She's been nothing but a slut all along, I think her only future is in porn films, Hell i'd pay to see that bitch take it in the ass,suck cock and swallow loads of cum maybe some lesbian stuff too! Yeah, that's her future.
The parent got modded flamebait for the above comment, but is it really debatable?
Hell, I understand the allure. I'm a lonely slashdotter on a friday night, and it would be nice to, uh... hang... with a girl like that for awhile. But we all know she has no substance, and no... ya know, mystery about her. What you see is what you get. I long for the day when music of substance returns, just like everyone else...but did it ever really leave? Or did the public get sucked down the corporate-pop drainpipe?
There are still artists of integrity, soul, and majesty out there now, playing in empty clubs, or their own basements. We, as the public, need to find them. Really, it's just a matter of looking - the internet makes this possible.
I think Britney's time may be coming to an end. Music of substance and power will find its way back to us as we struggle to find it. I've discovered some incredible east asian folk music recently, and it's some of the most eerie and amazing music I've ever heard. Great songs are out there, we just need to find them, and quit BITCHING all the time about how corporate america doesn't deliver the music we require upon a silver platter. Until we seek out new/old music we deserve that poptripe.
And which one would that be? The one with all the doping scandals and judging fiascos? The one that gave the corporations huge concessions such as making blogging illegal for athletes?
All very true. I'm massively perturbed. I feel faint.
swoons
But wait, this is offtopic, but I am pissed about that iTunes bug for Macs - the crashing, freezy thing? Damn that sucks! Apple's gotta fix that shit or what'll i do?!
Life can't compensate for a windmill slowing down the wind.
Oh my God! If your theory is correct we'd better make sure not to put too many more propellers in the ocean or it could just stop moving!! Think of the horror!!!
Not really the news I wanted to hear. The last thing we need is that nutcase Kim Jong Il with nuclear-fucking-weapons! I was (and am) against the war in Iraq - Saddam never kept me up at night. Kim Jong Il, on the other hand, is a different story. This guy could be extremely dangerous. I can't really think of a good way to contain/eliminate him, but I'm thinking it would be a smart idea to do so before he starts LAUNCHING NUCLEAR FUCKING WEAPONS!
-=Memo to Bush=- ___________________ Wrong country, dude.
Gak! That was supposed to be a teaching story! There aren't any other references to the character in that sense anywhere else!
The rest of them are usually mistranslations of characterisations intended to refer to human mischiefs and schemers, not supernatural entities.
Um.....Genesis? I mean come on, dude - if you're gonna talk about the Old Testament, start at the beginning.
I suppose you may believe it was actually just a talking snake. You clearly have your interpretation ready-made. In this way man has always made the Bible mean what he wants it to mean.
Also, I should point out that your whole point is wrong. There is a nemesis character in almost every theology. There's no way to explain evil without it, unless humanity gets all the blame (we usually just get some). There are so many different names for the devil that it's hard to keep them all straight, but he's usually around somewhere. In pagan theology (in this case Greek & Roman) there were several gods who had a satanic bent - Hades, Ares, Zeus & Posiedon all have demonic elements.
I actually suspect that many references to the devil were changed to God in the Bible! It's confusing as shit when God is kind and loving one moment, and tormenting people for no reason the next, and I don't exactly trust the Bible after all the translations and editions its been through.
You're absolutely right about Christians using the devil to scare parishoners, though. You might actually want to look more at the origin of "hell" than the devil. Hell is relatively new invention, perfected during the dark ages. In many other theologies, it's unclear where the devil "lives."
Oh come on. Don't give me that look - you know it's brilliant.
Dark Helmet : Before you die there is something you should know about us, Lone Starr.
Lone Starr : What?
Dark Helmet : I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Lone Starr : What's that make us?
Dark Helmet : Absolutely nothing!
As humans, that's what we do. To deny us that right is an attack on our human rights - which includes freedom of speech under the UN charter.
Luckily, if you RTFA they say that existing personal websites are exempt, but even then you apparently cannot post pix or video. That's fucking bullshit. I would very much like to see somebody challenge this rule, but unfortunately I think they would be simply kicked out of the Olympics and left with no recourse. Who is the IOC accountable to? No one, except for member countries, I'd bet.
Really, this seems to be a sad attempt by the news media to protect their turf. It's so pathetic. My question is, what if an athlete is also an accredited journalist in real life. Does the IOC grant them permission to post on their website? Obviously big money trumps free speech every time, though. I guess it's about time we just gave in and begged our corporate masters to be merciful. Fat lotta good that will do.
The folks outside the U.S. should care what happens here in the U.S. because they are going to be greatly effected by it. If, for instance, strong DRM gets mandated here in the U.S. then you can bet your bottom dollar that Microsoft will push it out to the rest of the world.
You're dodging my point. DRM, which you and I agree is bad, is the only way to stop file sharing (and that is a stretch. Likely, nothing can stop it). Lawsuits can't stop it. You're right folks outside the US should be concerned, but I don't think you'll be able to ask them nicely to stop sharing files and get a response. Lawsuits are ineffective against them. DRM is the big bad gorilla we need to be afraid of.
If someone else doesn't want their copyrighted material on the P2P networks that should likewise be their choice. If the RIAA took your music, without your permission, and put it on one of their albums you would probably be upset. It's no different when you take someone else's copyrighted material and share it without their permission.
No, that's a huge difference. If the RIAA put my music on an album I would indeed throw a fit, but that's because they're intending to profit massively from my work. If the individual members of the RIAA put my tunes on mix CDs and gave them free of charge to their friends I would have no problem with that. BIG difference when commerce is involved. This is file sharing we're talking about, remember.
In a perfect world, the boy bands could tell us not to share their music and that would be fine. But now everything is being shared. It's not some malicious plot against artists - people have the data on their computers and it's only natural to share it. It's what the internet is all about. I know you want to protect the internet, but DRM will destroy it. On some level this whole conversation is pointless because people are going to write software and use that software to share files - no matter what the courts say.
Over time more and more people are going to be looking to the Internet as one of their primary sources of new music. If the Internet is flooded with RIAA music then the chances of your music getting noticed is less than if the P2P networks contained primarily music that was legal to share.
Two points: First, I would love it if there was a network dedicated to getting new, unsigned bands out there without being obscured by all the major label acts. I just don't think we need to make the existing P2P systems illegal (or effectively so, given massive RIAA lawsuits against end users) in order to make that happen. They are not mutually exclusive.
Secondly, the reason why I like existing P2P networks is the same reason you mentioned above: it's a great way to find new music/bands. I can't tell you how many hundreds of bands I've discovered this way. Since you realize this, it makes me wonder why your whole argument seems to be predicated on the RIAA-approved notion that file-sharing is somehow hurting artists. I'd say it's the exact opposite. It may hurt the MTV-boy-bands you're so fond of mentioning, but the world is not composed of boy bands (thank god). They may take it in the shorts a bit because they have the most to lose, but they won't be selling their mansions anytime soon. Most bands are being helped by the movement. People are discovering new bands, finding new genres of music that they love, and learning more about artists they thought they knew. And what about deceased artists like Otis Redding or Jimi Hendrix? Are they being harmed? I kinda doubt it since they're fuckin' dead. And don't bring up their estates. The way they so often exploit the dead artist they supposedly represent is sickening. The point is that artists benefit from P2P, and isn't that who we're looking out for? And if there's nothing wrong with file sharing why would we sacrifice it? To do so would only furher bind the artists to the RIAA, an orga
I am more than happy to allow the RIAA to control their proprietary files by suing folks that distribute them illegally. This doesn't wreck the network, it simply makes it more likely that folks will share files legally.
This is the fatal flaw in your plan.
Most folks around here take their efforts as a challenge, an affront to our liberties. We'd work harder to get the files we want. Secondly, it would have to greatly distort the network, if not "wreck" it. And how, exactly, would the RIAA even accomplish this goal without resorting to driver-level DRM, like you mentioned earlier in the same breath as "Microsoft"? Remember, many/most of the people sharing files on P2P networks are oversees and thus out of the reach of the RIAA. Until they become a global cabal with UN-sanctioned powers we don't have to worry about them shutting down file sharing. No doubt they do crave more power, but if we don't give up and keep fighting they shall be reduced to a shell of what they are now.
I see no reason to give up - even a small part of the battle as you suggest. I think you're implying it will give us legal and moral cover, but I think you're wrong - it will do the opposite. I truly believe that music was meant to be free, and to betray that belief is to agree with you. I'm a musician myself, and I have MP3s available on my website. I hope to God that one day they are all over P2P networks. I'm not doing it for the money - I'm not making any.
Music is too precious to lock away, and it violates so many truths. Songs are given to songwriters by their muse. The songwriters are supposed to give the songs to us all. Anyone who betrays that does not deserve their million dollar home, swimming pool, bentley, etc.
Reading comprehension. Read the parents posts. Comprehend them. THEN use the reply button if you have something useful to add to the discussion.
I don't think you comprehend what I was saying. Perhaps that's my fault - I should've used crayon. And if my point was not adding anything, why did Jason respond?
The point is that shifting legal pressure from one group to another does not help us, any more than electing democrats instead of republicans helps us. The system is set up to fuck us either way. Grandparent poster seems willing to sacrifice one group's rights (ours) to protect a small, elite group (software creators). It's clear to me that we need both, or else the RIAA will just write (literally) a law that says filesharing programs can be written but never used. Pull your head out - this is prohibition. They can't make everything illegal, so they make as much as they possibly can illegal. I say we give no quarter.
Just memorize the serial numbers for every droid/starship/weapon in the Star Wars universe and use those. Shit, many of us have them memorized already. When we run out of obscure pop-culture references we can just use the names of the girls who've turned us down through the years.
So don't ask them to vote for it and just unleash it upon them.
You're quite right, but what you're speaking of has already been unleashed. I think blogging will fundamentally rewrite the laws, assumptions & possibilities of the public dissemination of information. In short, traditional journalism (and soon, official "history" itself) is being radically altered by the freedom of the internet. If you have a story, or you're a witness/whistleblower, you now have choices.
Does the matter involve government, business, sex or religion? Will most mainstream publications ignore it, attack it and bury it? Now you can take the matter directly to the people with your own website, or if secrecy & privacy are vital (as they usually will be), you can simply give the "scoop" to a popular blogger and let the people hear about it. Many folks fancy themselves amatuer investigators/researchers and they will track down the truth if they care/can.
Public officials should not be privy to more privacy than the people. Let us monitor the viewers as best we can. I think the public should have access to videos shot in public by the government.
History, for its part, will be much different with people writing first hand accounts of all the daily or relevant occurrences in their lives. Anthropologists would love to get their hands on the 1st century version of a weblog. I guess I diary/journal is the equivilant, but paper & ink were expensive until recently and not everybody had access to such tools, just as the internet is not yet accessible to everyone. But the incredible volume of electronic information is very ephemeral (we don't exactly write our weblogs in literal stone). However, I think there are "savers" out there; freelance/hobbyist versions of the other archiving efforts out there.
All I know is that every day I am amazed by the breadth of information (and people) out there on the (in the?) internet. So many of the crazy ideas I've had end up showing up on the internet in different form, authored by some more passionate soul.
I judge people by their name, Slime-dogg. And you, I'm said to say, have one too many Gs in your name. I'm afraid this certifies you as a complete and total moron.
Your assertion that stylistic usage should be accepted as correct is pure bullshit.
I also judge people based on the vulgar words they use. You are clearly an irredeemable, ignorant piece of street trash. Go back to your crappy apartment and pick fleas off yourself.
I am totally kidding of course. Unlike certain people, I do NOT judge people based on such purely superficial qualities. I try to go deeper, and judge them based on their personality and deeds.
Modern grammar and spelling conventions have an element of fascism in them. And, dare I say it, classism and racism. Isn't that what this is really about, dogg? You don't like the way black people talk.
Get over yourself.
There is no correct language. Language is about communication.
If you can't understand that, it's not because of my poor grammar. You have some personal issues to work out. I also suggest you google for some info on the history and evolution of the English language.
Oh no! The language police are coming to get me! I used "google" as a verb!!!
Thank you for posting that link. I did my part and formally requested iTunes and iPod support for both encoding and decoding Ogg Vorbis. The quicktime plug in is nice in that it allows playback, but it is not the real deal. It doesn't work with the EQ-display thingie and it doesn't show the bitrate or, of course, allow encoding.
Actually, shit. Now that I think about it, I should've requested FLAC and SHN support as well. Perhaps other/.'ers would be so kind as to request those features in my stead.....or is it as I fear... that Slashdot is a haven for whiners and moaners. It would be nice to see more action and less words bandied about. But I digress - many members of any group should be willing to take action. Please support free & open source software with words....and deeds.
Oh, and it probably doesn't hurt to hint that your buying decision may hinge on that feature.
Good. iTunes definitely has an innovative design. Although Apple bought the basis for iTunes from another company (Cassady & Greene's SoundJam program, which was great), they really took it to the next level...and then the next level after that. I haven't seen an interface for a music app than can top iTunes for power or ease of use.
I think many of you are missing something, but it's also possible that you don't listen to a lot of obscure music. Sure, I listen to all the latest rock music, but I also like to listen to our local classical music channel here in MN, 99.5 FM.
I love classical, but it's a real bitch figuring out the song names. Hell, most of the time it's something like: "Concerto No. 432, Op. 5341: Andante con margarine" or something equally lame. If this service could help me out with that, it would be worth a buck to me.
I've listened to brilliant classical works, and then the announcer comes on and says (in his heavily-tranquilized drawl) a bunch of words I've never freaking heard before. No doubt it's the name of some obscure foreign composer and the foreign conductor and the foreign symphony that played the tune, which has a name derived from latin. Great. That fucking helps me a bunch.
Oh, and that's another thing; the songs can go on forever. If he plays 3 or 4 movements it can easily be a half hour. Don't get me wrong; I love the station (no commercials!), and I love classical music, but can this service really tell the difference between Handel and Mozart? And for that matter, can it tell me which movement, and who is conducting? Please excuse my skepticism, but I seriously fucking doubt it. The idea is great, and it's useful to me since my tastes range from pop to ultra-obscure, but does it work?
Hopefully it will be running on Windows Me. That way, most of the time we won't be distracted by the blue screens (of death). The color might even be soothing.
What man? Oh yeah, sorry, I'll turn that shit down. It's no problem, we were just rockin' on a new jam, and we may have gotten a little carried away. What? Oh yeah, I dunno how the fireworks and golf clubs got involved. Maybe we shouldn't've lit the mattresses on fire for effect. I'm sorry; it won't happen again...
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't do it, I swear! Ask anyone! I have no idea where all that porn came from!
Hey now, is that any way to talk about our beloved president? Besides, we won't know until election day whether that's true.
The parent got modded flamebait for the above comment, but is it really debatable?
Hell, I understand the allure. I'm a lonely slashdotter on a friday night, and it would be nice to, uh... hang... with a girl like that for awhile. But we all know she has no substance, and no... ya know, mystery about her. What you see is what you get. I long for the day when music of substance returns, just like everyone else...but did it ever really leave? Or did the public get sucked down the corporate-pop drainpipe?
There are still artists of integrity, soul, and majesty out there now, playing in empty clubs, or their own basements. We, as the public, need to find them. Really, it's just a matter of looking - the internet makes this possible.
I think Britney's time may be coming to an end. Music of substance and power will find its way back to us as we struggle to find it. I've discovered some incredible east asian folk music recently, and it's some of the most eerie and amazing music I've ever heard. Great songs are out there, we just need to find them, and quit BITCHING all the time about how corporate america doesn't deliver the music we require upon a silver platter. Until we seek out new/old music we deserve that poptripe.
And which one would that be? The one with all the doping scandals and judging fiascos? The one that gave the corporations huge concessions such as making blogging illegal for athletes?
The Olympics are full of crap.
But wait, this is offtopic, but I am pissed about that iTunes bug for Macs - the crashing, freezy thing? Damn that sucks! Apple's gotta fix that shit or what'll i do?!
man, rough day for apple!
Oh my God! If your theory is correct we'd better make sure not to put too many more propellers in the ocean or it could just stop moving!! Think of the horror!!!
Not really the news I wanted to hear. The last thing we need is that nutcase Kim Jong Il with nuclear-fucking-weapons! I was (and am) against the war in Iraq - Saddam never kept me up at night. Kim Jong Il, on the other hand, is a different story. This guy could be extremely dangerous. I can't really think of a good way to contain/eliminate him, but I'm thinking it would be a smart idea to do so before he starts LAUNCHING NUCLEAR FUCKING WEAPONS!
-=Memo to Bush=-
___________________
Wrong country, dude.
Gak! That was supposed to be a teaching story! There aren't any other references to the character in that sense anywhere else!
The rest of them are usually mistranslations of characterisations intended to refer to human mischiefs and schemers, not supernatural entities.
Um.....Genesis? I mean come on, dude - if you're gonna talk about the Old Testament, start at the beginning.
I suppose you may believe it was actually just a talking snake. You clearly have your interpretation ready-made. In this way man has always made the Bible mean what he wants it to mean.
Also, I should point out that your whole point is wrong. There is a nemesis character in almost every theology. There's no way to explain evil without it, unless humanity gets all the blame (we usually just get some). There are so many different names for the devil that it's hard to keep them all straight, but he's usually around somewhere. In pagan theology (in this case Greek & Roman) there were several gods who had a satanic bent - Hades, Ares, Zeus & Posiedon all have demonic elements.
I actually suspect that many references to the devil were changed to God in the Bible! It's confusing as shit when God is kind and loving one moment, and tormenting people for no reason the next, and I don't exactly trust the Bible after all the translations and editions its been through.
You're absolutely right about Christians using the devil to scare parishoners, though. You might actually want to look more at the origin of "hell" than the devil. Hell is relatively new invention, perfected during the dark ages. In many other theologies, it's unclear where the devil "lives."
Dark Helmet : Before you die there is something you should know about us, Lone Starr.
Lone Starr : What?
Dark Helmet : I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Lone Starr : What's that make us?
Dark Helmet : Absolutely nothing!
Oh yeah, baby.
Dark Helmet : I bet she gives great helmet.
Luckily, if you RTFA they say that existing personal websites are exempt, but even then you apparently cannot post pix or video. That's fucking bullshit. I would very much like to see somebody challenge this rule, but unfortunately I think they would be simply kicked out of the Olympics and left with no recourse. Who is the IOC accountable to? No one, except for member countries, I'd bet.
Really, this seems to be a sad attempt by the news media to protect their turf. It's so pathetic. My question is, what if an athlete is also an accredited journalist in real life. Does the IOC grant them permission to post on their website? Obviously big money trumps free speech every time, though. I guess it's about time we just gave in and begged our corporate masters to be merciful. Fat lotta good that will do.
[/rant]
You're dodging my point. DRM, which you and I agree is bad, is the only way to stop file sharing (and that is a stretch. Likely, nothing can stop it). Lawsuits can't stop it. You're right folks outside the US should be concerned, but I don't think you'll be able to ask them nicely to stop sharing files and get a response. Lawsuits are ineffective against them. DRM is the big bad gorilla we need to be afraid of.
No, that's a huge difference. If the RIAA put my music on an album I would indeed throw a fit, but that's because they're intending to profit massively from my work. If the individual members of the RIAA put my tunes on mix CDs and gave them free of charge to their friends I would have no problem with that. BIG difference when commerce is involved. This is file sharing we're talking about, remember.
In a perfect world, the boy bands could tell us not to share their music and that would be fine. But now everything is being shared. It's not some malicious plot against artists - people have the data on their computers and it's only natural to share it. It's what the internet is all about. I know you want to protect the internet, but DRM will destroy it. On some level this whole conversation is pointless because people are going to write software and use that software to share files - no matter what the courts say.
Two points: First, I would love it if there was a network dedicated to getting new, unsigned bands out there without being obscured by all the major label acts. I just don't think we need to make the existing P2P systems illegal (or effectively so, given massive RIAA lawsuits against end users) in order to make that happen. They are not mutually exclusive.
Secondly, the reason why I like existing P2P networks is the same reason you mentioned above: it's a great way to find new music/bands. I can't tell you how many hundreds of bands I've discovered this way. Since you realize this, it makes me wonder why your whole argument seems to be predicated on the RIAA-approved notion that file-sharing is somehow hurting artists. I'd say it's the exact opposite. It may hurt the MTV-boy-bands you're so fond of mentioning, but the world is not composed of boy bands (thank god). They may take it in the shorts a bit because they have the most to lose, but they won't be selling their mansions anytime soon. Most bands are being helped by the movement. People are discovering new bands, finding new genres of music that they love, and learning more about artists they thought they knew. And what about deceased artists like Otis Redding or Jimi Hendrix? Are they being harmed? I kinda doubt it since they're fuckin' dead. And don't bring up their estates. The way they so often exploit the dead artist they supposedly represent is sickening. The point is that artists benefit from P2P, and isn't that who we're looking out for? And if there's nothing wrong with file sharing why would we sacrifice it? To do so would only furher bind the artists to the RIAA, an orga
This is the fatal flaw in your plan.
Most folks around here take their efforts as a challenge, an affront to our liberties. We'd work harder to get the files we want. Secondly, it would have to greatly distort the network, if not "wreck" it. And how, exactly, would the RIAA even accomplish this goal without resorting to driver-level DRM, like you mentioned earlier in the same breath as "Microsoft"? Remember, many/most of the people sharing files on P2P networks are oversees and thus out of the reach of the RIAA. Until they become a global cabal with UN-sanctioned powers we don't have to worry about them shutting down file sharing. No doubt they do crave more power, but if we don't give up and keep fighting they shall be reduced to a shell of what they are now.
I see no reason to give up - even a small part of the battle as you suggest. I think you're implying it will give us legal and moral cover, but I think you're wrong - it will do the opposite. I truly believe that music was meant to be free, and to betray that belief is to agree with you. I'm a musician myself, and I have MP3s available on my website. I hope to God that one day they are all over P2P networks. I'm not doing it for the money - I'm not making any.
Music is too precious to lock away, and it violates so many truths. Songs are given to songwriters by their muse. The songwriters are supposed to give the songs to us all. Anyone who betrays that does not deserve their million dollar home, swimming pool, bentley, etc.
I don't think you comprehend what I was saying. Perhaps that's my fault - I should've used crayon. And if my point was not adding anything, why did Jason respond?
The point is that shifting legal pressure from one group to another does not help us, any more than electing democrats instead of republicans helps us. The system is set up to fuck us either way. Grandparent poster seems willing to sacrifice one group's rights (ours) to protect a small, elite group (software creators). It's clear to me that we need both, or else the RIAA will just write (literally) a law that says filesharing programs can be written but never used. Pull your head out - this is prohibition. They can't make everything illegal, so they make as much as they possibly can illegal. I say we give no quarter.
And giving the RIAA the power to control file sharing networks (enough power/control to shut them down) would help our cause how, exactly?
Once they win control over one sector of the internet they can claim more. That's bullshit. The internet should be free. Period.
Just memorize the serial numbers for every droid/starship/weapon in the Star Wars universe and use those. Shit, many of us have them memorized already. When we run out of obscure pop-culture references we can just use the names of the girls who've turned us down through the years.
You're quite right, but what you're speaking of has already been unleashed. I think blogging will fundamentally rewrite the laws, assumptions & possibilities of the public dissemination of information. In short, traditional journalism (and soon, official "history" itself) is being radically altered by the freedom of the internet. If you have a story, or you're a witness/whistleblower, you now have choices.
Does the matter involve government, business, sex or religion? Will most mainstream publications ignore it, attack it and bury it? Now you can take the matter directly to the people with your own website, or if secrecy & privacy are vital (as they usually will be), you can simply give the "scoop" to a popular blogger and let the people hear about it. Many folks fancy themselves amatuer investigators/researchers and they will track down the truth if they care/can.
Public officials should not be privy to more privacy than the people. Let us monitor the viewers as best we can. I think the public should have access to videos shot in public by the government.
History, for its part, will be much different with people writing first hand accounts of all the daily or relevant occurrences in their lives. Anthropologists would love to get their hands on the 1st century version of a weblog. I guess I diary/journal is the equivilant, but paper & ink were expensive until recently and not everybody had access to such tools, just as the internet is not yet accessible to everyone. But the incredible volume of electronic information is very ephemeral (we don't exactly write our weblogs in literal stone). However, I think there are "savers" out there; freelance/hobbyist versions of the other archiving efforts out there.
All I know is that every day I am amazed by the breadth of information (and people) out there on the (in the?) internet. So many of the crazy ideas I've had end up showing up on the internet in different form, authored by some more passionate soul.
I judge people by their name, Slime-dogg. And you, I'm said to say, have one too many Gs in your name. I'm afraid this certifies you as a complete and total moron.
Your assertion that stylistic usage should be accepted as correct is pure bullshit.
I also judge people based on the vulgar words they use. You are clearly an irredeemable, ignorant piece of street trash. Go back to your crappy apartment and pick fleas off yourself.
I am totally kidding of course. Unlike certain people, I do NOT judge people based on such purely superficial qualities. I try to go deeper, and judge them based on their personality and deeds.
Modern grammar and spelling conventions have an element of fascism in them. And, dare I say it, classism and racism. Isn't that what this is really about, dogg? You don't like the way black people talk.
Get over yourself.
There is no correct language. Language is about communication.
If you can't understand that, it's not because of my poor grammar. You have some personal issues to work out. I also suggest you google for some info on the history and evolution of the English language.
Oh no! The language police are coming to get me! I used "google" as a verb!!!
Actually, shit. Now that I think about it, I should've requested FLAC and SHN support as well. Perhaps other /.'ers would be so kind as to request those features in my stead.....or is it as I fear... that Slashdot is a haven for whiners and moaners. It would be nice to see more action and less words bandied about. But I digress - many members of any group should be willing to take action. Please support free & open source software with words....and deeds.
Oh, and it probably doesn't hurt to hint that your buying decision may hinge on that feature.
Good. iTunes definitely has an innovative design. Although Apple bought the basis for iTunes from another company (Cassady & Greene's SoundJam program, which was great), they really took it to the next level...and then the next level after that. I haven't seen an interface for a music app than can top iTunes for power or ease of use.
I love classical, but it's a real bitch figuring out the song names. Hell, most of the time it's something like: "Concerto No. 432, Op. 5341: Andante con margarine" or something equally lame. If this service could help me out with that, it would be worth a buck to me.
I've listened to brilliant classical works, and then the announcer comes on and says (in his heavily-tranquilized drawl) a bunch of words I've never freaking heard before. No doubt it's the name of some obscure foreign composer and the foreign conductor and the foreign symphony that played the tune, which has a name derived from latin. Great. That fucking helps me a bunch.
Oh, and that's another thing; the songs can go on forever. If he plays 3 or 4 movements it can easily be a half hour. Don't get me wrong; I love the station (no commercials!), and I love classical music, but can this service really tell the difference between Handel and Mozart? And for that matter, can it tell me which movement, and who is conducting? Please excuse my skepticism, but I seriously fucking doubt it. The idea is great, and it's useful to me since my tastes range from pop to ultra-obscure, but does it work?
Hopefully it will be running on Windows Me. That way, most of the time we won't be distracted by the blue screens (of death). The color might even be soothing.
...tonight.
Paladin144
Always Rockin'
Trees Eat People
Oh man, if I had a nickel for every time I've heard that one....
...
Nice.
But then they started putting these ads in the InStyle magazine (girly fashion mag touting the latest styles out there).
These two paragraphs seem contradictory to me....