What terrorism is Israel combating? Oh.. You are thinking about the palestines? Yeah. Real terrorist. Just because they can't afford stealth fighters and heavy tanks does that mean that if they want to fight back they are a terrorist?
What about sitting in a gunship shooting people which are absolutely no threat to you with 20mm multipurpose bullets, and getting it on tape? That's not terrorism? Even tho a lot of contries are trying to ban multipurpose ammunition and make it not allowed against humans. Obviously that is of no importance to those that are not terrorist. Like good ol'US. Running over to someone with a bomb in your backback. That's terrorism.
Conclusion: You are a terrorist if you can't afford proper weapons of destruction.
So finally.. Terrorism is just another thing tied up to economy and rich fu##ers.
Israel is such a pimple on the face of the earth. I couldn't even believe my ears when I heard the israeli diplomat at their embassy in Sweden commenting on the exposition 'Snow White and the Madness of Truth' at Stockholm's Museum of National Antiquities. They are just plain mad.
Just a thought... A big CRT would probably occupy almost a square meter of my apartment. The current value of my apartment is 40.000+ NOK per square meter:p I acutally can't afford a CRT because of the space it would occupy;)
But as Kjella posted. Right now I have 17" LCD monitors here only capable of 1280x1024. With the current games I'm getting all the performance I need with a Radeon 9700. If I were to buy some new 'heavy duty' graphic cards I would also have to buy new monitors.....
"I've personally seen a few PHP sites that run flawlessly but they are not easily extendable. They are written in such a manner that developers are afraid to work with it because it's too easy to break stuff, or adding new features will involve rewriting big chunks of code."
You are 100% correct here.:-/
PHP can be bad because it's so easy to write really really low quality code making it hard to later add more features or for 3rd party programmers to add/use the code. But that is possible in other languages too and it is avoidable in PHP4 and even more so in PHP5 (I think and hope. Just started looking at PHP5.)
But I believe it's not enough of a problem to invalidate the points I tried to make in my first post. Since it's a universial problem for whatever language you use. A company is just required to put some more effort into forcing the developer to do it the 'right way' from the beginning.
Conclusion might be that for any system/language you choose to use, you should follow coding and development 'standards' which are easy for others to follow/learn. Don't just 'hack&slash' something together.
I see a lot of posts making 'fun' of PHP/Apache/MySQL. Especially things like large scale applications, hard/difficult maintenance on larger projects and not good at scaling.
Well. That might be true.... For those few sites which actually DO require 'scalability', easy maintenance when the project get bigger and the target is millions of hits per hour/day for some really heavy computations and what-not.
But there are SO few of these projects around. So for all of you who thinks php stinks at least try to use the right tool for the right job. From my experience in web-application development in Norway almost every large software company will recommend some closed source, inhouse made, 'superheavy' application for whatever site you want to have. They will use every argument you post here to put their software in a better light than some 'light weight solution' like PHP/Apache/Linux/MySQL/postgresql. Seriously, almost no web-sites in Norway targeted at norwegians will ever require 'large scale' solutions. There simply aren't enough people around. Still the companies will push forth their solution on unsuspecting customers.
I had a e-commerce site I made (using php/apache/mysql, python/perl for backend functionality running on TSLinux), reviewed by a respected IT-consultant company in Norway (Bekk - http://www.bekk.no/). Their conclusion was that it was a good solution, well written, but.... "It should have been made in a java/C# or something like that" Why? Because of scalability. It's just absurd. They really don't take into account the target marked for the solution. And the current system setup is running just fine and dandy without any trouble. Should the number of visitors increase ten-fold (which it never will), well... Add some slave database servers and more webservers. Suddenly you have the board of directors going: -Uhm, why didn't you write the system in Java. We hear Java is a good thing. Java is scalable. Java is more secure. Why? Because it took me such a impossible short time to make the site with php and it's been going for 2 years now, without problems. That's why. The solution they would have otherwise chosen would be 10-100 times more expensive, would require expensive servers and would probably take years to develop.
Don't underestimate the power of backward compatibility....
Tekken, Rayman, Final Fantasy, and a some other titles are still frequently used in my PS-2.
"Backward compatibility only helps you get people when the console is new." -No. Not 'only'. It also helps when the developer creates the SAME game for the new console. With maybe a few more lens flares. Well. Lens flares have never made a game good and seldom better.
If what you say should be true we would have to relay on the developers to release the same games over and over or almost the same games, just a bit better, AND we would have to be stupid enough to buy them over and over.
I see it as more or less having to replace me CD collection every 4-5 years. Which is just no-no.
It's been this way with Windows and Office too, but lately it seems like it is going to stop. Or.. Maybe MS will add some lens flares to the Office Helper:p
The link didn't work right now so I'll make a guess...
Test must at least include Q3, UT-2004 and 3DMark03, but since these are pretty powerful computers I guess they also use some sort of advanced custom built MineSweeper with like 10.000x10.000 grid playing field or something wild crazy stuff like that. Maybe 400+ pages Word documents? Final test is probably Halo for pc. Any fps score above 20 will result in a spot > 100 on the list.
I have a hotmail adress I use from time to time. And I can't say I have experienced much improvement in the spam-handling on my hotmail account. And what pisses me off, is not all the spam which do reach my inbox, but all the 'real' emails which is put in the 'Junk E-Mail' folder.
"You run what is almost certainly the most spammed mail service in the world and do a better job."
I don't see any relevance here.. What's the difference between one e-mail adress and another one. Or someone running an e-mail service with 100 accounts or 1 million accounts? You can still use the same filtering and software for both, just on a different scale, hardwarewise. As for the adresses, for a spammer they should be all the same... Or might it be that they know that hotmail adresses have poor spam filtering?
Isn't 'uploading' the act of activly uploading something (put data) to someone, while downloading is when you actively download something (get data) from someone. So someone uploads something to one server so others can download it, at their leasure.
Because, if not, the first thing I would say if RIAA knocked on my door would be: Hey! They uploaded those movies to me! I didn't do anything.
" once called for parking an US aircraft carrier off the coast of france to intimidate them"
Yes! Lets intimidate Europe. I guess we don't have enough nuclear weapons to pass around to even think about standing up against a boat. I bet Russia would be happy to sell a few to another European nation if the price was right.
If the west had just stopped selling their 'old' weapons, we still wouldn't have had any need to make even more sophisticated weapons.
We could instead be spending money on education and increased peace effort in 3rd world contries.
And we should have helped former USSR, when the communist leadership lost control. Instead we suddenly had huge aoumnts of advanced weaponry being shipped all over the place.
Spend billions and billions of dollars on new weapons. Sell off all the old weapons to foreign nations to get some balance in the budget. Realise that the weapon you sold are almost as good as the weapon you developed and start all over again researching even better and more deadlier weapons. Sell off all the old weapons....
And then you have it going. Great profit for those who make weapons tho:) So it's not all bad.
You are not an artist. You are just someone trying to make a living. Every word you utter proves it.
"When you watch a movie or listen to a song that you've downloaded, you try to justify not paying for it in any way you can: You tell yourself that it isn't worth the price, or that the artist needs only the enjoyment of making art, or that the real value lies in the cost of reproduction, which is zero."
You haven't understood anything? If I go to watch a movie or buy a CD I want to enjoy it. It's so simple. Whatever you say and whatever personal insults you 'hit me with' it all comes down to that. Problem is that I often go and see a movie and it plain sucks. Take the lates StarWars movies. I don't enjoy it, I hate it. I hate it for having wasted MONEY it, I hate it for wasting TIME on it. And then along comes someone like you and say I'm arrogant and that this was some work of art and that I should have enjoyed it? How clueless can you be? You are not an artist, you are someone who don't believe in your own work, you are someone who want to trick, fool, lure and push your product on people.
I downloaded every lord of the rings movie. I also bought the two first extended editions of the LotR. LotR was and is probably the most downloaded movie of all times. By your totally unreal believes and opinions Peter Jackson and his movie company should have lost billions of USD. Did they?! No!!! Because they made a GOOD PRODUCT which can actually stand the trial of being tested before you buy it.
Make a good product and people will buy it. Don't fool yourself like you are doing now.:)
"Work is a resource. Time is a resource." They are both relative. So it's very hard to measure work and time and then require to get a fair pay. Also, artist do what they think is fun. I train martial-arts because I think it's fun. Never did I believe I would do it because I would get money. Same for artists. (trying to make money of it is a different story)
You say: "Don't fool yourself into thinking that your actions have no consequences."
Since you say you are a musician, lets try out a simple experiment. I've got one of your songs here. And now I copied it 40 times. On 10 different computers. To 5 different people. How much did you 'lose'? Nothing! That's right. Nothing. You don't even know it has happened........
Don't you see? The problem isn't that we won't have new music or that people will stop writing music. Maybe you will stop writing music, but then I don't think it would be a big loss because if that was the case. It's obviously nothing you think is fun if that was to happen....
Where does it say that musician should earn tons of cash or actually be required to earn anything on their music. They are artists. Makers of art. I know artists who has a ordinary job to get money and do their art on their spare time. There is no human right that says you are required to get paid to do what -YOU- want. BUT..... With that out of the way, lets go over to the important part. The record companies. It's they who start out with a totally wrong image of what group will be buyers. It's they who spend tons of cash on promoting etc. So they are the ones who -NEED- cash and lots of it. And of course, even tho you don't have to make money of your art you sure as hell don't want to see other people making money from your work of art. As I see it here is the problem. Companies getting greedy. Artists seeing that someone is making money but not them and trouble arises.
Remember: People have money. Money which do not get spent have no value. So people will spend money. Just make something that people want and will pay for. But at least have the balls to let people know what they are getting before trying to sell it to them. If not I'll believe you think that your 'product' suck and therefor are trying to fool us into buying it. Current CDs, DVDs, movies and other digital media won't let us, except if we download it. I've stopped going to the movies, because that's one place I have a hard time getting my money back when the 'product' I bought sucked big time. 4 months ago I actually demanded to get my cash back because the movie wasn't even close to what the trailer promised.
As you said: "Work is a resource. Time is a resource." Well. Those resources aren't worth squat if I don't enjoy your product. Because movies and music I buy for my enjoyment. So if I don't enjoy your product, something is wrong. And it's your product which is at fault. And since enjoyment is relative to we have a big problem. Too bad you can't see this.
I'll still stand by my statement. When MS has made WinXP it's impossible for them to lose money on it by someone copying it. This statement is 100% true. No matter how much work went into it or bla bla bla.
No, it is not. MS can't lose money on already made versions of Windows. They can get in a situation where there is a decrease in their potential group of buyers.
Also remember, you won't get any money from people who don't have any money. So if the entire population of Africa pirated WinXP do you think MS would lose much potential income? No. What am I getting at? The point is that COMPANIES will make software companies money. If the entire Siemens Corporation was caught using pirated WinXP copies MS would sue them for billions, so they simply don't copy it. They buy it!
In your mind you actually seem to believe that since I copied 3D Studio Release 4 the maker of the program 'lost money' because of decrease in it's potential revenue. But it didn't. I was never in their group of companies/people who they considered their potential revenue.
It's impossible for a software company to lose money once they have their product finished by people copying it. Because it's there. No one is stealing their product. They are just getting a stream of bytes. Only possible way for someone to lose on this would be if you didn't pay the ISP, which would lose money on their service.
Problem arises tho, when companies start pretending that every living person belong to their potential revenue source. Of course they'll start 'losing money' then. And even more problems surfaces when they start using budgets based on that insane buyer group.
"If shoplifting was as harmless and easy to get away with as trading copyrighted material is, you can sure as hell bet I would get myself some free candy every day, and so would millions of other people."
It's just so very different. If you steal a car or candy, you are actually taking something which have been made by the use of several difference resources, which can -never- be remade/reclaimed and those in charge of making the things won't get anything in return.
If I copy a file from one computer to the other, nothing, absolutely nothing have been wasted. There are no resources that have been spent. No one will go home emptyhanded because they didn't get paid. No one will lose anything on it.
It's impossible for, lets say MS, to lose money on people copying WinXP opposed to someone making cars or mp3 players. Because, once you have made WinXP, it's there. The cost of making one or one billion copies of WinXP is the same. the cost of making you candy increases with every bit made. Same for cars or mp3 players.
Tho I wish MS would enforce their copy protections, because the day everyone would have to pay for every copy of Office and Windows they use, will be the day Linux goes mainstream.
"As a person who used to run several large IIS webservers, i recently set up my own website on Apache. With IIS I had multiple sites with many virtual directories (with vastly different permissions per directory) up and running in about 10 min."
ok.. Here goes: As a person who run several large Linux/Apache webservers, i recently set up my own website on IIS (just for testing). With Apache I can set up a domain running a webstore + advanced CMS in 5 minutes, capable of holding 1.7million articles, several thousand customers and thousand of visits each day. All running from a $800 computer.
With IIS everything takes a shit-long time to do... Since the option you are trying to find is hidden behind Control Panel->This tab->That tab->Tab II->Tab III->TabIV->New tab->Do you want help with this Tab->Maybe the last tab->..... Instead of being neatly tucked away in one easy to edit httpd.conf file.
And the httpd.conf is so dead easy to use. Because every option you can edit has some # help line 1 # help line 2 # help line 3 above it so just by opening the file you get most of the help you need for all the options which are there. Later on you can just remove the #-lines when you don't need them and have a compact httpd.conf for even easier editing.
Nothing can even compare to having the IIS server go down because some stupid ass GUI dll decided to die on you.
GUI for config file editing is just plain stupid. What's even more stupid is that on Windows you often have several different ways to change settings for programs, say IIS.
These notebooks are not for using on your lap while traveling etc.
They are instead excellent replacement for desktop computers which take A LOT of space, have multiple cables running everywhere and most importantly are almost impossible to put away when space is needed for something else. And if need you can take it with you without having to drag with you a keyboard, mouse and several extra cabels.
Right now I use one desktop compter and one Dell Inspiron 8200 (luggable laptop) with 1600x1200 lcd screen and I would love to have two of those or this one.
Or just let the music be free and let people pay for concerts etc.
IMO an artist is someone who makes something because he want to express himself or makes something which the artist himself like. On a sidenote: It would be funny if politicians made people pay to hear their views on things.
An artis with a huge following would earn a lot of money from doing concerts and selling different kind of mercendise. Also, a burnt CD in the bookself looks really lame.
Why not just let there be a donate button on an artists page, so you could donate money to him if you liked his music. That way you would make it so that the artist didn't have to flip burgers or something and instead make more music for you.
Diversity is what keeps the 'digital world' going. Standards specify how we communcate, but what we do with the information we process is up to the operation system/applications.
What the article suggest is that we should have a 'standard' ways of doing this, "standard software patches". Now what if someone breaks that standard and introduces a bug/backdoor a standard patch which everyone will recieve? We'll have a situation much worse that what can possible happen today.
"The federal government will mandate that users must authenticate their identity to access the Internet itself" -Wow! Only one place 'to hit' to deny access for everyone to the internet. What if I identify myself as someone else? Of course it will happen, then someone can wreak havoc and later the innocent neighbor will be arrested because: 'It was him, without doubt, that did all this and that on the internet. Proof? We have logs which clearly showes the perpetrator logging on to the net'
Standards and centralizing is what will bring us a 'digital Perl Harbor' (what a stupid name).
Obviously it wouldn't take much of an effort to capture it. In comparison to France which DID declare war on Germany, and long before Germany invaded France.
God damn, your comparison suck!
I don't see how you can even compare those two things. One country declaring war on someone, then doing virtually nothing, just sitting at it's boarders firing a gun once or twice. Then when the germans DID attack, just to be conquered in a flash. France WAS at war with Germany, and the french had generals saying 'We don't fire upon them since they aren't doing anything wrong...' Oviously they had forgotten they had declared war.
Norway, on the other side, declaring itself neutral, which it was under WW-I, then getting 'attacked' by the allies and also having the allies laying mines down it's costline, at the same time a HUGE german invasion force moving to attack.
Yup.
As for Poland, some countries guarnteed it's safety... France and England. Did they do anything when Poland was attacked? No! Nothing. Or... They started dropping leaflets on German cities, telling the germans that 'war is a generally bad idea'.
FRANCE declared war on Germany, then proceeded to do nothing before it was conquered in a stunningly short time. You can't compare it to anything. There was France in the second world war, and then there were a lot of other countries being conquered, but only France f'ed it up SO bad and had the ability to actually do something, should have done something, was actually obligated to do something, but failed miserably at everything.
Slashdot Mirror
What terrorism is Israel combating? Oh.. You are thinking about the palestines? Yeah. Real terrorist. Just because they can't afford stealth fighters and heavy tanks does that mean that if they want to fight back they are a terrorist?
What about sitting in a gunship shooting people which are absolutely no threat to you with 20mm multipurpose bullets, and getting it on tape? That's not terrorism? Even tho a lot of contries are trying to ban multipurpose ammunition and make it not allowed against humans. Obviously that is of no importance to those that are not terrorist. Like good ol'US.
Running over to someone with a bomb in your backback. That's terrorism.
Conclusion: You are a terrorist if you can't afford proper weapons of destruction.
So finally.. Terrorism is just another thing tied up to economy and rich fu##ers.
Israel is such a pimple on the face of the earth. I couldn't even believe my ears when I heard the israeli diplomat at their embassy in Sweden commenting on the exposition 'Snow White and the Madness of Truth' at Stockholm's Museum of National Antiquities. They are just plain mad.
" the penalty shall be life for a life"
Does that mean I could kill the one who kill the person who did the first killing?
Just a thought... :p I acutally can't afford a CRT because of the space it would occupy ;)
A big CRT would probably occupy almost a square meter of my apartment. The current value of my apartment is 40.000+ NOK per square meter
But as Kjella posted. Right now I have 17" LCD monitors here only capable of 1280x1024. With the current games I'm getting all the performance I need with a Radeon 9700. If I were to buy some new 'heavy duty' graphic cards I would also have to buy new monitors.....
"I've personally seen a few PHP sites that run flawlessly but they are not easily extendable. They are written in such a manner that developers are afraid to work with it because it's too easy to break stuff, or adding new features will involve rewriting big chunks of code."
:-/
PHP can be bad because it's so easy to write really really low quality code making it hard to later add more features or for 3rd party programmers to add/use the code. But that is possible in other languages too and it is avoidable in PHP4 and even more so in PHP5 (I think and hope. Just started looking at PHP5.)
But I believe it's not enough of a problem to invalidate the points I tried to make in my first post. Since it's a universial problem for whatever language you use. A company is just required to put some more effort into forcing the developer to do it the 'right way' from the beginning.
You are 100% correct here.
Conclusion might be that for any system/language you choose to use, you should follow coding and development 'standards' which are easy for others to follow/learn. Don't just 'hack&slash' something together.
I see a lot of posts making 'fun' of PHP/Apache/MySQL. Especially things like large scale applications, hard/difficult maintenance on larger projects and not good at scaling.
Well. That might be true.... For those few sites which actually DO require 'scalability', easy maintenance when the project get bigger and the target is millions of hits per hour/day for some really heavy computations and what-not.
But there are SO few of these projects around. So for all of you who thinks php stinks at least try to use the right tool for the right job. From my experience in web-application development in Norway almost every large software company will recommend some closed source, inhouse made, 'superheavy' application for whatever site you want to have. They will use every argument you post here to put their software in a better light than some 'light weight solution' like PHP/Apache/Linux/MySQL/postgresql.
Seriously, almost no web-sites in Norway targeted at norwegians will ever require 'large scale' solutions. There simply aren't enough people around. Still the companies will push forth their solution on unsuspecting customers.
I had a e-commerce site I made (using php/apache/mysql, python/perl for backend functionality running on TSLinux), reviewed by a respected IT-consultant company in Norway (Bekk - http://www.bekk.no/). Their conclusion was that it was a good solution, well written, but.... "It should have been made in a java/C# or something like that" Why? Because of scalability.
It's just absurd. They really don't take into account the target marked for the solution. And the current system setup is running just fine and dandy without any trouble. Should the number of visitors increase ten-fold (which it never will), well... Add some slave database servers and more webservers.
Suddenly you have the board of directors going: -Uhm, why didn't you write the system in Java. We hear Java is a good thing. Java is scalable. Java is more secure.
Why? Because it took me such a impossible short time to make the site with php and it's been going for 2 years now, without problems. That's why.
The solution they would have otherwise chosen would be 10-100 times more expensive, would require expensive servers and would probably take years to develop.
Don't underestimate the power of backward compatibility....
:p
Tekken, Rayman, Final Fantasy, and a some other titles are still frequently used in my PS-2.
"Backward compatibility only helps you get people when the console is new."
-No. Not 'only'. It also helps when the developer creates the SAME game for the new console. With maybe a few more lens flares. Well. Lens flares have never made a game good and seldom better.
If what you say should be true we would have to relay on the developers to release the same games over and over or almost the same games, just a bit better, AND we would have to be stupid enough to buy them over and over.
I see it as more or less having to replace me CD collection every 4-5 years. Which is just no-no.
It's been this way with Windows and Office too, but lately it seems like it is going to stop. Or.. Maybe MS will add some lens flares to the Office Helper
So how do they measure?
The link didn't work right now so I'll make a guess...
Test must at least include Q3, UT-2004 and 3DMark03, but since these are pretty powerful computers I guess they also use some sort of advanced custom built MineSweeper with like 10.000x10.000 grid playing field or something wild crazy stuff like that.
Maybe 400+ pages Word documents?
Final test is probably Halo for pc. Any fps score above 20 will result in a spot > 100 on the list.
I have a hotmail adress I use from time to time. And I can't say I have experienced much improvement in the spam-handling on my hotmail account.
And what pisses me off, is not all the spam which do reach my inbox, but all the 'real' emails which is put in the 'Junk E-Mail' folder.
"You run what is almost certainly the most spammed mail service in the world and do a better job."
I don't see any relevance here.. What's the difference between one e-mail adress and another one. Or someone running an e-mail service with 100 accounts or 1 million accounts? You can still use the same filtering and software for both, just on a different scale, hardwarewise.
As for the adresses, for a spammer they should be all the same... Or might it be that they know that hotmail adresses have poor spam filtering?
"People, believe it or not, know how to upgrade software."
-no.
Isn't 'uploading' the act of activly uploading something (put data) to someone, while downloading is when you actively download something (get data) from someone.
So someone uploads something to one server so others can download it, at their leasure.
Because, if not, the first thing I would say if RIAA knocked on my door would be: Hey! They uploaded those movies to me! I didn't do anything.
" once called for parking an US aircraft carrier off the coast of france to intimidate them"
Yes! Lets intimidate Europe. I guess we don't have enough nuclear weapons to pass around to even think about standing up against a boat. I bet Russia would be happy to sell a few to another European nation if the price was right.
If the west had just stopped selling their 'old' weapons, we still wouldn't have had any need to make even more sophisticated weapons.
We could instead be spending money on education and increased peace effort in 3rd world contries.
And we should have helped former USSR, when the communist leadership lost control. Instead we suddenly had huge aoumnts of advanced weaponry being shipped all over the place.
-Troll post my ass....
Spend billions and billions of dollars on new weapons.
:) So it's not all bad.
Sell off all the old weapons to foreign nations to get some balance in the budget.
Realise that the weapon you sold are almost as good as the weapon you developed and start all over again researching even better and more deadlier weapons.
Sell off all the old weapons....
And then you have it going. Great profit for those who make weapons tho
You are not an artist. You are just someone trying to make a living. Every word you utter proves it.
:)
"When you watch a movie or listen to a song that you've downloaded, you try to justify not paying for it in any way you can: You tell yourself that it isn't worth the price, or that the artist needs only the enjoyment of making art, or that the real value lies in the cost of reproduction, which is zero."
You haven't understood anything?
If I go to watch a movie or buy a CD I want to enjoy it. It's so simple.
Whatever you say and whatever personal insults you 'hit me with' it all comes down to that.
Problem is that I often go and see a movie and it plain sucks. Take the lates StarWars movies. I don't enjoy it, I hate it. I hate it for having wasted MONEY it, I hate it for wasting TIME on it.
And then along comes someone like you and say I'm arrogant and that this was some work of art and that I should have enjoyed it? How clueless can you be?
You are not an artist, you are someone who don't believe in your own work, you are someone who want to trick, fool, lure and push your product on people.
I downloaded every lord of the rings movie. I also bought the two first extended editions of the LotR. LotR was and is probably the most downloaded movie of all times. By your totally unreal believes and opinions Peter Jackson and his movie company should have lost billions of USD. Did they?! No!!! Because they made a GOOD PRODUCT which can actually stand the trial of being tested before you buy it.
Make a good product and people will buy it. Don't fool yourself like you are doing now.
Ok....
"Work is a resource. Time is a resource."
They are both relative. So it's very hard to measure work and time and then require to get a fair pay. Also, artist do what they think is fun. I train martial-arts because I think it's fun. Never did I believe I would do it because I would get money. Same for artists. (trying to make money of it is a different story)
You say:
"Don't fool yourself into thinking that your actions have no consequences."
Since you say you are a musician, lets try out a simple experiment. I've got one of your songs here. And now I copied it 40 times. On 10 different computers. To 5 different people.
How much did you 'lose'?
Nothing! That's right. Nothing. You don't even know it has happened........
Don't you see? The problem isn't that we won't have new music or that people will stop writing music. Maybe you will stop writing music, but then I don't think it would be a big loss because if that was the case. It's obviously nothing you think is fun if that was to happen....
Where does it say that musician should earn tons of cash or actually be required to earn anything on their music. They are artists. Makers of art. I know artists who has a ordinary job to get money and do their art on their spare time. There is no human right that says you are required to get paid to do what -YOU- want. BUT.....
With that out of the way, lets go over to the important part. The record companies. It's they who start out with a totally wrong image of what group will be buyers. It's they who spend tons of cash on promoting etc. So they are the ones who -NEED- cash and lots of it. And of course, even tho you don't have to make money of your art you sure as hell don't want to see other people making money from your work of art. As I see it here is the problem. Companies getting greedy. Artists seeing that someone is making money but not them and trouble arises.
Remember: People have money. Money which do not get spent have no value. So people will spend money. Just make something that people want and will pay for. But at least have the balls to let people know what they are getting before trying to sell it to them. If not I'll believe you think that your 'product' suck and therefor are trying to fool us into buying it. Current CDs, DVDs, movies and other digital media won't let us, except if we download it.
I've stopped going to the movies, because that's one place I have a hard time getting my money back when the 'product' I bought sucked big time. 4 months ago I actually demanded to get my cash back because the movie wasn't even close to what the trailer promised.
As you said: "Work is a resource. Time is a resource." Well. Those resources aren't worth squat if I don't enjoy your product. Because movies and music I buy for my enjoyment. So if I don't enjoy your product, something is wrong. And it's your product which is at fault. And since enjoyment is relative to we have a big problem.
Too bad you can't see this.
I'll still stand by my statement. When MS has made WinXP it's impossible for them to lose money on it by someone copying it.
This statement is 100% true. No matter how much work went into it or bla bla bla.
"That is utter horseshit."
No, it is not. MS can't lose money on already made versions of Windows.
They can get in a situation where there is a decrease in their potential group of buyers.
Also remember, you won't get any money from people who don't have any money. So if the entire population of Africa pirated WinXP do you think MS would lose much potential income? No.
What am I getting at?
The point is that COMPANIES will make software companies money. If the entire Siemens Corporation was caught using pirated WinXP copies MS would sue them for billions, so they simply don't copy it. They buy it!
In your mind you actually seem to believe that since I copied 3D Studio Release 4 the maker of the program 'lost money' because of decrease in it's potential revenue. But it didn't. I was never in their group of companies/people who they considered their potential revenue.
It's impossible for a software company to lose money once they have their product finished by people copying it. Because it's there. No one is stealing their product.
They are just getting a stream of bytes. Only possible way for someone to lose on this would be if you didn't pay the ISP, which would lose money on their service.
Problem arises tho, when companies start pretending that every living person belong to their potential revenue source. Of course they'll start 'losing money' then. And even more problems surfaces when they start using budgets based on that insane buyer group.
"If shoplifting was as harmless and easy to get away with as trading copyrighted material is, you can sure as hell bet I would get myself some free candy every day, and so would millions of other people."
It's just so very different. If you steal a car or candy, you are actually taking something which have been made by the use of several difference resources, which can -never- be remade/reclaimed and those in charge of making the things won't get anything in return.
If I copy a file from one computer to the other, nothing, absolutely nothing have been wasted. There are no resources that have been spent. No one will go home emptyhanded because they didn't get paid. No one will lose anything on it.
It's impossible for, lets say MS, to lose money on people copying WinXP opposed to someone making cars or mp3 players. Because, once you have made WinXP, it's there. The cost of making one or one billion copies of WinXP is the same. the cost of making you candy increases with every bit made. Same for cars or mp3 players.
Tho I wish MS would enforce their copy protections, because the day everyone would have to pay for every copy of Office and Windows they use, will be the day Linux goes mainstream.
"As a person who used to run several large IIS webservers, i recently set up my own website on Apache. With IIS I had multiple sites with many virtual directories (with vastly different permissions per directory) up and running in about 10 min."
ok.. Here goes:
As a person who run several large Linux/Apache webservers, i recently set up my own website on IIS (just for testing). With Apache I can set up a domain running a webstore + advanced CMS in 5 minutes, capable of holding 1.7million articles, several thousand customers and thousand of visits each day. All running from a $800 computer.
With IIS everything takes a shit-long time to do... Since the option you are trying to find is hidden behind Control Panel->This tab->That tab->Tab II->Tab III->TabIV->New tab->Do you want help with this Tab->Maybe the last tab->.....
Instead of being neatly tucked away in one easy to edit httpd.conf file.
And the httpd.conf is so dead easy to use. Because every option you can edit has some
# help line 1
# help line 2
# help line 3
above it so just by opening the file you get most of the help you need for all the options which are there.
Later on you can just remove the #-lines when you don't need them and have a compact httpd.conf for even easier editing.
Nothing can even compare to having the IIS server go down because some stupid ass GUI dll decided to die on you.
GUI for config file editing is just plain stupid. What's even more stupid is that on Windows you often have several different ways to change settings for programs, say IIS.
Just because you do it, or your friend does it, does not mean that everyone do it.
One in a million!
These notebooks are not for using on your lap while traveling etc.
They are instead excellent replacement for desktop computers which take A LOT of space, have multiple cables running everywhere and most importantly are almost impossible to put away when space is needed for something else. And if need you can take it with you without having to drag with you a keyboard, mouse and several extra cabels.
Right now I use one desktop compter and one Dell Inspiron 8200 (luggable laptop) with 1600x1200 lcd screen and I would love to have two of those or this one.
Or just let the music be free and let people pay for concerts etc.
IMO an artist is someone who makes something because he want to express himself or makes something which the artist himself like.
On a sidenote: It would be funny if politicians made people pay to hear their views on things.
An artis with a huge following would earn a lot of money from doing concerts and selling different kind of mercendise. Also, a burnt CD in the bookself looks really lame.
Why not just let there be a donate button on an artists page, so you could donate money to him if you liked his music. That way you would make it so that the artist didn't have to flip burgers or something and instead make more music for you.
Diversity is what keeps the 'digital world' going. Standards specify how we communcate, but what we do with the information we process is up to the operation system/applications.
What the article suggest is that we should have a 'standard' ways of doing this, "standard software patches". Now what if someone breaks that standard and introduces a bug/backdoor a standard patch which everyone will recieve? We'll have a situation much worse that what can possible happen today.
"The federal government will mandate that users must authenticate their identity to access the Internet itself"
-Wow! Only one place 'to hit' to deny access for everyone to the internet.
What if I identify myself as someone else? Of course it will happen, then someone can wreak havoc and later the innocent neighbor will be arrested because:
'It was him, without doubt, that did all this and that on the internet. Proof? We have logs which clearly showes the perpetrator logging on to the net'
Standards and centralizing is what will bring us a 'digital Perl Harbor' (what a stupid name).
Norway was neutral!!
Obviously it wouldn't take much of an effort to capture it. In comparison to France which DID declare war on Germany, and long before Germany invaded France.
God damn, your comparison suck!
I don't see how you can even compare those two things.
One country declaring war on someone, then doing virtually nothing, just sitting at it's boarders firing a gun once or twice. Then when the germans DID attack, just to be conquered in a flash. France WAS at war with Germany, and the french had generals saying 'We don't fire upon them since they aren't doing anything wrong...' Oviously they had forgotten they had declared war.
Norway, on the other side, declaring itself neutral, which it was under WW-I, then getting 'attacked' by the allies and also having the allies laying mines down it's costline, at the same time a HUGE german invasion force moving to attack.
Yup.
As for Poland, some countries guarnteed it's safety... France and England. Did they do anything when Poland was attacked? No! Nothing. Or... They started dropping leaflets on German cities, telling the germans that 'war is a generally bad idea'.
FRANCE declared war on Germany, then proceeded to do nothing before it was conquered in a stunningly short time. You can't compare it to anything.
There was France in the second world war, and then there were a lot of other countries being conquered, but only France f'ed it up SO bad and had the ability to actually do something, should have done something, was actually obligated to do something, but failed miserably at everything.
You're right.. Just before I made the post I was reading another post by someone about how good it was that this case was at last at it's end.
So I misinterpreted what I read.