Maybe there's something you don't realize about children - they have no taste at all. Pretty much everything kids are into, be it food, movies, music, or whatever, is sheer crap.
The worst part? This holds true for you, too. All those things you remember as awesome from your childhood are just as crappy as what's out there now. Even worse, actually, because the production values are better today.
They take a bold stance against war. They're possibly sacrificing their artistic popularity and credibility to make a point. You had better shape up and learn to appreciate them right fucking now.
Then again, I find it ironic that it's the European newspapers that are the ones who are trumpeting this. You'd think rabid corporatists in America would be screaming their heads off if they thought their bottom lines were hurting from Google.
Seriously. I too have a hard time believing that Europeans aren't superior to Americans in every aspect of life. Hasn't Slashdot taught us all... oh, fuck this. I can't maintain it.
By the by, you share an incorrect definition of irony with Alanis. I find it poetic that you are wrong on so many levels in one post. I won't bother addressing your understanding of the issue displayed in your first paragraph.
Grumbling is infectious, you know, and the nice thing about living in a democracic system is that if enough people start grumbling, things get done.
No, grumbling doesn't get anything done. Only doing is meaningful, and grumbling is as far from doing as you can get.
I'm not going to change it, but that doesn't mean I have to accept it either, nor does it mean things won't change.
What I was trying to say won't change (and I admit this may not have been completely clear) is that people with means will always run things. This has been true since the dawn of civilization, and it's not a situation that will change.
a corporation is a group of people avoiding taking responsibility for their decisions by hiding behind a legal fiction.
This anti-corporate stance is... well, for lack of a better word, cute. Everything in society can be said to be a legal fiction. In reality, a corporation is a group of people banded together for a common cause. Because of the grouping aspects, things can scale to sizes that aren't easily humanizable, but behind everything is people.
The avoiding responsibility aspect only happens in certain extreme cases, and it happens with or without corporations. Let's not act like corporations are at fault for human failings here. That as ridiculous a point as you could possibly make, and it certainly doesn't refute anything I've said.
Overall, I think you're probably more than a little idealistic. Nothing wrong with that, of course. It just has a limited scope in the real world.
Your contention isn't true in the least. The court is bound to prevent the government from abridging freedom of speech - there is no such clause in the constitution regarding private institutions.
Who said anything about an illegal copy of windows?
Let's put this in modern, everyday terms. Imagine Sony's media companies releasing only DVDs that work only on Sony players. I own a Panasonic player. You're telling me that I should buy a Sony player at whatever price Sony asks rather than whining about Sony's exclusivity?
No, I'm saying whine away, but have the full understanding that it's inneffectual. This is a classic case of too bad, so sad.
It's kind of like signing a temperance pledge because practically everybody else in my community has VD, and subsequently being told that if I want to watch a movie I have to have sex in the back row of it. Am I a whiner because I refuse?
I'm sorry, what? I think torturing a simile this badly is against some sort of international convention. In any case, refusal alone isn't the issue - it's complaining about your own refusal that crosses the line.
What the hell does this have to do with anything I said?
Incidentally, I personally haven't owned a car in 8 years - and I get a ride to work in a hybrid. I just think it's funny that you would try to make a point that happened to be wrong in all respects.
I remember watching that movie on my playstation - it was sort of cheesy japanese soap opera style pop culture crap. Don't remember it as a game though - are you sure something was produced by that name that had an actual game attached?
Microsoft is an entity composed entirely of people, you know. It's not at all fictitious. The concept of the faceless corporation is a popular one (for limited values of popular, in certain circles for example) but there's no such thing in reality.
They don't have any rights above yours. They just have more means. You may not like that, but you're never going to change it. Don't take that as me discouraging you from trying - in my view, reality will do that job much better than I ever could.
Just realize, in the end, it's all people. Nothing more than that - which means, should you have the will and gumption, it's all there for you, as well.
Incidentally, none of this is to convince you to accept it. You are free to rage against it til the end of your strength, til your breath will no longer draw. I guess my position can best be summed up with a quote from PKD - "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Look at kkrieger (can be found at http://www.theprodukkt.com/). This is a first person shooter demo that is on par with most first person shooters today...
Okay, that's neat as a demonstration of techniques, but saying that it's on par with most first person shooters today is incredibly disingenuous.
There's no challenge, it's about 10 minutes long, the sound is as good as nonexistent (there is sound, but it's awful), I could go on, but that'll miss the point. It's nothing like modern first person shooters. It's not impressive as a game at all, just as a demo.
I have to wonder if you've played any of the latest games - give F.E.A.R. a try on a beefy box and you'll see where the size of the content comes into play.
x86s are the cheapest general purpose computers on the market. With windows, they can be had for 300 dollars. I would call that price fairly irrelevant if you want in on computing.
Aside from that, the WMV codecs are available as binary only packages. Possibly illegal, but again, that comes down to principles.
I've really got to stop defending this point of mine...
None of your examples seems applicable to me. BrainInAJar voluntarily put himself in a situation where he refuses to use Microsoft products. It's intellectually bankrupt to then complain that he can't use Microsoft products. He refuses, on principle, apparently.
To make an analogy that works (and involves cars!), it's like selling your car, then complaining that you can't drive it anymore.
What do yu mean, he delibertely handicapped himself.
What I mean is, nothing aside from his own principles stop him from using a Windows PC to watch the video. He did this to himself, so he gets to deal with the consequences.
It's like if I sign a virginity pledge and then complain about not getting laid. Kind of silly, huh?
Hey, its not like they can't make the stuff available in multiple formats. Oh, right, this is Microsoft. They really can't handle multiple formats. Look at Word.
As a company, they are doing what makes sense for them. Right or wrong is another issue altogether, and a theoretical one at that. I'm just dealing in reality here.
An interesting theory... do you really think anyone who has beliefs has no right to complain?
Not in every situation. However, there are some extenuating circumstances here.
by publishing the videos in a closed format, the publishers unintentionally made it difficult for people to view their content
This is published by Microsoft. I'm pretty sure they intentionally published it in their own format, without caring about the difficulties they cause people who won't use their products.
If nobody complains, the situation will never improve, no?
If it was anyone else publishing, I would agree with you. In this case, I stand by my original statement.
Look, the guy obviously got it, he just had to throw a quick MS bash in there because it's the karmariffic thing to do. Sheesh. It's called 'whoring.' Geddit now?
That's not true at all. Anything bad about Americans that you read on slashdot is true. Anyone not American is enlightened, and likely years ahead of us technologically, socially, and spiritually as well. Plus more attractive, and overall worth more to the race as a whole.
Slashdot Mirror
We mock what we don't understand.
So what language has native socket manipulation as a feature?
Maybe there's something you don't realize about children - they have no taste at all. Pretty much everything kids are into, be it food, movies, music, or whatever, is sheer crap.
The worst part? This holds true for you, too. All those things you remember as awesome from your childhood are just as crappy as what's out there now. Even worse, actually, because the production values are better today.
You've got bigger problems than that, my friend - someone who claims to love you keeps trying to dress you in gap clothes
Wow. Good thing you're not a lawyer, because you'd be fucking your clients over big time.
Define an agile browser, please.
They take a bold stance against war. They're possibly sacrificing their artistic popularity and credibility to make a point. You had better shape up and learn to appreciate them right fucking now.
Bash Linux and George Bush in the same post to avoid downmods! It's so crazy, it just might work!
It speaks for itself, but it doesn't say anything coherent...
Then again, I find it ironic that it's the European newspapers that are the ones who are trumpeting this. You'd think rabid corporatists in America would be screaming their heads off if they thought their bottom lines were hurting from Google.
Seriously. I too have a hard time believing that Europeans aren't superior to Americans in every aspect of life. Hasn't Slashdot taught us all... oh, fuck this. I can't maintain it.
By the by, you share an incorrect definition of irony with Alanis. I find it poetic that you are wrong on so many levels in one post. I won't bother addressing your understanding of the issue displayed in your first paragraph.
Grumbling is infectious, you know, and the nice thing about living in a democracic system is that if enough people start grumbling, things get done.
No, grumbling doesn't get anything done. Only doing is meaningful, and grumbling is as far from doing as you can get.
I'm not going to change it, but that doesn't mean I have to accept it either, nor does it mean things won't change.
What I was trying to say won't change (and I admit this may not have been completely clear) is that people with means will always run things. This has been true since the dawn of civilization, and it's not a situation that will change.
a corporation is a group of people avoiding taking responsibility for their decisions by hiding behind a legal fiction.
This anti-corporate stance is... well, for lack of a better word, cute. Everything in society can be said to be a legal fiction. In reality, a corporation is a group of people banded together for a common cause. Because of the grouping aspects, things can scale to sizes that aren't easily humanizable, but behind everything is people.
The avoiding responsibility aspect only happens in certain extreme cases, and it happens with or without corporations. Let's not act like corporations are at fault for human failings here. That as ridiculous a point as you could possibly make, and it certainly doesn't refute anything I've said.
Overall, I think you're probably more than a little idealistic. Nothing wrong with that, of course. It just has a limited scope in the real world.
Your contention isn't true in the least. The court is bound to prevent the government from abridging freedom of speech - there is no such clause in the constitution regarding private institutions.
This really isn't so difficult.
Who said anything about an illegal copy of windows?
Let's put this in modern, everyday terms. Imagine Sony's media companies releasing only DVDs that work only on Sony players. I own a Panasonic player. You're telling me that I should buy a Sony player at whatever price Sony asks rather than whining about Sony's exclusivity?
No, I'm saying whine away, but have the full understanding that it's inneffectual. This is a classic case of too bad, so sad.
It's kind of like signing a temperance pledge because practically everybody else in my community has VD, and subsequently being told that if I want to watch a movie I have to have sex in the back row of it. Am I a whiner because I refuse?
I'm sorry, what? I think torturing a simile this badly is against some sort of international convention. In any case, refusal alone isn't the issue - it's complaining about your own refusal that crosses the line.
What the hell does this have to do with anything I said?
Incidentally, I personally haven't owned a car in 8 years - and I get a ride to work in a hybrid. I just think it's funny that you would try to make a point that happened to be wrong in all respects.
games like FFVII
I remember watching that movie on my playstation - it was sort of cheesy japanese soap opera style pop culture crap. Don't remember it as a game though - are you sure something was produced by that name that had an actual game attached?
Microsoft is an entity composed entirely of people, you know. It's not at all fictitious. The concept of the faceless corporation is a popular one (for limited values of popular, in certain circles for example) but there's no such thing in reality.
They don't have any rights above yours. They just have more means. You may not like that, but you're never going to change it. Don't take that as me discouraging you from trying - in my view, reality will do that job much better than I ever could.
Just realize, in the end, it's all people. Nothing more than that - which means, should you have the will and gumption, it's all there for you, as well.
Incidentally, none of this is to convince you to accept it. You are free to rage against it til the end of your strength, til your breath will no longer draw. I guess my position can best be summed up with a quote from PKD - "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Look at kkrieger (can be found at http://www.theprodukkt.com/). This is a first person shooter demo that is on par with most first person shooters today...
Okay, that's neat as a demonstration of techniques, but saying that it's on par with most first person shooters today is incredibly disingenuous.
There's no challenge, it's about 10 minutes long, the sound is as good as nonexistent (there is sound, but it's awful), I could go on, but that'll miss the point. It's nothing like modern first person shooters. It's not impressive as a game at all, just as a demo.
I have to wonder if you've played any of the latest games - give F.E.A.R. a try on a beefy box and you'll see where the size of the content comes into play.
x86s are the cheapest general purpose computers on the market. With windows, they can be had for 300 dollars. I would call that price fairly irrelevant if you want in on computing.
Aside from that, the WMV codecs are available as binary only packages. Possibly illegal, but again, that comes down to principles.
I've really got to stop defending this point of mine...
None of your examples seems applicable to me. BrainInAJar voluntarily put himself in a situation where he refuses to use Microsoft products. It's intellectually bankrupt to then complain that he can't use Microsoft products. He refuses, on principle, apparently.
To make an analogy that works (and involves cars!), it's like selling your car, then complaining that you can't drive it anymore.
What do yu mean, he delibertely handicapped himself.
What I mean is, nothing aside from his own principles stop him from using a Windows PC to watch the video. He did this to himself, so he gets to deal with the consequences.
It's like if I sign a virginity pledge and then complain about not getting laid. Kind of silly, huh?
Hey, its not like they can't make the stuff available in multiple formats. Oh, right, this is Microsoft. They really can't handle multiple formats. Look at Word.
As a company, they are doing what makes sense for them. Right or wrong is another issue altogether, and a theoretical one at that. I'm just dealing in reality here.
An interesting theory... do you really think anyone who has beliefs has no right to complain?
Not in every situation. However, there are some extenuating circumstances here.
by publishing the videos in a closed format, the publishers unintentionally made it difficult for people to view their content
This is published by Microsoft. I'm pretty sure they intentionally published it in their own format, without caring about the difficulties they cause people who won't use their products.
If nobody complains, the situation will never improve, no?
If it was anyone else publishing, I would agree with you. In this case, I stand by my original statement.
Do you think maybe you gave up the right to complain when you espoused your beliefs?
I seriously don't mean to troll - you've voluntarily handicapped yourself. Now you get to live with it.
Look, the guy obviously got it, he just had to throw a quick MS bash in there because it's the karmariffic thing to do. Sheesh. It's called 'whoring.' Geddit now?
structured authentic urban art
Jesus, that's the most pretentious description of vandalism I've ever seen. I have to wonder if you attended art school. You seem to have the chops.
That's not true at all. Anything bad about Americans that you read on slashdot is true. Anyone not American is enlightened, and likely years ahead of us technologically, socially, and spiritually as well. Plus more attractive, and overall worth more to the race as a whole.
That is all.