> I for one never want to see my tax dollars being use *even once* for viewing crap like porn.
And I dont want to see my tax dollars being used *even once* for viewing crap like Brittany Spears fan sites. Think I'll get my way? Shuttup and tolerate.
Anyhow, as your fight against drugs has proven, banning something only puts it furthur underground, where the damage to its participants becomes subject to many of the other subcultures and undergrounds.
> Some of the problem is adults whacking off in libraries looking at porn. We can protect the kids from that by banning porn altogether.
I have a brilliant idea. Why not ban adults from whacking off in libraries?
I wouldn't say he's communist (after all, hes not against the concept of selling software for money.) All he's against is one simple thing, that, I think we should all be against:
Hoarding and creating scarcity. (And interoperability, for that matter.)
He's against powerful entities from using that power to _create_ scarcity.. to use something somebody else made for free, and then restricting the distribution of that thing for their own benifit.
I mean, Adam Smith said capitalism allowed us to leverage our abilities to gain wealth and bring everybody up. What he didn't forsee is 'horizontal positioning', where an already-successful entity would use their size and success to leverage their market reach and visibility to profit of somebody else's work.
If I make something amazing, there is a 0.5% chance in hell that I could sell it for a living, being one guy with 0 business sense. But thats alright.. I dont mind giving my work away for free as long as some other asshole doesn't try to get wealthier off of my work. Its amazing how many stupid old white men get richer every day because ideals like RMSs are dismissed as crackpotism by the general public. In reality, if the GPL didn't exist, we'd be paying Bill Gates' for other peoples' work! I dont know about you, but I'm not sure he deserves that.
You'd do well to read some of the posts above. The whole point is that he's denouncing the software that _isnt_ licenced under the GPL (and thus allowed to be licenced per-seat.)
It's nothing new, but all you RMS-triggerfinger-flamers ought to conceed defeat. People have always been trepedacious about ideals, but its approaching the levels where the noise the RMS-haters make would drown out any legitamite claims he makes. It's always the same stories with the visionaries.. the crowd gets so loud that in the end, they end up feeding their own fire with their own false portrayals of their target.
AHAHAH.. so you sit 20 (okay, just one)/dev/urandom devices down on a keyboard and get Shakespeare? Man, thats even cheaper than the monkeys I'm employing now...
That sounds like a brilliant idea. I'm sure its been done to some extent, but I'm sure a pre-packaged distro with the neccessary visible user base would really help *nix fight *doze in the schools.
1. Most people, for any given type of culture, dont have the time to actually research new artists or culture. This is analagous to why people who research music all the time dont have time to research clothes. Or why fashion experts dont have time to research movies. Or why movie buffs dont have time to research the best lawn-mower companies when they buy lawnmowers. I mean, thats what we're all here for - some people research A, B and C, and we get together at the end of the day to recommend stuff to each other. That's what radio used to be, and to a large extent, one of the promises made by Adam Smith - that by commericalizing these efforts and skills, we'd end up helping each other out, and thusly becoming wealthier in the process.
Well, radio was and should still be one of the best hot mediums for discovering new music; it's location independant, its free (minus the time you spend listening to ads), its economically accessible, and most importantly of all, its somebody else doing the driving. So to say, stop listening to the radio and adapt to a completely new (for many people) way of finding information (its still funny how many people just assume having a computer is as ubiquitous as having a radio), rather than relying on public, community based sources from people who have the ability to spend their every waking hour hunting for good music to play to you, is not much of a solution at all. The whole point is, if I love music, and discover all these great new bands, it would seem to me I should be *able* to start up a radio station and help my fellow peers by giving them access to my love of music.
You're essentially saying, to people who listened to radio (typically people without the time or desire to do their own discovery), well, tough shit, find your own stuff. Where's the love in that? Where's the cop-operation? The social synergy? The efficiency?
2. > the radio telling you what to like shouldn't be a concern of yours.
Well, it wouldn't be if there was more new music, or greater diversity, or better selection. This much is obvious when you talk to people who listen to the few-and-far-between good radio content available out there (usually college radio, although I'm sure thats a last bastion that will be gone once corperations have time the time to drop another carrot down in one of the last relatively uncorperate cultures available). However, its fairly easy to figure out that people *dont* see themselves getting this from radio as much as they used to, as evidenced by lower listenership, and the popularity of the penultimate anti-mass-market kitchphrase, "I dont listen to the radio, it sucks." The ultimate, being, of course, "I dont watch TV, it sucks." BTW.
This, "What do you expect, youre the only person you can rely on," attitude that seems to be one of the more popular solutions to corperate subversion of community and culture is only going to drive us apart furthur and ensure that the only people who seek to serve the broader interests of people are only doing so in order to turn mad profit lines and to keep dishing out that cultural crack that is pop music.
we know the term 'barrier to market', right? well, this is a good example of 'barrier to process'.
I agree with you, although since most people tend to think much useful (or at least profitable) stuff wouldn't get done without companies, I suspect many people whould just shrug and tell any would-be small-time patent owner to start/join a company.
I think thats one of the mentalities we need to change.. getting people to believe that worthwhile culture/product can come out of low production value gigs, including the small-time patent holder. only then will people care enough to ensure that their laws do not contain significant barrier to processes.
holy shit, there goes that whole anti-DMCA 'jsut cause you own a burglar tool doesn't mean they can arrest you for burglaring, why should technology be any different' argument.:(
for opponants of blanket and umbrella patenting tactics, although maybe this helps the little guy in the sense that a big fish cant take a patent, change the color, and patent that?
If film goes to public domain, George can do whatever he likes to the thing, while I can still distribute the originals on whatever medium I like without his over-tinkering.
It's about choice. Some of us like what hes doing, some dont. The way people talk sometimes, you'd think the idea of choice was some unneeded, valueless concept (or according to those who have a little power or property, downright dangerous.)
George had his chance, did his thing, got rich, got paid, lived well, made lots of other movies, yadda yadda. Would it kill us to allow the population to pick their poison (in this case, the version of Star Wars) after 20 years.. you know, now that the IP creator has been compensated (and then some) for his work?
Scientists have documentented that your body 'hears' sounds your ears do not, outside of our normal audible frequency range. These hi and lo frequencies interact with your body, thus affecting how you 'hear' the audible frequencies. (Not sure how, but I believe it.. you know how your own voice sounds different than how your friends hear it. Same kinda deal.)
Anyhow, records, as far as I know, can produce a far wider range of frequencies than the CD, who's 'inaudible' frequencies are lopped off the top and bottom end of a CD's audio data (i'm sure somebody else can provide the actual freq. range.)
So, if you're searching for the recording that most closely resembles the original recording (including frequencies your ear cannot detect), which some may contend is the sole purpose of a recording, leaving aside such issues as media size and portability, there is a grey area in which you could contend that the CD is the superior medium.
It's a tenuous claim, I'd say; if anything, most of the above mentionned technologies proved that media quality and experience alone doth not technological-adoption make. He's certainly correct in stating that the technical capabilities of a technology can easily take a second seat to factors such as product awareness, non technical factors (form factor, durability, copyability), and context (such as VHS winning over Beta due to Sony's attempt to keep pronographers from distributing content on Beta).
> I would be more inclined to listen to these claims if he wasn't just some hack trying to break into a bigger arena.
Right, cause the only ones we can trust are the ones who've already attained financial success. It's a sure mark of intelligence, business accumen, ethics, and most importantly of all, righeousness and correctness.
It's pretty funny - on the one hand you have a huge monopoly that attempts to keep the lid on independant artists' noise level, and on the other hand, you have a generation thats been born and bred not to believe anything unless the production values are high. Talk about your catch-22s.
>some MMOGs that actually set roleplaying as the thing that matters
Dunno if you're referring to the new graphical games or the M*s, but tons of MOOs were completetly non goal based, meaning the only thing people did was RP, even if they used the MOO to automate and 'game' some of the RP elements.
>I'm a little depressed at the thought of a world whose "social infrastructure" is the internet.
Its not *the* social structure, but one of the tennets of technology is that it is impossible to introduce new technology without effecting the social patterns of humans. Cell phones, cars, paper, written word.. none of these technologies on its own are the 'social infrastructure', but each one has a hand in moulding our behaviour.
The introduction of the Internet to our lives has not had a significant social impact on a particular percentage of humans (presumably, those with access and means to use the Internet). In that respect, its not depressing, it just is.
Good point about cars becoming more enviro-friendly tho. I hadn't though of that, and that certainly reduces the significance of my point.
For a site that sometimes purpots to be concered with the environment, should we really be so glib to add yet another reason to depend on cars for smooth operation of our social infratructure?
Amen brother. Monkey Ball 2 is definately going to blow up the spot, and will likely go down as one of the best party games ever. I'm eargerly waiting... I'd take MonkeyBall over Halo any day! (I don't get Halo fans.. decent game, but FPSes on mouse-less systems will always be 2nd to the PC)
Metroid looks to me like it will retain the atmostphere, but I maintain that the true thing of Nintendo games is that they are massive adventures that pull you in and wont let go. The atmosphere is crucial to the second-to-second experience, but IMHO, its the adventures, stories, and familiar characters that keep me coming back from more.
Call me a loser, but I really feel like I've accomplished a massive task when I finish a metroid or zelda game. Other huge games may have the atmosphere and flash down pat, but I rarely give a shit about the character and story. To me, thats the Nintendo Difference (well, and the polish. NOBODY polishes like Nintendo.)
I'm not sure Retro will fuck Metroid up. Remember, we've seen the action bits, but tons of the Metroid experience is about travelling, discovering, looking, etc. Details are thin, but this kind of experience looks to be preserved in Metroid Prime, even if it's not the kind of stuff you'd show in your 10 second vidcaps.:)
> .. current creative minds can rest on their laurels.
Or the creative minds' parents, or kids, or family, or employees.... some copyright holders can support armies of folks who 'eek out' (sarcasm) a living off the nepotistic returns of a ubiquitous (high use) and nearly expire-less copyright law.
I'm a programmer. I work at a company. I 'invented' popupunders, without ever having heard of this company of jokers, in under 4 minutes. For that, you get 5 or 25(?) years of royalties?
Thats a joke. A complete, insane, joke. To whom do I send my hard earned dollars making these 'giant leaps' in technology in order to fight this shit?
Slashdot Mirror
> I for one never want to see my tax dollars being use *even once* for viewing crap like porn.
And I dont want to see my tax dollars being used *even once* for viewing crap like Brittany Spears fan sites. Think I'll get my way? Shuttup and tolerate.
Anyhow, as your fight against drugs has proven, banning something only puts it furthur underground, where the damage to its participants becomes subject to many of the other subcultures and undergrounds.
> Some of the problem is adults whacking off in libraries looking at porn. We can protect the kids from that by banning porn altogether.
I have a brilliant idea. Why not ban adults from whacking off in libraries?
People like you are dumb. =)
I wouldn't say he's communist (after all, hes not against the concept of selling software for money.) All he's against is one simple thing, that, I think we should all be against:
.. to use something somebody else made for free, and then restricting the distribution of that thing for their own benifit.
.. I dont mind giving my work away for free as long as some other asshole doesn't try to get wealthier off of my work. Its amazing how many stupid old white men get richer every day because ideals like RMSs are dismissed as crackpotism by the general public. In reality, if the GPL didn't exist, we'd be paying Bill Gates' for other peoples' work! I dont know about you, but I'm not sure he deserves that.
Hoarding and creating scarcity. (And interoperability, for that matter.)
He's against powerful entities from using that power to _create_ scarcity
I mean, Adam Smith said capitalism allowed us to leverage our abilities to gain wealth and bring everybody up. What he didn't forsee is 'horizontal positioning', where an already-successful entity would use their size and success to leverage their market reach and visibility to profit of somebody else's work.
If I make something amazing, there is a 0.5% chance in hell that I could sell it for a living, being one guy with 0 business sense. But thats alright
You'd do well to read some of the posts above. The whole point is that he's denouncing the software that _isnt_ licenced under the GPL (and thus allowed to be licenced per-seat.)
.. the crowd gets so loud that in the end, they end up feeding their own fire with their own false portrayals of their target.
It's nothing new, but all you RMS-triggerfinger-flamers ought to conceed defeat. People have always been trepedacious about ideals, but its approaching the levels where the noise the RMS-haters make would drown out any legitamite claims he makes. It's always the same stories with the visionaries
Good stuff. Consider yourself virtually-modded, +1 Insightful.
I feel bad for the libertarians here. Most of them seem exceedingly confused.
AHAHAH .. so you sit 20 (okay, just one) /dev/urandom devices down on a keyboard and get Shakespeare? Man, thats even cheaper than the monkeys I'm employing now ...
That sounds like a brilliant idea. I'm sure its been done to some extent, but I'm sure a pre-packaged distro with the neccessary visible user base would really help *nix fight *doze in the schools.
A few points:
1. Most people, for any given type of culture, dont have the time to actually research new artists or culture. This is analagous to why people who research music all the time dont have time to research clothes. Or why fashion experts dont have time to research movies. Or why movie buffs dont have time to research the best lawn-mower companies when they buy lawnmowers. I mean, thats what we're all here for - some people research A, B and C, and we get together at the end of the day to recommend stuff to each other. That's what radio used to be, and to a large extent, one of the promises made by Adam Smith - that by commericalizing these efforts and skills, we'd end up helping each other out, and thusly becoming wealthier in the process.
Well, radio was and should still be one of the best hot mediums for discovering new music; it's location independant, its free (minus the time you spend listening to ads), its economically accessible, and most importantly of all, its somebody else doing the driving. So to say, stop listening to the radio and adapt to a completely new (for many people) way of finding information (its still funny how many people just assume having a computer is as ubiquitous as having a radio), rather than relying on public, community based sources from people who have the ability to spend their every waking hour hunting for good music to play to you, is not much of a solution at all. The whole point is, if I love music, and discover all these great new bands, it would seem to me I should be *able* to start up a radio station and help my fellow peers by giving them access to my love of music.
You're essentially saying, to people who listened to radio (typically people without the time or desire to do their own discovery), well, tough shit, find your own stuff. Where's the love in that? Where's the cop-operation? The social synergy? The efficiency?
2. > the radio telling you what to like shouldn't be a concern of yours.
Well, it wouldn't be if there was more new music, or greater diversity, or better selection. This much is obvious when you talk to people who listen to the few-and-far-between good radio content available out there (usually college radio, although I'm sure thats a last bastion that will be gone once corperations have time the time to drop another carrot down in one of the last relatively uncorperate cultures available). However, its fairly easy to figure out that people *dont* see themselves getting this from radio as much as they used to, as evidenced by lower listenership, and the popularity of the penultimate anti-mass-market kitchphrase, "I dont listen to the radio, it sucks." The ultimate, being, of course, "I dont watch TV, it sucks." BTW.
This, "What do you expect, youre the only person you can rely on," attitude that seems to be one of the more popular solutions to corperate subversion of community and culture is only going to drive us apart furthur and ensure that the only people who seek to serve the broader interests of people are only doing so in order to turn mad profit lines and to keep dishing out that cultural crack that is pop music.
we know the term 'barrier to market', right? well, this is a good example of 'barrier to process'.
.. getting people to believe that worthwhile culture/product can come out of low production value gigs, including the small-time patent holder. only then will people care enough to ensure that their laws do not contain significant barrier to processes.
I agree with you, although since most people tend to think much useful (or at least profitable) stuff wouldn't get done without companies, I suspect many people whould just shrug and tell any would-be small-time patent owner to start/join a company.
I think thats one of the mentalities we need to change
holy shit, there goes that whole anti-DMCA 'jsut cause you own a burglar tool doesn't mean they can arrest you for burglaring, why should technology be any different' argument. :(
shit.
for opponants of blanket and umbrella patenting tactics, although maybe this helps the little guy in the sense that a big fish cant take a patent, change the color, and patent that?
Thats the whole point, dummy.
.. you know, now that the IP creator has been compensated (and then some) for his work?
If film goes to public domain, George can do whatever he likes to the thing, while I can still distribute the originals on whatever medium I like without his over-tinkering.
It's about choice. Some of us like what hes doing, some dont. The way people talk sometimes, you'd think the idea of choice was some unneeded, valueless concept (or according to those who have a little power or property, downright dangerous.)
George had his chance, did his thing, got rich, got paid, lived well, made lots of other movies, yadda yadda. Would it kill us to allow the population to pick their poison (in this case, the version of Star Wars) after 20 years
> Who should be the members of such a crew if it were to be launched?
Oh, too easy! The MPAA and the RIAA, of course!
Er, I'm an idiot.
..
.. there is a grey area in which you could contend that vinyl is the superior medium
Thats what I meant to say. Sorry for the confusion.
Scientists have documentented that your body 'hears' sounds your ears do not, outside of our normal audible frequency range. These hi and lo frequencies interact with your body, thus affecting how you 'hear' the audible frequencies. (Not sure how, but I believe it .. you know how your own voice sounds different than how your friends hear it. Same kinda deal.)
Anyhow, records, as far as I know, can produce a far wider range of frequencies than the CD, who's 'inaudible' frequencies are lopped off the top and bottom end of a CD's audio data (i'm sure somebody else can provide the actual freq. range.)
So, if you're searching for the recording that most closely resembles the original recording (including frequencies your ear cannot detect), which some may contend is the sole purpose of a recording, leaving aside such issues as media size and portability, there is a grey area in which you could contend that the CD is the superior medium.
It's a tenuous claim, I'd say; if anything, most of the above mentionned technologies proved that media quality and experience alone doth not technological-adoption make. He's certainly correct in stating that the technical capabilities of a technology can easily take a second seat to factors such as product awareness, non technical factors (form factor, durability, copyability), and context (such as VHS winning over Beta due to Sony's attempt to keep pronographers from distributing content on Beta).
> I would be more inclined to listen to these claims if he wasn't just some hack trying to break into a bigger arena.
Right, cause the only ones we can trust are the ones who've already attained financial success. It's a sure mark of intelligence, business accumen, ethics, and most importantly of all, righeousness and correctness.
It's pretty funny - on the one hand you have a huge monopoly that attempts to keep the lid on independant artists' noise level, and on the other hand, you have a generation thats been born and bred not to believe anything unless the production values are high. Talk about your catch-22s.
>some MMOGs that actually set roleplaying as the thing that matters
Dunno if you're referring to the new graphical games or the M*s, but tons of MOOs were completetly non goal based, meaning the only thing people did was RP, even if they used the MOO to automate and 'game' some of the RP elements.
Ah, memories.
>I'm a little depressed at the thought of a world whose "social infrastructure" is the internet.
.. none of these technologies on its own are the 'social infrastructure', but each one has a hand in moulding our behaviour.
Its not *the* social structure, but one of the tennets of technology is that it is impossible to introduce new technology without effecting the social patterns of humans. Cell phones, cars, paper, written word
The introduction of the Internet to our lives has not had a significant social impact on a particular percentage of humans (presumably, those with access and means to use the Internet). In that respect, its not depressing, it just is.
Good point about cars becoming more enviro-friendly tho. I hadn't though of that, and that certainly reduces the significance of my point.
>every car would have a router in it.
For a site that sometimes purpots to be concered with the environment, should we really be so glib to add yet another reason to depend on cars for smooth operation of our social infratructure?
Amen brother. Monkey Ball 2 is definately going to blow up the spot, and will likely go down as one of the best party games ever. I'm eargerly waiting ... I'd take MonkeyBall over Halo any day! (I don't get Halo fans .. decent game, but FPSes on mouse-less systems will always be 2nd to the PC)
Ah no, not a 'good ol days' post!
:)
Metroid looks to me like it will retain the atmostphere, but I maintain that the true thing of Nintendo games is that they are massive adventures that pull you in and wont let go. The atmosphere is crucial to the second-to-second experience, but IMHO, its the adventures, stories, and familiar characters that keep me coming back from more.
Call me a loser, but I really feel like I've accomplished a massive task when I finish a metroid or zelda game. Other huge games may have the atmosphere and flash down pat, but I rarely give a shit about the character and story. To me, thats the Nintendo Difference (well, and the polish. NOBODY polishes like Nintendo.)
I'm not sure Retro will fuck Metroid up. Remember, we've seen the action bits, but tons of the Metroid experience is about travelling, discovering, looking, etc. Details are thin, but this kind of experience looks to be preserved in Metroid Prime, even if it's not the kind of stuff you'd show in your 10 second vidcaps.
Its called Diddy Kong Racing. And yes, its coming. You didn't think it wouldn't be, did you? :) Check www.planetgamecube.com
> .. current creative minds can rest on their laurels.
.... some copyright holders can support armies of folks who 'eek out' (sarcasm) a living off the nepotistic returns of a ubiquitous (high use) and nearly expire-less copyright law.
Or the creative minds' parents, or kids, or family, or employees
I don't know, but I'm pretty sure you can find out on the DMCA author page. ;)
> I just wish there was more money in doing the Right Thing :\
Well, I salute you and your self discipline. Anyhow, money's no good if you had to feel like the hollow shell of a man to get it. =)
I, also, refuse to climb the corperate latter if it means pushing technologies or principals I do not ethically condone. Good for you.
I'm a programmer. I work at a company. I 'invented' popupunders, without ever having heard of this company of jokers, in under 4 minutes. For that, you get 5 or 25(?) years of royalties?
Thats a joke. A complete, insane, joke. To whom do I send my hard earned dollars making these 'giant leaps' in technology in order to fight this shit?