You can't call up a radio station and ask them to play any whole CD you want so you can tape it.
p2p lets you grab entire CDs at very close to CD quality, any CD you want to find. Almost perfect dupes. How can you not see the difference here? Are you that blinded?
This same post comes up every single time there's a p2p article, and it's never any less wrong (no matter how many Slashbots fall over themselves trying to mod it up fast enough).
I don't know why people always try to liken music sharing to property theft. It's just not the same thing.
Yes, it absolutely 100% is. It's intellectual property theft. You are stealing music, because you didn't pay for that music. The object in question doesn't matter. You're decreasing its value by not paying. You owe money, but you aren't giving it. You stole their owed profits by obtaining their product without paying for it. Why is this simple concept so hard for downloaders to understand? Oh, that's right, they're just so used to the convenience of downloading that they've justified it in their minds to alleviate the guilt.
I would say half of my music downloads (and I don't download very much) lead to CD purchases.
The other classic argument people make, as if that justifies the copyright infringement going on. You're in the minority, and it doesn't matter anyway, it's still illegal.
How does free CDs online become profitable for the music industry? Honest, I'd like to know. I'm tired of vague claims about the "benefits" of p2p sharing for artists.
Free stuff means someone doesn't get paid for their work. You can't ignore this FACT.
I'm confused. How could there be a "legitimate use" for P2P file-sharing? No ways around it, you're infringing on copyright by acquiring music you haven't paid for. This is a simple insurmountable fact.
256mb of RAM should be fine. The difference in memory usage between a bare windowmaker desktop and a KDE one is about 60meg (~34meg -> ~90meg). That's worth about what, $20? Considering the vast amount of functionality that gives me, I think that's a worthwhile trade off.
And in the next Windows article, people will bitch about how much of a system hog XP is. I was running XP on 64MB of RAM last year just fine.
Slashdot double-standard #78,947.
Something I don't get about Linux apps
on
Gnome 2.4 Release(d)
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Short of recompiling evolution to use.evolution for its datastore, I have to live with it.
That is ridiculous. And I see it all the time in Linux apps. Things that should be simple configuration options, mere checkboxes, are instead compile-time parameters! So much for usability when you have to recompile the entire program every time you need to change a simple option like a filename...
It'll never happen. People in the Linux community are OBSESSED with "choice." Everything is about choice. Basic functionality is second to tons of conflicting windowing libraries, "toolkits, " theme managers, package managers, etc. Nobody wants just a simple unified desktop so we can get our work done (except Red Hat, and remember how they got knee-jerk blasted by all the zealots just for using the same theme in both desktop environments?).
I'm not so sure...the features of Longhorn sound like very revolutionary changes in the idea of a desktop, things that I doubt GNOME or anything else will be catching up to anytime soon. I mean, today's OSS projects are still fixing their Save dialogs and font rendering while Microsoft is hardware accelerating their entire desktop and replacing Win32 with.NET, making the entire interface vector scalable, implementing XML scripting for custom modular Windows installs, etc., etc.
We'll have to wait and see. But don't think Microsoft is just kicking back watching the OSS community. They'll stay as far ahead as they can, and it looks like they're succeeding on all counts.
Rest assured, you weren't hurting artists. You were hurting some rich RIAA execuative who likely has billions of dollars to his or her name.
How was she, or anyone else who downloads music, not hurting artists in some way?
It stands to reason if you grab an artist's music without paying for it--regardless of how much you hate the RIAA or disagree with how much percentage they get of sales--you still didn't pay for that artist's album. And it will show up when the label looks at record sales and eventually drops that band for lack of it.
Why is this +5 Insightful? It's common sense. Why is Sherman's quote so "shocking?"
Why do you think so many people download music? They know it's not "technically right." They do it because it's easy, convenient, and they won't be caught.
How do you know? Did you have access to their files or something?
With the help of the open source community, they are slowly changing their weapon of choice from a shotgun to a rifle.
If SCO is right and somebody copied their code illegally, it shouldn't be about avoiding addressing their claims just to skirt by and have them sent home regardless of whether they were right or wrong. What kind of image does that give the Linux community when you say things like that? It should be about what's right. We have yet to see.
Look how Slashdot turned this into another SCO article.
The news was a simple source tree comparison tool. Why is the headline "ESR to Shred SCO Claims?" He didn't mention anything about SCO whatsoever.
Just noticing. Now we'll have yet another few hundred SCO bitch posts. The Darl McBride troll will post and get modded up, people will try to act like intellectual property experts, and we'll all go about our day as usual. There is nothing new here but another attempt for more page hits on the part of corporate-owned Slashdot...
I'm curious, is *anything* that shows Linux as not the superior OS always a "slanted study?" Because whenever studies like these come out, no matter who funded by, Slashbots jump on them left and right. Tells you something.
This is rich, a discussion of dicto simpliciter on Slashdot. Aren't you people supposed to be bashing all that is Microsoft, all the time, right about now?
Slashdot Mirror
Why should you care? Unless you're illegally sharing and downloading music.
But we're against illegal things at Slashdot...right? I guess I couldn't tell from all the pro-piracy cheerleading going on here.
Let's just face it, it's the new radio.
Radio stations pay for their music.
You can't call up a radio station and ask them to play any whole CD you want so you can tape it.
p2p lets you grab entire CDs at very close to CD quality, any CD you want to find. Almost perfect dupes. How can you not see the difference here? Are you that blinded?
Or, maybe they just don't like their stuff being put online for free and downloaded without being paid for.
Take off your tinfoil hat.
This same post comes up every single time there's a p2p article, and it's never any less wrong (no matter how many Slashbots fall over themselves trying to mod it up fast enough).
I don't know why people always try to liken music sharing to property theft. It's just not the same thing.
Yes, it absolutely 100% is. It's intellectual property theft. You are stealing music, because you didn't pay for that music. The object in question doesn't matter. You're decreasing its value by not paying. You owe money, but you aren't giving it. You stole their owed profits by obtaining their product without paying for it. Why is this simple concept so hard for downloaders to understand? Oh, that's right, they're just so used to the convenience of downloading that they've justified it in their minds to alleviate the guilt.
I would say half of my music downloads (and I don't download very much) lead to CD purchases.
The other classic argument people make, as if that justifies the copyright infringement going on. You're in the minority, and it doesn't matter anyway, it's still illegal.
How does free CDs online become profitable for the music industry? Honest, I'd like to know. I'm tired of vague claims about the "benefits" of p2p sharing for artists. Free stuff means someone doesn't get paid for their work. You can't ignore this FACT.
I'm confused. How could there be a "legitimate use" for P2P file-sharing? No ways around it, you're infringing on copyright by acquiring music you haven't paid for. This is a simple insurmountable fact.
So download the free multiple desktop Powertoy for Windows, that has been out for some years now. Next.
Because you can't get rid of Internet Explorer in Windows.
Yes, you can. You haven't heard of the oft-touted XP Lite? Do a Google search.
256mb of RAM should be fine. The difference in memory usage between a bare windowmaker desktop and a KDE one is about 60meg (~34meg -> ~90meg). That's worth about what, $20? Considering the vast amount of functionality that gives me, I think that's a worthwhile trade off.
And in the next Windows article, people will bitch about how much of a system hog XP is. I was running XP on 64MB of RAM last year just fine.
Slashdot double-standard #78,947.
Short of recompiling evolution to use .evolution for its datastore, I have to live with it.
That is ridiculous. And I see it all the time in Linux apps. Things that should be simple configuration options, mere checkboxes, are instead compile-time parameters! So much for usability when you have to recompile the entire program every time you need to change a simple option like a filename...
Complaining about how "complicated" KDE is doesn't either.
It'll never happen. People in the Linux community are OBSESSED with "choice." Everything is about choice. Basic functionality is second to tons of conflicting windowing libraries, "toolkits, " theme managers, package managers, etc. Nobody wants just a simple unified desktop so we can get our work done (except Red Hat, and remember how they got knee-jerk blasted by all the zealots just for using the same theme in both desktop environments?).
I'm not so sure...the features of Longhorn sound like very revolutionary changes in the idea of a desktop, things that I doubt GNOME or anything else will be catching up to anytime soon. I mean, today's OSS projects are still fixing their Save dialogs and font rendering while Microsoft is hardware accelerating their entire desktop and replacing Win32 with .NET, making the entire interface vector scalable, implementing XML scripting for custom modular Windows installs, etc., etc.
We'll have to wait and see. But don't think Microsoft is just kicking back watching the OSS community. They'll stay as far ahead as they can, and it looks like they're succeeding on all counts.
Basically, the very thing everyone bitched endlessly about five years ago when Windows 98 came out.
When have facts ever stopped someone on Slashdot from making an erroneous claim about that which they know little about?
Rest assured, you weren't hurting artists. You were hurting some rich RIAA execuative who likely has billions of dollars to his or her name.
How was she, or anyone else who downloads music, not hurting artists in some way?
It stands to reason if you grab an artist's music without paying for it--regardless of how much you hate the RIAA or disagree with how much percentage they get of sales--you still didn't pay for that artist's album. And it will show up when the label looks at record sales and eventually drops that band for lack of it.
Why is this +5 Insightful? It's common sense. Why is Sherman's quote so "shocking?"
Why do you think so many people download music? They know it's not "technically right." They do it because it's easy, convenient, and they won't be caught.
How do you know? Did you have access to their files or something?
With the help of the open source community, they are slowly changing their weapon of choice from a shotgun to a rifle.
If SCO is right and somebody copied their code illegally, it shouldn't be about avoiding addressing their claims just to skirt by and have them sent home regardless of whether they were right or wrong. What kind of image does that give the Linux community when you say things like that? It should be about what's right. We have yet to see.
Look how Slashdot turned this into another SCO article.
The news was a simple source tree comparison tool. Why is the headline "ESR to Shred SCO Claims?" He didn't mention anything about SCO whatsoever.
Just noticing. Now we'll have yet another few hundred SCO bitch posts. The Darl McBride troll will post and get modded up, people will try to act like intellectual property experts, and we'll all go about our day as usual. There is nothing new here but another attempt for more page hits on the part of corporate-owned Slashdot...
I'm curious, is *anything* that shows Linux as not the superior OS always a "slanted study?" Because whenever studies like these come out, no matter who funded by, Slashbots jump on them left and right. Tells you something.
You don't know, but at least there is corporate liability.
Who do you sue for Linux? Do you go after Linus? The original contributers? What?
Yeah, that's the mature response. Label him a troll and ignore. Right.
Slashdot School of Analogy Lesson #1:
Everything can be applied to an example involving somebody's car.
Next week, Lesson #2, downloading mp3s is a "cultural movement."
This is rich, a discussion of dicto simpliciter on Slashdot. Aren't you people supposed to be bashing all that is Microsoft, all the time, right about now?
(downmods expose those with lack of humor sense)
All the posts saying "oh, it's funded by a certain Redmond company, so much for non-biased." Read a little.