Err... I was talking about things like using OSX keyboard shortcuts, not having a Start menu, etc. mostly -- eye-candy is not my biggest concern. I would use GNUStep, but that project seems to be in rather poor health and I'd end up having to use GNOME or KDE apps anyway...
But yeah, Compiz and Beryl are definitely things I'm interested in, especially since the new laptop will have a well-supported GPU for once (an Intel GMA950).
Perhaps you're unaware of the fact that QT, the API that KDE is based on, has always been cross-platform. The only thing that ever stopped KDE from running on Windows or Mac OS before was licensing -- it wasn't GPL'd on platforms other than unix/X11 until QT 4.
then another one with KDE looking exactly like Mac OS-X
Okay, but did it act like OSX? And do you have a link to some instructions on how I can configure it that way? Out of the four major desktop environments (Windows, OSX, Gnome, KDE) I like OSX the best, but my new computer isn't going to be a Mac so I'll have to switch...
What you don't seem to realize is that your list of people "effected" by this is irrelevant. There's exactly one category that matters:
People who will not even consider alternatives to MS Office by the fact that only Microsoft could possibly ever claim "full compliance" with the "standard."
Have you tried downloading a full sized DVD and burning it? Come on, I don't have the time or patience required to do that via bittorrent
Not everyone shares your opinion. Some people have the patience even to download whole TV series as DVD ISOs (for an hour-long show, that would be about 7 discs per season).
Actually, the legal idea that permits investigating a possble bomb in the mail is Exigent Circumstance not simply probable cause. In the case of Exigent Circumstances they *may* make a warrantless search, but the thing is that there has to be strong evidence that an emergency situation exists, where waiting to get a warrant will result in either destruction of evidence, escape of the suspect, or the key part: to prevent imminent danger to life or serious damage to property.
You know, it really doesn't matter how "exigent" the circumstances are, they still should be required to get court approval at least after the fact!
The other reason being we don't generally drink tea.
Speak for yourself, ya damn yank! 'Round these parts (the South, that is), we drink tea all the time. And it ain't that hot British junk, either -- sweet iced is the way ta go!
I must just be weird then -- I usually heat water on the stove, both for cooking and for making tea (sweet, iced of course). But then again, I usually make tea by the pitcher, not the cup.
The fire marshall came in and said "you can't have those low-voltage wires run through that conduit, that conduit is designed for high voltage wiring."
That's okay... at least in the fire marshall's case, he isn't expected to actually know anything about networking.
Okay, but can't he expected to know a tiny bit about voltage? Or even English vocabulary? Namely, that low voltage is less thanhigh voltage?
Back to the Future was never designed to have a sequel, the "To Be Continued..." caption was added after the film was released to video (or translated in some cases).
Hmm... I guess that's what happens when you're trying to talk intelligently about a movie that came out when you were a toddler -- oh well. I wonder, is the "to be continued" included when it gets played on TV?
Robert Zemeckis stated that had sequels been planed, BTTF 1 would not have ended with Marty girlfriend entering the DeLorean with him and Doc, which was a huge plot writing annoyance for the following movie script.
Okay, so the gutsiness is diminished, but not eliminated, since that scene still counts as a bit of a cliffhanger.
As an adult, I do have a problem with being asked for ID. I have gray hair and I'm obviously older than the little fucks asking for my ID. It's a power-trip for minimum-wage clerks.... "Sir, the law REQUIRES me to card you for appearing to be under the age of 60...."
And big fucks like you are the reason my girlfriend hates her job! Here's a newsflash, asshole: those clerks really are required by law to ID you! In fact, in my state it's required regardless of age -- she even has to ask 80-year-old geezers, because she'd get fired if she didn't.
Tell you what, why don't you post your name and address, so I can come beat the shit out of you for abusing people like my girlfriend, who are only trying to do their jobs! How would you like that, hmm?
In all of these movies -- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, Back to the Future II, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, The Matrix Reloaded, etc. -- the cliffhanger is always the second movie. Why? Because when they made the first one, they weren't sure if it would make enough money to justify a sequel, so they had to wrap up the story. With these second movies, they already know they're going to make a third, so they let it be a cliffhanger.
Incidentally, the "to be continued..." at the end of Back to the Future was rather gutsy, since it was the first movie -- they must have had unusually high expectations for it. Also, note that Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan had a rather weak cliffhanger (just the hint of the last bit of Genesis effect, and the fact that the coffin soft-landed); I would guess that poor reviews of The Motion Picture (and maybe poor sales -- I wasn't born yet, so I don't remember how well it did at the box office) reduced the confidence in a third movie. The cliffhanger at the end of The Search for Spock was much stronger (destruction of the Enterprise), due to the corresponding strength of The Wrath of Khan.
My question is though... why is that right? Why should someone, who's still alive, who made a movie/song back in 1970 say, not still be getting money from it if people are still wanting to buy said movie/song?
Conversely, why should someone who made a movie/song today be getting money for it in the first place? It's equally debatable...
Owning music is fine, possesing stolen music tracks, or making copies of stolen music, is not.
The point which you obstinantly seem to be refusing to grasp is that the music is NOT "stolen!" It's not even copyright-infringed. It's ENTIRELY LEGAL.
Weed is not an appropriate analogy, because it's illegal in the US. Music, as the person you replied to mentioned, is not. What is a valid analogy in this case is going to Hong Kong or somewhere and buying cheap CDs or DVDs and bringing them home with you. Is that legal? After all, for all you know they're paying the appropriate organization in their country instead of the RIAA directly too. (note: I am not talking about copyright-infringed stuff; I'm talking about (for example) local-region DVDs that might be cheaper than the region 1 equivalent.) If what AllOfMP3 does is wrong, that must be too, so why is the RIAA going after one and not the other?
If Apple comes out with that, I'm going to have to kill someone -- after waiting about six months, I broke down and bought a (non-Mac) Thinkpad X60 tablet to replace my iBook (granted, I had to wait for the X60 too, but I was hopeing for a tablet Mac the whole time).
The same thing happened with American car companies during the 80s and 90s. The sad result is that American companies are STILL suffering from a bad reputation they aquired from the poor quality of cars in the 80s and 90s compared to Japanese cars.
No, the sad thing is that American companies are still earning that bad reputation by continuing to make poor quality cars! My dad owned a 2003 Chevy Astro that was a total POS. I imagine a 2003 Chevy Aveo (made in Korea) might be better...
Specifically that making a copy is illegal, and a copy is defined as a tangible object, and downloading doesn't involve moving tangible objects like CDs, it involves using intangible information to create a new tangible copy within the US, where that's prohibited
That's ridiculous. If you have a legal right to a file in another country, and posession of it in this country is not otherwise illegal (e.g., it's not kiddie porn or something), there's no sane reason you can't copy it across the (virtual, and therefore nonexistant) border.
Let's use an analogy: imagine you're on vacation in Europe, and you buy a CD, burn it, put it on your iPod, and bring it back home with you. Is that illegal? Of course not, that would be absurd!
Next, imagine you do the same thing, but you put it on a computer you happen to own, that you leave in Europe. You then transfer it to yourself after you get back home. Is that illegal? Of course not, that would be absurd!
Now, finally, imagine exactly the same thing, except that AllOfMP3.com just happens to be storing the file for you instead of you doing it for yourself (note: it's still your file, because you bought it). How is that any different? It's not, therefore it would still be absurd for it to be illegal!
No, the payments go to a legal entity -- specifically, ROMS, "the national Russian organization providing professional collective management of authors' property rights and protection of interests of rightsholders in cases of use of their works in digital interactive networks, including the Internet."
Slashdot Mirror
Err... I was talking about things like using OSX keyboard shortcuts, not having a Start menu, etc. mostly -- eye-candy is not my biggest concern. I would use GNUStep, but that project seems to be in rather poor health and I'd end up having to use GNOME or KDE apps anyway...
But yeah, Compiz and Beryl are definitely things I'm interested in, especially since the new laptop will have a well-supported GPU for once (an Intel GMA950).
Perhaps you're unaware of the fact that QT, the API that KDE is based on, has always been cross-platform. The only thing that ever stopped KDE from running on Windows or Mac OS before was licensing -- it wasn't GPL'd on platforms other than unix/X11 until QT 4.
Okay, but did it act like OSX? And do you have a link to some instructions on how I can configure it that way? Out of the four major desktop environments (Windows, OSX, Gnome, KDE) I like OSX the best, but my new computer isn't going to be a Mac so I'll have to switch...
What you don't seem to realize is that your list of people "effected" by this is irrelevant. There's exactly one category that matters:
The strings command supports all legacy document formats! What more could you possibly need? Besides, formatting is overrated anyway...
Not everyone shares your opinion. Some people have the patience even to download whole TV series as DVD ISOs (for an hour-long show, that would be about 7 discs per season).
You know, it really doesn't matter how "exigent" the circumstances are, they still should be required to get court approval at least after the fact!
Speak for yourself, ya damn yank! 'Round these parts (the South, that is), we drink tea all the time. And it ain't that hot British junk, either -- sweet iced is the way ta go!
I must just be weird then -- I usually heat water on the stove, both for cooking and for making tea (sweet, iced of course). But then again, I usually make tea by the pitcher, not the cup.
Okay, but can't he expected to know a tiny bit about voltage? Or even English vocabulary? Namely, that low voltage is less than high voltage?
You know, they do make solutions for that...
Hmm... I guess that's what happens when you're trying to talk intelligently about a movie that came out when you were a toddler -- oh well. I wonder, is the "to be continued" included when it gets played on TV?
Okay, so the gutsiness is diminished, but not eliminated, since that scene still counts as a bit of a cliffhanger.
That doesn't (or shouldn't) count -- the only AO content required a hack to get to.
And big fucks like you are the reason my girlfriend hates her job! Here's a newsflash, asshole: those clerks really are required by law to ID you! In fact, in my state it's required regardless of age -- she even has to ask 80-year-old geezers, because she'd get fired if she didn't.
Tell you what, why don't you post your name and address, so I can come beat the shit out of you for abusing people like my girlfriend, who are only trying to do their jobs! How would you like that, hmm?
In all of these movies -- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, Back to the Future II, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, The Matrix Reloaded, etc. -- the cliffhanger is always the second movie. Why? Because when they made the first one, they weren't sure if it would make enough money to justify a sequel, so they had to wrap up the story. With these second movies, they already know they're going to make a third, so they let it be a cliffhanger.
Incidentally, the "to be continued..." at the end of Back to the Future was rather gutsy, since it was the first movie -- they must have had unusually high expectations for it. Also, note that Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan had a rather weak cliffhanger (just the hint of the last bit of Genesis effect, and the fact that the coffin soft-landed); I would guess that poor reviews of The Motion Picture (and maybe poor sales -- I wasn't born yet, so I don't remember how well it did at the box office) reduced the confidence in a third movie. The cliffhanger at the end of The Search for Spock was much stronger (destruction of the Enterprise), due to the corresponding strength of The Wrath of Khan.
Conversely, why should someone who made a movie/song today be getting money for it in the first place? It's equally debatable...
Like I said, I imagine a 2003 Chevy Aveo might be better. In other words, yes, the Astro was that bad.
Indeed -- what those of us on private trackers really need is a client that does exactly the opposite of BitTyrant, to keep our ratios up.
The point which you obstinantly seem to be refusing to grasp is that the music is NOT "stolen!" It's not even copyright-infringed. It's ENTIRELY LEGAL.
Weed is not an appropriate analogy, because it's illegal in the US. Music, as the person you replied to mentioned, is not. What is a valid analogy in this case is going to Hong Kong or somewhere and buying cheap CDs or DVDs and bringing them home with you. Is that legal? After all, for all you know they're paying the appropriate organization in their country instead of the RIAA directly too. (note: I am not talking about copyright-infringed stuff; I'm talking about (for example) local-region DVDs that might be cheaper than the region 1 equivalent.) If what AllOfMP3 does is wrong, that must be too, so why is the RIAA going after one and not the other?
If Apple comes out with that, I'm going to have to kill someone -- after waiting about six months, I broke down and bought a (non-Mac) Thinkpad X60 tablet to replace my iBook (granted, I had to wait for the X60 too, but I was hopeing for a tablet Mac the whole time).
No, the sad thing is that American companies are still earning that bad reputation by continuing to make poor quality cars! My dad owned a 2003 Chevy Astro that was a total POS. I imagine a 2003 Chevy Aveo (made in Korea) might be better...
That's ridiculous. If you have a legal right to a file in another country, and posession of it in this country is not otherwise illegal (e.g., it's not kiddie porn or something), there's no sane reason you can't copy it across the (virtual, and therefore nonexistant) border.
Let's use an analogy: imagine you're on vacation in Europe, and you buy a CD, burn it, put it on your iPod, and bring it back home with you. Is that illegal? Of course not, that would be absurd!
Next, imagine you do the same thing, but you put it on a computer you happen to own, that you leave in Europe. You then transfer it to yourself after you get back home. Is that illegal? Of course not, that would be absurd!
Now, finally, imagine exactly the same thing, except that AllOfMP3.com just happens to be storing the file for you instead of you doing it for yourself (note: it's still your file, because you bought it). How is that any different? It's not, therefore it would still be absurd for it to be illegal!
It does, however, illustrate the fact that the lawmakers who came up with that number in the first place were fucking morons!
Well, it's their loss -- all the artists would have to do is register with ROMS, and they'd get royalties from AllOfMP3's sales!
No, the payments go to a legal entity -- specifically, ROMS, "the national Russian organization providing professional collective management of authors' property rights and protection of interests of rightsholders in cases of use of their works in digital interactive networks, including the Internet."