I mispoke (although some believe that King James did have slight altercates installed into the translation.
At any rate it seems that all christians are not in agreement about which books are or are not in the bible.
There are many who believe that parts of the bible have been corrupted by various parties. And before you discount them all as 'wackjobs' I'd like to point out that Muslims hold this belief as well.
Then there are the matter of the omitted books. The argument against which is 'well, God wanted the bible to be rearranged.' Ya, ok.
One way to look at it is this: If there is a God, and you believe he created the Laws of physics and chemistry and the entire universe, then WHAT reason would God have to break his own laws?
But supposedly he did; or at least let his son. Jesus turned water into wine, created bread out of nothing and walked on water.
Interesting, since we KNOW that King James REWROTE parts of the bible that didn't fit with his ideas. Yet people claim that the Bible cannot have been altered by man for his own purposes...
The truth is that we are probably better off with no new laws at all. Let the companies who screw with traffic go broke, and let the market force neutral access and not the government.
So if AT&T tries this and slows Google's packets, who exactly do I switch to if my only choices are Comcast and Verizon? Who does Google switch to if their only choices are Bell South or Qwest?
Basically DSL was a money hole (at least in 2003)... You'd often pour $1,000 to get a single customer up and running with the installation and fixing all their line problems and finding the load coils and everything else that could go wrong (and even then some of it wouldn't work).
That is why we held this "contractual agreement" over a customers head and threatened them with a big fat cancelation fee if they canceled their service.
So, basically the telcos sold something they really couldn't provide, and that's the justfication for locking you into a contract?
You don't think cable companies need to do line tests and what not? We had them come out once because our internet stated going flaky after they line to the cable modem was hooked up to an amplifier (which they later discovered filtered out 'noise' which was actually signal). It took them quite a few tests before they figured out what was going on.
Lets not forget the reason we needed the amp in the first place; the higher frequencies weren't reaching us as well, so we weren't able to use the VOD they just rolled out.
AT&T's complaint is that they have to carry this traffic for free across their network, and get nothing from this particular transaction.
Except that they are getting paid; they are charging the two networks which AT&T connects. Of course they in turn charge AT&T back, so they may not be making a profit on it.
No, the physical copy was owned by the people who financied the artist.
Which is what I said.
The information within was free to be copied by anyone, and it could then be freely sold.
Were there laws to prevent them from keeping the books to themselves? If not, how many books were lost because they kept it to themselves?
Furthermore, literacy in Rome was quite high, and authors such as Catullus and Martial were known to the general populce, and so your idea that copyright is necessary to keep art from belonging to some elite is silly.
Again, how are you sure that every book financed was allowed to be copied?
Also, you forget that books aren't the only form of art. How well did this method work for sculptures, paintings, music, etc? Did people at the time flock to copy David? Are you even sure that all paintings were put on display for everyone to enjoy? Or did many end up hanging on someone's wall, where only their guests could see them?
I'm sure there's alot of great art that was lost because it had only one owner.
Finally, I have this point. If i work months or even years to write a great book, why should I get a one time payment, but the publisher gets revenue for every copy sold? Making copies is the easy part, yet publishers are the ones that benefit most from a good book under your model. How is that at all fair?
Simple, it's spyware. Winblow$ is the only inoperable system that requires product activation. I avoid anything that requires activation.
I see. I guess filling out product registration forms for games or other software isn't the same thing at all. Wait its not, since WPA doesn't collect any personal information. That's some spyware, it doesn't even get to know you're name!
Well, let's see, Winblow$ 98 to 98SE or ME, Winblow$ 2000 to Winblow$ XP, Winblow$ 9x to XP, Winblow$ 2000/xp to either Winblow$ 2003 or Vista.
Oh of course, these were just security enhancements, nothing more. No new features, just the same thing over and over again. You really have no clue, do you? And of course you argue your case in such an adult manner I don't know how I'll go on rebutting you...
Yeah, to suck all of the life out of OSS, especially Linux. I can just see it now, they "co-operate" with the Open Source community, they take code from Linux, change it just a little bit, then release it in Windows and claim that it was 'stolen' from them.
Because of course there's no way that they realize that Linux is a serious server contender, and they don't want someone to decide Linux xor Windows. I'm sure they'd rather have 0 servers instead of half of them, given the choice. Oh, and when has MS claimed that Linux stole source code from Windows?
I wouldn't put anything past those fucktards just so they can keep their monopoly.
Monopoly or not, every business wants to 1) become an 'industry leader' and 2) stay there. You think any other company is different?
The biggest reason why they're being sued in the first place is because they're a convicted monopoly, as such they should be denied the privilege to do business anywhere.
And you think firing their legal department would protect them from lawsuits? Hint: they had lawyers before the DOJ case, and they would still have lawyers even if the DOJ case never was. You honestly think that any lawsuit is or would be because they are a monopoly? That's just plain stupid, sorry.
Just like you are doing to the grandparent post? Yes, you are doing nothing but bitching and trolling like a typical Micro$hit winblow$ fanboy that is obviously too stupid to even exist let alone use a computer.
Funny, because you're acting like a typical 13 year old Linux fanboy that really doesn't have any reason behind his beliefs and that ignores any valid critisms of Linux. Of course, since I am such a fanboy, I ran Linux on my desktop exclusively for 5 years (except on my laptop, because Linux didn't have network drivers for my wireless card). Also being such a good MS fanboy, I ran a Linux server in my home since, oh, 1998 until just a few months ago.
I guess I should tell my boss that he's too stupid to exist, since he runs Windows on all our servers and desktops. And I'll tell that all the other successful businesses that run Windows, especially my last employer, who CHOSE to move from Novell to Windows.
One of the reasons why I use ubuntu is because it's being distributed by a tech company that is run by geeks.
Ya, I'm sure they have no lawyers, and no business minded people. If they don't, I'm willing to bet they won't be around long. I know how to build complex software systems, but I'm not going to claim I know how to run my own business.
Stop treating me like a criminal -- get rid of WPA.
Just curious, when a game does something similar, do you get all pissy about that too? WPA isn't that big a deal, honestly. What has it prevented you from doing?
Stop treating me like a criminal -- get rid of DRM (and the whole "trusted" thing).
Rest assured that if it wasn't for Hollywood, I don't think MS would be trying to do DRM at all. Put the blame where it belongs. MS is reacting to fear that they won't be able to allow users to play DVDs on Windows (a pretty ligit concern, I would have to say).
Stop behaving like a criminal -- get out of the "protection racket" by forcing me to pay money to make Windows secure.
Um, excuse me? All of their security updates are free, even if you pirated thier stuff.
Stop behaving like a criminal -- play fairly with other companies.
That seems to be what they are doing in this case.
I think that a good first step would be to fire the entire legal department.
And what exactly would they do when everyone tries to sue them? I've never worked for a company that didn't have a lawyer on hand.
Let a tech company be run by geeks. If they do all of this, they might get me back as a happy paying customer.
Doubtful. More than likely you'll find something else to bitch about.
Your basic criminal knows this because it's been popularized on TV and in popular culture over the past 30 years. The reason Miranda Rights originally started being read to people being arrested is because some people DIDN'T know they had them.
Ok, fair enough.
so they must be aware that Federal level overrules state. That is not always true, and actually, is false far more often than it is true. The Federal government is only supposed to overrule the states in very limited instances.
I think we've hit the 'how things are' vs. 'how things should' be line. I'm aware the Feds are supposed to have limited authority, but unfortunatly that's now how it is. It seems that if there is a conflict between state and federal laws, the federal level ends up trumping the state. Believe me I wish that were not the case, but it does seem to be.
These days, with the consequences of activist Supreme Court judges over the past 200 years, the Federal government holds alot more power than it was originally designed to, but even still many decisions are still in state hands, not Federal hands.
I don't think I agree here; I think that the state vs. federal goverment power shift occurred with the amendment to directly elect senators by the people, not the state level legilstator. Which means that no one in the Federal congress represents the interests of the state; they pander instead to the people (who already have representation via the House). I think the purpose of the Senate was supposed to be that they were to keep power in the states because the framers understood everyone involved would be vying for more power. The Senate was the check against the federal goverments power.
And the thing is, because of the endless list of laws designed to assert Federal power in the past 50 years, it has gotten so confusing to determine where the Federal government ends and the states begin, that no common layperson could really make sense of it.
While the layperson may not understand it, lawyers do know to look in the state codes or federal codes. So hopefully all is not lost. I would think that most people are aware if something is a state or federal law, since at least some live on the border to other states (for example, everyone knows sales tax is a state by state thing; hence the people in PA going into DE to buy expensive items).
And this is exactly how the states and the Federals like it. It means that your common citizen is ill equipped to challenge the authority of any government entity, because they don't have a clear view of their own rights and the powers of the government. And governments love it when you weaken a citizen's ability to defend themselves. Makes their job so much easier.
Unfortunatly I have to agree with you here. But I think they key to getting power back into the hands of the State (where each individual has a much greater influence) would be to give state governments direct representation, as they were supposed to have.
For thousands of years, art was considered a public resource that anyone could have
No, I don't think so. For thousands of years, the aristocrats and kings or other rulers commisioned artists to create the art. It was owned by the people that financed the artist.
Going back to your first statement, why are live performances any different? In the time before recordings, this was most certainly a 'pay per play' way to hear music. I'm infering from your statement that the painter must sell his work for only the cost of the paint and canvas. Why shouldn't he be able to demand a higher price for it? Especially since thousands of years ago it was really 'one of a kind.'
It was only in the last couple of centuries, in only Western Europe, that the concept of copyright appeared, and though international treaties imposed by the West have spread it, it is justly repulsive to much of the world.
You do realize that without copyright, there'd be only a very small group of people to enjoy the work of DaVinci and Picaso, right? The painter would only be able to sell one copy, and if the buyer doesn't want to share, well, you're just SOL. Or would you rather the painter to now, instead of selling exactly one copy, to be able to sell none (since as soon as he is done, you can produce infinite copies today)? Why would someone devote the time necessary to become a great artist if they now have no way to even feed themselves?
Information wants to be free, this is self-evident to rational people.
Information is a concept, not a living being, and thus cannot want anything. This is self-evident to any sane person.
Please, stop repeating catchy but meaningless statements. You're not going to convience anyone by attempting to paint opponents to your view point as irrational. You may not think copyright is rational, but that doesn't mean you're right (or rational, for that matter). Believe me, I think current copyright goes way too far, but I don't think the answer is to just remove it either.
FWIW, the founders specifically said that congress could control copyright. Are you implying they were not rational people?
Yes, I've installed exactly one patch that messed something up. It wasn't for server though, it was for WinXP. And it messed up something with ASP.Net. It took a bit of time, but I eventually found how to fix ASP.Net.
As a final note, I'd like to add in that of the 25 developers all running the same OS and hardware, there were only two of us that had this problem.
Then the parent can block the kids ability to install stuff. Then they get oversight on what games or other software will be installed.
As an added benefit, the computer will have one less vector for a virus to come in... the computer gets a virus because the parent did somethign stupid, the kid can't though.
Very few American citizens are actually aware of that fact
I dunno, I find that extremely hard to believe. Even your basic criminal knows it gives him the right to silence, to an attorney, etc.
I'd love to see a study which tests this, but there are just so many times that federal law (not even the Constitution) tramples over state law. People are aware of that, so they must be aware that Federal level overrules state.
In Ubuntu I click Applications->Add/Remove, check some boxes, click "OK" and the software gets installed. The default installation isn't just a media player and web browser, either.
There's more than a medial play in Windows too; there's an email program, a couple of game, etc.
Its funny; Linux lovers bash MS for bloat, than turn around and claim that Linux comes with everything by default.
No, because in a vast majority of cases you have drivers bundled along with the distribution or not available at all. From your tone I presume you've walked into an unfortunate case akin to what I went through with WinModems a few years ago.
You would be correct; my USB printer fell into the 'not at all' category.
But as you said, the fact that driver hackers don't have specifications and vendors don't provide their own drivers is hardly something the distribution builder can resolve.
I realize that; however, what I think many Linux lovers forget is that they don't care whose fault it is that their printer doesn't work, they just want it to work. I do like Linux, honestly. I still have a box or two running it, but its more to tinker, and not to use as a server or desktop.
It works the other way around, too: I have a few pieces of just slightly older USB hardware that will never work with 64-bit builds of Windows due to lack of vendor support, but function happily with the default installation of the AMD64 version of Ubuntu.
I realize that too. I'm not expecting windows xp drivers for my ISA Soundblaster or video card. But for something I bought only a few months ago, I do. Anything hardware wise you can buy today, you can be sure there will be XP drivers. Unfortunatly, its not the same for Linux.
I do like Linux, and I really wanted it to become my desktop, but the hit or miss hardware support, endless reading piles and piles of documentation, and the KDE rot that seems to occur caused me to dump it.
the fact that you have to romp through driver discs and various web sites just to get your hardware supported
Yes, having the hardware come with a CD that contains the necessary drivers is the same as not having any drivers at all. FWIW, I don't have to 'go romping through websites' to get my drivers. They come on discs. To get updates I go to the manufacturers website and download and install them. I don't need to go to some third party website and download a driver written by Joe Linux Developer.
then go through the same again for applications to actually be able to do something useful speaks volumes of its own
Again, I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. Usually I just insert the disc and install, and my application is up and running. Again, updates I may have to pull of the web from the vendor. But I don't need to go update some library which itself requires other libraries to be updated, etc. etc. Usually there's a simple 'Update' option in the program. Can you elaborate please on which applications require you to go through more effort than running the installer?
Deployment-wise Linux is already ahead, and usability-wise it's really a matter of training.
What exactly are you refering to? Installing Windows on a new machine? Installing applications on the OS? How is it a matter of training if there are no drivers AT ALL for my printer?
I wouldn't buy a printer blind even if I were a Windows user. As a Linux user "some list" enables me to vote with my wallet and choose a vendor who sees fit to provide me with service.
Can you name a printer that comes without Windows drivers? You need to research the features of your printer, yes, but once you buy it, you know it will work with Windows. The same can't be said for Linux. A printer isn't a service, its a product. So if you're fine looking through lists to see which printer does what you want AND is known to work on windows, that's your choice. But don't tell me its easier than purchasing a printer for Windows.
Possibly not, but then again he might be able to use the same data with some other application. Speaking as a person with nil experience about accounting software, here.
Yes, Wine. A steaming pile. Believe me, I tried it too, and I ran into more problems than successes. It doesn't quite 'just work' as running the application on windows will. I even paid for the version from Transgaming. I didn't have much success running games either.
I used GNUCash. Its not on par with Quicken or MS Money. Also add in the nice lack of a useful export function, and lets just say I won't go back. It was easy to convert TO GNUCash, but I had to leave my data behind when I decided to leave GNUCash. That's right, there's no way to export your transactions to ODF or QIF. At least if I wanted to go back to Quicken, there is an easy way to do so.
That said, I do sympathize with the parents who are begginb for bills like this because they can't get retailers to cooperate. They're trying to raise their kids without the rest of the world making it easy for those kids to get their hands on things they may not be mature enough to see.
If its tough to raise kids, well, too bad. Who ever said that it should (or must) be easy? How many kids have the $50 to buy a game, plus the $129+ to buy the console to begin with. If parents have a problem with video games, take away the stupid consoles.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would your company adapt vista premium anyway? It includes features targeted at home users..
Doesn't full speed mean USB 1.1?
You can consider them wackjobs if you also include Christians and Jewish people under the same category.
I mispoke (although some believe that King James did have slight altercates installed into the translation.
At any rate it seems that all christians are not in agreement about which books are or are not in the bible.
There are many who believe that parts of the bible have been corrupted by various parties. And before you discount them all as 'wackjobs' I'd like to point out that Muslims hold this belief as well.
Then there are the matter of the omitted books. The argument against which is 'well, God wanted the bible to be rearranged.' Ya, ok.
One way to look at it is this: If there is a God, and you believe he created the Laws of physics and chemistry and the entire universe, then WHAT reason would God have to break his own laws?
But supposedly he did; or at least let his son. Jesus turned water into wine, created bread out of nothing and walked on water.
If it is in their KJV bible it is true
Interesting, since we KNOW that King James REWROTE parts of the bible that didn't fit with his ideas. Yet people claim that the Bible cannot have been altered by man for his own purposes...
Except that Vista will not install drivers which don't have the logo (meaning, they drivers aren't signed).
I'm concerned that if it's released too soon, it might not be certified to work on Windows Vista.
I thought I'd have to dust of my copy of Win3.11 to play it.
The truth is that we are probably better off with no new laws at all. Let the companies who screw with traffic go broke, and let the market force neutral access and not the government.
So if AT&T tries this and slows Google's packets, who exactly do I switch to if my only choices are Comcast and Verizon? Who does Google switch to if their only choices are Bell South or Qwest?
THATS why we need the law enforcing neutrality.
Basically DSL was a money hole (at least in 2003)... You'd often pour $1,000 to get a single customer up and running with the installation and fixing all their line problems and finding the load coils and everything else that could go wrong (and even then some of it wouldn't work).
That is why we held this "contractual agreement" over a customers head and threatened them with a big fat cancelation fee if they canceled their service.
So, basically the telcos sold something they really couldn't provide, and that's the justfication for locking you into a contract?
You don't think cable companies need to do line tests and what not? We had them come out once because our internet stated going flaky after they line to the cable modem was hooked up to an amplifier (which they later discovered filtered out 'noise' which was actually signal). It took them quite a few tests before they figured out what was going on.
Lets not forget the reason we needed the amp in the first place; the higher frequencies weren't reaching us as well, so we weren't able to use the VOD they just rolled out.
AT&T's complaint is that they have to carry this traffic for free across their network, and get nothing from this particular transaction.
Except that they are getting paid; they are charging the two networks which AT&T connects. Of course they in turn charge AT&T back, so they may not be making a profit on it.
No, the physical copy was owned by the people who financied the artist.
Which is what I said.
The information within was free to be copied by anyone, and it could then be freely sold.
Were there laws to prevent them from keeping the books to themselves? If not, how many books were lost because they kept it to themselves?
Furthermore, literacy in Rome was quite high, and authors such as Catullus and Martial were known to the general populce, and so your idea that copyright is necessary to keep art from belonging to some elite is silly.
Again, how are you sure that every book financed was allowed to be copied?
Also, you forget that books aren't the only form of art. How well did this method work for sculptures, paintings, music, etc? Did people at the time flock to copy David? Are you even sure that all paintings were put on display for everyone to enjoy? Or did many end up hanging on someone's wall, where only their guests could see them?
I'm sure there's alot of great art that was lost because it had only one owner.
Finally, I have this point. If i work months or even years to write a great book, why should I get a one time payment, but the publisher gets revenue for every copy sold? Making copies is the easy part, yet publishers are the ones that benefit most from a good book under your model. How is that at all fair?
Simple, it's spyware. Winblow$ is the only inoperable system that requires product activation. I avoid anything that requires activation.
I see. I guess filling out product registration forms for games or other software isn't the same thing at all. Wait its not, since WPA doesn't collect any personal information. That's some spyware, it doesn't even get to know you're name!
Well, let's see, Winblow$ 98 to 98SE or ME, Winblow$ 2000 to Winblow$ XP, Winblow$ 9x to XP, Winblow$ 2000/xp to either Winblow$ 2003 or Vista.
Oh of course, these were just security enhancements, nothing more. No new features, just the same thing over and over again. You really have no clue, do you? And of course you argue your case in such an adult manner I don't know how I'll go on rebutting you...
Yeah, to suck all of the life out of OSS, especially Linux. I can just see it now, they "co-operate" with the Open Source community, they take code from Linux, change it just a little bit, then release it in Windows and claim that it was 'stolen' from them.
Because of course there's no way that they realize that Linux is a serious server contender, and they don't want someone to decide Linux xor Windows. I'm sure they'd rather have 0 servers instead of half of them, given the choice. Oh, and when has MS claimed that Linux stole source code from Windows?
I wouldn't put anything past those fucktards just so they can keep their monopoly.
Monopoly or not, every business wants to 1) become an 'industry leader' and 2) stay there. You think any other company is different?
The biggest reason why they're being sued in the first place is because they're a convicted monopoly, as such they should be denied the privilege to do business anywhere.
And you think firing their legal department would protect them from lawsuits? Hint: they had lawyers before the DOJ case, and they would still have lawyers even if the DOJ case never was. You honestly think that any lawsuit is or would be because they are a monopoly? That's just plain stupid, sorry.
Just like you are doing to the grandparent post? Yes, you are doing nothing but bitching and trolling like a typical Micro$hit winblow$ fanboy that is obviously too stupid to even exist let alone use a computer.
Funny, because you're acting like a typical 13 year old Linux fanboy that really doesn't have any reason behind his beliefs and that ignores any valid critisms of Linux. Of course, since I am such a fanboy, I ran Linux on my desktop exclusively for 5 years (except on my laptop, because Linux didn't have network drivers for my wireless card). Also being such a good MS fanboy, I ran a Linux server in my home since, oh, 1998 until just a few months ago.
I guess I should tell my boss that he's too stupid to exist, since he runs Windows on all our servers and desktops. And I'll tell that all the other successful businesses that run Windows, especially my last employer, who CHOSE to move from Novell to Windows.
One of the reasons why I use ubuntu is because it's being distributed by a tech company that is run by geeks.
Ya, I'm sure they have no lawyers, and no business minded people. If they don't, I'm willing to bet they won't be around long. I know how to build complex software systems, but I'm not going to claim I know how to run my own business.
We have too many lawyers because we have too many laws. Eliminate the excess laws, and we'll have less lawyers as a side effect.
Stop treating me like a criminal -- get rid of WPA.
Just curious, when a game does something similar, do you get all pissy about that too? WPA isn't that big a deal, honestly. What has it prevented you from doing?
Stop treating me like a criminal -- get rid of DRM (and the whole "trusted" thing).
Rest assured that if it wasn't for Hollywood, I don't think MS would be trying to do DRM at all. Put the blame where it belongs. MS is reacting to fear that they won't be able to allow users to play DVDs on Windows (a pretty ligit concern, I would have to say).
Stop behaving like a criminal -- get out of the "protection racket" by forcing me to pay money to make Windows secure.
Um, excuse me? All of their security updates are free, even if you pirated thier stuff.
Stop behaving like a criminal -- play fairly with other companies.
That seems to be what they are doing in this case.
I think that a good first step would be to fire the entire legal department.
And what exactly would they do when everyone tries to sue them? I've never worked for a company that didn't have a lawyer on hand.
Let a tech company be run by geeks.
If they do all of this, they might get me back as a happy paying customer.
Doubtful. More than likely you'll find something else to bitch about.
Your basic criminal knows this because it's been popularized on TV and in popular culture over the past 30 years. The reason Miranda Rights originally started being read to people being arrested is because some people DIDN'T know they had them.
Ok, fair enough.
so they must be aware that Federal level overrules state.
That is not always true, and actually, is false far more often than it is true. The Federal government is only supposed to overrule the states in very limited instances.
I think we've hit the 'how things are' vs. 'how things should' be line. I'm aware the Feds are supposed to have limited authority, but unfortunatly that's now how it is. It seems that if there is a conflict between state and federal laws, the federal level ends up trumping the state. Believe me I wish that were not the case, but it does seem to be.
These days, with the consequences of activist Supreme Court judges over the past 200 years, the Federal government holds alot more power than it was originally designed to, but even still many decisions are still in state hands, not Federal hands.
I don't think I agree here; I think that the state vs. federal goverment power shift occurred with the amendment to directly elect senators by the people, not the state level legilstator. Which means that no one in the Federal congress represents the interests of the state; they pander instead to the people (who already have representation via the House). I think the purpose of the Senate was supposed to be that they were to keep power in the states because the framers understood everyone involved would be vying for more power. The Senate was the check against the federal goverments power.
And the thing is, because of the endless list of laws designed to assert Federal power in the past 50 years, it has gotten so confusing to determine where the Federal government ends and the states begin, that no common layperson could really make sense of it.
While the layperson may not understand it, lawyers do know to look in the state codes or federal codes. So hopefully all is not lost. I would think that most people are aware if something is a state or federal law, since at least some live on the border to other states (for example, everyone knows sales tax is a state by state thing; hence the people in PA going into DE to buy expensive items).
And this is exactly how the states and the Federals like it. It means that your common citizen is ill equipped to challenge the authority of any government entity, because they don't have a clear view of their own rights and the powers of the government. And governments love it when you weaken a citizen's ability to defend themselves. Makes their job so much easier.
Unfortunatly I have to agree with you here. But I think they key to getting power back into the hands of the State (where each individual has a much greater influence) would be to give state governments direct representation, as they were supposed to have.
For thousands of years, art was considered a public resource that anyone could have
No, I don't think so. For thousands of years, the aristocrats and kings or other rulers commisioned artists to create the art. It was owned by the people that financed the artist.
Going back to your first statement, why are live performances any different? In the time before recordings, this was most certainly a 'pay per play' way to hear music. I'm infering from your statement that the painter must sell his work for only the cost of the paint and canvas. Why shouldn't he be able to demand a higher price for it? Especially since thousands of years ago it was really 'one of a kind.'
It was only in the last couple of centuries, in only Western Europe, that the concept of copyright appeared, and though international treaties imposed by the West have spread it, it is justly repulsive to much of the world.
You do realize that without copyright, there'd be only a very small group of people to enjoy the work of DaVinci and Picaso, right? The painter would only be able to sell one copy, and if the buyer doesn't want to share, well, you're just SOL. Or would you rather the painter to now, instead of selling exactly one copy, to be able to sell none (since as soon as he is done, you can produce infinite copies today)? Why would someone devote the time necessary to become a great artist if they now have no way to even feed themselves?
Information wants to be free, this is self-evident to rational people.
Information is a concept, not a living being, and thus cannot want anything. This is self-evident to any sane person.
Please, stop repeating catchy but meaningless statements. You're not going to convience anyone by attempting to paint opponents to your view point as irrational. You may not think copyright is rational, but that doesn't mean you're right (or rational, for that matter). Believe me, I think current copyright goes way too far, but I don't think the answer is to just remove it either.
FWIW, the founders specifically said that congress could control copyright. Are you implying they were not rational people?
All software must be free as in freedom as well.
Sorry but, no, it doesn't. Would you claim musicians MUST perform for free? Painters MUST give away their work? Didn't think so.
Yes, I've installed exactly one patch that messed something up. It wasn't for server though, it was for WinXP. And it messed up something with ASP.Net. It took a bit of time, but I eventually found how to fix ASP.Net.
As a final note, I'd like to add in that of the 25 developers all running the same OS and hardware, there were only two of us that had this problem.
I HAVE to lower my expectations to use Linux? Well, good luck pusing Linux with that attitude.
There's a reason people choose to buy a washing machine, dryer and dishwasher, even though the alternative is more or less 'free.'
Then the parent can block the kids ability to install stuff. Then they get oversight on what games or other software will be installed.
As an added benefit, the computer will have one less vector for a virus to come in... the computer gets a virus because the parent did somethign stupid, the kid can't though.
Very few American citizens are actually aware of that fact
I dunno, I find that extremely hard to believe. Even your basic criminal knows it gives him the right to silence, to an attorney, etc.
I'd love to see a study which tests this, but there are just so many times that federal law (not even the Constitution) tramples over state law. People are aware of that, so they must be aware that Federal level overrules state.
In Ubuntu I click Applications->Add/Remove, check some boxes, click "OK" and the software gets installed. The default installation isn't just a media player and web browser, either.
There's more than a medial play in Windows too; there's an email program, a couple of game, etc.
Its funny; Linux lovers bash MS for bloat, than turn around and claim that Linux comes with everything by default.
No, because in a vast majority of cases you have drivers bundled along with the distribution or not available at all. From your tone I presume you've walked into an unfortunate case akin to what I went through with WinModems a few years ago.
You would be correct; my USB printer fell into the 'not at all' category.
But as you said, the fact that driver hackers don't have specifications and vendors don't provide their own drivers is hardly something the distribution builder can resolve.
I realize that; however, what I think many Linux lovers forget is that they don't care whose fault it is that their printer doesn't work, they just want it to work. I do like Linux, honestly. I still have a box or two running it, but its more to tinker, and not to use as a server or desktop.
It works the other way around, too: I have a few pieces of just slightly older USB hardware that will never work with 64-bit builds of Windows due to lack of vendor support, but function happily with the default installation of the AMD64 version of Ubuntu.
I realize that too. I'm not expecting windows xp drivers for my ISA Soundblaster or video card. But for something I bought only a few months ago, I do. Anything hardware wise you can buy today, you can be sure there will be XP drivers. Unfortunatly, its not the same for Linux.
I do like Linux, and I really wanted it to become my desktop, but the hit or miss hardware support, endless reading piles and piles of documentation, and the KDE rot that seems to occur caused me to dump it.
the fact that you have to romp through driver discs and various web sites just to get your hardware supported
Yes, having the hardware come with a CD that contains the necessary drivers is the same as not having any drivers at all. FWIW, I don't have to 'go romping through websites' to get my drivers. They come on discs. To get updates I go to the manufacturers website and download and install them. I don't need to go to some third party website and download a driver written by Joe Linux Developer.
then go through the same again for applications to actually be able to do something useful speaks volumes of its own
Again, I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. Usually I just insert the disc and install, and my application is up and running. Again, updates I may have to pull of the web from the vendor. But I don't need to go update some library which itself requires other libraries to be updated, etc. etc. Usually there's a simple 'Update' option in the program. Can you elaborate please on which applications require you to go through more effort than running the installer?
Deployment-wise Linux is already ahead, and usability-wise it's really a matter of training.
What exactly are you refering to? Installing Windows on a new machine? Installing applications on the OS? How is it a matter of training if there are no drivers AT ALL for my printer?
I wouldn't buy a printer blind even if I were a Windows user. As a Linux user "some list" enables me to vote with my wallet and choose a vendor who sees fit to provide me with service.
Can you name a printer that comes without Windows drivers? You need to research the features of your printer, yes, but once you buy it, you know it will work with Windows. The same can't be said for Linux. A printer isn't a service, its a product. So if you're fine looking through lists to see which printer does what you want AND is known to work on windows, that's your choice. But don't tell me its easier than purchasing a printer for Windows.
Possibly not, but then again he might be able to use the same data with some other application. Speaking as a person with nil experience about accounting software, here.
Yes, Wine. A steaming pile. Believe me, I tried it too, and I ran into more problems than successes. It doesn't quite 'just work' as running the application on windows will. I even paid for the version from Transgaming. I didn't have much success running games either.
I used GNUCash. Its not on par with Quicken or MS Money. Also add in the nice lack of a useful export function, and lets just say I won't go back. It was easy to convert TO GNUCash, but I had to leave my data behind when I decided to leave GNUCash. That's right, there's no way to export your transactions to ODF or QIF. At least if I wanted to go back to Quicken, there is an easy way to do so.
That said, I do sympathize with the parents who are begginb for bills like this because they can't get retailers to cooperate. They're trying to raise their kids without the rest of the world making it easy for those kids to get their hands on things they may not be mature enough to see.
If its tough to raise kids, well, too bad. Who ever said that it should (or must) be easy? How many kids have the $50 to buy a game, plus the $129+ to buy the console to begin with. If parents have a problem with video games, take away the stupid consoles.