A model rocket is little more than a retrievable firework. It's made of paper, plastic and a small charge to get it off the ground. The fact that it's shaped like a rocket has no bearing.
The hobby teaches kids about something interesting.
Who proposed the restriction? We should remove him / her from office.
to prefer thinking of the mountains of nepal as not needing this stuff?
isn't it possible to look at regions of the world not as potential markets, but also as places where people live (happily) without the baited hook of western consumerism dangled in their noses?
there are places where the music is folk music, and you can tell what region it's from. places where each village has its own recipes, over 1000 years old. places where a person need not work 50 hours a week just to support his mortgage, toys, wife's wardrobe and car, with its 20 gallons of arab blood in the tank. there are places where people are happier with less. there are places where most of a person's time is free time, where life is simple, and the stress of paying ten bills each month isn't enslaving the population. places where the divorce rate is almost zero, and advertising is so rare that it's an oddity.
who thinks the west has the right answer for them? wifi to the mountains of nepal.
The scenario described by the original post sounds like nothing more than unfounded hypothetical doomspeak. So I'll counter with well founded hypothetical hopespeak.:)
Having an army of lawyers and the opportunity to sue does not imply that a lawsuit will occur. Here are two general reasons why such lawsuits might NOT occur:
(1) From the hardware seller's perspective, linux could be viewed as a $100-200 [=cost of windows?] customer incentive coupon towards purchase of a PC. As linux grows in popularity, so does that "incentive value," from their perspective.
(a) A patent lawsuit probably wouldn't gain them that much.
(b) "Killing" linux might lose them that $100-200 incentive.
(2) Why take the piano from an orphanage?
(a) Linux is a public benefit. Consider the PR ramifications. For example, has SCO's recent legal gambit made you MORE, or LESS likely to buy their products? [assuming linux isn't one - hehe]
(b) Consider the "i'm happy with my life" factor. Corporations are run by decent people, I presume. And most people dont want to be Eboneezer Scrooge.
The tunnels at UT are something of a school legend. Nobody's seen them. Everybody's heard of them. A massive steam tunnel network that runs for miles, under campus. (COOL!!) Maybe i'm a freak.. i like old rusty train tracks, abandoned factories and that sort of thing. Industry makes such interesting settings.
Anyhow, the point is that (right or wrong, in terms of this student's rights) the investigation is barking up the wrong tree. There are something like 50,000 students attending UT, and getting information might be daunting. So a student gets curious about the tunnels (WELL, THEY ARE A MYSTERY-LEGEND). ALERT! WAIT A FULL YEAR, and Send in a SWAT team? Sigh.
911 has not made terrorism any more likely than it ever was. Has the invasion of Iraq?
Isn't there a law against collective pricefixing?
on
RIAA's Nasty Easter Egg
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I believe I've heard the labels were sued for doing this kind of thing with cd's.
Even if it's just a spammer website, that doesn't mean I'd want AOL blocking it (if i USED AOL). I'd still want a user level option not to block the website. Not convinced? Remember how the web filters (proposed for public libraries), and some "child safe" web filters took out all kinds of stuff that shouldn't have been filtered.
I'm more concerned about some titan corporation unilaterally deciding which websites i can't visit than about getting some spam.
There is a third option: Mark the website as a spammer in search results. At that point the user can rationally choose whether or not to divulge personal information, but isn't outright forbidden from accessing it.
It doesn't take that much work to "Nerf" a game down to demo grade. Just take out the pay-to-play content, and insert the stubs that say "sorry it's just the demo, to order click here." recompile. Should take less than a week, even with a burnt out development team. I claim that's not a substantial delay.
On the other hand, if you're asking "should companies release demos?" I'd say yes. A demo extablishes consumer trust -- trust that the game is worth plunking down $35-50. (potentially nonrefundable) My claim is that it's that level of trust which can pursuade consumers to buy.
On the other hand.. If there's no demo, I can reasonably ask whether the company's hiding a bad game behind flashy splash screenshots on a box.
I honestly can't say i've been all that impressed with the games EA has released. The worst was dungeon keeper.
Maybe they're making their living on the kind of games I've generally considered "beneath me" - sports, car racing games and the like. But that leaves me wondering why they'd buy out a company that makes games in a totally seperate genre. What genre? Hardcore geek - Intelligent - True cyberpunk - Worth the money because the game is absorbing. Examples that I've played: System Shock 1 and 2, Asheron's Call, anything by blizzard, Deus Ex.
Did anyone ever play system shock 1? It was made by looking glass studios back in the early 80's. EA bought them. I just replayed that game a few months back. (took weeks of hacking just to get it to run on a modern machine) It's 20 years old, made on low budget, and it's STILL better than anything I ever played from EA.
It sounds to me like EA needs to parse out its game planning into seperate departments, because there's alot of talent that they've wasted in the process of assimilation. If they're aquiring good geek companies and making crappy geek games, they're losing something major.
My first guess is that they've got a non-geek calling the shots in what should be their insular geek games department. And that ain't good, because the mindset that makes Indy500 entertaining is not sufficient to keep a true geek satisfied.
If I don't like it, I don't play it. So in a way it's not a problem for me, but it saddens me that EA has taken so many good programmers off of interesting game projects, and cubbyholed them into EA style games.. all the while forgetting that it wasn't just programming that made the parent companies good. It was vision.
I can't help but hope that somebody at EA reads this, and somehow fixes the problem. It would be nice to be able to say: "I remember back when EA games weren't any good. It took them a while, but they finally got their act together."
our government is based on checks and balances, and designed to resist centralization of power. there have been some abusive executives, pushing for centralization. in that push, private sector databases have been abused. therefore, it is the duty of legislators (and the courts) to block those efforts. case in point.
for example, the governor of UTAH just sold out his people in one fell swoop: he secretly built a database on them without any approval. as described, the database was assembled based upon data acquired from the private sector.
given that history of abuse, legislation requiring submission to database records (even those in the private sector) must be tempered with the knowledge that such records have been abused.
It's a start, but considering what it will have to stand up against.. I've seen to many infested command centers.. even with seige tanks and wraiths, etc. Good luck, USA.
The Opposition
Oh, yea, wait. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world.
When's Pentagon II coming out?
i'll explain: say you own a phonograph, an eight track, a cd, a tape, a record, a vcr-tape, a dvd, etc. generally, it's in a format which you cannot read on your computer. many times now, the industry has forced format changes onto us. that has left a trail of "orphan rights." rights to things which you paid for, but can't play anymore. you might not even have the original file anymore, given that it's been so long since its format was the convention. if you own (or once bought) an eight-track of the dubie brothers greatest hits, you either buy an eight track player, or you can just download the mp3.
with the advent of broadband internet connection, generally speaking, it's cheaper and easier to do the download than to buy the eight track player.
back to the topic of orphan rights, consider the number of scratched cd's, warped tapes that got caught in the gears of your tape player, records that got melted in the back seat of your car on a hot day. etc. the physical demise of the original storage format doesn't mean you lost the right to the music.
another example: my house was once burglarized. the burglars took about 50 cd's. in that case, i certainly still consider myself to have the right to play that music, given that the physical cd was stolen, and i paid for the right to play that music.
there are many other cases of how an orphan right might exist. i just wanted to present a few solid ones, here, to fortify the idea.
my own belief is that there are so many "orphan rights" out there that the music industry has no right to chase a downloader. nor should it be granted any presumption (of guilt) when it DOES catch a downloader. it simply cannot prove that the downloader is not the holder of an orphan right to the file, and our legal system requires proof, in criminal cases, "beyond a shadow of a doubt" -- and in civil cases, "beyond a reasonable doubt." chasing every downloader of copyrighted files would be the equivalent of chasing every guy on the street with a bag of groceries. many of those grocery carriers have already paid for what's in their hands, and sending police after them all would be asinine.
given a random downloader, and a random file, my belief is that the industry can establish guilt neither beyond "shadow of a doubt" nor beyond "reasonable doubt". the "orphan rights potential" blocks reasonable doubt (the weaker of the two standards) in almost every case. so, my belief is that the industry lawyers would have to prove, specifically, that a downloader does not have an orphan right to the file. and that's not an easy task!
these facts should be enough to shut down the lawsuit bonanza they've been chasing.
but wait, there's more! consider that there are enough "alienated orphan rights" out there - i.e. rights which people have forgotten they even had, and that nobody claims, but that were CERTAINLY paid for, that there should be sufficient right to justify free internet file libraries. that is, unless you think those rights should just evaporate entirely while the little people get sued by megacorporations for downloading the exact same files.
"Nevertheless, the Pentagon stands by the system and plans to use in in elections next month."
what is this junk? it's OUR election. not the pentagon's. they can't just ramrod this kind of thing. this is SO out of their domain, it's not even funny. who's taking this to the courts?..not that i wouldn't mind seeing 120 million "mystery votes" for ralph nader, but i really don't like the idea of a gaping security hole in internet voting. especially not when it's pushed by the sector of our government which should be most heavily scrutinized.
the real way to make a security-prone election software stink (as it should) would be to push 120 million votes for sadam hussein! ousted by bush, only to replace him. =)
neat idea, moving the heat that way. here's another application of the same notion. (which i haven't yet seen) they should make a jacket/gloves that warms from a motorcycle cylendar head.
if anyone's ridden a motorbike in cold weather, you know what i mean. something that took the heat from the cylendar head would be a gem.. at 70 mph wind chill in 20 degree weather, nothing from your armpit's gonna help those fingers. many's the day i've ridden one handed in that kind of weather, holding my left hand to the engine block.
It's interesting to hear slashdot discuss these matters, but I'm a little taken aback by the choice of wording.
Referring back to the text of the original post: "subvert corporate control." I'd like to point out that there's a difference between subverting and circumventing.
First, "subvert" has a slightly..uh.. subversive ring to it. Second, the word almost implies that the corporations HAVE control. The internet's still largely free territory. Belief to the contrary would be, i think, a mental handicap. =)
"Circumvent corporate control"... now that's got a nice ring to it. I suspect that's a better word for filesharing. The term acknowledges that there's a corporate domain, but also allows for reality, which is that there's also a domain of independents. That is, i believe, a healthier way of thinking about it.
And, by the way, i think the term "piracy" might be a bit harsh, don't you think? Consider the fact that many downloaders are merely getting an mp3 format of something they already own, or owned, on phonograph, eight track, cd, tape, record, vcr-tape, dvd, etc. I think it would be a mistake to conflate downloading with piracy. To do so puts the "front line" further back than it has to be.
I think the best way to present filesharing in a positive light would be to present it as a form of public library. Ahh. The public library. One of the best bastions of public decency remaining in America. And people love them. And the analogy is so nice.
Somebody once told me the best things in life are free. So if you insist on calling the free things in life piracy, where's that going to get you? Checking out a library book, or tape, or movie, isn't piracy. And it's free.
(1) vote it out. reclaim the country. tell the orwellians to move to orwellia, and leave us alone.
(2) conduct civil disobedience.
(3) suffer loss of liberty and try to ignore the problem.
just what would it take to dismantle a FULLY OPERATIONAL police state? how close are we to that? is it better to act now, or to hide and wait? how long did the soviet union last? are we so ready to yield to pressures that point in that direction? what means do we have to stop the perceived trend of government net widening?
carnivore, eschelon, public cameras, airport background checks, the un"patriot"ic act... these are just some of the recent events from around the world. enough is enough. freedom loving people should work to put their governments on a short, heavy leash, and start clubbing without mercy.
or, for the less idealistic, it could be examined on purely cost/benefit terms:
the quality of life gained by having: fair and free elections, personal liberty and privacy, the ability to accidentally (or even on purpose!) speed a little, without getting bloodsucked for $300.
the government knowing where your car is, at all times, and arbitrary taxation via speeding ticket revenues.
just what does it take to detect and destroy a camera relay unit?
Slashdot Mirror
Basically the Undead could have rights too, I suppose.
A model rocket is little more than a retrievable firework. It's made of paper, plastic and a small charge to get it off the ground. The fact that it's shaped like a rocket has no bearing.
The hobby teaches kids about something interesting.
Who proposed the restriction? We should remove him / her from office.
to prefer thinking of the mountains of nepal as not needing this stuff?
isn't it possible to look at regions of the world not as potential markets, but also as places where people live (happily) without the baited hook of western consumerism dangled in their noses?
there are places where the music is folk music, and you can tell what region it's from. places where each village has its own recipes, over 1000 years old. places where a person need not work 50 hours a week just to support his mortgage, toys, wife's wardrobe and car, with its 20 gallons of arab blood in the tank. there are places where people are happier with less. there are places where most of a person's time is free time, where life is simple, and the stress of paying ten bills each month isn't enslaving the population. places where the divorce rate is almost zero, and advertising is so rare that it's an oddity.
who thinks the west has the right answer for them? wifi to the mountains of nepal.
God help us.
who knows, maybe there's no harm done.
The scenario described by the original post sounds like nothing more than unfounded hypothetical doomspeak. So I'll counter with well founded hypothetical hopespeak. :)
Having an army of lawyers and the opportunity to sue does not imply that a lawsuit will occur. Here are two general reasons why such lawsuits might NOT occur:
(1) From the hardware seller's perspective, linux could be viewed as a $100-200 [=cost of windows?] customer incentive coupon towards purchase of a PC. As linux grows in popularity, so does that "incentive value," from their perspective.
(a) A patent lawsuit probably wouldn't gain them that much.
(b) "Killing" linux might lose them that $100-200 incentive.
(2) Why take the piano from an orphanage?
(a) Linux is a public benefit. Consider the PR ramifications. For example, has SCO's recent legal gambit made you MORE, or LESS likely to buy their products? [assuming linux isn't one - hehe]
(b) Consider the "i'm happy with my life" factor. Corporations are run by decent people, I presume. And most people dont want to be Eboneezer Scrooge.
The tunnels at UT are something of a school legend. Nobody's seen them. Everybody's heard of them. A massive steam tunnel network that runs for miles, under campus. (COOL!!) Maybe i'm a freak.. i like old rusty train tracks, abandoned factories and that sort of thing. Industry makes such interesting settings.
Anyhow, the point is that (right or wrong, in terms of this student's rights) the investigation is barking up the wrong tree. There are something like 50,000 students attending UT, and getting information might be daunting. So a student gets curious about the tunnels (WELL, THEY ARE A MYSTERY-LEGEND). ALERT! WAIT A FULL YEAR, and Send in a SWAT team? Sigh.
911 has not made terrorism any more likely than it ever was. Has the invasion of Iraq?
I believe I've heard the labels were sued for doing this kind of thing with cd's.
He should have a 5-insightful by now.
It makes little sense delving into the obscure details of the impact of filetrading on the music economy when the economy as a whole is so down.
Even if it's just a spammer website, that doesn't mean I'd want AOL blocking it (if i USED AOL). I'd still want a user level option not to block the website. Not convinced? Remember how the web filters (proposed for public libraries), and some "child safe" web filters took out all kinds of stuff that shouldn't have been filtered.
I'm more concerned about some titan corporation unilaterally deciding which websites i can't visit than about getting some spam.
There is a third option: Mark the website as a spammer in search results. At that point the user can rationally choose whether or not to divulge personal information, but isn't outright forbidden from accessing it.
this asteroid simulator
(developed by NASA) shows just how easy asteroid defense can be, given timing, positioning, thruster movements, etc.
Very well, you're right, again. My point remains firm. Knock my memory if u like. I'm still right.
EA hasn't made a better game than system shock 1. Which they acquired by destroying the company that made the game.
EA hasn't made a better game.
Ever.
never.
ever.
ever.
brap. beep. beep. beep.
:)
--malfunction!--
--malfunction!--
--malfunction!--
sorry - you're right. i first played it around 1991. anyhoo, the point remains the same..
A demo release shouldn't result in product delay.
It doesn't take that much work to "Nerf" a game down to demo grade. Just take out the pay-to-play content, and insert the stubs that say "sorry it's just the demo, to order click here." recompile. Should take less than a week, even with a burnt out development team. I claim that's not a substantial delay.
On the other hand, if you're asking "should companies release demos?" I'd say yes. A demo extablishes consumer trust -- trust that the game is worth plunking down $35-50. (potentially nonrefundable) My claim is that it's that level of trust which can pursuade consumers to buy.
On the other hand.. If there's no demo, I can reasonably ask whether the company's hiding a bad game behind flashy splash screenshots on a box.
I honestly can't say i've been all that impressed with the games EA has released. The worst was dungeon keeper.
Maybe they're making their living on the kind of games I've generally considered "beneath me" - sports, car racing games and the like. But that leaves me wondering why they'd buy out a company that makes games in a totally seperate genre. What genre? Hardcore geek - Intelligent - True cyberpunk - Worth the money because the game is absorbing. Examples that I've played: System Shock 1 and 2, Asheron's Call, anything by blizzard, Deus Ex.
Did anyone ever play system shock 1? It was made by looking glass studios back in the early 80's. EA bought them. I just replayed that game a few months back. (took weeks of hacking just to get it to run on a modern machine) It's 20 years old, made on low budget, and it's STILL better than anything I ever played from EA.
It sounds to me like EA needs to parse out its game planning into seperate departments, because there's alot of talent that they've wasted in the process of assimilation. If they're aquiring good geek companies and making crappy geek games, they're losing something major.
My first guess is that they've got a non-geek calling the shots in what should be their insular geek games department. And that ain't good, because the mindset that makes Indy500 entertaining is not sufficient to keep a true geek satisfied.
If I don't like it, I don't play it. So in a way it's not a problem for me, but it saddens me that EA has taken so many good programmers off of interesting game projects, and cubbyholed them into EA style games.. all the while forgetting that it wasn't just programming that made the parent companies good. It was vision.
I can't help but hope that somebody at EA reads this, and somehow fixes the problem. It would be nice to be able to say: "I remember back when EA games weren't any good. It took them a while, but they finally got their act together."
I'm reminded of that old pink floyd song, "dogs of war" - "one world, and it's a battleground.."
h tm
How would he have approached dismantling the military industrial complex?
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/editorial_feb0704.
seems pretty uncontextual to me... does it have to do with linux? computers? bsd? or. what?
sigh.
our government is based on checks and balances, and designed to resist centralization of power. there have been some abusive executives, pushing for centralization. in that push, private sector databases have been abused. therefore, it is the duty of legislators (and the courts) to block those efforts. case in point.
for example, the governor of UTAH just sold out his people in one fell swoop: he secretly built a database on them without any approval. as described, the database was assembled based upon data acquired from the private sector.
given that history of abuse, legislation requiring submission to database records (even those in the private sector) must be tempered with the knowledge that such records have been abused.
It's a start, but considering what it will have to stand up against.. I've seen to many infested command centers.. even with seige tanks and wraiths, etc. Good luck, USA. The Opposition Oh, yea, wait. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. Real World..Fantasy world. When's Pentagon II coming out?
i'll explain: say you own a phonograph, an eight track, a cd, a tape, a record, a vcr-tape, a dvd, etc. generally, it's in a format which you cannot read on your computer. many times now, the industry has forced format changes onto us. that has left a trail of "orphan rights." rights to things which you paid for, but can't play anymore. you might not even have the original file anymore, given that it's been so long since its format was the convention. if you own (or once bought) an eight-track of the dubie brothers greatest hits, you either buy an eight track player, or you can just download the mp3.
with the advent of broadband internet connection, generally speaking, it's cheaper and easier to do the download than to buy the eight track player.
back to the topic of orphan rights, consider the number of scratched cd's, warped tapes that got caught in the gears of your tape player, records that got melted in the back seat of your car on a hot day. etc. the physical demise of the original storage format doesn't mean you lost the right to the music.
another example: my house was once burglarized. the burglars took about 50 cd's. in that case, i certainly still consider myself to have the right to play that music, given that the physical cd was stolen, and i paid for the right to play that music.
there are many other cases of how an orphan right might exist. i just wanted to present a few solid ones, here, to fortify the idea.
my own belief is that there are so many "orphan rights" out there that the music industry has no right to chase a downloader. nor should it be granted any presumption (of guilt) when it DOES catch a downloader. it simply cannot prove that the downloader is not the holder of an orphan right to the file, and our legal system requires proof, in criminal cases, "beyond a shadow of a doubt" -- and in civil cases, "beyond a reasonable doubt." chasing every downloader of copyrighted files would be the equivalent of chasing every guy on the street with a bag of groceries. many of those grocery carriers have already paid for what's in their hands, and sending police after them all would be asinine.
given a random downloader, and a random file, my belief is that the industry can establish guilt neither beyond "shadow of a doubt" nor beyond "reasonable doubt". the "orphan rights potential" blocks reasonable doubt (the weaker of the two standards) in almost every case. so, my belief is that the industry lawyers would have to prove, specifically, that a downloader does not have an orphan right to the file. and that's not an easy task!
these facts should be enough to shut down the lawsuit bonanza they've been chasing.
but wait, there's more! consider that there are enough "alienated orphan rights" out there - i.e. rights which people have forgotten they even had, and that nobody claims, but that were CERTAINLY paid for, that there should be sufficient right to justify free internet file libraries. that is, unless you think those rights should just evaporate entirely while the little people get sued by megacorporations for downloading the exact same files.
"Nevertheless, the Pentagon stands by the system and plans to use in in elections next month."
what is this junk? it's OUR election. not the pentagon's. they can't just ramrod this kind of thing. this is SO out of their domain, it's not even funny. who's taking this to the courts?
the real way to make a security-prone election software stink (as it should) would be to push 120 million votes for sadam hussein! ousted by bush, only to replace him. =)
neat idea, moving the heat that way. here's another application of the same notion. (which i haven't yet seen) they should make a jacket/gloves that warms from a motorcycle cylendar head.
if anyone's ridden a motorbike in cold weather, you know what i mean. something that took the heat from the cylendar head would be a gem.. at 70 mph wind chill in 20 degree weather, nothing from your armpit's gonna help those fingers. many's the day i've ridden one handed in that kind of weather, holding my left hand to the engine block.
It's interesting to hear slashdot discuss these matters, but I'm a little taken aback by the choice of wording.
Referring back to the text of the original post: "subvert corporate control." I'd like to point out that there's a difference between subverting and circumventing.
First, "subvert" has a slightly
"Circumvent corporate control"... now that's got a nice ring to it. I suspect that's a better word for filesharing. The term acknowledges that there's a corporate domain, but also allows for reality, which is that there's also a domain of independents. That is, i believe, a healthier way of thinking about it.
And, by the way, i think the term "piracy" might be a bit harsh, don't you think? Consider the fact that many downloaders are merely getting an mp3 format of something they already own, or owned, on phonograph, eight track, cd, tape, record, vcr-tape, dvd, etc. I think it would be a mistake to conflate downloading with piracy. To do so puts the "front line" further back than it has to be.
I think the best way to present filesharing in a positive light would be to present it as a form of public library. Ahh. The public library. One of the best bastions of public decency remaining in America. And people love them. And the analogy is so nice.
Somebody once told me the best things in life are free. So if you insist on calling the free things in life piracy, where's that going to get you? Checking out a library book, or tape, or movie, isn't piracy. And it's free.
either:
(1) vote it out. reclaim the country. tell the orwellians to move to orwellia, and leave us alone.
(2) conduct civil disobedience.
(3) suffer loss of liberty and try to ignore the problem.
just what would it take to dismantle a FULLY OPERATIONAL police state? how close are we to that? is it better to act now, or to hide and wait? how long did the soviet union last? are we so ready to yield to pressures that point in that direction? what means do we have to stop the perceived trend of government net widening?
carnivore, eschelon, public cameras, airport background checks, the un"patriot"ic act... these are just some of the recent events from around the world. enough is enough. freedom loving people should work to put their governments on a short, heavy leash, and start clubbing without mercy.
or, for the less idealistic, it could be examined on purely cost/benefit terms:
the quality of life gained by having: fair and free elections, personal liberty and privacy, the ability to accidentally (or even on purpose!) speed a little, without getting bloodsucked for $300.
the government knowing where your car is, at all times, and arbitrary taxation via speeding ticket revenues.
just what does it take to detect and destroy a camera relay unit?
it would save the rest of us quite a bit of headache.
i sure hope they brought one of these little gems along: fix leak
here, you can see how the laser glanced off its target, without a scratch:
first laser test