Not really. Just because I've used VB6 more doesn't mean I haven't used VC++6. And in VS6, they aren't THAT different. VC++ allows you easier control over the execution of the code and in interacting with the OS, mainly because it is C++, but the IDEs are similar. Even then I wasn't impressed with the MFC, and prefered using the STL instead. But being a business programmer, I used what was available at the company. Truth be told, I used Borland C++ Builder for my final project in college and would have liked to continue with that. It's too bad Borland lost out to Microsoft because even though it had some unique issues of it's own, I found it easier then VC++ at the time since I didn't have to worry about coding to capture and throw events to my program by hand. And you were using C++, so you could still easily interact with the OS if you choose to. In the future, I will be recommending Eclipse for C++ and Java projects to whoever I'm working for. Microsoft is allowing too much bloat into their tools for my liking.
I have quite a number of years experience with VS6, more specifically VB6. Recently I started a job that, while not a programming role, allows me the time and flexibility to create programs to do my job how I want to code them. At first, since this an MS shop, I grabbed the.NET "Learning Edition" or whatever they're calling it nowadays. I understood that I wouldn't be able to create executables, but I could send my code to systems and get them to do it. After using the IDE for a couple of days, I found it so convoluted that I just gave up. Then I downloaded Eclipse with the Visual Class editor. Nice, simple, and it reminds me of the VB6 IDE. Only cleaner. Now I will say that I've had some problems with the Visual Class editor not rendering properly, but that hasn't stopped me from coding. In 2 weeks of coding on and off, I've created my first program and have been using it to do my job. Granted, it's not complex. Just does a database search and grabs data. But I still prefer the Ecplise IDE, even without the Visual Class editor working properly, over the VS.NET IDE. And I don't need to jump through MS' hoops just to get an executable. I'm distributing the program to the rest of the team next week after the boss tests it, and other departments are getting interested in it too. And with any luck, I'll get out of this support position and into a nice well-paid programming job at the same time.
Sadly, this is the best level that some will achieve. Not because the market is bad, or they are being unfairly discriminated against, but because they truly don't have the skills/discipline/abilities/whatever to become a senior developer. Then again, there are many other options besides developmemt. Working in a developer role is a very narrow definition of being an IT professional. There are multitudes of other roles to aim for, second and third tier support being some. There's people who specialise in database creation and management. Some do reporting and data mining. Some do technical writing and documentation. I knew one person in college who was an average coder, but blew everyone out of the water when it came to screen design. These are all vital roles in the IT arena. But too many people are focused on "must make senior developer...", seeing everything else as below them, that they don't realise the incredible opportunities that are available to them. So they wallow in misery trying to get that developer position from their helpdesk job...
Um...actually, I can read just fine. But that, not to mention nearly all of Shakespeare's work, is just too mindnumbing to understand. I have a friend that thinks it's hilarious, but I find it torturous to watch.
Oh, yeah, and it's a movie. So it's not like you're reading in the first place...
I think the geek community is a good indicator of how business *should* allow they're employees to dress, short of the old concert t-shirts and torn jeans. Geeks usually tend to not bother with fashion, opting for comfort instead. But in business, especially the marketing peons and others who think appearance is everything, clothes make the man. A suit just makes you a better person. I think it's BS, but unfortunately people like that run the business world. Funny how they think that clothing, rather then actions, make a person. Hell, mobsters and contract killers always dress pretty nicely in movies, but that doesn't make them good people. They still go around killing people...
No...Alexa Doig is MUCH MUCH hotter then Majel Barret ever was. And she's not even dressed that provocatively. No miniskirts or anything needed. She's just naturally hot.
I'd almost say that doesn't count, because of the editing. With the amount of swearing in it, rivalling Ozzy Osborne's foul mouth, the bleeps kill all the humour. I could never stand watching the US version after being accustomed to the Canadian version in all it's curse-fucking-filled glory. Not after hearing "FOR FUCK SAKES RICKY! WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING TO THE SATELLITE! I PAID $10 FUCKING DOLLARS! I WANT MY FUCKING SATELLITE SIGNAL! JESUS CHRIST! $10 FUCKING DOLLARS...A MONTH!"
This kind of scouting was reduced when stores started installing the tinted bubbles in the ceilings. I've heard, but not confirmed, that not all bubbles have cameras in them. But they're all over the store so you'd have to know someone on the inside, preferably in security, to know which ones have camera. But if you're going that far, it wouldn't be hard to get the cameras shutdown for "maintenance" when you needed. Or to let you in at night when you are free to take your time.
Whenever there is a human factor involved, that's usually your biggest security gap...
TOS had the miniskirts and Kirk doing alien babes in skimpy outfits. I know this was part of the show. But it being a sci-fi show in the 60's, I can forgive that.
TNG started out with miniskirts and Marina Sirtis' wonderful cleavage, but it wasn't really shoved in your face constantly. And by the third season all that had been taken out. There was the very occasional cleavage, which I was always thankful for, but no more miniskirts. It was finally able to stand on it's stories without resorting to cheap gimmicks.
DS9 NEVER did it as bad as the rest. It was the most respectable of all of them, in that regard. Sure, there were Dabo girls, but they weren't really a part of the story and they were used in the proper context...eye candy to get people in a bar to gamble. And how often did you see Nana Visitor playing her alter ego from the alternate universe? 3, maybe 4 times?
Voyager and Enterprise should have been able to stand without the cheap gimmicks. They had all that history and a good fanbase. They should have had better writing. They should NOT have had to constantly remind people of how long the show had been on the air. Voyager was especially bad for that starting in season 4. How often did you hear "We've been in the Delta Quadrent for 4/5/6/7 years..."? Or "We've been on our mission to explore the galaxy for 2/3/4 years..."? There was no need for any of it. What was needed was to get Bermen out of the picture. Too bad it comes too late...
When the ratings drooped, Voyager brought out the borg.
No...when the ratings drooped, they brought out *a* borg. One that happened to dress in skintight uniforms. I've heard stories that Jeri Ryan actually passed out from the suit being too tight. If you're going to blame Voyager's complete loss of credibility on anything, blame it on Berman going for the horny male demographic.
Uh...no. I consider myself a hardcore Trek fan. I've never once gone to a con or even put on rubber ears. I kinda pride myself on that fact. But the shows...I know my Trek. I recently decided to download all the episodes and watch the full series. I hadn't watched any shows before, because of all the bad press other fans had given it. But I wanted to give it a chance before making a final decision.
And my final decision is this: let it die. As much as I hate saying that, I believe it's the right thing to do. It was a good concept, but poorly executed. The first problem I found was that there was too much emphasis on "filling in the gaps." They tried to explain away everything that the other shows introduced. The most glaring offence was the Borg episode. For god's sake...BORG?!? This says that the Enterprise-E crew were stupid enough to leave a whole crapload of future technology laying on Earth, potentially polluting their own timeline. AND that the Temporal Police or whatever they want to call themselves didn't do their jobs. For what? To explain away why the Borg invade the Alpha Quadrent 200 years later? Wasn't that already explained in TNG? The whole episode should have been killed in writing.
Besides that was the over-sexual use of T'Pol. You saw this happen with Voyager when Seven was brought in. They decided to start off with some hot babe in skintight uniforms on this one, killing the show's credibility in the process. Then there was the sterile acting of Reed and Archer in the first 2 season. Most of the cast was guilty of this actually. This I think was more caused by letting nearly every actor in previous shows have a chance to direct on Enterprise. And speaking of previous actors, there was far too many actors from previous shows playing in Enterprise. Part of the joy I got out of watching the show was spotting recycled actors. I've seen the guy who played General Martok on DS9 play at least 3 other characters in other Treks, including playing a Klingon on Enterprise. And they should have NEVER let Ethan Philips play a Ferengi, since he was the easiest to spot from playing one on Voyager. I didn't really like them bringing in Ferengi in the first place, but it sorta fit with the Star Trek Universe laid down by TNG. Storyline-wise, I wasn't impressed with the Temporal Cold War, and it really didn't do anything except introduce even more inconsistances in the Star Trek Universe. But at least they wrapped that up. The fourth season was picking up steam, and I would have liked to see that have been the first season. But it's too late. The damage is done. This is a hardcore Star Trek fan saying: Let It Die...
Excuse me, but someone out there has the rights to those live shows -- and it isn't EZTree
And that's exactly the issue, isn't it? EZTree didn't host the files. They just tracked them. Other people hosted and downloaded the files. THEY are the ones breaking the copyright, not EZTree. But the RIAA is having problems going after the filesharers, despite what their press releases about suing 12 year old and grandmothers would have you believe. Don't blame the technology for the acts of the person. You only drive the technology into oblivion, and the people underground. The "crime" will still happen, it will just be harder to track...
Suppose you take your car to the mechanic, and he says, "It's broken, and you'll have to pay me a bunch of money to fix it."
You say, "Well, before I pay you all that money, how about you tell me exactly what's wrong?"
And he says "Well your discombobulator is shot...that needs to be replaced. Your E.S.R. needs a complete overhaul. You F.A.R. has taken some damage. And your I.C.E....don't even get me started on that. Just pay me a bunch of money."
Is that better? BTW:
E.S.R. = Electric Sun Roof
F.A.R. = Front Arm Rest
I.C.E. = In Car Entertainment
But if you know absolutely nothing about cars...this is going to scare you, and you'll probably give the guy whatever he asks for. People in general are stupid in one area of their daily life, while being experts in other areas. I myself have no clue about cars. So I call someone I trust who knows about cars to help me, like my sister. Just like I get constant calls from people who know nothing about computers but use one everyday. Don't get pissed off. It's all about give and take man...just remember that one day you might have to rely on one of those whiners...
I've tried this. Left it in for 2 hours. Nothing. Now unless I'm doing something wrong, I'm pretty sure this doesn't work. Which was bad, since I tried it while cleaning before a party...
At any rate, this could prove quite interesting and make irrelevant many of the security concerns that the average consumer faces as well as consolidate and ease software distribution issues.
Funny, where have I heard this before? Oh yeah...late 90's...internet becoming popular with the unwashed masses...and the introdution of thin clients. Or a recycling of the dumb terminal idea. This may stand a chance, but they'll have to overcome the serious security and privacy issues that thin clients have. Not to mention that people really don't like the idea of some server somewhere hold ALL of your personal data. Ya know...credit card numbers, banking info, that porn collection you think no one knows about. Hopefully they can come up with a product that combines the two schools of thought, and knowing Google there's a good chance they will. But until I see it I'm not getting excited.
I'd say that in many of these cases, the 20 some hours a week in the game is just displacing the 20 some hours a week previously spent watching TV. The games are not inherently evil, they just give us something to do other then watch the idiot box...
No...it won't stop anyone. Anyone who is pirating XP knows how to work around the activation anyways, and would never both to call Microsoft for anything. This is only stopping legitimate customers from doing what they need, while doing nothing to prevent piracy. Even for Microsoft, this is an utterly stupid idea.
Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down.
on
LokiTorrent Shut Down
·
· Score: 1
Hate to tell you, but according to the law he is technically correct. The best kind of correct, in today's law system. Legally, if you purchase a movie, you may not show it publically. That includes inviting friends over to watch. Revisit the VCR wars of the early 80's to see what I mean. That kind of stuff isn't big news anymore, because not many companies sue for it to make a splash. But it's still law. You see warnings about it at the beginning of football games, wrestling PPVs, etc. You know..."This broadcast may not be recorded or distributed to the public without the express written concent yada yada yada..." Yeah, that's still law. But people still record football. Bars show wrestling PPVs free. Hell, technically you're still not allowed to record TV shows. But people do it, because eventually an equalibrium settled in where companies couldn't sue anymore without REALLY pissing a lot of people off. Eventually, we will have the same in the P2P wars. It won't look anything like the landscape we see today, but it will happen.
You're right...the punishment should be unequal, because the crimes are illegal. But it's the other way around. Consider that when you shoplift you are actually taking a physical item that the store purchase in order to resell. They are losing real money. Downloading, on the other hand, takes nothing away from anyone. The stores are free to sell they're stuff. Now you could argue that the downloader is "stealing" from the producer, but what's to say the person would have bought it in the first place? I know I have downloaded a lot of things I would never actually buy. But to download and check out, then a lot of times delete afterwards, I won't waste my money. So this 3.3 million that the article talked about is the punishment for *POTENTIAL* lost sales, where as shoplifting is *DEFINATELY* a lost sale. Why should the potential crime be more then the definate crime?
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. Just because I've used VB6 more doesn't mean I haven't used VC++6. And in VS6, they aren't THAT different. VC++ allows you easier control over the execution of the code and in interacting with the OS, mainly because it is C++, but the IDEs are similar. Even then I wasn't impressed with the MFC, and prefered using the STL instead. But being a business programmer, I used what was available at the company. Truth be told, I used Borland C++ Builder for my final project in college and would have liked to continue with that. It's too bad Borland lost out to Microsoft because even though it had some unique issues of it's own, I found it easier then VC++ at the time since I didn't have to worry about coding to capture and throw events to my program by hand. And you were using C++, so you could still easily interact with the OS if you choose to. In the future, I will be recommending Eclipse for C++ and Java projects to whoever I'm working for. Microsoft is allowing too much bloat into their tools for my liking.
He doesn't know me...but I'm one...
.NET "Learning Edition" or whatever they're calling it nowadays. I understood that I wouldn't be able to create executables, but I could send my code to systems and get them to do it. After using the IDE for a couple of days, I found it so convoluted that I just gave up. Then I downloaded Eclipse with the Visual Class editor. Nice, simple, and it reminds me of the VB6 IDE. Only cleaner. Now I will say that I've had some problems with the Visual Class editor not rendering properly, but that hasn't stopped me from coding. In 2 weeks of coding on and off, I've created my first program and have been using it to do my job. Granted, it's not complex. Just does a database search and grabs data. But I still prefer the Ecplise IDE, even without the Visual Class editor working properly, over the VS.NET IDE. And I don't need to jump through MS' hoops just to get an executable. I'm distributing the program to the rest of the team next week after the boss tests it, and other departments are getting interested in it too. And with any luck, I'll get out of this support position and into a nice well-paid programming job at the same time.
I have quite a number of years experience with VS6, more specifically VB6. Recently I started a job that, while not a programming role, allows me the time and flexibility to create programs to do my job how I want to code them. At first, since this an MS shop, I grabbed the
Sadly, this is the best level that some will achieve. Not because the market is bad, or they are being unfairly discriminated against, but because they truly don't have the skills/discipline/abilities/whatever to become a senior developer. Then again, there are many other options besides developmemt. Working in a developer role is a very narrow definition of being an IT professional. There are multitudes of other roles to aim for, second and third tier support being some. There's people who specialise in database creation and management. Some do reporting and data mining. Some do technical writing and documentation. I knew one person in college who was an average coder, but blew everyone out of the water when it came to screen design. These are all vital roles in the IT arena. But too many people are focused on "must make senior developer...", seeing everything else as below them, that they don't realise the incredible opportunities that are available to them. So they wallow in misery trying to get that developer position from their helpdesk job...
About #1). I tell ya...that sure did work with this guy...
Um...actually, I can read just fine. But that, not to mention nearly all of Shakespeare's work, is just too mindnumbing to understand. I have a friend that thinks it's hilarious, but I find it torturous to watch.
Oh, yeah, and it's a movie. So it's not like you're reading in the first place...
I think this sums up why I could never watch more then a half hour of that movie before switching to video games...
I think the geek community is a good indicator of how business *should* allow they're employees to dress, short of the old concert t-shirts and torn jeans. Geeks usually tend to not bother with fashion, opting for comfort instead. But in business, especially the marketing peons and others who think appearance is everything, clothes make the man. A suit just makes you a better person. I think it's BS, but unfortunately people like that run the business world. Funny how they think that clothing, rather then actions, make a person. Hell, mobsters and contract killers always dress pretty nicely in movies, but that doesn't make them good people. They still go around killing people...
No...Alexa Doig is MUCH MUCH hotter then Majel Barret ever was. And she's not even dressed that provocatively. No miniskirts or anything needed. She's just naturally hot.
I'd almost say that doesn't count, because of the editing. With the amount of swearing in it, rivalling Ozzy Osborne's foul mouth, the bleeps kill all the humour. I could never stand watching the US version after being accustomed to the Canadian version in all it's curse-fucking-filled glory. Not after hearing "FOR FUCK SAKES RICKY! WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING TO THE SATELLITE! I PAID $10 FUCKING DOLLARS! I WANT MY FUCKING SATELLITE SIGNAL! JESUS CHRIST! $10 FUCKING DOLLARS...A MONTH!"
This kind of scouting was reduced when stores started installing the tinted bubbles in the ceilings. I've heard, but not confirmed, that not all bubbles have cameras in them. But they're all over the store so you'd have to know someone on the inside, preferably in security, to know which ones have camera. But if you're going that far, it wouldn't be hard to get the cameras shutdown for "maintenance" when you needed. Or to let you in at night when you are free to take your time.
Whenever there is a human factor involved, that's usually your biggest security gap...
Buzzwords? Inflammitory headline with no real story? Maybe he didn't write it at all.
No no...
TOS had the miniskirts and Kirk doing alien babes in skimpy outfits. I know this was part of the show. But it being a sci-fi show in the 60's, I can forgive that.
TNG started out with miniskirts and Marina Sirtis' wonderful cleavage, but it wasn't really shoved in your face constantly. And by the third season all that had been taken out. There was the very occasional cleavage, which I was always thankful for, but no more miniskirts. It was finally able to stand on it's stories without resorting to cheap gimmicks.
DS9 NEVER did it as bad as the rest. It was the most respectable of all of them, in that regard. Sure, there were Dabo girls, but they weren't really a part of the story and they were used in the proper context...eye candy to get people in a bar to gamble. And how often did you see Nana Visitor playing her alter ego from the alternate universe? 3, maybe 4 times?
Voyager and Enterprise should have been able to stand without the cheap gimmicks. They had all that history and a good fanbase. They should have had better writing. They should NOT have had to constantly remind people of how long the show had been on the air. Voyager was especially bad for that starting in season 4. How often did you hear "We've been in the Delta Quadrent for 4/5/6/7 years..."? Or "We've been on our mission to explore the galaxy for 2/3/4 years..."? There was no need for any of it. What was needed was to get Bermen out of the picture. Too bad it comes too late...
When the ratings drooped, Voyager brought out the borg.
No...when the ratings drooped, they brought out *a* borg. One that happened to dress in skintight uniforms. I've heard stories that Jeri Ryan actually passed out from the suit being too tight. If you're going to blame Voyager's complete loss of credibility on anything, blame it on Berman going for the horny male demographic.
Are the fans just less hard core?
Uh...no. I consider myself a hardcore Trek fan. I've never once gone to a con or even put on rubber ears. I kinda pride myself on that fact. But the shows...I know my Trek. I recently decided to download all the episodes and watch the full series. I hadn't watched any shows before, because of all the bad press other fans had given it. But I wanted to give it a chance before making a final decision.
And my final decision is this: let it die. As much as I hate saying that, I believe it's the right thing to do. It was a good concept, but poorly executed. The first problem I found was that there was too much emphasis on "filling in the gaps." They tried to explain away everything that the other shows introduced. The most glaring offence was the Borg episode. For god's sake...BORG?!? This says that the Enterprise-E crew were stupid enough to leave a whole crapload of future technology laying on Earth, potentially polluting their own timeline. AND that the Temporal Police or whatever they want to call themselves didn't do their jobs. For what? To explain away why the Borg invade the Alpha Quadrent 200 years later? Wasn't that already explained in TNG? The whole episode should have been killed in writing.
Besides that was the over-sexual use of T'Pol. You saw this happen with Voyager when Seven was brought in. They decided to start off with some hot babe in skintight uniforms on this one, killing the show's credibility in the process. Then there was the sterile acting of Reed and Archer in the first 2 season. Most of the cast was guilty of this actually. This I think was more caused by letting nearly every actor in previous shows have a chance to direct on Enterprise. And speaking of previous actors, there was far too many actors from previous shows playing in Enterprise. Part of the joy I got out of watching the show was spotting recycled actors. I've seen the guy who played General Martok on DS9 play at least 3 other characters in other Treks, including playing a Klingon on Enterprise. And they should have NEVER let Ethan Philips play a Ferengi, since he was the easiest to spot from playing one on Voyager. I didn't really like them bringing in Ferengi in the first place, but it sorta fit with the Star Trek Universe laid down by TNG. Storyline-wise, I wasn't impressed with the Temporal Cold War, and it really didn't do anything except introduce even more inconsistances in the Star Trek Universe. But at least they wrapped that up. The fourth season was picking up steam, and I would have liked to see that have been the first season. But it's too late. The damage is done. This is a hardcore Star Trek fan saying: Let It Die...
Excuse me, but someone out there has the rights to those live shows -- and it isn't EZTree
And that's exactly the issue, isn't it? EZTree didn't host the files. They just tracked them. Other people hosted and downloaded the files. THEY are the ones breaking the copyright, not EZTree. But the RIAA is having problems going after the filesharers, despite what their press releases about suing 12 year old and grandmothers would have you believe. Don't blame the technology for the acts of the person. You only drive the technology into oblivion, and the people underground. The "crime" will still happen, it will just be harder to track...
Suppose you take your car to the mechanic, and he says, "It's broken, and you'll have to pay me a bunch of money to fix it."
You say, "Well, before I pay you all that money, how about you tell me exactly what's wrong?"
And he says "Well your discombobulator is shot...that needs to be replaced. Your E.S.R. needs a complete overhaul. You F.A.R. has taken some damage. And your I.C.E....don't even get me started on that. Just pay me a bunch of money."
Is that better? BTW:
E.S.R. = Electric Sun Roof
F.A.R. = Front Arm Rest
I.C.E. = In Car Entertainment
But if you know absolutely nothing about cars...this is going to scare you, and you'll probably give the guy whatever he asks for. People in general are stupid in one area of their daily life, while being experts in other areas. I myself have no clue about cars. So I call someone I trust who knows about cars to help me, like my sister. Just like I get constant calls from people who know nothing about computers but use one everyday. Don't get pissed off. It's all about give and take man...just remember that one day you might have to rely on one of those whiners...
Now they've run out of April Fools jokes, but they still keep posting...
I'm just going to assume that this is yet another April Fools Day joke. Do you guys know of the noon rule? These just aren't funny anymore...
And for those times when you don't get either...
I've tried this. Left it in for 2 hours. Nothing. Now unless I'm doing something wrong, I'm pretty sure this doesn't work. Which was bad, since I tried it while cleaning before a party...
At any rate, this could prove quite interesting and make irrelevant many of the security concerns that the average consumer faces as well as consolidate and ease software distribution issues.
Funny, where have I heard this before? Oh yeah...late 90's...internet becoming popular with the unwashed masses...and the introdution of thin clients. Or a recycling of the dumb terminal idea. This may stand a chance, but they'll have to overcome the serious security and privacy issues that thin clients have. Not to mention that people really don't like the idea of some server somewhere hold ALL of your personal data. Ya know...credit card numbers, banking info, that porn collection you think no one knows about. Hopefully they can come up with a product that combines the two schools of thought, and knowing Google there's a good chance they will. But until I see it I'm not getting excited.
I'd say that in many of these cases, the 20 some hours a week in the game is just displacing the 20 some hours a week previously spent watching TV. The games are not inherently evil, they just give us something to do other then watch the idiot box...
No...it won't stop anyone. Anyone who is pirating XP knows how to work around the activation anyways, and would never both to call Microsoft for anything. This is only stopping legitimate customers from doing what they need, while doing nothing to prevent piracy. Even for Microsoft, this is an utterly stupid idea.
Hate to tell you, but according to the law he is technically correct. The best kind of correct, in today's law system. Legally, if you purchase a movie, you may not show it publically. That includes inviting friends over to watch. Revisit the VCR wars of the early 80's to see what I mean. That kind of stuff isn't big news anymore, because not many companies sue for it to make a splash. But it's still law. You see warnings about it at the beginning of football games, wrestling PPVs, etc. You know..."This broadcast may not be recorded or distributed to the public without the express written concent yada yada yada..." Yeah, that's still law. But people still record football. Bars show wrestling PPVs free. Hell, technically you're still not allowed to record TV shows. But people do it, because eventually an equalibrium settled in where companies couldn't sue anymore without REALLY pissing a lot of people off. Eventually, we will have the same in the P2P wars. It won't look anything like the landscape we see today, but it will happen.
You're right...the punishment should be unequal, because the crimes are illegal. But it's the other way around. Consider that when you shoplift you are actually taking a physical item that the store purchase in order to resell. They are losing real money. Downloading, on the other hand, takes nothing away from anyone. The stores are free to sell they're stuff. Now you could argue that the downloader is "stealing" from the producer, but what's to say the person would have bought it in the first place? I know I have downloaded a lot of things I would never actually buy. But to download and check out, then a lot of times delete afterwards, I won't waste my money. So this 3.3 million that the article talked about is the punishment for *POTENTIAL* lost sales, where as shoplifting is *DEFINATELY* a lost sale. Why should the potential crime be more then the definate crime?