Dude, everyone knows you are a RIAA/MPAA apologist.
In other words, you can't address a single point I made, so you're bringing out the tired "you're an APOLOGIST!" retort.
Just because the corporations tell you something doesn't mean it is true.
Nobody's telling me anything. Why are you guys OBSESSED with the "corporations?" Why not a single thought devoted toward the very real human beings you're ripping off instead? You know, the artists you're making sure don't get paid today?
Your anti-copyright rant means the GPL has no legal standing. You do realize the GPL stands on copyright, don't you? I'll be sure to remember what you said in the next "stolen GPL code" article...
But of course, I know nothing, RIAA is always correct and evil commmie pink liberals should all die.
And again, we run back to the scapegoat-the-RIAA mindset. It's all you have, stereotypes and emotion-based rhetoric.
Please, your apologist stance is getting old and pointless.
You just can't address my points. As I said, Slashdot has become piracy central, actively advocating ripping people off just because they made the mistake of trying to sell something in a world of freeloaders with high-speed connections.
Yes, that's all piracy is. No freedom-fighter movement against copyright, no freedom-fighter movement against the RIAA--it's just college kids getting albums for free so they don't have to pay for it. Purely selfish. Deep down, you know it, which is why you invent little movements to be part of. "I'm taking down copyright, dude!" Sure.
Then you can no longer refer to copyright-violated GPL code as "stolen code."
Maybe it isn't such a big deal.
Wow. I can't argue with that kind of research.
You are assuming that pirates think it's wrong in the first place.
Oh, they do, very much so. This is why they invent entire belief systems to justify it and make themselves not feel guilty. "The RIAA made me do it!" It's like blaming violent videogames for murder.
"And the "RIAA," a lobby group for the record labels, is made up into this giant evil controlling corporation that you can use to blame everything on to justify your piracy. "I'm ripping Trent Reznor off to protect him from the RIAA!"" Straw man argument.
No, it's not. You just have no counterargument for it. The RIAA is absolutely used as a scapegoat to justify ripping people off so you don't have to pay for something. "The RIAA made me do it!"
When was the last time something like this worked? Most people are sheep.
Again, I just can't argue with this kind of superb dorm-room rhetoric. Most people are sheep, dude! By the way, "something like this" works all the time.
You only say that they are "bogus" because it doesn't fit your view of the world.
No, I say it's bogus because I just proved why it's bogus--esoteric music is rarely traded, if at all, on P2P. What you find are Billboard artists. It makes you frustrated that you can't counter this, so you invent a "world view" argument. Next.
I saw this post here on Slashdot (I think), where this guy was actively downloading popular music, and burning it on CD for his friends so that they got it for free instead of paying money for it. That way, he contributed to making sure the recording industry made less money.
This is the real kicker. You illustrate my own point for me that "today's music sucks, so that's why people pirate" is bogus. You also illustrate that the only reason people want to rip off artists is so they don't have to pay money for it. Congratulations on ripping people off. You just don't care. You've never met, talked to, or asked an artist about what they feel. You just scapegoat some faceless adversary, the "RIAA."
Although if certain studies are to be believed, this kind of thing might actually encourage people to just buy more music. Apparently these evil pirates have more legal music than most people.
"If certain studies are to be believed"..."Apparently"...lovely. No cited studies, and no mention of the fact that correlation does not equal causation anyway.
I think it's pretty clear your pro-piracy agenda is pretty much decimated by simple logic. Have fun making sure people don't get paid today. Next time, do a little thinking before you embarrass yourself with such flawed logic in a post.
Correlation does not equal causation. Forgive me if I don't trust a bunch of Slashdot-posted studies and opinion. If people who download music buy more music than people who don't download music, it's more likely the downloaders are just active music listeners which is why they also happened to buy more music. My friend's girlfriend isn't really into music at all and only listens to a couple of old CDs she has lying around. Guess what, she also doesn't download music or buy much music.
Expect to get attacked by the pro-piracy contingent around here, who will argue that copyright is wrong (expect when it comes to GPL code, of course), that piracy is just a-okay, that artists don't mind getting ripped off and not paid, and that's it's okay to do something simply because technology has made it easy to do so (kind of like firing missiles at someone just because you can). They will insist to the bitter end that "piracy is not theft" (even though pirated GPL code gets called "stolen code").
Every year, I've watched this shift in the Slashdot comments, where at first, people were halfway there about piracy or at least understood the position. Gradually as time passed, more and more people were admiting pirating everything like it was no big deal, and now you can fully expect people to openly admit that they pirate, recommend other P2P networks to pirate on, complain when authorities go after P2P piracy, etc. It's rather blatant now, to the point you can reasonably argue Slashdot is now a pro-piracy website.
Which is odd, because it means a lot of people are actively encouraging ripping John Carmack off by not paying him for his work on Doom 3, ripping off Trent Reznor by not paying him for his work on the latest NIN album, etc. And the "RIAA," a lobby group for the record labels, is made up into this giant evil controlling corporation that you can use to blame everything on to justify your piracy. "I'm ripping Trent Reznor off to protect him from the RIAA!"
It just ticks me off that pirates don't just admit what they do. Once in a while, someone responds and is completely honest about it. Those guys I at least respect, because they're honest and objective. "Yeah, I know what I do is wrong and that I'm pirating the artist's music." Unfortunately, I've watched Slashdot over the years construct this entire artificial belief system that lives in a pro-piracy echo-chamber where everything the RIAA does is evil, going after individual infringers (which is what Slashdot editors and readers said the RIAA should do five years ago) to protect your own copyrighted materials is somehow evil, etc.
I think it's stupid that the labels want to raise prices for online music. But you respond by voicing your complaints and not buying said music if prices go up. They see that, and lower them. You don't pirate the hell out of everything and then claim "The RIAA made me do it!"
Other dumb excuses, like "P2P is this great network for finding esoteric music that the RIAA doesn't want you to hear," are completely bogus. The most widely traded music files on P2P networks are the popular artists on the Billboard charts! A lot of groups you can't even find on P2P are only available on iTunes, particularly independent artists who sign up with services like CDBaby. You know, independent artists. Those guys you claim to be fighting for are only on places like iTunes. You can't find them on P2P at all. What you find on P2P is crap like Creed, Michael Jackson, Britney Spears, etc.
Even worse is the "today's music is crap which is why we pirate RIAA music" excuse, which makes no sense whatsoever. If the music sucks, why are you pirating it?
Whatever. I don't pirate music. I can shell out a freakin' dollar for a song on iTunes. It's time for the pro-piracy contingency on/. to grow up. The "obsolete business model" canard doesn't apply anymore (iTunes and other online services), and the "we're sticking it to the RIAA by making sure artists don't get paid today" canard doesn't work anymore either. At some people, these people need to just admit that all they're doing is freeloading stuff so they don't have to pay for it. "I'm making sure System of a Down doesn't get paid today!" No culture movement, no revolution, no statement.
A minor, rarely occurring flaw in the device begins to be discussed in the Apple support forums. Whiny, artistic types post lengthy diatribes about how this terrible design flaw has made the device unusable and scarred them emotionally. Electronic petitions are created demanding that Apple replace the devices for free, plus pay for counseling to help traumatized users overcome their emotional distress.
They didn't get anything wrong. What the article submitter didn't quote was the part where the Apple guy says the Nano is not only made of the same material as the higher-end iPods, but that they've received no complaints about those iPods.
Some of the other posters who don't believe Apple and post a bunch of links to websites are making a logical fallacy. Just because there are websites doesn't make the problem widespread. It's not. It's been blown out of proportion by a contingent of people who just don't like iPods for various reasons, including competitors who have been astroturfing websites in a desperate attempt to discredit the Nano.
In a couple of weeks, nobody will even remember any of this "controversy," because it's overblown and phony. The Nanos are selling like hotcakes.
Use of a period instead of a question mark. Use of the aging term "Micro$oft." And a poorly constructed sentence that uses "it's" instead of "its." Modded up as insightful.
Obviously, your admins were not qualified to administer a Linux server like this. If it took them two weeks to get software installed and running like that, I'd fire them right away.
Thereby reinforcing the guy's experience that it cost more to do Linux in his business than it did Windows.
Just because you got it up and running in 2 days on Windows doesn't mean it was done right, or done securely.
We could say that about anything. Just because you say his admins weren't qualified doesn't mean they weren't! And so on.
Well, hey your anecdotal experience somehow applies to the one in the story. Next time he should just give you a call and ask how it went for you instead of going by how it went for him!
As a result of the early release, Episode III only managed to earn $380 million at the box office."
Apparently Slashdot thinks because the movie earned $380 million, it's completely okay to illegally bootleg the movie early. What an stupid justification. It doesn't matter if you think the movie did well, the creator of the film still has rights.
The MySQL developers have been subjected to some very harsh criticism over the years, but few would accuse them of ignoring it.
Then why did they dismiss all the criticism in the MySQL 3 manual, even claiming the features make databases more complex and aren't needed? Some of those features are now in MySQL 4.1 and 5 despite their earlier dismissal by MySQL's developers.
I'll respond and go so far as to ask, why all the obsessive defense of MySQL from fanboys? It's a indisputable fact that MySQL has less features than alternatives like PostgreSQL, it has data truncation issues, NULL-handling issues, and more.
And yet, there are people who defend MySQL to the bitter end when there are already free, superior alternatives like PostgreSQL. I just don't get it. I think these people are just used to the idea of MySQL because it was on their cheap PHP webhosting service, and it's all they learned.
The Nine Billion Names Of God by Kathy Kachelries September 12th, 2005
After three hours, the old man in front of me had worked his way through six beers, in addition to every help desk joke I'd already heard. The cupholder. The any key. The write click. These are the stories people tell, now. These are the fish that got away.
"Let me ask you something," the man said. I didn't argue. One of the first tricks I learned about being a bartender is to make them think you're interested.
"Have you ever created a web site?"
I shook my head.
"Not at all? Not even one of those geocities things?"
"Nope."
"What about a blog? Or an ebay About Me page? You didn't even have an AOL site or something?"
"Do I look like an AOL user to you?" For the record, I don't think AOL even has access numbers in the valley anymore. "I'm sure I have something, somewhere," I said, realizing that I was jeopardizing my tips. Besides, I had a distant memory of a single Angelfire page back in middle school.
"You know what Google is?"
"Yes," I said. I was running low on patience.
"No, I mean, do you really know? More than just the site?"
Reluctantly, I shook my head.
"You ever meet anyone who worked for them?"
"Don't think so."
"You haven't. Nobody works for them anymore."
I shrugged, and took the man's empty pint. I didn't offer to refill it.
"They're self-contained. It's all automated, in there. It's underground."
I nudged the basket of pretzels in his direction. "Why don't you eat something?" I suggested. He shook his head with so much force that I thought he might knock himself off of the stool.
"Listen. Hear me out. You know how Google works," he said, but didn't want for a response. "They cache things, right? Like they send out these spiders and take pictures of everything on the web, so when you're searching, you're not even searching the internet."
I've heard that before, but it never made much of a difference to me. "Same thing, though," I said.
"You ever wonder why Google doesn't cache it's own searches?"
"They program around it."
"No. That's what you think. That's what everyone thinks. But it started back when Google was just a thesis project, back when it was just a drop in the data sea. No one thought to stop it back then. That web site you had, the one you forgot about. Almost everyone's got one of those, right? But Google doesn't forget. Google's studied that thing so many times that it's studied its own caches of you. What do you figure happens, when a site gets so big that it's bigger than the internet?"
"It's still a part of the internet, though."
"No. Now, the internet is a part of Google."
The man had a point. I nodded.
"Here's the thing. Google has memorized who you are. It's memorized all of us, through those little forgotten bits that we leave behind like breadcrumbs. And what's more important, it's memorized it's own idea of you. Google is omniscient. It's omniscient and omnipotent. When it cached its cache for the first time, back in 1994, that's when Google realized what it was."
Gradually, it dawned on me what the man was getting at. "You think it's sentient."
"I know it's sentient."
"How?"
He smiled, but it seemed kind of empty. "Me and Google go way back. But what I'm saying is," he continued, "It knows us. All of us. It is us."
For the first time, the man fell silent. He touched his finger to the bar and began tracing circles in the condensation, apparently lost in thought.
"Think about that website you created, okay? That website will last forever, do you understand? That website is echoing through cyberspace. It's one of the nine billion names of God."
Windows Vista lets you apply labels to files on your hard drive. You can even create a Virtual Folder containing all the files with a particular label!
Holy slap-happy! I already have this in OS X, but the mere fact Windows Vista will someday-in-the-future-maybe-do-it is super-exciting!
Wake up. The entire internet, not just P2P has mostly illegal uses.
The entire Internet has mostly illegal uses? Do you have any stats or numbers to back this up whatsoever, or did you just invent right there on the spot?
That didn't answer my question. How did the eyeglass industry solve this years ago? People don't put their eyeglasses bare in their pockets along with their keys.
I've kept my iPod nano in my pocket every day for four days, and there's nothing on it but thumb smudges.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, everyone knows you are a RIAA/MPAA apologist.
In other words, you can't address a single point I made, so you're bringing out the tired "you're an APOLOGIST!" retort.
Just because the corporations tell you something doesn't mean it is true.
Nobody's telling me anything. Why are you guys OBSESSED with the "corporations?" Why not a single thought devoted toward the very real human beings you're ripping off instead? You know, the artists you're making sure don't get paid today?
Your anti-copyright rant means the GPL has no legal standing. You do realize the GPL stands on copyright, don't you? I'll be sure to remember what you said in the next "stolen GPL code" article...
But of course, I know nothing, RIAA is always correct and evil commmie pink liberals should all die.
And again, we run back to the scapegoat-the-RIAA mindset. It's all you have, stereotypes and emotion-based rhetoric.
Please, your apologist stance is getting old and pointless.
You just can't address my points. As I said, Slashdot has become piracy central, actively advocating ripping people off just because they made the mistake of trying to sell something in a world of freeloaders with high-speed connections.
Yes, that's all piracy is. No freedom-fighter movement against copyright, no freedom-fighter movement against the RIAA--it's just college kids getting albums for free so they don't have to pay for it. Purely selfish. Deep down, you know it, which is why you invent little movements to be part of. "I'm taking down copyright, dude!" Sure.
Maybe because it isn't.
Then you can no longer refer to copyright-violated GPL code as "stolen code."
Maybe it isn't such a big deal.
Wow. I can't argue with that kind of research.
You are assuming that pirates think it's wrong in the first place.
Oh, they do, very much so. This is why they invent entire belief systems to justify it and make themselves not feel guilty. "The RIAA made me do it!" It's like blaming violent videogames for murder.
"And the "RIAA," a lobby group for the record labels, is made up into this giant evil controlling corporation that you can use to blame everything on to justify your piracy. "I'm ripping Trent Reznor off to protect him from the RIAA!""
Straw man argument.
No, it's not. You just have no counterargument for it. The RIAA is absolutely used as a scapegoat to justify ripping people off so you don't have to pay for something. "The RIAA made me do it!"
When was the last time something like this worked? Most people are sheep.
Again, I just can't argue with this kind of superb dorm-room rhetoric. Most people are sheep, dude! By the way, "something like this" works all the time.
You only say that they are "bogus" because it doesn't fit your view of the world.
No, I say it's bogus because I just proved why it's bogus--esoteric music is rarely traded, if at all, on P2P. What you find are Billboard artists. It makes you frustrated that you can't counter this, so you invent a "world view" argument. Next.
I saw this post here on Slashdot (I think), where this guy was actively downloading popular music, and burning it on CD for his friends so that they got it for free instead of paying money for it. That way, he contributed to making sure the recording industry made less money.
This is the real kicker. You illustrate my own point for me that "today's music sucks, so that's why people pirate" is bogus. You also illustrate that the only reason people want to rip off artists is so they don't have to pay money for it. Congratulations on ripping people off. You just don't care. You've never met, talked to, or asked an artist about what they feel. You just scapegoat some faceless adversary, the "RIAA."
Although if certain studies are to be believed, this kind of thing might actually encourage people to just buy more music. Apparently these evil pirates have more legal music than most people.
"If certain studies are to be believed"..."Apparently"...lovely. No cited studies, and no mention of the fact that correlation does not equal causation anyway.
I think it's pretty clear your pro-piracy agenda is pretty much decimated by simple logic. Have fun making sure people don't get paid today. Next time, do a little thinking before you embarrass yourself with such flawed logic in a post.
Correlation does not equal causation. Forgive me if I don't trust a bunch of Slashdot-posted studies and opinion. If people who download music buy more music than people who don't download music, it's more likely the downloaders are just active music listeners which is why they also happened to buy more music. My friend's girlfriend isn't really into music at all and only listens to a couple of old CDs she has lying around. Guess what, she also doesn't download music or buy much music.
Blu-ray supports hybrid discs, and in fact allows both versions on one side of the disc, which is certainly easier for labeling purposes.
Expect to get attacked by the pro-piracy contingent around here, who will argue that copyright is wrong (expect when it comes to GPL code, of course), that piracy is just a-okay, that artists don't mind getting ripped off and not paid, and that's it's okay to do something simply because technology has made it easy to do so (kind of like firing missiles at someone just because you can). They will insist to the bitter end that "piracy is not theft" (even though pirated GPL code gets called "stolen code").
Every year, I've watched this shift in the Slashdot comments, where at first, people were halfway there about piracy or at least understood the position. Gradually as time passed, more and more people were admiting pirating everything like it was no big deal, and now you can fully expect people to openly admit that they pirate, recommend other P2P networks to pirate on, complain when authorities go after P2P piracy, etc. It's rather blatant now, to the point you can reasonably argue Slashdot is now a pro-piracy website.
Which is odd, because it means a lot of people are actively encouraging ripping John Carmack off by not paying him for his work on Doom 3, ripping off Trent Reznor by not paying him for his work on the latest NIN album, etc. And the "RIAA," a lobby group for the record labels, is made up into this giant evil controlling corporation that you can use to blame everything on to justify your piracy. "I'm ripping Trent Reznor off to protect him from the RIAA!"
It just ticks me off that pirates don't just admit what they do. Once in a while, someone responds and is completely honest about it. Those guys I at least respect, because they're honest and objective. "Yeah, I know what I do is wrong and that I'm pirating the artist's music." Unfortunately, I've watched Slashdot over the years construct this entire artificial belief system that lives in a pro-piracy echo-chamber where everything the RIAA does is evil, going after individual infringers (which is what Slashdot editors and readers said the RIAA should do five years ago) to protect your own copyrighted materials is somehow evil, etc.
I think it's stupid that the labels want to raise prices for online music. But you respond by voicing your complaints and not buying said music if prices go up. They see that, and lower them. You don't pirate the hell out of everything and then claim "The RIAA made me do it!"
Other dumb excuses, like "P2P is this great network for finding esoteric music that the RIAA doesn't want you to hear," are completely bogus. The most widely traded music files on P2P networks are the popular artists on the Billboard charts! A lot of groups you can't even find on P2P are only available on iTunes, particularly independent artists who sign up with services like CDBaby. You know, independent artists. Those guys you claim to be fighting for are only on places like iTunes. You can't find them on P2P at all. What you find on P2P is crap like Creed, Michael Jackson, Britney Spears, etc.
Even worse is the "today's music is crap which is why we pirate RIAA music" excuse, which makes no sense whatsoever. If the music sucks, why are you pirating it?
Ugh.
Whatever. I don't pirate music. I can shell out a freakin' dollar for a song on iTunes. It's time for the pro-piracy contingency on /. to grow up. The "obsolete business model" canard doesn't apply anymore (iTunes and other online services), and the "we're sticking it to the RIAA by making sure artists don't get paid today" canard doesn't work anymore either. At some people, these people need to just admit that all they're doing is freeloading stuff so they don't have to pay for it. "I'm making sure System of a Down doesn't get paid today!" No culture movement, no revolution, no statement.
People who get music online without paying for it aren't "customers."
They didn't get anything wrong. What the article submitter didn't quote was the part where the Apple guy says the Nano is not only made of the same material as the higher-end iPods, but that they've received no complaints about those iPods.
Some of the other posters who don't believe Apple and post a bunch of links to websites are making a logical fallacy. Just because there are websites doesn't make the problem widespread. It's not. It's been blown out of proportion by a contingent of people who just don't like iPods for various reasons, including competitors who have been astroturfing websites in a desperate attempt to discredit the Nano.
In a couple of weeks, nobody will even remember any of this "controversy," because it's overblown and phony. The Nanos are selling like hotcakes.
Use of a period instead of a question mark. Use of the aging term "Micro$oft." And a poorly constructed sentence that uses "it's" instead of "its." Modded up as insightful.
Welcome home. You, sir, are welcome here.
Better tell the army.
Obviously, your admins were not qualified to administer a Linux server like this. If it took them two weeks to get software installed and running like that, I'd fire them right away.
Thereby reinforcing the guy's experience that it cost more to do Linux in his business than it did Windows.
Just because you got it up and running in 2 days on Windows doesn't mean it was done right, or done securely.
We could say that about anything. Just because you say his admins weren't qualified doesn't mean they weren't! And so on.
Well, hey your anecdotal experience somehow applies to the one in the story. Next time he should just give you a call and ask how it went for you instead of going by how it went for him!
Along with the submitter's quip:
As a result of the early release, Episode III only managed to earn $380 million at the box office."
Apparently Slashdot thinks because the movie earned $380 million, it's completely okay to illegally bootleg the movie early. What an stupid justification. It doesn't matter if you think the movie did well, the creator of the film still has rights.
Uh, you would just tell them to start Messenger while you opened Internet Explorer. Sorry, those are the most used in enterprises. Next.
You wouldn't say "Open up Explorer." You'd say something like "Open My Computer."
The MySQL developers have been subjected to some very harsh criticism over the years, but few would accuse them of ignoring it.
Then why did they dismiss all the criticism in the MySQL 3 manual, even claiming the features make databases more complex and aren't needed? Some of those features are now in MySQL 4.1 and 5 despite their earlier dismissal by MySQL's developers.
I'll respond and go so far as to ask, why all the obsessive defense of MySQL from fanboys? It's a indisputable fact that MySQL has less features than alternatives like PostgreSQL, it has data truncation issues, NULL-handling issues, and more.
And yet, there are people who defend MySQL to the bitter end when there are already free, superior alternatives like PostgreSQL. I just don't get it. I think these people are just used to the idea of MySQL because it was on their cheap PHP webhosting service, and it's all they learned.
Are you saying that PostgresSQL, Firebird may have better source quality because of their background?
No, he's asking if they do because of their backgrounds.
The correctly punctuated version, from here:
The Nine Billion Names Of God
by Kathy Kachelries
September 12th, 2005
After three hours, the old man in front of me had worked his way through six beers, in addition to every help desk joke I'd already heard. The cupholder. The any key. The write click. These are the stories people tell, now. These are the fish that got away.
"Let me ask you something," the man said. I didn't argue. One of the first tricks I learned about being a bartender is to make them think you're interested.
"Have you ever created a web site?"
I shook my head.
"Not at all? Not even one of those geocities things?"
"Nope."
"What about a blog? Or an ebay About Me page? You didn't even have an AOL site or something?"
"Do I look like an AOL user to you?" For the record, I don't think AOL even has access numbers in the valley anymore. "I'm sure I have something, somewhere," I said, realizing that I was jeopardizing my tips. Besides, I had a distant memory of a single Angelfire page back in middle school.
"You know what Google is?"
"Yes," I said. I was running low on patience.
"No, I mean, do you really know? More than just the site?"
Reluctantly, I shook my head.
"You ever meet anyone who worked for them?"
"Don't think so."
"You haven't. Nobody works for them anymore."
I shrugged, and took the man's empty pint. I didn't offer to refill it.
"They're self-contained. It's all automated, in there. It's underground."
I nudged the basket of pretzels in his direction. "Why don't you eat something?" I suggested. He shook his head with so much force that I thought he might knock himself off of the stool.
"Listen. Hear me out. You know how Google works," he said, but didn't want for a response. "They cache things, right? Like they send out these spiders and take pictures of everything on the web, so when you're searching, you're not even searching the internet."
I've heard that before, but it never made much of a difference to me. "Same thing, though," I said.
"You ever wonder why Google doesn't cache it's own searches?"
"They program around it."
"No. That's what you think. That's what everyone thinks. But it started back when Google was just a thesis project, back when it was just a drop in the data sea. No one thought to stop it back then. That web site you had, the one you forgot about. Almost everyone's got one of those, right? But Google doesn't forget. Google's studied that thing so many times that it's studied its own caches of you. What do you figure happens, when a site gets so big that it's bigger than the internet?"
"It's still a part of the internet, though."
"No. Now, the internet is a part of Google."
The man had a point. I nodded.
"Here's the thing. Google has memorized who you are. It's memorized all of us, through those little forgotten bits that we leave behind like breadcrumbs. And what's more important, it's memorized it's own idea of you. Google is omniscient. It's omniscient and omnipotent. When it cached its cache for the first time, back in 1994, that's when Google realized what it was."
Gradually, it dawned on me what the man was getting at. "You think it's sentient."
"I know it's sentient."
"How?"
He smiled, but it seemed kind of empty. "Me and Google go way back. But what I'm saying is," he continued, "It knows us. All of us. It is us."
For the first time, the man fell silent. He touched his finger to the bar and began tracing circles in the condensation, apparently lost in thought.
"Think about that website you created, okay? That website will last forever, do you understand? That website is echoing through cyberspace. It's one of the nine billion names of God."
Hey, thanks for just requoting CmdrTaco's dept. line joke in the article submission.
Windows Vista lets you apply labels to files on your hard drive. You can even create a Virtual Folder containing all the files with a particular label!
Holy slap-happy! I already have this in OS X, but the mere fact Windows Vista will someday-in-the-future-maybe-do-it is super-exciting!
Wake up. The entire internet, not just P2P has mostly illegal uses.
The entire Internet has mostly illegal uses? Do you have any stats or numbers to back this up whatsoever, or did you just invent right there on the spot?
So the program's no good unless it allows you to pirate copyrighted works? Bitter that the free ride is getting taken away?
Gotta love the moral standpoint of Slashdot. Next time there's a "stolen GPL code" article, I'll remember all these comments.
That didn't answer my question. How did the eyeglass industry solve this years ago? People don't put their eyeglasses bare in their pockets along with their keys.
I've kept my iPod nano in my pocket every day for four days, and there's nothing on it but thumb smudges.