At the risk of my karma, I'm going to mention that no one I know seems to fall into your generalization of people not buying Blu-Ray discs or players because of DRM.
Hi, I'm mrchaotica.
Now you know at least one person who falls into that category. Have a nice day!
Incidentally, now that it's cracked (and the method released publicly), I may very well start using it in the near future.
But, of course, the patch containing the new key would have to -- you guessed it -- contain the new key! So then you just compromise the new key (ad infinitum) by intercepting the patch. If the PS3 can read the key from the patch, so can you.
Imagine two big sedans colliding head-on at 10 mph. Then imagine picking one sedan up with a magnet and dropping it on top of the other at 10 mph. Now imagine dropping the sedan on its end, rather than flat.
It's not clear from the article how fast the demolition ball was moving at impact. Also, it hit the back of the car (where there's a whole bunch of reinforcement because it's common for cars to get hit there), whereas this space junk would hit the top.
I could hit a car with a 20,000 ton train without doing any damage, if the train were moving less than 5 miles per hour...
People also complained about Grand Theft Auto 3, just because it wasn't top-down like GTA 1 and 2 were. I think that parallels the complaints about the non-isometricism of Fallout 3 nicely.
A push away from earth would probably be easier, as you could do it with a ground-based laser. I imagine such a push could make the object's orbit elliptical enough that it would re-enter sooner than it otherwise would.
"hey let's index the minimum wage to inflation and the CPI and make it retroactive to 1980"
What do you mean by "retroactive minimum wage?" It almost sounds like you're talking about hitting up every business for back wages to 1980, which makes no sense at all.
"Hey lets tighten up labor laws so we don't have grocery chains hiring teenagers because they can: pay them less, know they're less likely to unionize and are less likely to complain about sexual harassment or bad workplace conditions."
FYI, the Kroger my girlfriend used to work at was unionized, and it still paid crappy wages compared to Publix.
That's nothing! I've heard them take out the entire line "making love in the green grass" from the song "Brown Eyed Girl" by Van Morrison! They dubbed over it with "Laughin and a-runnin, hey hey" from the previous verse.
Exactly, and your apartment isn't your property either!
It isn't the same thing and it isn't that different.
"[not] that different" is not the same thing as "identical."
If you lease something, you have full control over it and all rights to it for your benefit. If you buy it, you have the same but it is permanent.
No shit, Sherlock! The permanence is the difference.
You can use your lease to deny others from using the object just as you can as owner. Suppose you leased a house, the owner can't move in while your lease if active without your permission. You have control over that dwelling.
Yeah, and if you hold a copyright you have control over copying and distribution of an artistic work. But who cares? That's irrelevant to the fact that you still don't own the house, just like you still don't own the artistic work.
So, it seems to me that your argument is that you want to talk about "owning a copyright," in essentially the same way that you would talk about "owning a lease." The trouble is, nobody talks like that! Nobody cares about "owning a lease;" it's just semantic bullshit because people care about what rights you hold to the object itself, not what rights you hold to the abstract concept that represents what rights you hold to the object -- you can tell just by reading my description how stupid, awkward, and pointless it is!
Yep, and to do that, they created a right of control over the copying and dissemination of materials that you created. The copyright laws are about rights to works for a limited time.
Right, and time-limited control over copying is not the same as property. One way you can tell is that actual property rights are not time-limited.
If you understand the difference between "leasing" an object and "buying" it, then you should also understand [one aspect of] the difference between copyright and property!
Except damages aren't "imposed," they're "awarded." Or if they are imposed, then the ones doing the imposing are the plaintiffs, and the government is merely agreeing to enforce their imposition.
It doesn't matter if you're apathetic about the President; you still probably have a bunch of state and local elections and referendums that need voting on too!
If your company dropped your health coverage, then you'd have the additional $12k in wages, plus the $5k tax credit, to buy health care on your own.
That's bullshit. Insurance companies won't sell you the same health coverage, at the same price, on your own.
Getting it through your employer not only distorts the market (since the insurance company's customers aren't really you, but your employer), but also creates all sorts of problems when you change employers.
I don't disagree. However, as long as some people get it collectively through their employer, everyone else is still getting screwed in comparison.
By the way, you are partially right: there is one category of traffic offenses that are not criminal. Those are offenses recorded by automated cameras. There's no actual human to act as accuser, so it's not possible to defend against (i.e., to exercise the defendant's 6th Amendment rights). So instead, the corrupt bastards in the government made it what you call an "administrative" offense: sure, they lose the ability to put the defendent in jail, but who cares? It removes all those pesky "civil rights" that impede the government's ability to impose and collect fine$!
Not in Georgia: I managed to convince a judge to appoint a lawyer to me for a speeding ticket, because it could (theoretically) earn jail time. (I was a full-time student with no job, so technically I had zero income and zero assets -- the judge didn't mind that I was also still a dependent of my parents.) That wouldn't have happened if speeding were not a criminal offense.
Slashdot Mirror
Hi, I'm mrchaotica.
Now you know at least one person who falls into that category. Have a nice day!
Incidentally, now that it's cracked (and the method released publicly), I may very well start using it in the near future.
But, of course, the patch containing the new key would have to -- you guessed it -- contain the new key! So then you just compromise the new key (ad infinitum) by intercepting the patch. If the PS3 can read the key from the patch, so can you.
Imagine two big sedans colliding head-on at 10 mph. Then imagine picking one sedan up with a magnet and dropping it on top of the other at 10 mph. Now imagine dropping the sedan on its end, rather than flat.
See the difference?
It's not clear from the article how fast the demolition ball was moving at impact. Also, it hit the back of the car (where there's a whole bunch of reinforcement because it's common for cars to get hit there), whereas this space junk would hit the top.
I could hit a car with a 20,000 ton train without doing any damage, if the train were moving less than 5 miles per hour...
I didn't say people complained that GTA3 wasn't good, I said they complained that it wasn't like the previous versions.
People also complained about Grand Theft Auto 3, just because it wasn't top-down like GTA 1 and 2 were. I think that parallels the complaints about the non-isometricism of Fallout 3 nicely.
That's too bad; I was hoping I could get Lenovo to give me a new battery!
TFA says the largest piece could be about 40 pounds and hit at 100 mph. That wouldn't dent your car, it would totally destroy it.
A push away from earth would probably be easier, as you could do it with a ground-based laser. I imagine such a push could make the object's orbit elliptical enough that it would re-enter sooner than it otherwise would.
Ammonium chloride is not even slightly like ammonia, in the same way that table salt is not even slightly like chlorine gas.
What do you mean by "retroactive minimum wage?" It almost sounds like you're talking about hitting up every business for back wages to 1980, which makes no sense at all.
FYI, the Kroger my girlfriend used to work at was unionized, and it still paid crappy wages compared to Publix.
Replace "Linksys router" with "TiVo" and "openWRT/DD-WRT" with "modified software for TiVos" and then you'll have a good argument.
(Also replace "antitrust lawsuit" with "GPL violation (a.k.a. copyright infringement) lawsuit" in both cases.)
Wha...? You do realize that "wireless broadband" isn't the same thing as wi-fi, right?
That's nothing! I've heard them take out the entire line "making love in the green grass" from the song "Brown Eyed Girl" by Van Morrison! They dubbed over it with "Laughin and a-runnin, hey hey" from the previous verse.
Since when was "making love" a dirty word?!
But you still own the trash.
Exactly, and your apartment isn't your property either!
"[not] that different" is not the same thing as "identical."
No shit, Sherlock! The permanence is the difference.
Yeah, and if you hold a copyright you have control over copying and distribution of an artistic work. But who cares? That's irrelevant to the fact that you still don't own the house, just like you still don't own the artistic work.
So, it seems to me that your argument is that you want to talk about "owning a copyright," in essentially the same way that you would talk about "owning a lease." The trouble is, nobody talks like that! Nobody cares about "owning a lease;" it's just semantic bullshit because people care about what rights you hold to the object itself, not what rights you hold to the abstract concept that represents what rights you hold to the object -- you can tell just by reading my description how stupid, awkward, and pointless it is!
Right, and time-limited control over copying is not the same as property. One way you can tell is that actual property rights are not time-limited.
If you understand the difference between "leasing" an object and "buying" it, then you should also understand [one aspect of] the difference between copyright and property!
Except damages aren't "imposed," they're "awarded." Or if they are imposed, then the ones doing the imposing are the plaintiffs, and the government is merely agreeing to enforce their imposition.
Sweet! Now all I have to do is amass a vast fortune to pay for my campaign and wait 11 years to become eligible...
It doesn't matter if you're apathetic about the President; you still probably have a bunch of state and local elections and referendums that need voting on too!
If I were President, I'd veto every bill that contained a rider; is that close enough?
That's bullshit. Insurance companies won't sell you the same health coverage, at the same price, on your own.
I don't disagree. However, as long as some people get it collectively through their employer, everyone else is still getting screwed in comparison.
I'm curious; would you cite the part of the Constitution you base this argument on, please?
By the way, you are partially right: there is one category of traffic offenses that are not criminal. Those are offenses recorded by automated cameras. There's no actual human to act as accuser, so it's not possible to defend against (i.e., to exercise the defendant's 6th Amendment rights). So instead, the corrupt bastards in the government made it what you call an "administrative" offense: sure, they lose the ability to put the defendent in jail, but who cares? It removes all those pesky "civil rights" that impede the government's ability to impose and collect fine$!
Not in Georgia: I managed to convince a judge to appoint a lawyer to me for a speeding ticket, because it could (theoretically) earn jail time. (I was a full-time student with no job, so technically I had zero income and zero assets -- the judge didn't mind that I was also still a dependent of my parents.) That wouldn't have happened if speeding were not a criminal offense.
Don't forget Greek fire and Roman pozzolan concrete!