
I think that if they can do that we should be allowed to know exactly when the movie will start after those fucking ads.
Fair enough?
I thought it was illegal to do that (the whole DeCSS case and all).
Look at your list: No tabs. This is considered by most to be basic functionality.
Sorry but "most"? No. "Most" don't use a browser with tabs. "Most" use IE. Wrong.
No bookmarks! Come one here. Nobody is forcing you to use them, but bookmark code might take up 10K, if that. I would hardly consider bookmarks to be consideree bloat.
Searching bookmarks being essential? No. Bookmarks aren't essential either. Just because they are "comfortable" and you are used to them does not mean you need them. Hell, I haven't used a bookmark since the late 1990s when you couldn't search for something you forgot.
The only solution for you is to become your own tailor. You will need to get down'n'dirty with a compiler and write your own (or hack something that already exists, but you don't like firefox, so I am assuming that anything Mozilla is out also).
Why? Why can't Firefox just have these things as options you can remove? Why do we have to have them as static parts of the browser?