I assume you are judging the artform from the perspective of someone that has maybe read a superhero book or two, a funny animal cartoon book, or maybe Archie comics. That's really not much to go on.
There are real artists working in comics and they are able to create works of incredible depth. Good names to look for include: Jack Kirby, Matthias Schultheiss, Enki Bilal, Alan Moore, Harvey Kurtzman, William elder, Winsor McCay, Barry Smith, Jim Steranko, Robert Crumb, Jean Girard (a.k.a. Moebius), Wally Wood, Will Eisner, and Bernie Krigstein.
It is sometimes argued that Winsor McCay was an early surrealist for his work in the sunday comic strip "Little Nemo in Slumberland."
It's also worth noting that many movies are based on comicbook works.
This kind of exposition could go on almost forever so I'll just say that there is plenty more to say in this area and that you are dead wrong in your presumptions.
Why read the script when the commercials show plainly how bad the story and dialogue are going to be?
It's a pity that people treat Star Wars as a cultural event - as if Lucas deserved to have money simply laid at his feet. It isn't, he doesn't.
Just don't go. This guy is responsible for this piece of shit dialogue that should be written on his gravestone: "I don't like the sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating--not like you. You're soft and smooth."
Yeah, smooth...
I'd rather throw my money away on something a little less completely moronic.
Scarcity = numbers below 300, everything else is a stupid justification for paying too much for something that is desired (most probably unreasonably, but that's the way desire works).
Your main point has been answered to ad nauseam. No one is placing a limit on being paid for the writing or maintenance of private code. The OS and basic software needed for the average box does not need to be private and in fact is probably better if it is not as we apply common standards to common purposes.
How many instances of something like "Office" do we need? If just one, then it might as well be based on open standards.
It seems like a small point, but I believe the neocons use fundamentalists as Hitler used German supramacists - they are simply an exloitable power base and nothing more. The problem the neocons are having and that Hitler also had is that the ideology of the power base must eventually be appeased.
Maybe that's putting it too simply, but it's close to the truth.
Bale is actually one of the few AMAZING actors of his generation. He can act, sing, dance, has charisma, etc. All in all the guy is fairly watchable.
And for everyone that doesn't understand American Psycho (the movie, I never read the book) - it's a very dark comedy about the 80s. Very dark. The end result is that you aren't even sure that the whole movie isn't just the insane fantasies of a privileged nutcase.
Seriously, I can't think of a Christian Bale movie that isn't better for his presence in the movie, starting with Speilberg's botched "Empire of the Sun." The only reason it's good at all is Bale in nearly every scene.
If there is any chance of getting a digital copy first, I never rip from vinyl. If there is little chance of getting a digital copy, then I go ahead and rip using a series of mid-level components inputted to a better than average soundcard. I usually record one side of an album or 12" single as a track, flip it and do the same. If it's an album I will break up the resulting track into the appropriate segments. I run it through some noise (pop and scratch) filters, and then compress to VBR MP3. Some of the tracks I've done this way sound nearly as good as CDs (except for the possible artifacts like pops or clicks that filtering did not eliminate).
It sounds like a huge hassle, but my attitude is that interacting with the music this way further requires me to REALLY want to do this - if it's not worth doing, I probably don't need or want the music in question any longer. If it's music I really love, this just gives me a chance to get into it at a deeper than normal level.
And hey, it's better to spend my time converting vinyl to digital MP3s than watching the drivel that passes for entertainment on TV. Blech.
When I'm on a roll I can manage a few albums a week. It'll take time, but it won't take forever.
You make a good point about not believing the hype about body stereotypes; but then you fall for the culturally embedded gender stereotypes that follow with them.
Maybe it's just me, but I know lots of women that like porn better than I do. I don't send naked pictures of myself to women, nor do I ask women for naked pictures of themselves. That's all crap - it means nothing if you are looking for more than a night's hookup.
The only things that seem to be true across the board are that we are most of serial monogamists, most romantic relationships between human beings last between 4-6 years (enough to birth a child or two and rear them into early childhood), that 50%+ of us cheat given the chance, men sexually peak in their early to mid 20s, and women peak in their early to mid 40s. Everything else depends on the people involved.
That's why it's better to get to know someone than it is to receive a naked picture from them. Real compatibility is far more than skin deep. Beauty fades, people change, everybody has their flaws and good points. You have to take the time to find out about somebody to see what it may all mean to you.
Really when it gets down to it, we mistakenly use sexual attractiveness as our litmus test for relationships when it is in many ways the least important aspect of things - even sexually. Some of my best lovers are not the best looking people I know. Enthusiasm, humor, and a good attitude can means so much.
This is what I was getting at above, by I guess my shorthand description wasn't wordy enough. PGP, CRT, VHS and MP3 are all proof that a certain point of quality is "good enough" for most people, and most people is the target market. Some technically superior but expensive alternative to the sufficient quality good enough for most people will fail because there is no market for it - or at best it is a very small market.
You know, we haven't even fully exploited the potential of current DVDs so I am not exactly in a hurry to have 4-5 kinds of media to juggle. I am cool with just CD-R, and DVD+R/DVD-R (I never use the "W" rewriteable media myself, it tends to be dodgy). While good DVD burners will burn either + or - variety media, soon we shall have the dual layer disks in greater profusion and that will be a new kind of media requiring new hardware. Where does it end and what's the point of it? Why should we care?
HD seems like a big ripoff to me. The benefit is just not worth the price, there are too many issues to contend with. I am still perfectly happy with my plain old DVD player and jumbo CRT type TV. I get the sharpest picture that way even if it's not 10 feet wide. Hell, I am only sitting 5-10 feet away from it anyway.
I think we should persecute people of ambiguous or alternative sexual orientation because all they have contributed to civilization is nearly the whole of western culture via the ancient Greeks. And nothing excuses Turning himself being pivotal in the cracking of the Enigma code and developing a whole host of computer theories and ideas. We must burn these people out of our culture because of their failure to contribute to society in the genetically prescribed manner!
Almost everyone uses a computer for something. So yes, technical skills are relevant whether you are moving up to higher education or entering the work force. If you are lucky enough to be independently wealthy and don't have to do either then "yay!" for you.
The people who don't have a computer are largely being ghettoized. That's a pity, but then there are people that can't read also.
But first things first: fist the basic skills (without computer aids); then the computer aided skills; then higher education, work, or a life of leisure.
That's what high school should be for - refining the basic skills students have for either higher education or the work force.
Computer penetration into most households is pretty high, especially if they have kids. And anyway, most libraries have computers in my experience. If a kid is interested, s/he can find a computer.
This is probably the most insightful post in this thread. Reznor is far more interesting in conjunction with other artists, but it depends on the other artists too. Foetus has done a remix or two, but they really weren't that great (of course, Foetus is great solo - so I blame Reznor for this failure, or perhaps even for failing to recognize a mediocre Foetus effort and refusing to publish it).
Maybe Sleazy Christopherson could imbue some remixes with the needed magic.
Some buffoon down thread thinks the Fragile material was brilliant while I find it nearly unlistenable and very tedious.
I give the whole new NIN nails thing a big yawn. Throbbing Gristle has already been more interesting within the last 12 mos.
Piracy is a market-speak term that has no meaning in law. Just like terms such as "Intellectual Property" the term "piracy" is intended to loosely capture a whole set of specific ideas, but in fact it fails to capture the ideas for which it is intended as being synonymous. So let's get to it, shall we?
Section 2318. Trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, copies of computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging, and copies of motion pictures or other audio visual works, and trafficking in counterfeit computer program documentation or packaging
(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (c) of this section, knowingly traffics in a counterfeit label affixed or designed to be affixed to a phonorecord, or a copy of a computer program or documentation or packaging for a computer program, or a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, and whoever, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (c) of this section, knowingly traffics in counterfeit documentation or packaging for a computer program, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both. (b) As used in this section-- (1) the term "counterfeit label" means an identifying label or container that appears to be genuine, but is not; (2) the term "traffic" means to transport, transfer or otherwise dispose of, to another, as consideration for anything of value or to make or obtain control of with intent to so transport, transfer or dispose of; and (3) the terms "copy", "phonorecord", "motion picture", "computer program", and "audiovisual work" have, respectively, the meanings given those terms in section 101 (relating to definitions) of title 17. (c) The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) of this section are-- (1) the offense is committed within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States (as defined in section 46501 of title 49); (2) the mail or a facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used or intended to be used in the commission of the offense; (3) the counterfeit label is affixed to or encloses, or is designed to be affixed to or enclose, a copy of a copyrighted computer program or copyrighted documentation or packaging for a computer program, a copyrighted motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a phonorecord of a copyrighted sound recording; or (4) the counterfeited documentation or packaging for a computer program is copyrighted. (d) When any person is convicted of any violation of subsection (a), the court in its judgment of conviction shall in addition to the penalty therein prescribed, order the forfeiture and destruction or other disposition of all counterfeit labels and all articles to which counterfeit labels have been affixed or which were intended to have had such labels affixed. (e) Except to the extent they are inconsistent with the provisions of this title, all provisions of section 509, title 17, United States Code, are applicable to violations of subsection (a).
As a point of interest for myself, I note that this law actually makes a point of the fact that the crime must occur within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. - which kind of raises a huge question about that whole Australian national being brought over to the states a few weeks back.
The part you want to remember is this bit: "(2) the term "traffic" means to transport, transfer or otherwise dispose of, to another, as consideration for anything of value."
As in: not free - for something of value. Bartered, sold, traded - not just given away.
Yes, it tells the tale. As it turns out the tales presented aren't actually that clever or deep, and in fact are often redundant in terms of overall theme, sometimes even the story, and most certainly the violence. But I think Sin City was really good because it very faithfully recreated the feel of the comics to a really shockingly high degree - this is real pulp fiction! It's not high art or are dolled up wit clever-clever dialogue.
It makes one realize how appallingly bad almost every other comic book adapted movie has been.
Believe it or not, amongst the only other comic book adapted triumphs are Road to Perdition, The Rocketeer, and Tank Girl (and everyone hates that one anyway). There are very few success stories in this category.
So yes, it damned well matters whether they succeeded in "telling the tale" well because that's why we go to this movie rather than the other piece of summer crappolla "War of the Worlds" - which, let's face it, they will also get all wrong.
Hitchhiker's is not a comic book - it's a series of well told novels. The whole point would be to translate the humor of the books to a movie. And it sounds like they screwed that up, badly.
The only good thing about any of this is that they can't actually destroy the books themselves, they can only drag the reputation of the books down.
This is only slightly off-topic but I think we have to start rethinking what we mean by child pornography. So far we play pretty fast and loose with the precise meaning of it. And specifically I am concerned with the ages at which we still consider people children.
Some cultures debut a woman into society at the age of 15 or 16. At the age she is debuted as a person of marriageable years. Doesn't that mean she is no longer a child? How about a boy of the same age? Some states allow 16 year olds, or minors, to be married. How about the child pornography laws in those states - is the age 16 or 18?
Yes, it matters. A lot. One makes sense and the other does not.
I even have a specific example: Traci Lords. IIRC, she was supposedly 15-16 when she made all those movies. Now I don't know the lady, but I have heard that she was the one that conned the porn industry into thinking she was over 18. They inquired, she lied about it. I have also heard that she was pretty much the slut and a driven porn career girl in her time.
But under the law something as innocent as her Penthouse magazine debut is considered child pornography. Sorry, if I don't cry a river of tears for a woman of 16 that looks and acts like that. It doesn't seem like child pornography to me, nor was it peddled that way in my view.
What about another child viewing the information in question? I mean your 13 year old son is trading naked pictures of himself with a 13 year old girl he knows. Are you liable? How do you prove it's your son and not you?
This is a big joke. This is more than a slippery slope - this a friggin' slip and slide hosed down in K-Y. The abuse of this technology is about to run wild. And as others have pointed out - it's really hard to be the guy arguing against a "child pornography" technology. They will cram it down our throats this way and then just sit back and watch the scary, abusive results.
Some of these children are not children. For all intents and purposes they are adults and should be treated as such.
BTW, you may curious if I have a cut off point at which age I think it makes sense to protect a child. I do: the age is 14. But I have a stipulation that the child cannot have lied or had false ID that suggested he or she was older than was the case. Now a lie is hard to prove, but if they have emails where the kid claims he or she is older, I consider that a fair defense. Any fake IDs indicating an older age are also a defense.
But 14 or under and with no extenuating circumstances, throw the book at them. Just don't trample all over everyone's privacy rights to do it.
I'm really sick of all the new laws, rulings, and technology whose purpose is just to make it easier to catch a supposed "criminal." We all commit crimes all the time. Surveillance is not really the answer. How much are you enjoying those street cameras that photograph your license plate and send you a mailed traffic ticket? Does it seem fair to you that it's you against a possibly faulty machine? Do you even time to fight it, or is it just more cost effective for you to take it in the ass and work that day instead?
You see, that's how they think. It's all about revenue collection and cheap prison labor to them; while to you it seems like it's all about an ordered society of laws.
Good looks are fleeting, but a good brain and a quick wit can last you a lifetime. Even if you are having championship sex with your number one girl, what's that come to - 2 hours of sex a day at a maximum? That's maybe 20% of your time with your lover. What about the rest of the time? You can keep your "maid in the living room, cook in the kitchen and whore in the bedroom" gals well away from me. I'll take the brainy chick every time. She's the one with whom I can get along.
I've dated many really good ladies who weren't very good company and weren't very great in bed. Many women less fortunate in the looks department have been amazing in bed and provided me with excellent companionship. As long as the face is attractive and the rest is at least passable, I'm fine. Give me a smart, creative, and funny lady.
The human brain is the biggest sex organ. Believe it.
Seriously, that lady is just so cool. I have yet to read one of her opinion pieces with which I disagree with her perspective. A woman can be forgiven so many faults with so much going on between her ears.
Mom, Dad - this is my girlfriend: http://joi.typepad.com/photos/cc_anni versary_03/ci mg0171sized.jpg
That's her first google hit under the images tab. Classic.
I think my point, having lived through the period in question, is that Kraftwerk is merely one of the end products of a whole German Electronic Music movement. They hit big during the disco era and many of the technics employed by Kraftwerk were immediately picked up on as tactics for the flavor of the week records being churned out. They were influenced, in turn they influenced others - but the entrance of the synthesizer into pop music owes just as much to other goups using electronic music techniques for more ordinary sounding songs.
Kraftwerk did not make it as Tone Float, Ralf & Florian, nor as incarnations 1 & 2. Autobahn was "pop-like." It had a catchy quality. So even Kraftewerk had to tone it down and make it accessible.
Once the world grew accustomed to certain electronic sounds, thanks to all kinds of people really, it was possible to go for more experimental, more purely electronic work altogether.
The other thing about Kraftwerk is that it's not hard to imagine a hardlined profit motive, over a creative agenda, behind much of what they did. Hutter and Shneider somewhat famously hold on very tightly to the legal rights to work that is probably more of a group effort than they care to admit - but they have tended to treat their fellows as mere hired hands. To me Kraftwerk isn't really Kraftwerk without Flur and Bartos. With the monies flowing neatly into the pockets of only two persons, the two spend most of their time bicycle riding (apparently) instead of making new music. That's a fact immediately obvious to anyone that has heard the last album - two-thirds of which is old music essentially.
Many, many, many other artists have gone on to all kinds of interesting things in the meanwhile. Kraftwerk were not first and they didn't stay influential for very long. They were almost immediately subsumed and surpassed.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a really uneducated opinion, clearly.
I assume you are judging the artform from the perspective of someone that has maybe read a superhero book or two, a funny animal cartoon book, or maybe Archie comics. That's really not much to go on.
There are real artists working in comics and they are able to create works of incredible depth. Good names to look for include: Jack Kirby, Matthias Schultheiss, Enki Bilal, Alan Moore, Harvey Kurtzman, William elder, Winsor McCay, Barry Smith, Jim Steranko, Robert Crumb, Jean Girard (a.k.a. Moebius), Wally Wood, Will Eisner, and Bernie Krigstein.
It is sometimes argued that Winsor McCay was an early surrealist for his work in the sunday comic strip "Little Nemo in Slumberland."
It's also worth noting that many movies are based on comicbook works.
This kind of exposition could go on almost forever so I'll just say that there is plenty more to say in this area and that you are dead wrong in your presumptions.
Why read the script when the commercials show plainly how bad the story and dialogue are going to be?
It's a pity that people treat Star Wars as a cultural event - as if Lucas deserved to have money simply laid at his feet. It isn't, he doesn't.
Just don't go. This guy is responsible for this piece of shit dialogue that should be written on his gravestone: "I don't like the sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating--not like you. You're soft and smooth."
Yeah, smooth...
I'd rather throw my money away on something a little less completely moronic.
Is there no way to moderate a post simply "odd"?
Scarcity = numbers below 300, everything else is a stupid justification for paying too much for something that is desired (most probably unreasonably, but that's the way desire works).
Your main point has been answered to ad nauseam. No one is placing a limit on being paid for the writing or maintenance of private code. The OS and basic software needed for the average box does not need to be private and in fact is probably better if it is not as we apply common standards to common purposes.
How many instances of something like "Office" do we need? If just one, then it might as well be based on open standards.
It seems like a small point, but I believe the neocons use fundamentalists as Hitler used German supramacists - they are simply an exloitable power base and nothing more. The problem the neocons are having and that Hitler also had is that the ideology of the power base must eventually be appeased.
Maybe that's putting it too simply, but it's close to the truth.
No non-anonymous method is "safe."
Instead, try meeting in real life and trading whole databases of music. That's what I do with my friends.
"I'll swap you 100 GB Jazz for 100 GB Classical..."
Bale is actually one of the few AMAZING actors of his generation. He can act, sing, dance, has charisma, etc. All in all the guy is fairly watchable.
And for everyone that doesn't understand American Psycho (the movie, I never read the book) - it's a very dark comedy about the 80s. Very dark. The end result is that you aren't even sure that the whole movie isn't just the insane fantasies of a privileged nutcase.
Seriously, I can't think of a Christian Bale movie that isn't better for his presence in the movie, starting with Speilberg's botched "Empire of the Sun." The only reason it's good at all is Bale in nearly every scene.
You are SO right!
If there is any chance of getting a digital copy first, I never rip from vinyl. If there is little chance of getting a digital copy, then I go ahead and rip using a series of mid-level components inputted to a better than average soundcard. I usually record one side of an album or 12" single as a track, flip it and do the same. If it's an album I will break up the resulting track into the appropriate segments. I run it through some noise (pop and scratch) filters, and then compress to VBR MP3. Some of the tracks I've done this way sound nearly as good as CDs (except for the possible artifacts like pops or clicks that filtering did not eliminate).
It sounds like a huge hassle, but my attitude is that interacting with the music this way further requires me to REALLY want to do this - if it's not worth doing, I probably don't need or want the music in question any longer. If it's music I really love, this just gives me a chance to get into it at a deeper than normal level.
And hey, it's better to spend my time converting vinyl to digital MP3s than watching the drivel that passes for entertainment on TV. Blech.
When I'm on a roll I can manage a few albums a week. It'll take time, but it won't take forever.
You make a good point about not believing the hype about body stereotypes; but then you fall for the culturally embedded gender stereotypes that follow with them.
Maybe it's just me, but I know lots of women that like porn better than I do. I don't send naked pictures of myself to women, nor do I ask women for naked pictures of themselves. That's all crap - it means nothing if you are looking for more than a night's hookup.
The only things that seem to be true across the board are that we are most of serial monogamists, most romantic relationships between human beings last between 4-6 years (enough to birth a child or two and rear them into early childhood), that 50%+ of us cheat given the chance, men sexually peak in their early to mid 20s, and women peak in their early to mid 40s. Everything else depends on the people involved.
That's why it's better to get to know someone than it is to receive a naked picture from them. Real compatibility is far more than skin deep. Beauty fades, people change, everybody has their flaws and good points. You have to take the time to find out about somebody to see what it may all mean to you.
Really when it gets down to it, we mistakenly use sexual attractiveness as our litmus test for relationships when it is in many ways the least important aspect of things - even sexually. Some of my best lovers are not the best looking people I know. Enthusiasm, humor, and a good attitude can means so much.
This is what I was getting at above, by I guess my shorthand description wasn't wordy enough. PGP, CRT, VHS and MP3 are all proof that a certain point of quality is "good enough" for most people, and most people is the target market. Some technically superior but expensive alternative to the sufficient quality good enough for most people will fail because there is no market for it - or at best it is a very small market.
Duh.
You know, we haven't even fully exploited the potential of current DVDs so I am not exactly in a hurry to have 4-5 kinds of media to juggle. I am cool with just CD-R, and DVD+R/DVD-R (I never use the "W" rewriteable media myself, it tends to be dodgy). While good DVD burners will burn either + or - variety media, soon we shall have the dual layer disks in greater profusion and that will be a new kind of media requiring new hardware. Where does it end and what's the point of it? Why should we care?
HD seems like a big ripoff to me. The benefit is just not worth the price, there are too many issues to contend with. I am still perfectly happy with my plain old DVD player and jumbo CRT type TV. I get the sharpest picture that way even if it's not 10 feet wide. Hell, I am only sitting 5-10 feet away from it anyway.
This new media shit is just that - shit.
I think we should persecute people of ambiguous or alternative sexual orientation because all they have contributed to civilization is nearly the whole of western culture via the ancient Greeks. And nothing excuses Turning himself being pivotal in the cracking of the Enigma code and developing a whole host of computer theories and ideas. We must burn these people out of our culture because of their failure to contribute to society in the genetically prescribed manner!
Where's my lithium...
Almost everyone uses a computer for something. So yes, technical skills are relevant whether you are moving up to higher education or entering the work force. If you are lucky enough to be independently wealthy and don't have to do either then "yay!" for you.
The people who don't have a computer are largely being ghettoized. That's a pity, but then there are people that can't read also.
But first things first: fist the basic skills (without computer aids); then the computer aided skills; then higher education, work, or a life of leisure.
That's what high school should be for - refining the basic skills students have for either higher education or the work force.
Computer penetration into most households is pretty high, especially if they have kids. And anyway, most libraries have computers in my experience. If a kid is interested, s/he can find a computer.
Thanks.
This is probably the most insightful post in this thread. Reznor is far more interesting in conjunction with other artists, but it depends on the other artists too. Foetus has done a remix or two, but they really weren't that great (of course, Foetus is great solo - so I blame Reznor for this failure, or perhaps even for failing to recognize a mediocre Foetus effort and refusing to publish it).
Maybe Sleazy Christopherson could imbue some remixes with the needed magic.
Some buffoon down thread thinks the Fragile material was brilliant while I find it nearly unlistenable and very tedious.
I give the whole new NIN nails thing a big yawn. Throbbing Gristle has already been more interesting within the last 12 mos.
Piracy is a market-speak term that has no meaning in law. Just like terms such as "Intellectual Property" the term "piracy" is intended to loosely capture a whole set of specific ideas, but in fact it fails to capture the ideas for which it is intended as being synonymous. So let's get to it, shall we?
TITLE 18 USC, PART I, CHAPTER 113, Section 2318
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2318.html
Section 2318. Trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, copies of computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging, and copies of motion pictures or other audio visual works, and trafficking in counterfeit computer program documentation or packaging
(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (c) of this section, knowingly traffics in a counterfeit label affixed or designed to be affixed to a phonorecord, or a copy of a computer program or documentation or packaging for a computer program, or a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, and whoever, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (c) of this section, knowingly traffics in counterfeit documentation or packaging for a computer program, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.
(b) As used in this section--
(1) the term "counterfeit label" means an identifying label or container that appears to be genuine, but is not;
(2) the term "traffic" means to transport, transfer or otherwise dispose of, to another, as consideration for anything of value or to make or obtain control of with intent to so transport, transfer or dispose of; and
(3) the terms "copy", "phonorecord", "motion picture", "computer program", and "audiovisual work" have, respectively, the meanings given those terms in section 101 (relating to definitions) of title 17.
(c) The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) of this section are--
(1) the offense is committed within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States; or within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States (as defined in section 46501 of title 49);
(2) the mail or a facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used or intended to be used in the commission of the offense;
(3) the counterfeit label is affixed to or encloses, or is designed to be affixed to or enclose, a copy of a copyrighted computer program or copyrighted documentation or packaging for a computer program, a copyrighted motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a phonorecord of a copyrighted sound recording; or
(4) the counterfeited documentation or packaging for a computer program is copyrighted.
(d) When any person is convicted of any violation of subsection (a), the court in its judgment of conviction shall in addition to the penalty therein prescribed, order the forfeiture and destruction or other disposition of all counterfeit labels and all articles to which counterfeit labels have been affixed or which were intended to have had such labels affixed.
(e) Except to the extent they are inconsistent with the provisions of this title, all provisions of section 509, title 17, United States Code, are applicable to violations of subsection (a).
As a point of interest for myself, I note that this law actually makes a point of the fact that the crime must occur within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. - which kind of raises a huge question about that whole Australian national being brought over to the states a few weeks back.
The part you want to remember is this bit: "(2) the term "traffic" means to transport, transfer or otherwise dispose of, to another, as consideration for anything of value."
As in: not free - for something of value. Bartered, sold, traded - not just given away.
Now, of course, they have added in the DMCA and The No Electronic Theft ("NET") Act: http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1
Yes, it tells the tale. As it turns out the tales presented aren't actually that clever or deep, and in fact are often redundant in terms of overall theme, sometimes even the story, and most certainly the violence. But I think Sin City was really good because it very faithfully recreated the feel of the comics to a really shockingly high degree - this is real pulp fiction! It's not high art or are dolled up wit clever-clever dialogue.
It makes one realize how appallingly bad almost every other comic book adapted movie has been.
Believe it or not, amongst the only other comic book adapted triumphs are Road to Perdition, The Rocketeer, and Tank Girl (and everyone hates that one anyway). There are very few success stories in this category.
So yes, it damned well matters whether they succeeded in "telling the tale" well because that's why we go to this movie rather than the other piece of summer crappolla "War of the Worlds" - which, let's face it, they will also get all wrong.
Hitchhiker's is not a comic book - it's a series of well told novels. The whole point would be to translate the humor of the books to a movie. And it sounds like they screwed that up, badly.
The only good thing about any of this is that they can't actually destroy the books themselves, they can only drag the reputation of the books down.
This is only slightly off-topic but I think we have to start rethinking what we mean by child pornography. So far we play pretty fast and loose with the precise meaning of it. And specifically I am concerned with the ages at which we still consider people children.
Some cultures debut a woman into society at the age of 15 or 16. At the age she is debuted as a person of marriageable years. Doesn't that mean she is no longer a child? How about a boy of the same age? Some states allow 16 year olds, or minors, to be married. How about the child pornography laws in those states - is the age 16 or 18?
Yes, it matters. A lot. One makes sense and the other does not.
I even have a specific example: Traci Lords. IIRC, she was supposedly 15-16 when she made all those movies. Now I don't know the lady, but I have heard that she was the one that conned the porn industry into thinking she was over 18. They inquired, she lied about it. I have also heard that she was pretty much the slut and a driven porn career girl in her time.
But under the law something as innocent as her Penthouse magazine debut is considered child pornography. Sorry, if I don't cry a river of tears for a woman of 16 that looks and acts like that. It doesn't seem like child pornography to me, nor was it peddled that way in my view.
What about another child viewing the information in question? I mean your 13 year old son is trading naked pictures of himself with a 13 year old girl he knows. Are you liable? How do you prove it's your son and not you?
This is a big joke. This is more than a slippery slope - this a friggin' slip and slide hosed down in K-Y. The abuse of this technology is about to run wild. And as others have pointed out - it's really hard to be the guy arguing against a "child pornography" technology. They will cram it down our throats this way and then just sit back and watch the scary, abusive results.
Some of these children are not children. For all intents and purposes they are adults and should be treated as such.
BTW, you may curious if I have a cut off point at which age I think it makes sense to protect a child. I do: the age is 14. But I have a stipulation that the child cannot have lied or had false ID that suggested he or she was older than was the case. Now a lie is hard to prove, but if they have emails where the kid claims he or she is older, I consider that a fair defense. Any fake IDs indicating an older age are also a defense.
But 14 or under and with no extenuating circumstances, throw the book at them. Just don't trample all over everyone's privacy rights to do it.
I'm really sick of all the new laws, rulings, and technology whose purpose is just to make it easier to catch a supposed "criminal." We all commit crimes all the time. Surveillance is not really the answer. How much are you enjoying those street cameras that photograph your license plate and send you a mailed traffic ticket? Does it seem fair to you that it's you against a possibly faulty machine? Do you even time to fight it, or is it just more cost effective for you to take it in the ass and work that day instead?
You see, that's how they think. It's all about revenue collection and cheap prison labor to them; while to you it seems like it's all about an ordered society of laws.
Yeah, but think of it this way: she's a keeper.
Good looks are fleeting, but a good brain and a quick wit can last you a lifetime. Even if you are having championship sex with your number one girl, what's that come to - 2 hours of sex a day at a maximum? That's maybe 20% of your time with your lover. What about the rest of the time? You can keep your "maid in the living room, cook in the kitchen and whore in the bedroom" gals well away from me. I'll take the brainy chick every time. She's the one with whom I can get along.
I've dated many really good ladies who weren't very good company and weren't very great in bed. Many women less fortunate in the looks department have been amazing in bed and provided me with excellent companionship. As long as the face is attractive and the rest is at least passable, I'm fine. Give me a smart, creative, and funny lady.
The human brain is the biggest sex organ. Believe it.
I figure her SO is a lucky guy/gal.
Maybe this works: http://joi.typepad.com/photos/cc_anniversary_03/ci mg0171sized.html
Seriously, that lady is just so cool. I have yet to read one of her opinion pieces with which I disagree with her perspective. A woman can be forgiven so many faults with so much going on between her ears.
i versary_03/ci mg0171sized.jpg
Mom, Dad - this is my girlfriend:
http://joi.typepad.com/photos/cc_ann
That's her first google hit under the images tab. Classic.
I think my point, having lived through the period in question, is that Kraftwerk is merely one of the end products of a whole German Electronic Music movement. They hit big during the disco era and many of the technics employed by Kraftwerk were immediately picked up on as tactics for the flavor of the week records being churned out. They were influenced, in turn they influenced others - but the entrance of the synthesizer into pop music owes just as much to other goups using electronic music techniques for more ordinary sounding songs.
Kraftwerk did not make it as Tone Float, Ralf & Florian, nor as incarnations 1 & 2. Autobahn was "pop-like." It had a catchy quality. So even Kraftewerk had to tone it down and make it accessible.
Once the world grew accustomed to certain electronic sounds, thanks to all kinds of people really, it was possible to go for more experimental, more purely electronic work altogether.
The other thing about Kraftwerk is that it's not hard to imagine a hardlined profit motive, over a creative agenda, behind much of what they did. Hutter and Shneider somewhat famously hold on very tightly to the legal rights to work that is probably more of a group effort than they care to admit - but they have tended to treat their fellows as mere hired hands. To me Kraftwerk isn't really Kraftwerk without Flur and Bartos. With the monies flowing neatly into the pockets of only two persons, the two spend most of their time bicycle riding (apparently) instead of making new music. That's a fact immediately obvious to anyone that has heard the last album - two-thirds of which is old music essentially.
Many, many, many other artists have gone on to all kinds of interesting things in the meanwhile. Kraftwerk were not first and they didn't stay influential for very long. They were almost immediately subsumed and surpassed.