True, the sticker was not using the word "theory" in the scientific sense. I would agree with that. But, it was stating the facts. And one might be able to make an argument that it is a justified reaction to the theory being taught as proven fact. I think I would be more than happy with just a mention that this is a theory, and explanation of what that means in scientific terms, and then move on. If the ultra-right isn't happy with that, then they never will be.
A rewording of such a sticker would also be fine to me. But, I think a class room note would be better. It allows for questions and answers and a much better explanation of why it matters. After all we should be teaching kids what scientific theories are and the difference between them and proven fact, shouldn't we?
Greater point of contention is what I would say. As someone else pointed out, there is the "Theory of Gravity". But, everyone can see gravity. You can drop a glass and watch it break. You may not be able to prove for certain why it falls, but you can prove the action occurs. Also, gravity, and it's related theories, don't threaten the way we came to be. This does.
Though I'm not sure I would have put the sticker there, I don't think I see the harm in it's being there.
Just checking here, but are you saying that the members of the above mentioned religions accept the entire theory (single cells up to mankind) or just the idea that evolution takes place (organisms adapt over time by way of natural selection)?
Because, I'm pretty sure if you ask a pretty serious Catholic or non-fundamentalist Protestant if they believe all life evolved from single cell organisms up to it's current state, they wouldn't agree. Something about God having a hand in things or the other....
I would say the statement that the majority of the world accepts that evolution takes place, things adapt over time, is true. But, I would say the majority of the world would not agree that the world, and all life on it, came about because of cosmic chance.
On the other hand, I doubt either of us know for sure.
Many posts on this item will no doubt go on and on, back and forth, over whether Creationism, or Evolution is the "Truth". But, what is lost on me is, how is a sticker stating a theory is a theory possibly unconstitutional? It didn't say: "The State of Georgia declares that the Christian form of creationism is official State sanctioned fact."
It stated that the theory of evolution is a theory. Funny, that's what I thought it was. It has always bothered me that so many things that are theories in science are taught as though they are fact.
Does evolution take place? I think everyone but the farthest out there can agree with that. All life evolved to it's present state without any help or direction? Just an accident, as it were? That part is theory and should be treated as such. I don't think that is too unreasonable.
No state religion was established here, no one put "God created the Heaven and the Earth" on page 27, chapter 6. All that was stated is that evolution as an origin of life is a theory.
I disagree, it's 100% Apple's fault. They're the ones who disabled WMA support, they're the ones refusing to license FairPlay to other player manufacturers. It's a pretty clear case of deliberately locking iTMS users into the iPod and iPod users into iTMS.
I'll grant that they disabled WMA support. And I'll even grant that I don't understand myself the total reason for not licensing FairPlay, assuming that they own the whole thing and can license it. But, none of this addresses the ipods ability to play standard MP3s. I would only grant that they are locking you in if that ability wasn't there. The fact that it isn't convenient to do something doesn't take away your ability to do so.
As long as your music is in any of the ipod's supported formats (AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 (32 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Apple Lossless, WAV, AIFF, Audible) then you're good to go.
For true lock-in look to some of the devices out that which can only play encrypted files, such as the early RCA Lyras. No open/un-encrypted files. That's lock-in.
On the subject of Real, I'm not sure I would agree with Apple's reaction, whether they were within their rights or not.
Nearly no online music stores sell standard MP3's. Only indie type labels and such sell those, which is hardly much of the industry.
If you want to buy music online and you have an iPod, you're pretty much stuck with iTMS.
That, of course, is an unfortunate situation. Though, it is not apple's fault. The device is fully capable of playing standard MP3s. The fact that few are selling them really doesn't change anything. If a person has an iPod, and for some reason just doesn't like iTMS, then they can just buy what they like and convert as needed.
As I said before, it is unfortunate that the iPod doesn't support WMA. But, then again I can fully understand why they don't. I also have to say I'm glad they don't support it. Anything that helps WMA gain an even greater foothold is not really a good thing over all. And being supported on the most popular player would certainly help that right along.
Even if they did support it, don't all of the places that are selling WMA based music use a DRM scheme that apple would have to license? I'm not sure how that would make business sense for them.
As much as one might like WMA support, I personally would rather have OGG support. But, I don't see that happening either. It remains that, at this point, the iPod and iTMS are the best products in their categories. They are not the only ones, however. If you buy an iPod and didn't realize that the best licensed online source of music is iTMS, and you wouldn't really be able to use much else, I'm sorry. But, as sad as that is, it is not apple's fault and I don't see why they should do anything about it.
It's not like they are hiding anything. It's not like they are the only players in the market. It's actually a pretty crowded market, just all the other players aren't very good.
Hmmm..... Strange.. I thought they made portable CD players. Must have missed that.
I think I would be more upset about these things if there weren't other players in this market. It's not Apple's fault that napster blows. It's not Apple's fault that, for the most part, every other MP3 player type device isn't as good as theirs. If you don't like the restrictions on iTunes, don't use it. Use napster and the others. You have options. iTMS just happens to be the best, but it's not the only one.
As far as Fairplay goes, I imagine that Apple would have loved to leave that crap out. But, we all know the RIAA would never have gone for that.
This lawsuit is baseless and would be even if it were pointed at MS instead of Apple.
You're right on the META tag question. Given that, for the most part, webloggers are craving at least some form of attention, the odds that they would insert a tag that would limit that attention are slim and none. Perhaps google could just set a limit so that if a given site is linked to so many times, it becomes suspect and is lowered in the ranking. I would have to be set fairly high, of course. I would still like an easy option to filter out the large weblogging sites, livejournal being one.
I believe that google supports that, so I'll have to look into it. Of course, I'd also love an option to ignore trackbacks.:)
I wouldn't say something unintentional is never as bad as something intentional. There are a great man cases where that is not true. But, that is outside of this discussion. In any case, we aren't talking about people who are publishing things. We are talking about a God forsaken "feature" of a particular class of weblog software.
Trackback is evil. If you want to make a link to someone, make a link, don't use some horrible virus-like autolinking system. It's just as annoying as those bloody link farms. And for the most part just as useless. I'm glad you enjoy your weblog. At least I assume you do anyway. But, when I go searching for some topic, I don't want to find some person's weblog that for some reason a million people hit the trackback button.
I have to go with the suggestion another person made, there needs to be a BLOG meta-tag so that they can be properly ignored at the users discretion.
Conviently enough, TrackBack is probably the main reason a lot of people hate what weblogs are doing to google. As has been said by others google was not designed to deal with a billion people linking around to each other. It's as bad as intentional google spamming and all other forms of spam.
If it makes you feel better, I never used, and never would use, the "refer a friend" link they have to submit friend's email addresses. I'm not going to make the choice for them and subject their primary email address to the torrent of spam. I figure if someone wants to do it, they surely know their signing up that email account for tons of spam, and will pick an account for that purpose.
As such, I don't see a problem with someone willingly signing up knowing what their getting into. I would have a huge problem handing my friends email addresses to Gratis without their consent, and I wouldn't do it.
On that note, the amount of spam my spare account has received has dropped to nearly nothing lately. Makes me wonder if they only send for awhile if you always delete it. And canceling AOL was a breeze. Which surprised me more than the spam fall off. Might have had something to do with telling them I was switching the last computer to Linux.:)
I wouldn't say it's okay, it's just not theft. It will be interesting when it does get to the point where you can replicate physical objects with the same ease as digital ones. Is it stealing if I take a picture of your car, and replicate it?
I would have to generally say no, it is not. No one has been deprived of a possession that they formally had. It would, most likely, be a copy right violation.
You cannot steal income. You can only steal assets and property. Income doesn't exist yet until it is accounted as an asset. That's like saying a company should be paying me $150,000USD a year, because that's what I've decided I'm worth, and because they decide not to pay that they are "stealing" my income. I'm not saying that wanton copy right infringement is right or good. Just that it's not "stealing" and it clouds things to frame it in that mind set. These are two different sets of law and concepts and the division between them should be maintained for the good of all.
Nothing personal against you, but I really wish that there was an automatic mod down for using a term like "Intellectual Property". Why not say it's "stealing", too. It's copy right infringement. That's all. It is clearly not the same as stealing a car or other physical item. Whether you view copy right infringement as wrong, or justified, or whatever, it is not the same thing. Therefore the term "Intellectual Property" should not be used.
I'll have to agree with you there. To me, CS is a joke. With the far better games available in the same genre, I have no idea why anyone plays CS either.
You know, I hate to shoot the sacred cow of CS, but there really is not anything special about it. When it first came out, okay maybe. But, now?!
I have no idea how anyone can claim it's better than any of the more recent FPSes. If you want variety, options, and not just boring kill everything modes, then CS does not deliver. Compare CS and Desert Combat. DC has real world vehicles, excellent weapons, a real need for coordinated attacks and movements.. and CS has... ummm.... errr..... nothing but the weapons. You want to talk team-based action? Come back to me when you can call in an air strike, artillery barrage, or naval bombardment when you get pinned down.
Slashdot Mirror
On your second point, that's the short form of what I personally believe.
A rewording of such a sticker would also be fine to me. But, I think a class room note would be better. It allows for questions and answers and a much better explanation of why it matters. After all we should be teaching kids what scientific theories are and the difference between them and proven fact, shouldn't we?
Though I'm not sure I would have put the sticker there, I don't think I see the harm in it's being there.
Because, I'm pretty sure if you ask a pretty serious Catholic or non-fundamentalist Protestant if they believe all life evolved from single cell organisms up to it's current state, they wouldn't agree. Something about God having a hand in things or the other....
I would say the statement that the majority of the world accepts that evolution takes place, things adapt over time, is true. But, I would say the majority of the world would not agree that the world, and all life on it, came about because of cosmic chance.
On the other hand, I doubt either of us know for sure.
It stated that the theory of evolution is a theory. Funny, that's what I thought it was. It has always bothered me that so many things that are theories in science are taught as though they are fact.
Does evolution take place? I think everyone but the farthest out there can agree with that. All life evolved to it's present state without any help or direction? Just an accident, as it were? That part is theory and should be treated as such. I don't think that is too unreasonable.
No state religion was established here, no one put "God created the Heaven and the Earth" on page 27, chapter 6. All that was stated is that evolution as an origin of life is a theory.
There are times like these when I wish public horse whippings were legal.
I'll grant that they disabled WMA support. And I'll even grant that I don't understand myself the total reason for not licensing FairPlay, assuming that they own the whole thing and can license it. But, none of this addresses the ipods ability to play standard MP3s. I would only grant that they are locking you in if that ability wasn't there. The fact that it isn't convenient to do something doesn't take away your ability to do so.
As long as your music is in any of the ipod's supported formats (AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 (32 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Apple Lossless, WAV, AIFF, Audible) then you're good to go.
For true lock-in look to some of the devices out that which can only play encrypted files, such as the early RCA Lyras. No open/un-encrypted files. That's lock-in.
On the subject of Real, I'm not sure I would agree with Apple's reaction, whether they were within their rights or not.
If you want to buy music online and you have an iPod, you're pretty much stuck with iTMS.
That, of course, is an unfortunate situation. Though, it is not apple's fault. The device is fully capable of playing standard MP3s. The fact that few are selling them really doesn't change anything. If a person has an iPod, and for some reason just doesn't like iTMS, then they can just buy what they like and convert as needed.
As I said before, it is unfortunate that the iPod doesn't support WMA. But, then again I can fully understand why they don't. I also have to say I'm glad they don't support it. Anything that helps WMA gain an even greater foothold is not really a good thing over all. And being supported on the most popular player would certainly help that right along.
Even if they did support it, don't all of the places that are selling WMA based music use a DRM scheme that apple would have to license? I'm not sure how that would make business sense for them.
As much as one might like WMA support, I personally would rather have OGG support. But, I don't see that happening either. It remains that, at this point, the iPod and iTMS are the best products in their categories. They are not the only ones, however. If you buy an iPod and didn't realize that the best licensed online source of music is iTMS, and you wouldn't really be able to use much else, I'm sorry. But, as sad as that is, it is not apple's fault and I don't see why they should do anything about it.
It's not like they are hiding anything. It's not like they are the only players in the market. It's actually a pretty crowded market, just all the other players aren't very good.
I don't understand the link you're making in that if you have an ipod, you must use iTMS. It plays standard MP3s, yes?
The lack of support for WMA would be inconvenient for some, but would still not constitute lock-in.
In my eyes the lawsuit, as we know it, is still baseless.
I would imagine not.
I think I would be more upset about these things if there weren't other players in this market. It's not Apple's fault that napster blows. It's not Apple's fault that, for the most part, every other MP3 player type device isn't as good as theirs. If you don't like the restrictions on iTunes, don't use it. Use napster and the others. You have options. iTMS just happens to be the best, but it's not the only one.
As far as Fairplay goes, I imagine that Apple would have loved to leave that crap out. But, we all know the RIAA would never have gone for that.
This lawsuit is baseless and would be even if it were pointed at MS instead of Apple.
I believe that google supports that, so I'll have to look into it. Of course, I'd also love an option to ignore trackbacks. :)
Trackback is evil. If you want to make a link to someone, make a link, don't use some horrible virus-like autolinking system. It's just as annoying as those bloody link farms. And for the most part just as useless. I'm glad you enjoy your weblog. At least I assume you do anyway. But, when I go searching for some topic, I don't want to find some person's weblog that for some reason a million people hit the trackback button.
I have to go with the suggestion another person made, there needs to be a BLOG meta-tag so that they can be properly ignored at the users discretion.
Conviently enough, TrackBack is probably the main reason a lot of people hate what weblogs are doing to google. As has been said by others google was not designed to deal with a billion people linking around to each other. It's as bad as intentional google spamming and all other forms of spam.
Done. Or at least as close as /. will allow.
Stolen :)
As such, I don't see a problem with someone willingly signing up knowing what their getting into. I would have a huge problem handing my friends email addresses to Gratis without their consent, and I wouldn't do it.
On that note, the amount of spam my spare account has received has dropped to nearly nothing lately. Makes me wonder if they only send for awhile if you always delete it. And canceling AOL was a breeze. Which surprised me more than the spam fall off. Might have had something to do with telling them I was switching the last computer to Linux. :)
Well, since we're talking about free ipods... see my sig. :)
Surely you realize that link means nothing, yes?
I would have to generally say no, it is not. No one has been deprived of a possession that they formally had. It would, most likely, be a copy right violation.
You cannot steal income. You can only steal assets and property. Income doesn't exist yet until it is accounted as an asset. That's like saying a company should be paying me $150,000USD a year, because that's what I've decided I'm worth, and because they decide not to pay that they are "stealing" my income. I'm not saying that wanton copy right infringement is right or good. Just that it's not "stealing" and it clouds things to frame it in that mind set. These are two different sets of law and concepts and the division between them should be maintained for the good of all.
Nothing personal against you, but I really wish that there was an automatic mod down for using a term like "Intellectual Property". Why not say it's "stealing", too. It's copy right infringement. That's all. It is clearly not the same as stealing a car or other physical item. Whether you view copy right infringement as wrong, or justified, or whatever, it is not the same thing. Therefore the term "Intellectual Property" should not be used.
Uhhh.... okay....
I'll have to agree with you there. To me, CS is a joke. With the far better games available in the same genre, I have no idea why anyone plays CS either.
I have no idea how anyone can claim it's better than any of the more recent FPSes. If you want variety, options, and not just boring kill everything modes, then CS does not deliver. Compare CS and Desert Combat. DC has real world vehicles, excellent weapons, a real need for coordinated attacks and movements.. and CS has... ummm.... errr..... nothing but the weapons. You want to talk team-based action? Come back to me when you can call in an air strike, artillery barrage, or naval bombardment when you get pinned down.