Agreed. Copyrights are a good idea. The problem is the constant extension of copyright length. The founding fathers intented for copyright to exist to ensure profit for a limited time. Then the copyright expires and the copyrighted work enters the public domain for all to benefit from. Corporations have succeeded in extending the lenghth of copyright. We must all work to ensure that copyrighted works eventually enter the public domain. If corporations have their way then copyrights will ever expire.
I am a Christian. Now before you start flaming me for believing in stuff, just hear me out.
I find it interesting that felt the need to preface your remarks with such a statement. It speaks volumes about some of the people who post on these boards.
My favorite quote from an LA city attorney: 'If you carry one of these into a movie theater, you have to ask yourself, "Do I feel lucky?"
Raise your hand if you'd like this guy in the balls. I'm sick and fucking tired of lawyers. Do you realize how much of our tax dollars these fuckers waste every year? We need a few serial killing cannibals with a taste for attorneys in this country.
Single layer DVD writers are just that, a crippled DVD writer incompatible with all the DVD film formats out there.
While what you say is true, there are plenty of programs out there that let you drop some of the extra features and/or extra audio tracks so you can fit the entire video on a single DVD. There are also programs out there that let you recompress the video so you can fit the entire thing on one DVD, with all of the extras and special features intact. If you don't want to lose anything, there are programs that will split the main movie onto two DVD's and leave the extra's intact on each DVD so you don't lose anything but you will have to change the DVD half way through the movie (which you have to do with the special editions of the LOTR movies and some other movies anyway... not really a big deal IMHO).
Are they prefect solutions? No. Do they work well most of the time? Yes. I've spent too much money on my DVD collection not to have backups. A single scratch can totally mess a DVD up. I make backups of every DVD I own and put the originals away for safe keeping. Then when friends and/or family come over and are messing with stuff I don't have to worry about anyone scratching or misplacing a DVD.
Geez, the least you could do is cite a reasonably fair, unbiased article. That one is so right-leaning, I was worried I was going to fall off my chair.
What is your point? The national review online is a right leaning website, but just because it's leans right does not mean that the facts sighted in the article are somehow made up, or inaccurate! I suggest you re-read the article. People are being investigated, fined heavily and/or locked up for what the court deams as "hate speach". Who cares what the politics are of the person who reports it? Are you implying that he is lying about the facts surrounding the cases he is citing? If so, please post some proof to back it up or retract your statement.
Some writers on the New York Times lean to the left and the make no bones about it (e.g. Maureen Downd, Molly Ivins, Paul Kruegman). Should one disregard everything they report because they are left wingers? Absolutely not.
Gore was obviously the one who knew what he was doing.
Ah, but was it really so obvious? I voted for Gore and I don't particularly like Bush, but Gore was not "obviously" the best man for the job. The race was just about 50 / 50. If what you stated above was so obvious, Gore would have been elected by a land slide. He was not. Given the almsot 50 / 50 result, it's obvious that the "man who clearly knew what he was doing" was, in fact, not so obvious.
Obvious (from dictionary.com):
1. Easily perceived or understood; quite apparent. See Synonyms at apparent.
2. Easily seen through because of a lack of subtlety; transparent.p>
If Gore was in the best man for the job, then that fact wasn't "easily perceived or understood" by the voters, which means that it certainly wasn't obvious. You see while Gore was vice president, Bush served as govenor. Many governors throughout the course of US history have successfully made the jump from govenor to president. The President and a govenor are both executives, thus experience running a state can help you if you get elected and must run the country. Which means both men, probably had a rough idea of what they were doing. That fact, was obviously reflected by the 50 / 50 result.
Yeah right. The PC police are out in full force and it's only getting worse here. Now, you can actually be locked up or forced to pay damanges if the authorities here don't agree with your point of view. It's scary.
I'm shocked more people aren't aware of what's going on in this country. If this keeps up, I'm moving to the USA.
It's costing the Canadian economy billions of dollars
So let me get this straight. The USA stops importing Canadian beef due to health concerns, then Canada "gives the USA the finger" and you expect the USA to quickly allow Canadian beef exports back in?
That would be sort of like going to a restaurant, telling the waiter to fuck off and then expecting prompt service. It isn't going to happen, and quit frankly, the waiter would be a fucking idiot if he did anything other than take his sweet, sweet time.
... because afterall, people don't kill people, video games do! People have been committing violent acts against each other since the beginning. You know if you want to really cut back on violence then you should probably ban religion. Throughout our known history, religion has been one of the leading causes of voilence between groups of people.
But hey, why propose rational solutions, we might actually acomplish something.
Right on! I would love to know exactly what those idiots at Microsoft were smoking when they came up with that stupid, stupid idea. I understand they were trying to win the browser wars but they had no business integrating the browser into the OS like that. They could have just distributed IE with Windows and have it install by default. Sure users would be able to uninstall it, but how many home users would even bother to uninstall it and install their browser of choice as long as IE wasn't a total piece of crap? Not very many.
I still use Windows as my primary OS (I love games and right now Linux doesn't cut it in the gaming department) but I haven't touched IE or Outlook Express in ages. Why bother? I run Mozilla Firebird and Mozilla Thunderbird and I'm pretty happy with the results. Bye bye pop-ups, bye bye 85% of spam, bye bye stupid security holes, bye bye e-mail worms and finally, hello tabbed browsing!.
Two guys are in a pub drinking beer. One looks over his shoulder, spots a pool table and says to his buddy, "Do you want to play some pool?"
His buddy replies, "Hell yeah, let's play, I'll rack and you break". He goes over to the pool table to begin racking. He looks around the table for a few moments and then shouts over to the bartender, "Hey man, where are the balls?"
"It's French," the bartender replies, "it doesn't have any"
Finally we can be done with these pop start idiots. These people drive me nuts. They don't have a band, they don't write their own music, they just sing and look pretty, make videos and tell kids on MTV what's "cool". I hope one day the RIAA can replace them all. That might cause me to throw a little respect back their way. As for real bands, you know, where people play instruments and some sing and they actually, gasp, write thier own music, they won't ever be replaced.
Oh please. Don't you people realize that when you blabber on and on about these "right wing conspiracies" the majority of Americans (moderates and those who lean slightly left or slightly right) dismiss what you have to say outright? You people sound like raving lunatics. For every link you can produce about supposed right wing conspiracies, I can produce an equally stupid link with "evidence" about conspiracies on the left. Bush is not Adolph Hitler reincarnated who has come back to kill all of our first born children, cut down all of the trees and make us all pledge allegiance to oil. I realize this may come as a shock to you, but someone had to be the bearer of bad news.
Why bother spending the money on this box when you could take an old laptop, a WiFi network card, some audio and video cables and a cordless keyboard and mouse and get even more functionaltiy by hooking the laptop into your entertainment center? Laptops are pretty easy to hide (place it in a cabnet or something) and if your worried about WiFi reception get a USB WiFi card and place the antenna on top of everything so it's the only visible part of the setup.
I've had this type of setup for almost three years and it works like a charm. In fact, I'd say it's better because I can manage playlists, browse the web and check email right from my living room. I guess it would be the way to go if you didn't have an extra laptop or old PC lying around.
Linux isn't "better". Better is a very subjective term. It depends on ones standards. For my desktop at home I want a OS that can play all of the latest games and can run all of the apps that I've spent good money on that don't yet have a good open source alternative. I've got auto updating antivirus software, a good firewall, I don't use Outlook or Outlook Express and I've got automatic updates turned on. My system is secure and it's stable. That means that for me, Windows XP is much, much better than Linux on my desktop.
It's a completely differen't story when I'm at work. For servers, once they are setup I want them to "just work" without much tinkering. I don't want to always be worring about appying the latest security patches and I don't want to have to worry about viruses. I want as much uptime as possible. Linux is obviously better here. My corporate desktop is a slightly differnt matter. Security and realibilty are very important (so I can focus on work and not on patching my system or keeping up with the latest virus definitions) but appication compatibility is also an issue. We have some applicaitons that we run that work on Windows only and there isn't a good open source alternative. Linux is better on the systems that do not have to run these apps and Windows is better (with Software Update Services installed and a solid enterprise wide antivirus solution) on the systems that do.
My family doesn't like to tinker with PC's and they want something that's simply, easy to use, "just works" and is hard to mess up. I bought a Mac. For them OS X is better.
There is not one OS that is better than the others. Each has it place depending on the requirements of the system.
Your right, it is off topic. It would be nice if you liberals could actually go one article that isn't specifically Bush related without bringing up Bush but it's pretty obvious that you can't. Instead of bitching and moaning about Bush why don't you do something about Blair? You Brits don't have to go along with the Americans, your government chooses to. You can fix that on election day. Quit bitching and moaning on a board that should have little to do with politics and go do something about it.
All you've got to do is reflash the iPod and then format the drive using FAT32. Apple support will tell you that your shit out of luck but the fix I just mentioned works for a lot of the people that have had this problem.
All you have to do is reflash the firmware and then format the drive as FAT32. This fixes in the issue. Don't bother calling support. As of now they will just say that you are SOL but if you reflash the firmware and then format the drive to FAT32 you can get it to work again.
Sounds like a lot of trouble to prevent people from sharing music, which someone would figure out how to crack in weeks anyways.
Line out jack of said player to line in jack of a computer. Would it be a perfect digital copy? No. Would it be good enough for me? Yes. Would it be good enough for most people who download stuff from P2P networks? Considering the quality of half of the crap on there, probably.
What would be the end result? Millions spent to develop, test and deploy the technology. Millions spent to develop and market the players. Millions spent to convert existing music to the new format, repackage it and reship it. Millions of people pissed off that their CD collections are obsolete and millions spent on marketing to convince said people not to be so pissed because the new stuff with "DRM" is better than what they had before. Finally, millions still pirating the music via P2P.
The RIAA, kinda like BSD (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), is dying. They better wise up and wise up fast before it's too late. I'm willing to shell out $20 bucks for a CD / DVD combo. Kind of like Paul Van Dyk's CD/DVD combo Global. I get the CD, plus a DVD that contains a 5.1 channel mix of the CD to the backdrop of video footage of Paul spinning at various clubs around the world (broken up into chapters, a chapeter for each track on the album), a few music videos for the some of the tracks on the CD and a 15 minute interview. IMHO that's worth the cash. The RIAA should wise up. Why pay $12 - $16 for an hour of content when I can pay $15 - $20 and get a full length movie with extras on DVD? The major music labels need to start doing more CD / DVD bundles for the popular artists and charge more ($20 - $25), then offer the less popular stuff on CD only for less money ($8 - $12). Perhaps a have brackets. The more popular a CD the more they charge, up into a certain point when they release a CD/DVD combo. Certianly all greatest hits releases from now on should be CD/DVD combo's.
Don't worry, regular CD's aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Although hopefully as online music sales becomes for and more prominent and CD sales continue to decline the RIAA will pull their collective heads out of there asses and lower their prices. A CD should cost $10 - $12 tops.
Slashdot Mirror
I, for one, welcome our Canadian tax levying overloards!
Agreed. Copyrights are a good idea. The problem is the constant extension of copyright length. The founding fathers intented for copyright to exist to ensure profit for a limited time. Then the copyright expires and the copyrighted work enters the public domain for all to benefit from. Corporations have succeeded in extending the lenghth of copyright. We must all work to ensure that copyrighted works eventually enter the public domain. If corporations have their way then copyrights will ever expire.
He was talking for himself. Hence the subject of his post "Reasons why I oppose cloning".
I find it interesting that felt the need to preface your remarks with such a statement. It speaks volumes about some of the people who post on these boards.
Raise your hand if you'd like this guy in the balls. I'm sick and fucking tired of lawyers. Do you realize how much of our tax dollars these fuckers waste every year? We need a few serial killing cannibals with a taste for attorneys in this country.
While what you say is true, there are plenty of programs out there that let you drop some of the extra features and/or extra audio tracks so you can fit the entire video on a single DVD. There are also programs out there that let you recompress the video so you can fit the entire thing on one DVD, with all of the extras and special features intact. If you don't want to lose anything, there are programs that will split the main movie onto two DVD's and leave the extra's intact on each DVD so you don't lose anything but you will have to change the DVD half way through the movie (which you have to do with the special editions of the LOTR movies and some other movies anyway ... not really a big deal IMHO).
Are they prefect solutions? No. Do they work well most of the time? Yes. I've spent too much money on my DVD collection not to have backups. A single scratch can totally mess a DVD up. I make backups of every DVD I own and put the originals away for safe keeping. Then when friends and/or family come over and are messing with stuff I don't have to worry about anyone scratching or misplacing a DVD.
What is your point? The national review online is a right leaning website, but just because it's leans right does not mean that the facts sighted in the article are somehow made up, or inaccurate! I suggest you re-read the article. People are being investigated, fined heavily and/or locked up for what the court deams as "hate speach". Who cares what the politics are of the person who reports it? Are you implying that he is lying about the facts surrounding the cases he is citing? If so, please post some proof to back it up or retract your statement.
Some writers on the New York Times lean to the left and the make no bones about it (e.g. Maureen Downd, Molly Ivins, Paul Kruegman). Should one disregard everything they report because they are left wingers? Absolutely not.
Ah, but was it really so obvious? I voted for Gore and I don't particularly like Bush, but Gore was not "obviously" the best man for the job. The race was just about 50 / 50. If what you stated above was so obvious, Gore would have been elected by a land slide. He was not. Given the almsot 50 / 50 result, it's obvious that the "man who clearly knew what he was doing" was, in fact, not so obvious.
Obvious (from dictionary.com):
1. Easily perceived or understood; quite apparent. See Synonyms at apparent.
2. Easily seen through because of a lack of subtlety; transparent.p>
If Gore was in the best man for the job, then that fact wasn't "easily perceived or understood" by the voters, which means that it certainly wasn't obvious. You see while Gore was vice president, Bush served as govenor. Many governors throughout the course of US history have successfully made the jump from govenor to president. The President and a govenor are both executives, thus experience running a state can help you if you get elected and must run the country. Which means both men, probably had a rough idea of what they were doing. That fact, was obviously reflected by the 50 / 50 result.
Yeah right. The PC police are out in full force and it's only getting worse here. Now, you can actually be locked up or forced to pay damanges if the authorities here don't agree with your point of view. It's scary.
I'm shocked more people aren't aware of what's going on in this country. If this keeps up, I'm moving to the USA.
I'm happy with my service but it will help out if I ever decide I want to change in the future.
So let me get this straight. The USA stops importing Canadian beef due to health concerns, then Canada "gives the USA the finger" and you expect the USA to quickly allow Canadian beef exports back in?
That would be sort of like going to a restaurant, telling the waiter to fuck off and then expecting prompt service. It isn't going to happen, and quit frankly, the waiter would be a fucking idiot if he did anything other than take his sweet, sweet time.
... because afterall, people don't kill people, video games do! People have been committing violent acts against each other since the beginning. You know if you want to really cut back on violence then you should probably ban religion. Throughout our known history, religion has been one of the leading causes of voilence between groups of people.
But hey, why propose rational solutions, we might actually acomplish something.
Right on! I would love to know exactly what those idiots at Microsoft were smoking when they came up with that stupid, stupid idea. I understand they were trying to win the browser wars but they had no business integrating the browser into the OS like that. They could have just distributed IE with Windows and have it install by default. Sure users would be able to uninstall it, but how many home users would even bother to uninstall it and install their browser of choice as long as IE wasn't a total piece of crap? Not very many.
I still use Windows as my primary OS (I love games and right now Linux doesn't cut it in the gaming department) but I haven't touched IE or Outlook Express in ages. Why bother? I run Mozilla Firebird and Mozilla Thunderbird and I'm pretty happy with the results. Bye bye pop-ups, bye bye 85% of spam, bye bye stupid security holes, bye bye e-mail worms and finally, hello tabbed browsing!.
Two guys are in a pub drinking beer. One looks over his shoulder, spots a pool table and says to his buddy, "Do you want to play some pool?" His buddy replies, "Hell yeah, let's play, I'll rack and you break". He goes over to the pool table to begin racking. He looks around the table for a few moments and then shouts over to the bartender, "Hey man, where are the balls?" "It's French," the bartender replies, "it doesn't have any"
Finally we can be done with these pop start idiots. These people drive me nuts. They don't have a band, they don't write their own music, they just sing and look pretty, make videos and tell kids on MTV what's "cool". I hope one day the RIAA can replace them all. That might cause me to throw a little respect back their way. As for real bands, you know, where people play instruments and some sing and they actually, gasp, write thier own music, they won't ever be replaced.
Oh please. Don't you people realize that when you blabber on and on about these "right wing conspiracies" the majority of Americans (moderates and those who lean slightly left or slightly right) dismiss what you have to say outright? You people sound like raving lunatics. For every link you can produce about supposed right wing conspiracies, I can produce an equally stupid link with "evidence" about conspiracies on the left. Bush is not Adolph Hitler reincarnated who has come back to kill all of our first born children, cut down all of the trees and make us all pledge allegiance to oil. I realize this may come as a shock to you, but someone had to be the bearer of bad news.
Right on! Better yet get a used DVD burner and then you can get really crazy!
Why bother spending the money on this box when you could take an old laptop, a WiFi network card, some audio and video cables and a cordless keyboard and mouse and get even more functionaltiy by hooking the laptop into your entertainment center? Laptops are pretty easy to hide (place it in a cabnet or something) and if your worried about WiFi reception get a USB WiFi card and place the antenna on top of everything so it's the only visible part of the setup. I've had this type of setup for almost three years and it works like a charm. In fact, I'd say it's better because I can manage playlists, browse the web and check email right from my living room. I guess it would be the way to go if you didn't have an extra laptop or old PC lying around.
Linux isn't "better". Better is a very subjective term. It depends on ones standards. For my desktop at home I want a OS that can play all of the latest games and can run all of the apps that I've spent good money on that don't yet have a good open source alternative. I've got auto updating antivirus software, a good firewall, I don't use Outlook or Outlook Express and I've got automatic updates turned on. My system is secure and it's stable. That means that for me, Windows XP is much, much better than Linux on my desktop. It's a completely differen't story when I'm at work. For servers, once they are setup I want them to "just work" without much tinkering. I don't want to always be worring about appying the latest security patches and I don't want to have to worry about viruses. I want as much uptime as possible. Linux is obviously better here. My corporate desktop is a slightly differnt matter. Security and realibilty are very important (so I can focus on work and not on patching my system or keeping up with the latest virus definitions) but appication compatibility is also an issue. We have some applicaitons that we run that work on Windows only and there isn't a good open source alternative. Linux is better on the systems that do not have to run these apps and Windows is better (with Software Update Services installed and a solid enterprise wide antivirus solution) on the systems that do. My family doesn't like to tinker with PC's and they want something that's simply, easy to use, "just works" and is hard to mess up. I bought a Mac. For them OS X is better. There is not one OS that is better than the others. Each has it place depending on the requirements of the system.
Your right, it is off topic. It would be nice if you liberals could actually go one article that isn't specifically Bush related without bringing up Bush but it's pretty obvious that you can't. Instead of bitching and moaning about Bush why don't you do something about Blair? You Brits don't have to go along with the Americans, your government chooses to. You can fix that on election day. Quit bitching and moaning on a board that should have little to do with politics and go do something about it.
All you've got to do is reflash the iPod and then format the drive using FAT32. Apple support will tell you that your shit out of luck but the fix I just mentioned works for a lot of the people that have had this problem.
All you have to do is reflash the firmware and then format the drive as FAT32. This fixes in the issue. Don't bother calling support. As of now they will just say that you are SOL but if you reflash the firmware and then format the drive to FAT32 you can get it to work again.
How long ago was Slashdot bought out? I'm curious as to how long it's been since it was independent.
Line out jack of said player to line in jack of a computer. Would it be a perfect digital copy? No. Would it be good enough for me? Yes. Would it be good enough for most people who download stuff from P2P networks? Considering the quality of half of the crap on there, probably.
What would be the end result? Millions spent to develop, test and deploy the technology. Millions spent to develop and market the players. Millions spent to convert existing music to the new format, repackage it and reship it. Millions of people pissed off that their CD collections are obsolete and millions spent on marketing to convince said people not to be so pissed because the new stuff with "DRM" is better than what they had before. Finally, millions still pirating the music via P2P.
The RIAA, kinda like BSD (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), is dying. They better wise up and wise up fast before it's too late. I'm willing to shell out $20 bucks for a CD / DVD combo. Kind of like Paul Van Dyk's CD/DVD combo Global. I get the CD, plus a DVD that contains a 5.1 channel mix of the CD to the backdrop of video footage of Paul spinning at various clubs around the world (broken up into chapters, a chapeter for each track on the album), a few music videos for the some of the tracks on the CD and a 15 minute interview. IMHO that's worth the cash. The RIAA should wise up. Why pay $12 - $16 for an hour of content when I can pay $15 - $20 and get a full length movie with extras on DVD? The major music labels need to start doing more CD / DVD bundles for the popular artists and charge more ($20 - $25), then offer the less popular stuff on CD only for less money ($8 - $12). Perhaps a have brackets. The more popular a CD the more they charge, up into a certain point when they release a CD/DVD combo. Certianly all greatest hits releases from now on should be CD/DVD combo's.
Don't worry, regular CD's aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Although hopefully as online music sales becomes for and more prominent and CD sales continue to decline the RIAA will pull their collective heads out of there asses and lower their prices. A CD should cost $10 - $12 tops.