When a Linux zealot uses every anti-Microsoft buzzword together--"evil empire," "M$," and "FUD campaign" (apparently when a company gives an opinion on anything, including competition, it's now a FUD campaign), it totally makes people stay far, far away from Linux and its immature community.
There's gotta be some sort of record for most-used zealot buzzwords in a post.
No, Linux fans, gurus, and hackers are obsessed with making better software, helping people, and making the world a place.
Linux zealots are obsessed with bashing Microsoft, hurting Microsoft, DOSing sites critical of Linux and, bashing newbies and people who use other operating systems.
That's why they're called, rather negatively, "zealots." And I'm ashamed that Slashdot has purposely become a haven for them, and that they permeate IRC channels, newsgroups, and other websites.
You Linux zealots are severely holding back Linux with your immature, unprofessional attitude towards "M$" and others.
His point was that Slashdot has already posted an article about this stuff. Should we just fish out and repost our comments from last time? Or did Slashdot want another article for people to bash Microsoft (and therefore continue the immature and unprofessional image of the Linux community)?
Isn't this article incredibly redundant? The last article linked to Microsoft's comments on iTunes. People already discussed it.
What more is there to say? Should everyone just repost their comments from yesterday? Or was this just another Microsoft-flamebait-for-page-hits article?
That's because iTunes is really just a standard media player, the player that shipped with OS X. They only integrated the iTunes Music Store with it last April.
It's only purpose isn't just to buy music online. It's supposed to play audio media files.
Apple announced today that Windows users have downloaded more than 1 million copies of iTunes Windows in the first three and a half days since its launch.
Furthermore, over 1 million songs have been purchased at the iTunes Music (presumably by both Mac and PC users) store over the same time. In comparison, the iTunes Music Store sold one million songs over 7 days during its initial launch on the Mac in April.
Steve Jobs revealed at last week's Music Event that Mac users alone were purchasing music at a rate of 600,000 songs a week.
What excuses will you have now to keep using Kazaa and so forth? You're always rattling on about how file-traders brave freedom fighters shoving it to the RIAA by avoiding an "obsolete business model," and how record companies should instead embrace Internet file-sharing.
Well, here it is. Have you switched to this excellent, high-quality p2p file-sharing program or are you still leeching off of Kazaa? I think it's a legitimate question, because iTunes is just the tip of the iceberg with this kind of success. I'm very pleased that Apple is leading the charge.
Will you actually stand behind your ideals, or does it turn out that you've just been justifying your guilt for leeching all this time?
First of all, Windows 2000/XP is set to automatically restart after a BSOD after the memory dump.
I disabled that the first time I installed Windows 2000.
Besides, it's take to take someone with a sig with a link to "Linux Security Flaw" site that lists NetBSD vulnerabilities.
Huh? My sig lists vulnerabilities for all Linux and BSD distributions. But what does that have to do with this?
When Longhorn comes out and all Windows applications are running via the.NET run-time, everything will be sandboxed and even BSODs--aside from unrecoverable hardware errors--will be a thing of the forgotten past (not to Slashdot posters, of course, who will continue to make BSOD jokes well into the next two decades, not realizing that the rest of the computing world moved on long ago).
Precisely. Just today, I was having numerous BSODs, but luckily the screens mentioned "multiple IRQ" problems. I traced it to an option in my sound driver control panel that was checked and shouldn't have been.
Voila, no more BSODs. And I even saw lessened choppiness in sound-heavy programs like Sonar.
Aside from those specific instances of hardware and driver issues, I have not seen a single BSOD since late 1999. Windows 2000 and XP are really incredibly stable operating systems, and I don't feel ashamed saying that on Slashdot (in fact, it needs to be said more often...if people were more calmly rational around here, it would help the Linux cause a lot more).
I don't know, but when someone generalizes me into a stereotype, I just grin with satisfaction that they have nothing to offer in the way of discussion and have resorted to personal attacks to distance me from their views.
That's right. Never. Read up sometime on how the NT kernel system is designed. It's actually impossible to BSOD without doing it through hardware in some way.
They've definitely lost my respect. Apparently, if you mention that there are text ads at the top of your site, and direct your readers to click on them if they're interested in the products, Google will tell you that you cheated the system through false clicks when your click amounts gets too high for them to spare the cash.
All that blame against the RIAA and you ignore two things:
1.) The artists who are getting screwed by people like you.
2.) That no matter how much you despise the RIAA, think they missed the ball on mp3s, etc.--pirating their product is still illegal, immoral, and wrong. We live in a "pay money, get product" system when it comes to this industry. I don't know about you, but I kind of respect artists enough not to fuck them over by taking their albums without paying them.
Besides, your entire rant was moot since iTunes is out and it rocks. $0.99 for a song in AAC format, and $9.99 for an album. So things are there. It's just that people wont't get their asses off Kazaa because they want free shit.
That's another thing morons like Slashdot editor michael ("Music-Lovers"...ha!) and other blinded Slashbots don't get--this isn't about free speech for 95% of downloaders. It's about free beer. You guys love to ignore that in order to make some idealistic stand that just falls flat because even the downloaders themselves know what they're doing is wrong.
If you steal it, you don't deserve music the artist is selling, period.
What part of this extremely simple concept of "pay money, get product" do Slashbots not understand? Or is every media pirate a brave freedom fighter against the evils of the RIAA conglomerate?
Meanwhile, artists get screwed. But that doesn't matter, because the RIAA threatens "music-lovers" and mp3-trading is just a "culture movement!"
As were a lot of other wrong, silly things in our history, by the way.
[16:57:45] <hemos_> Alterslash is illegal. [16:57:52] <hemos_> And is violating copyright. [16:57:56] <CmdrTaco> Oh, this is a real site? [16:58:02] <hemos_> And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works [16:58:11] <hemos_> they will probably get a cease and desist soon. [16:58:21] <hemos_> Becuase if we don't - then we give up the right todefend ourselves. [16:58:26] <hemos_> So, I don't want to be hostile [16:58:33] <CmdrTaco> oh geezus, yeah. [16:58:35] <hemos_> but because of the law, we have to. http://www.slashnet.org/forums/Slashdot-20020 306.txt
[16:57:45] <hemos_> Alterslash is illegal. [16:57:52] <hemos_> And is violating copyright. [16:57:56] <CmdrTaco> Oh, this is a real site? [16:58:02] <hemos_> And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works [16:58:11] <hemos_> they will probably get a cease and desist soon. [16:58:21] <hemos_> Becuase if we don't - then we give up the right to defend ourselves. [16:58:26] <hemos_> So, I don't want to be hostile [16:58:33] <CmdrTaco> oh geezus, yeah. [16:58:35] <hemos_> but because of the law, we have to. http://www.slashnet.org/forums/Slashdot-20020 306.txt
Yeah, they're going after people not because they're illegally getting their product for free but because it's an evil conspiracy against "a fair digital music service."
In actuality, going after illegal file-traders makes people MOVE to fair digital music services, like the awesome iTunes.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, maybe they thought it was worthy of further discussion. Whatever.
So stick it in a box on the side. Are you actually saying it's okay to dupe the article again with almost the exact same headline?
It's not like it's magnificent hard news or anything. Microsoft just gave an opinion on iTunes.
I didn't see it yesterday, and I find it pretty interesting that Microsoft would have the gall to make such ridiculous statements.
It's called the "Older Stuff" box. Check it out when you miss a day.
The fact is, Microsoft is being extremely hypocritical. That's certainly something a lot of people here are interested in discussing.
I know. We already discussed it yesterday. Even the headline was almost exactly the same.
When a Linux zealot uses every anti-Microsoft buzzword together--"evil empire," "M$," and "FUD campaign" (apparently when a company gives an opinion on anything, including competition, it's now a FUD campaign), it totally makes people stay far, far away from Linux and its immature community.
There's gotta be some sort of record for most-used zealot buzzwords in a post.
"LOL!"
No, Linux fans, gurus, and hackers are obsessed with making better software, helping people, and making the world a place.
Linux zealots are obsessed with bashing Microsoft, hurting Microsoft, DOSing sites critical of Linux and, bashing newbies and people who use other operating systems.
That's why they're called, rather negatively, "zealots." And I'm ashamed that Slashdot has purposely become a haven for them, and that they permeate IRC channels, newsgroups, and other websites.
You Linux zealots are severely holding back Linux with your immature, unprofessional attitude towards "M$" and others.
His point was that Slashdot has already posted an article about this stuff. Should we just fish out and repost our comments from last time? Or did Slashdot want another article for people to bash Microsoft (and therefore continue the immature and unprofessional image of the Linux community)?
Isn't this article incredibly redundant? The last article linked to Microsoft's comments on iTunes. People already discussed it.
What more is there to say? Should everyone just repost their comments from yesterday? Or was this just another Microsoft-flamebait-for-page-hits article?
That's because iTunes is really just a standard media player, the player that shipped with OS X. They only integrated the iTunes Music Store with it last April.
It's only purpose isn't just to buy music online. It's supposed to play audio media files.
He's wanting to be on a service that actually has users on it. It's called "exposure."
Um, according to macrumors.com:
Apple announced today that Windows users have downloaded more than 1 million copies of iTunes Windows in the first three and a half days since its launch.
Furthermore, over 1 million songs have been purchased at the iTunes Music (presumably by both Mac and PC users) store over the same time. In comparison, the iTunes Music Store sold one million songs over 7 days during its initial launch on the Mac in April.
Steve Jobs revealed at last week's Music Event that Mac users alone were purchasing music at a rate of 600,000 songs a week.
Actually, Apple has sold 14 million tracks, one million of which were sold in the past three days.
What excuses will you have now to keep using Kazaa and so forth? You're always rattling on about how file-traders brave freedom fighters shoving it to the RIAA by avoiding an "obsolete business model," and how record companies should instead embrace Internet file-sharing.
Well, here it is. Have you switched to this excellent, high-quality p2p file-sharing program or are you still leeching off of Kazaa? I think it's a legitimate question, because iTunes is just the tip of the iceberg with this kind of success. I'm very pleased that Apple is leading the charge.
Will you actually stand behind your ideals, or does it turn out that you've just been justifying your guilt for leeching all this time?
First of all, Windows 2000/XP is set to automatically restart after a BSOD after the memory dump.
.NET run-time, everything will be sandboxed and even BSODs--aside from unrecoverable hardware errors--will be a thing of the forgotten past (not to Slashdot posters, of course, who will continue to make BSOD jokes well into the next two decades, not realizing that the rest of the computing world moved on long ago).
I disabled that the first time I installed Windows 2000.
Besides, it's take to take someone with a sig with a link to "Linux Security Flaw" site that lists NetBSD vulnerabilities.
Huh? My sig lists vulnerabilities for all Linux and BSD distributions. But what does that have to do with this?
When Longhorn comes out and all Windows applications are running via the
Just did with Visual Studio .NET 2003. No BSOD. Is that what's supposed to happen?
Precisely. Just today, I was having numerous BSODs, but luckily the screens mentioned "multiple IRQ" problems. I traced it to an option in my sound driver control panel that was checked and shouldn't have been.
Voila, no more BSODs. And I even saw lessened choppiness in sound-heavy programs like Sonar.
Aside from those specific instances of hardware and driver issues, I have not seen a single BSOD since late 1999. Windows 2000 and XP are really incredibly stable operating systems, and I don't feel ashamed saying that on Slashdot (in fact, it needs to be said more often...if people were more calmly rational around here, it would help the Linux cause a lot more).
I don't know, but when someone generalizes me into a stereotype, I just grin with satisfaction that they have nothing to offer in the way of discussion and have resorted to personal attacks to distance me from their views.
That's right. Never. Read up sometime on how the NT kernel system is designed. It's actually impossible to BSOD without doing it through hardware in some way.
A replaced DLL or bad registry key will absolutely not BSOD Windows 2k/XP. It's impossible. I doubt you'll ever present evidence, either.
I'm sorry, but Google rips off people who are even mildly successful with their text ads.
See here, and here.
They've definitely lost my respect. Apparently, if you mention that there are text ads at the top of your site, and direct your readers to click on them if they're interested in the products, Google will tell you that you cheated the system through false clicks when your click amounts gets too high for them to spare the cash.
Max Payne set a bar for graphics standards? Are you joking? What games are trying to look like Max Payne...Doom 3? Half-Life 2? UT2004?
You're just some Max Payne fanboy.
You just showed that Slashdot stated that Alterslash can't distribute someone else's copyrighted works, just like michael's "Music-Lovers."
Next.
How do you "murder" a lump of cells? Always more rhetoric from the conservative wackos. Hitler was almost aborted. So what's your point?
All that blame against the RIAA and you ignore two things:
1.) The artists who are getting screwed by people like you.
2.) That no matter how much you despise the RIAA, think they missed the ball on mp3s, etc.--pirating their product is still illegal, immoral, and wrong. We live in a "pay money, get product" system when it comes to this industry. I don't know about you, but I kind of respect artists enough not to fuck them over by taking their albums without paying them.
Besides, your entire rant was moot since iTunes is out and it rocks. $0.99 for a song in AAC format, and $9.99 for an album. So things are there. It's just that people wont't get their asses off Kazaa because they want free shit.
That's another thing morons like Slashdot editor michael ("Music-Lovers"...ha!) and other blinded Slashbots don't get--this isn't about free speech for 95% of downloaders. It's about free beer. You guys love to ignore that in order to make some idealistic stand that just falls flat because even the downloaders themselves know what they're doing is wrong.
Next.
If you steal it, you don't deserve music the artist is selling, period.
What part of this extremely simple concept of "pay money, get product" do Slashbots not understand? Or is every media pirate a brave freedom fighter against the evils of the RIAA conglomerate?
Meanwhile, artists get screwed. But that doesn't matter, because the RIAA threatens "music-lovers" and mp3-trading is just a "culture movement!"
As were a lot of other wrong, silly things in our history, by the way.
[16:57:45] <hemos_> Alterslash is illegal.0 306.txt
[16:57:52] <hemos_> And is violating copyright.
[16:57:56] <CmdrTaco> Oh, this is a real site?
[16:58:02] <hemos_> And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works
[16:58:11] <hemos_> they will probably get a cease and desist soon.
[16:58:21] <hemos_> Becuase if we don't - then we give up the right todefend ourselves.
[16:58:26] <hemos_> So, I don't want to be hostile
[16:58:33] <CmdrTaco> oh geezus, yeah.
[16:58:35] <hemos_> but because of the law, we have to.
http://www.slashnet.org/forums/Slashdot-2002
[16:57:45] <hemos_> Alterslash is illegal.0 306.txt
[16:57:52] <hemos_> And is violating copyright.
[16:57:56] <CmdrTaco> Oh, this is a real site?
[16:58:02] <hemos_> And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works
[16:58:11] <hemos_> they will probably get a cease and desist soon.
[16:58:21] <hemos_> Becuase if we don't - then we give up the right to defend ourselves.
[16:58:26] <hemos_> So, I don't want to be hostile
[16:58:33] <CmdrTaco> oh geezus, yeah.
[16:58:35] <hemos_> but because of the law, we have to.
http://www.slashnet.org/forums/Slashdot-2002
That is so lame.
Yeah, they're going after people not because they're illegally getting their product for free but because it's an evil conspiracy against "a fair digital music service."
In actuality, going after illegal file-traders makes people MOVE to fair digital music services, like the awesome iTunes.
Next.