---The beauty I see in a diamond isn't because of the marketing, the advertising campaign, their market value or anything like that.
The standard "advertising doesn't affect me" line... It's just that more insidious that you believe it does not.
---What I find beautiful about a diamond is that it's natural.. that it was made by nature and by the natural happenings of the planet Earth, which in itself is beautiful. The right balance of elements and conditions came together to create a crystal clear diamond from such unlikely elements, and the end result to me is beautiful because of how it was formed, and what it was formed with.
It's all natural. Some things are just given more processing than others. And now, with the vapor sublimination techniques, we can create cheap diamonds with the appropriate impurities... or perfect. And it's just carbon. Cheap element.
If you want something rare, use lanthanide metals and make a truly rare ring. With rare metals going for what they are, the ring itself is pricey. And those metals were made in the star that last created our solar system.
---Artificial stuff isn't as beautiful to me because it imitates beauty.
That sounds like, in a nutshell, what deBeers would say. Do you not see beauty in the understanding to recreate materials, or beauty in understanding? Or do you see beauty in the horrible actions deBeers uses to keep a stranglehold on the diamond business?
Does OSX allow users to create a "virtual cd burner" in which iTunes can burn?
Example: You buy movie on iTunes. You want to watch on TV, so you need to convert to mpeg2. Can you do this, and burn to a fictional disc to bypass crippling?
---Your argument is analogous to saying that if racial equality were reached then the need for organizations like the NAACP would be gone, so members of the NAACP should fight against racial equality.
The crux of the matter: does a group go away if they succeed in their goal? What does the NAACP seek, and would they disband themselves if they succeeded 100%?
Many of these groups do not just seek what they state, but they want "more equal", and will make up issues to substantiate living.
I see it akin to the "Cancer Orgs" never seeking a real cure to cancer, but instead keep taking donations.
I watched "The Day the Earth Stood Still" on my DS. 15 fps, but it was smooth, and seeking was kinda slow, but acceptable. The sound encoding is MP3 112 Kbit
There's scads of addons, both in software and hardware.
Hardware wise, many in our family have DS'es, along with 32 MB rampacks that fit the slot 2 side, along with M3 DS Simply/Real. That alone allows us to use homebrew and downloaded games. Whether you agree with downloading games, it makes a really nifty dev kit.
Software wise, we use a multitude of software. Moonshell is probably the most known, as it can pay movies, MP3s and a bunch of other formats. Other high points are DSorganizer which has IRC and HTTP, along with other nifty tools, dsLinux (self explanatory), SnemulDS - snes emulator.. kinda buggy, treasures of gaia - google earth for DS, dsVNC - VNC from your DS, various software to use your DS as a "joypad" for your computer including mouse emulation, NDSmail (cant do tls on send;( ).
There's even Quake for the DS somewhere. The development is just crazy... and then you can get into copyrighted games. That's a whole other ball park.
I've got mod points, but they're rather unimportant to me.. If you have suggestions for mod points to throw at, let me know.
---Now, I think I'm pretty progressive in my thinking on copyright. Does the creator of the work deserve payment for the product of his labors? Yes. Does he deserve royalties forever and ever and ever? Probably not. Does he deserve royalties for some period of time? Probably.
That in itself is the definition of limited. Not too long, but not too short. My question to you would be as follows: Has taking photos of recently built public landmarks landed you in hot water due to the "building" being copyrighted?
---So here's a what-if: I'm out on assignment about weekend outings for a magazine. I am not an employee of the magazine, and there is no permanent transfer of rights for the images I make. I retain copyright and license the work to the publisher for a specified time.
I read a possible solution to this "problem" a while back. The solution changed copyright law in that individuals who created the copyright could not transfer it, and could not exclusively license it. However, I dont understand the dynamic of copyright to understand why this would fail (if it does).
---The problem is, where do I draw the line? As a businessman and artist, I think 'life of the author' is fair. As a consumer, I think 5-15 years is probably fair.
And then I point you at any other worker that does not rely on copyright to make money. Most of our work force does a job and gets X money for services rendered. Companies take a risk on new people because they have to pay no matter what. If copyright fails for any reason, authors and such people will resort on commissioned works and public performances again... the old paid for services rendered.
As a musician and soon to be chemist, I find it appalling that many authors demand money for what job they may have done 3 years ago, 5 years ago, or even 40 years ago. Even in my soon to be industry, our exclusivity is at maximum 20 years. What one thing someone to that makes them deserve to be in the lap of luxury for 30 years?
And it comes down to this point: copyright is deteriorating because the majority of the people think the social contract that substantiated its use has failed. No one (or any) agency or corporation will stop it. Instead, commissioned works will reign supreme. As you being a photographer, you could take photos for certain events, as you probably have done prior. Along with that, these companies who use much copyrighted material can instead put "bounties" on certain photos. Capture this X photo for Y money. And they can choose who to go with as to the quality of their previous work... Just like everybody else: paying better as to the quality of their prior works.
---That's where we get into fair use. Atlantic Monthly wants to run a photo of mine anywhere in the magazine? Seems to me that they're profiting from a work I created. I should be duly compensated (in an agreement between myself and the magazine). Your sister has a website where she posts pictures of her cats and pretty sunsets, and happens to like a cat photo I took? Let her post the photo in a non-commercial non-endorsed way, and I couldn't care less. Now, if she compiles a book of cat and sunset pictures that she's found, I want a cut of the action.
But when does personal and "for profit" start and end? Does the inclusion of even one advert make it for-profit? 501(c)3 is the definition of non-profit, but there can be no distinction between a personal website and a LLC run by the same person.
However, I do agree that non-profit use probably has a darned good legitimacy, but I shudder at how that would be legally described, and I'd expect you would worry the same.
Hey! I work at a Starbucks and I dont see the kind of person you talk about.
I serve people who work in places from the receptionist counter at the local recycling plant, all the way to doctors and lawyers. Starbucks isnt a "richie" joint, but rather just a damn good drink. Thats shown by our wide clientèle.
Wanna see a mold-breaker? I work for Starbucks, play in the local community band, part time tinkerer, beer/wine/mead maker, amateur radio operator, studying for bs in chemistry/minor: math and anthropology. And I have a tan minivan... and Im almost 2 meters tall so nobody gives me lip about the minivan;)
If the artists were coerced or otherwise forced to sign, then the contracts are invalid.
Is there any evidence of these things happening? If not, I am forced to take the opinion that they knew and understood the ramifications of their contracts.
---Personally, I want to be able to go to RIAA's website, spend about $150 or so, and have a license to consume as I please. After I pay that $150, I'm free to get the damn music where I want - the asshats in the SECURITY shirts can't take away my bootleg equipment at a concert, the asshats in the RIAA flak jackets cant take away my external HDD's for downloading on P2P, and they sure as hell can't fine my music store because I accidentally played a riff from a copyrighted tune with one of their goonies around.
That's the rub... They do not want a one time payment. Instead, they want a forever recurring payment.
How much would be enough? However much you could afford.
---Look at the economics and you will see where the changes are really going to come.
---Today, promotional advertising is a huge part of the economy. It supports printers, advertising companies, magazines, and all manner of newsletters and such. It enables radio stations to play music for free, network television to exist and is why things work as they do today. Promotion of music, movies, books and other "intellectual property" has an overall economic impact far greater than simply compensating creators for their work.
Advertising also leads to much nastier side effects. Many books have explained the varied effects of advertising, but one of the worst is apathy. Aside from that, it still is a great noise compared to signal. And worse yet, how do we know what is real to what is paid advertising?
---We stand on the edge of a new age where there will be no compensation. Today's young people understand that advertising is something they want no part of and object when they are subjected to it. The idea that you are paying $10 for a piece of plastic that cost $0.50 to make because of all of the promotion that went along astounds them. They want to get rid of the $9.50 so they could buy their music for $0.50. There are two problems with that idea.
When TV and radio were first used commercially, we knew what was paying for what. When the shows introduced XYZ soap pellets, they were talked as sponsors of the show. You buying their goods promoted the well-being of the show. The older commercials were just plain "This is product X. It does this job. Buy X." Those worked... until these days they want you to buy a feeling. Buy love... in a new crappy motorvehicle. Become sexed up.... buy a new overpriced liquor.
Why do we want no part of these adverts? Because they proclaim FALSE messages, FALSE beliefs, and FALSE hopes. They are selling a product, but they promise the moon. If they want to lie, they can go to hell. If they want to cheat us, we will be guaranteed to cheat them.
---The first problem is nobody is going to make the studio recording that results in the $0.50 piece of plastic without the promotion that went along with it. While we might not like advertising, we haven't reached the enlightened age where products reach out and grab people when they are needed. Without promotion - including but not limited to advertising - you just aren't going to see products.
The internet IS the device that allows us to go out and grab what we want. What it comes down to is that we want movies and music. The owners of these copyrights want to control who has access, and how much it costs to unlock this access. People have one idea of how much their media is worth, and the companies have another. Since there is no meeting of the minds, the people choose the third choice.. the black market provides the product at a cost more acceptable to listeners: cost of drug and porn ads, along with extremely abusive spyware.
---The second problem is many people have seen the vastly different landscape away from commercial products called "free". You get your music for free, maybe download some other entertainment for free. With faster Internet connections it will all be free. Nobody is going to be paying that $0.50 - they want it all for free.
Well.. Free is nice for the short term. However, when there is a lack of new works, people will be encouraged to pay again. Instead, it will be in a form of "do a service, get paid for a service", and not the revolving door of "I did it once, I expect to be paid forever." This model is how most of the world operates. Only the media types demand continual payment of services rendered long ago.
When one provides better work, one can be expected to get paid more. Better musicians will be paid accordingly to skill judged by their previous works, just as the carpenter or the chemist or the engineer would.
---I would expect to see lots of people out of work. Anyone connected with promotion is going to be out of work pretty soon. I don't thi
Soda is sold by the 2 liter bottles, yet milk is sold by the gallon. However, 3,8 l is also on there....
And where I work at (starbucks) 3.8 measures out to 4 l from most of our milk producers. Our cream based frappucinos require milk for preparation, we make 4 liters at a time. One gallon should be.2 l shy, but almost never is.
And btw, all of our ingredients and preparatory instructions are in metric.
I'm sorry, I have to question your experience with EMACS. At $10000 US, EMACS is intended for use by professional Web designers (haha) and by those learning the trade, and is out of reach of most hobbyists (although the educational version is much less). Obviously someone who uses a tool without understanding the underlying concepts is going to produce bad work. That's not the fault of the tool, that's due to the individual, and is also part of their learning. EMACS as a tool does what it does very well, and is standard fare in many Web shops for a good reason. I use primarily the text view, but the visual view is good for tweaks and getting an overall sense of changes as they are made. The split visual/code view also works quite well as a learning mechanism for those learning HTML development. For those who say it messes up your code, that was the case many years ago, but the last three versions or so have done a much better job, and it also gives you control of what file types you really want for it to leave alone.
As far as I can tell, they dont watch Sneakernet, nor do they use WASTE.
10 minute trip at 500GB per drive, 3 drives...
WASTE for when we NEED on-band communications/transfer.
Anonymous high speed WIFI for torrent leach, along with IRC/FTP downloads.
10 minutes to 2hours from a college town: can arrange meets for goods. We could encrypt the drives in that the key is given later out of band... No being caught red-handed with "illegal" files.
Whatever they may try, we'll be there to stop them. Good luck stopping human interaction and sharing.
Slashdot Mirror
---The beauty I see in a diamond isn't because of the marketing, the advertising campaign, their market value or anything like that.
The standard "advertising doesn't affect me" line... It's just that more insidious that you believe it does not.
---What I find beautiful about a diamond is that it's natural.. that it was made by nature and by the natural happenings of the planet Earth, which in itself is beautiful. The right balance of elements and conditions came together to create a crystal clear diamond from such unlikely elements, and the end result to me is beautiful because of how it was formed, and what it was formed with.
It's all natural. Some things are just given more processing than others. And now, with the vapor sublimination techniques, we can create cheap diamonds with the appropriate impurities... or perfect. And it's just carbon. Cheap element.
If you want something rare, use lanthanide metals and make a truly rare ring. With rare metals going for what they are, the ring itself is pricey. And those metals were made in the star that last created our solar system.
---Artificial stuff isn't as beautiful to me because it imitates beauty.
That sounds like, in a nutshell, what deBeers would say. Do you not see beauty in the understanding to recreate materials, or beauty in understanding? Or do you see beauty in the horrible actions deBeers uses to keep a stranglehold on the diamond business?
Does OSX allow users to create a "virtual cd burner" in which iTunes can burn?
Example: You buy movie on iTunes. You want to watch on TV, so you need to convert to mpeg2. Can you do this, and burn to a fictional disc to bypass crippling?
---Your argument is analogous to saying that if racial equality were reached then the need for organizations like the NAACP would be gone, so members of the NAACP should fight against racial equality.
The crux of the matter: does a group go away if they succeed in their goal? What does the NAACP seek, and would they disband themselves if they succeeded 100%?
Many of these groups do not just seek what they state, but they want "more equal", and will make up issues to substantiate living.
I see it akin to the "Cancer Orgs" never seeking a real cure to cancer, but instead keep taking donations.
I watched "The Day the Earth Stood Still" on my DS. 15 fps, but it was smooth, and seeking was kinda slow, but acceptable. The sound encoding is MP3 112 Kbit
It really was pretty good.
There's scads of addons, both in software and hardware.
;( ).
Hardware wise, many in our family have DS'es, along with 32 MB rampacks that fit the slot 2 side, along with M3 DS Simply/Real. That alone allows us to use homebrew and downloaded games. Whether you agree with downloading games, it makes a really nifty dev kit.
Software wise, we use a multitude of software. Moonshell is probably the most known, as it can pay movies, MP3s and a bunch of other formats. Other high points are DSorganizer which has IRC and HTTP, along with other nifty tools, dsLinux (self explanatory), SnemulDS - snes emulator.. kinda buggy, treasures of gaia - google earth for DS, dsVNC - VNC from your DS, various software to use your DS as a "joypad" for your computer including mouse emulation, NDSmail (cant do tls on send
There's even Quake for the DS somewhere. The development is just crazy... and then you can get into copyrighted games. That's a whole other ball park.
I've got mod points, but they're rather unimportant to me.. If you have suggestions for mod points to throw at, let me know.
---Now, I think I'm pretty progressive in my thinking on copyright. Does the creator of the work deserve payment for the product of his labors? Yes. Does he deserve royalties forever and ever and ever? Probably not. Does he deserve royalties for some period of time? Probably.
That in itself is the definition of limited. Not too long, but not too short. My question to you would be as follows: Has taking photos of recently built public landmarks landed you in hot water due to the "building" being copyrighted?
---So here's a what-if: I'm out on assignment about weekend outings for a magazine. I am not an employee of the magazine, and there is no permanent transfer of rights for the images I make. I retain copyright and license the work to the publisher for a specified time.
I read a possible solution to this "problem" a while back. The solution changed copyright law in that individuals who created the copyright could not transfer it, and could not exclusively license it. However, I dont understand the dynamic of copyright to understand why this would fail (if it does).
---The problem is, where do I draw the line? As a businessman and artist, I think 'life of the author' is fair. As a consumer, I think 5-15 years is probably fair.
And then I point you at any other worker that does not rely on copyright to make money. Most of our work force does a job and gets X money for services rendered. Companies take a risk on new people because they have to pay no matter what. If copyright fails for any reason, authors and such people will resort on commissioned works and public performances again... the old paid for services rendered.
As a musician and soon to be chemist, I find it appalling that many authors demand money for what job they may have done 3 years ago, 5 years ago, or even 40 years ago. Even in my soon to be industry, our exclusivity is at maximum 20 years. What one thing someone to that makes them deserve to be in the lap of luxury for 30 years?
And it comes down to this point: copyright is deteriorating because the majority of the people think the social contract that substantiated its use has failed. No one (or any) agency or corporation will stop it. Instead, commissioned works will reign supreme. As you being a photographer, you could take photos for certain events, as you probably have done prior. Along with that, these companies who use much copyrighted material can instead put "bounties" on certain photos. Capture this X photo for Y money. And they can choose who to go with as to the quality of their previous work... Just like everybody else: paying better as to the quality of their prior works.
---That's where we get into fair use. Atlantic Monthly wants to run a photo of mine anywhere in the magazine? Seems to me that they're profiting from a work I created. I should be duly compensated (in an agreement between myself and the magazine). Your sister has a website where she posts pictures of her cats and pretty sunsets, and happens to like a cat photo I took? Let her post the photo in a non-commercial non-endorsed way, and I couldn't care less. Now, if she compiles a book of cat and sunset pictures that she's found, I want a cut of the action.
But when does personal and "for profit" start and end? Does the inclusion of even one advert make it for-profit? 501(c)3 is the definition of non-profit, but there can be no distinction between a personal website and a LLC run by the same person.
However, I do agree that non-profit use probably has a darned good legitimacy, but I shudder at how that would be legally described, and I'd expect you would worry the same.
Hey! I work at a Starbucks and I dont see the kind of person you talk about.
;)
I serve people who work in places from the receptionist counter at the local recycling plant, all the way to doctors and lawyers. Starbucks isnt a "richie" joint, but rather just a damn good drink. Thats shown by our wide clientèle.
Wanna see a mold-breaker? I work for Starbucks, play in the local community band, part time tinkerer, beer/wine/mead maker, amateur radio operator, studying for bs in chemistry/minor: math and anthropology. And I have a tan minivan... and Im almost 2 meters tall so nobody gives me lip about the minivan
Fine. Let me get my pound of thermite and magnesium igniter mixture and burn a hole through the plane.
What puts out thermite? Nothing.
Oh, that's right. People are dangerous. Aluminum and rust are not.
If the artists were coerced or otherwise forced to sign, then the contracts are invalid.
Is there any evidence of these things happening? If not, I am forced to take the opinion that they knew and understood the ramifications of their contracts.
---Personally, I want to be able to go to RIAA's website, spend about $150 or so, and have a license to consume as I please. After I pay that $150, I'm free to get the damn music where I want - the asshats in the SECURITY shirts can't take away my bootleg equipment at a concert, the asshats in the RIAA flak jackets cant take away my external HDD's for downloading on P2P, and they sure as hell can't fine my music store because I accidentally played a riff from a copyrighted tune with one of their goonies around.
That's the rub... They do not want a one time payment. Instead, they want a forever recurring payment.
How much would be enough? However much you could afford.
---Look at the economics and you will see where the changes are really going to come.
---Today, promotional advertising is a huge part of the economy. It supports printers, advertising companies, magazines, and all manner of newsletters and such. It enables radio stations to play music for free, network television to exist and is why things work as they do today. Promotion of music, movies, books and other "intellectual property" has an overall economic impact far greater than simply compensating creators for their work.
Advertising also leads to much nastier side effects. Many books have explained the varied effects of advertising, but one of the worst is apathy. Aside from that, it still is a great noise compared to signal. And worse yet, how do we know what is real to what is paid advertising?
---We stand on the edge of a new age where there will be no compensation. Today's young people understand that advertising is something they want no part of and object when they are subjected to it. The idea that you are paying $10 for a piece of plastic that cost $0.50 to make because of all of the promotion that went along astounds them. They want to get rid of the $9.50 so they could buy their music for $0.50. There are two problems with that idea.
When TV and radio were first used commercially, we knew what was paying for what. When the shows introduced XYZ soap pellets, they were talked as sponsors of the show. You buying their goods promoted the well-being of the show. The older commercials were just plain "This is product X. It does this job. Buy X." Those worked... until these days they want you to buy a feeling. Buy love... in a new crappy motorvehicle. Become sexed up.... buy a new overpriced liquor.
Why do we want no part of these adverts? Because they proclaim FALSE messages, FALSE beliefs, and FALSE hopes. They are selling a product, but they promise the moon. If they want to lie, they can go to hell. If they want to cheat us, we will be guaranteed to cheat them.
---The first problem is nobody is going to make the studio recording that results in the $0.50 piece of plastic without the promotion that went along with it. While we might not like advertising, we haven't reached the enlightened age where products reach out and grab people when they are needed. Without promotion - including but not limited to advertising - you just aren't going to see products.
The internet IS the device that allows us to go out and grab what we want. What it comes down to is that we want movies and music. The owners of these copyrights want to control who has access, and how much it costs to unlock this access. People have one idea of how much their media is worth, and the companies have another. Since there is no meeting of the minds, the people choose the third choice.. the black market provides the product at a cost more acceptable to listeners: cost of drug and porn ads, along with extremely abusive spyware.
---The second problem is many people have seen the vastly different landscape away from commercial products called "free". You get your music for free, maybe download some other entertainment for free. With faster Internet connections it will all be free. Nobody is going to be paying that $0.50 - they want it all for free.
Well.. Free is nice for the short term. However, when there is a lack of new works, people will be encouraged to pay again. Instead, it will be in a form of "do a service, get paid for a service", and not the revolving door of "I did it once, I expect to be paid forever." This model is how most of the world operates. Only the media types demand continual payment of services rendered long ago.
When one provides better work, one can be expected to get paid more. Better musicians will be paid accordingly to skill judged by their previous works, just as the carpenter or the chemist or the engineer would.
---I would expect to see lots of people out of work. Anyone connected with promotion is going to be out of work pretty soon. I don't thi
and I assume that /dev/null are blackholes... /root is god. literally
/proc/kcore
and I just want read/write access to
Too true..
.2 l shy, but almost never is.
Soda is sold by the 2 liter bottles, yet milk is sold by the gallon. However, 3,8 l is also on there....
And where I work at (starbucks) 3.8 measures out to 4 l from most of our milk producers. Our cream based frappucinos require milk for preparation, we make 4 liters at a time. One gallon should be
And btw, all of our ingredients and preparatory instructions are in metric.
Oh well. Guess it'll take 3 days to recreate that backup set.
And, Buddha makes incremental backups. Somebody's sig said that.
Bad joke:
Whats yellow and lives on dead beetles?
Yoko Ono
Is it your intent to cause harm?
Intent is the difference between involuntary manslaughter and 1'st degree murder.
It seems you have an ASS affliction. It seems that you can only talk about shit and ass.
Given the username, it must be winter break.
I just love intellectual conversations.
In a nutshell, that's what my sister said when she was 5 years old ;)
Enter in the "Drug Olympics". No holds barred.
I'm sorry, I have to question your experience with EMACS. At $10000 US, EMACS is intended for use by professional Web designers (haha) and by those learning the trade, and is out of reach of most hobbyists (although the educational version is much less). Obviously someone who uses a tool without understanding the underlying concepts is going to produce bad work. That's not the fault of the tool, that's due to the individual, and is also part of their learning. EMACS as a tool does what it does very well, and is standard fare in many Web shops for a good reason. I use primarily the text view, but the visual view is good for tweaks and getting an overall sense of changes as they are made. The split visual/code view also works quite well as a learning mechanism for those learning HTML development. For those who say it messes up your code, that was the case many years ago, but the last three versions or so have done a much better job, and it also gives you control of what file types you really want for it to leave alone.
---So when is Sun going to turn control of ODF over to a standards body?
They don't have to. The source is opened and what ODF is has been released to the community at large.
Anybody with the appropriate manpower can effectively freeze what ODF is.. just call it GAODF- government approved ODF.
When is a standard not a standard?
Perhaps... it's when the company who wrote it won't pass it over to standards bodies.
Perhaps we ought to have "varying" standards for road design... or we should have ever-changing standards for building construction.
Considering this is public documents are at stake, it is our history. It is no less important than safety.
Im part 97.
Turn YOURS off.
---your friendly ham operator.
As far as I can tell, they dont watch Sneakernet, nor do they use WASTE.
10 minute trip at 500GB per drive, 3 drives...
WASTE for when we NEED on-band communications/transfer.
Anonymous high speed WIFI for torrent leach, along with IRC/FTP downloads.
10 minutes to 2hours from a college town: can arrange meets for goods. We could encrypt the drives in that the key is given later out of band... No being caught red-handed with "illegal" files.
Whatever they may try, we'll be there to stop them. Good luck stopping human interaction and sharing.
You look cold. Here's a blanket.
Does your country support liberal gun ownership and self-defense laws?
If so, there's your answer right there.