More to the point, the stat you quoted could mean EITHER Debian's QA isn't as good at finding bugs OR Debian has fewer bugs/line of code than Microsoft Win2k.
It has been stated many times--Since the original Playstation at least, if not before, consoles have made profits for the manufacturers.
Think about it. There are and have been free PSX development tools, so you don't have to pay Sony anythign to develop games for it. Sony doesn't make their own games.
By your logic, the PS1 is a complete money hole for Sony. Which it isn't. PS1 hardware has turned a profit from day 1.
Incidentally, TurboGrafix16 was around $350 when it came out, as was the 3DO, and Sega Saturn was higher IIRC.
RedHat 9 works just fine with the USB mice I've used with it, the wheel even works all teh time (which is more than I can say for Logitech's Win2k drivers, grumblemutter.)
Speaking as a content creator (I program, among other things, and I'm a recorded artist), I seriously think current copyright and patent laws need to be reformed into oblivion ( I have no problem with trademark law, as it doesn't prevent anything useful ).
I'd rather see all my work go public-domain after 15-20 years. I'll put it there anyway, but honestly I don't see many things that make money beyond that except things that are/become critical parts of our culture and society. And they really should be public, at that point.
Other poster is pretty correct. You can't distribute/share the file in question for those reasons. You can download it. You can own it. You cannot make it available to others.
1st, your statement may or may not be correct. It's definitely legal to shift any music you own to mp3 format, it may or may not be legal for someone else to provide you with an mp3 of music you own.
2nd, this is currently a moot point, the RIAA is going after people providing mp3s, not people downloading them. Same as always.
IANAL, but it can't be considered barratry as long as:
You actually follow through with the suit/settlement, and don't merely threaten then back off immediately.
The lawsuits are based on a real, non-frivolous violation.
These suits don't seem to be barratry in any way, shape, or form--Their gripe is legit under current law, and I don't think they'll fail to follow through and prosecute.
I've personally worked with ~150 windows admins. That's not terribly small for a sample set, IMHO, although I don't remember enough statistics to know what certainty that gives any conclusions I draw (and I'd also have to know the total population of windows admins, and assume a normal distribution of skills among windows admins, etc).
My point is that merely due to job churn and sysadmin classes, I've met and worked with a freakin' pile of windows admins. About 60% of them fall into the "Wow, computers are where the money [is|was] at. What's a partition again?" set.
Admittedly, I think the reason the MCSE was easy for me was that I have a solid grounding in administration concepts, unix and otherwise (I interned for a year as a Win2k admin, before the MCSE).
I mean, I don't mind Win2k. Really, I don't. However, my current company uses products that work best under Linux. And that's where the decision point is. Price/performance. Which is why we have Win2k or RH9, depending on their preference, on the desktop. It makes for happier developers which makes for better products. =)
I can answer at least one of those--if you wanna distribute a cover version (in other words, a song another band has copyrighted), you have to pay royalties. I think those royalties are fixed in the vicinity of US$0.08 per song per distribution, but it might have changed since I last had to deal with it.
Usually this is only applied to CDs. You have to get prior permission, and you have to have accurate counts of how many copies you distribute.
Of course, if you're only sharing your own original works, performed by you, as mp3, you are completely free and clear.
In general, it'd be pretty easy to show exactly who owned copyright on any files you have on your server. That's what the discovery phase of a court case would be for, and it'd weed out stupidities like similarly named files with different content.
The RIAA may be evil, but they ARE playing to win. C&D letters are one thing, but when it comes down to lawsuits they are going to check every file, dot all the i's, cross all the t's, and make sure they don't sue for a single file they don't have enforcement authority over.
Because if they do, a sympathetic judge may well toss them on their ear. And they (presumably) don't want to have the slightest chance of that.
>I honestly don't understand why people have such a >hard time grasping this simple idea.
YAAT YHBS YHL
I understand why people have a hard time grasping it. BECAUSE IT'S WRONG. The simple fact is thus: If copyright infringement were legally theft, they would not exist in seperate places in the laws and they would not have vastly different penalties.
Unfortunately for your arguement, the two concepts are dealt with differently and are penalized differently. Legally, they are distinct concepts.
Sorry, kid, you lose. And it wasn't even that good a troll.
Y'know, I have to disagree. Windows adminning with wizards/point-click is sorta like Linux adminning with mini-HOWTOs. It gets the job done, but until you read the manual and stick your head under the hood, you're not really doing it.
Admittedly, most windows "admins" are crap, but for the same reasons that most viruses target windows--the market is bigger.
Oh, and one more thing. I'm a linux admin by trade, and I got my MCSE for resume-boosting. It took me one textbook (~$60), two weeks to read it, and then I took the test and passed.
So either you're really, incredibly unsuited for technical work, or I'm a super-genius.
Or maybe MCSEs aren't worth the paper they're printed on (for my money, that's true of any cert except for aforementioned resume-building).
Anyway, I really pity all those companies (such as mine) that sell a service, but need custom software to do it because no one produces commercial software that even remotely comes close to our needs.
By your logic, since I'm not selling software, all our in-house programmers are a waste of time. 'Cause, y'know, specialized meterological analysis packages are available for sale.
Oh, and just as an amusing unrelated note, I have problems because one of our senior admins is a religious Linux zealot and refuses to even consider analysis of Microsoft products in comparison to Linux. So I'm stuck with working with and idiot exactly opposite you, and I'm curious--did you suffer severe head trauma as a child, as well?
>So, if you wanted to read tags in my house from the >street 40 feet away instead of the normal 2 feet, you'd >need 20^4 or 160,000 times the power. As I'd be >toasted to a crisp, I'd doubt that I'd mind you reading >the tags.
Plausible scenario:
"Hrm. That black government-lookin' van's been parked across the street for a while, now, but the guy's just sitting there, not getting out."
"You suppose they're lookin' for them damn terrorists, honey?...Say, is it getting warmer in here or is it just me?"
The point is, that the raw end-user speed of a system is bound by the compiler. As in, if all available compilers for the system are 3x as inefficient as your competitor, it doesn't matter if your system is 2x as fast in terms of raw operations, except to the guys making your complier more efficient.
In the real world, CPU speed is not as important as CPU+compiler.
Slashdot Mirror
More to the point, the stat you quoted could mean EITHER Debian's QA isn't as good at finding bugs OR Debian has fewer bugs/line of code than Microsoft Win2k.
The data does not support either conculsion.
I consider the "downloading without telling me" a bug, rather than a feature.
And thus far, my Red Hat system is functioning fine. Holes get patched within a few days of any advisory.
And if I'm careful about what I install, my 3rd-party software is secure, too, which is something Microsoft doesn't bother about as much.
As usual, it boils down to "what you like in a computer".
Y'know, you made my point exactly. Most "Windows Admins" are crap, at least in my experience.
Buddy, if you put together a well-made, cute penguin plushie, I will buy it. That's a promise.
It has been stated many times--Since the original Playstation at least, if not before, consoles have made profits for the manufacturers.
Think about it. There are and have been free PSX development tools, so you don't have to pay Sony anythign to develop games for it. Sony doesn't make their own games.
By your logic, the PS1 is a complete money hole for Sony. Which it isn't. PS1 hardware has turned a profit from day 1.
Incidentally, TurboGrafix16 was around $350 when it came out, as was the 3DO, and Sega Saturn was higher IIRC.
RedHat 9 works just fine with the USB mice I've used with it, the wheel even works all teh time (which is more than I can say for Logitech's Win2k drivers, grumblemutter.)
No idea about Mozilla, but works fine in Konquerer.
I haven't worked with XP, and I make no claims about being a windows admin. My MCSE dates back to Windows 2000.
My point stands that most of the Windows admins I've worked with won't even understand your question.
Speaking as a content creator (I program, among other things, and I'm a recorded artist), I seriously think current copyright and patent laws need to be reformed into oblivion ( I have no problem with trademark law, as it doesn't prevent anything useful ).
I'd rather see all my work go public-domain after 15-20 years. I'll put it there anyway, but honestly I don't see many things that make money beyond that except things that are/become critical parts of our culture and society. And they really should be public, at that point.
Other poster is pretty correct. You can't distribute/share the file in question for those reasons. You can download it. You can own it. You cannot make it available to others.
1st, your statement may or may not be correct. It's definitely legal to shift any music you own to mp3 format, it may or may not be legal for someone else to provide you with an mp3 of music you own.
2nd, this is currently a moot point, the RIAA is going after people providing mp3s, not people downloading them. Same as always.
These suits don't seem to be barratry in any way, shape, or form--Their gripe is legit under current law, and I don't think they'll fail to follow through and prosecute.
I've personally worked with ~150 windows admins. That's not terribly small for a sample set, IMHO, although I don't remember enough statistics to know what certainty that gives any conclusions I draw (and I'd also have to know the total population of windows admins, and assume a normal distribution of skills among windows admins, etc).
My point is that merely due to job churn and sysadmin classes, I've met and worked with a freakin' pile of windows admins. About 60% of them fall into the "Wow, computers are where the money [is|was] at. What's a partition again?" set.
Admittedly, I think the reason the MCSE was easy for me was that I have a solid grounding in administration concepts, unix and otherwise (I interned for a year as a Win2k admin, before the MCSE).
I mean, I don't mind Win2k. Really, I don't. However, my current company uses products that work best under Linux. And that's where the decision point is. Price/performance. Which is why we have Win2k or RH9, depending on their preference, on the desktop. It makes for happier developers which makes for better products. =)
Sorry, kid, but I cut a few cds that were mostly covers (college acapella, actually). You pay the cover royalties up front.
Which is why the defendant will have to prove, as part of their defense, that they have rights to the music in question.
Or they hang. Figuratively.
Y'know, because that's how law works.
I can answer at least one of those--if you wanna distribute a cover version (in other words, a song another band has copyrighted), you have to pay royalties. I think those royalties are fixed in the vicinity of US$0.08 per song per distribution, but it might have changed since I last had to deal with it.
Usually this is only applied to CDs. You have to get prior permission, and you have to have accurate counts of how many copies you distribute.
Of course, if you're only sharing your own original works, performed by you, as mp3, you are completely free and clear.
In general, it'd be pretty easy to show exactly who owned copyright on any files you have on your server. That's what the discovery phase of a court case would be for, and it'd weed out stupidities like similarly named files with different content.
The RIAA may be evil, but they ARE playing to win. C&D letters are one thing, but when it comes down to lawsuits they are going to check every file, dot all the i's, cross all the t's, and make sure they don't sue for a single file they don't have enforcement authority over.
Because if they do, a sympathetic judge may well toss them on their ear. And they (presumably) don't want to have the slightest chance of that.
>I honestly don't understand why people have such a
>hard time grasping this simple idea.
YAAT YHBS YHL
I understand why people have a hard time grasping it. BECAUSE IT'S WRONG. The simple fact is thus: If copyright infringement were legally theft, they would not exist in seperate places in the laws and they would not have vastly different penalties.
Unfortunately for your arguement, the two concepts are dealt with differently and are penalized differently. Legally, they are distinct concepts.
Sorry, kid, you lose. And it wasn't even that good a troll.
I personally think the "which should induce Leslie-like effects in the tune" line deserves a +2 or 3 Funny, but I haven't the points at this time. =P
Y'know, I have to disagree. Windows adminning with wizards/point-click is sorta like Linux adminning with mini-HOWTOs. It gets the job done, but until you read the manual and stick your head under the hood, you're not really doing it.
Admittedly, most windows "admins" are crap, but for the same reasons that most viruses target windows--the market is bigger.
Oh, and one more thing. I'm a linux admin by trade, and I got my MCSE for resume-boosting. It took me one textbook (~$60), two weeks to read it, and then I took the test and passed.
So either you're really, incredibly unsuited for technical work, or I'm a super-genius.
Or maybe MCSEs aren't worth the paper they're printed on (for my money, that's true of any cert except for aforementioned resume-building).
YAAT YHBS YHL.
Anyway, I really pity all those companies (such as mine) that sell a service, but need custom software to do it because no one produces commercial software that even remotely comes close to our needs.
By your logic, since I'm not selling software, all our in-house programmers are a waste of time. 'Cause, y'know, specialized meterological analysis packages are available for sale.
Oh, and just as an amusing unrelated note, I have problems because one of our senior admins is a religious Linux zealot and refuses to even consider analysis of Microsoft products in comparison to Linux. So I'm stuck with working with and idiot exactly opposite you, and I'm curious--did you suffer severe head trauma as a child, as well?
Bright bulbs who come up with the idea of mandatory unpaid overtime for warehouse workers, for one. =P
Don't have references, but if you can't google for yourself I can find 'em again, I'm sure.
>So, if you wanted to read tags in my house from the
...Say, is it getting warmer in here or is it just me?"
>street 40 feet away instead of the normal 2 feet, you'd
>need 20^4 or 160,000 times the power. As I'd be
>toasted to a crisp, I'd doubt that I'd mind you reading
>the tags.
Plausible scenario:
"Hrm. That black government-lookin' van's been parked across the street for a while, now, but the guy's just sitting there, not getting out."
"You suppose they're lookin' for them damn terrorists, honey?
The point is, that the raw end-user speed of a system is bound by the compiler. As in, if all available compilers for the system are 3x as inefficient as your competitor, it doesn't matter if your system is 2x as fast in terms of raw operations, except to the guys making your complier more efficient.
In the real world, CPU speed is not as important as CPU+compiler.