nightmare on elm street and a single, common (is spain, anyway) word are two slightly different things. I think i'll trademark 'the' and then no one could use it.
How do you trademark (i thought a mark was a symbol or something) a word of a language? Even Word needs the Microsoft before it. Diablo is spanish i believe for devil...how can that be a trademark, especially in Spain?!
Actually i've found cable modemto be pretty nice...it would be my prefered internet connection, ifi had it back home. I doubt DSL is dying a horrible death, but here anyway, DSL is only a thrid of what the cable modem is, at the same price. But if it were all i could get, i may do that.
When was the last time you saw an ad for something that was truely new and unique? Alot of the best products i know about i discovered via word of mouth. Even the new Cingular (sp?) phone company i don't really care about. To me its just another crappy cell phone provider. Verizon advertises with 'people want to be free.' From personal experience, i know this not to be the case (which is why i'm dumping them). Cingular says they value personal expression...why should ithink that any different?
And no, most of us do not have broadband by now. Most of us are using modems, and will be for quite some time. Take a look at normal people, not the close circle of your friends...
By the way, no one cares that you don't own a car or television. The only reason i can think thta you would even meantion that non-issue is b/c you're trying to see like you are 'holier then thou.' Unfortunatly not owning a car or tv doesn't make you any better then anyone else. And just as we do not care that you don't own these things, neither do any corporations.
great, let's block those ads! it's my God-given right to have free Internet content!
Actually to me its 'Hmm some company wants to use the bandwidth I paid for to deliver something i don't want. They're giving the content away for free, i never said they had to do it. They can always become a pay site if they like. But right now they are free, so i'll take what i want, and ignore/block the rest. Just like i never watch commercials on tv (when i do watch tv, that is). Do you think thats wrong? Do i have some kind of obligation to watch the commercials on tv b/c i'm watching a program i like? Would it be wrong for me to use the commercial skip button i have on my vcr?
and not so that we can add better functionality and improve the product, but so that we can port it to Linux (ie, steal it)
Porting to linux may be considered a derivitive work, which i think is allowed under copyright. Besides, what would they be stealing if the original author has no intention of porting it to linux themselves? Besides, i don't know where this has been done. Most open source things i've seen are for linux to begin with. The 'stolen products' you describe aren't usually ports at all. They are written from the ground up, yes possiblly to provide the same functionality as a commercial product, but they are hardly stolen. Would you say that GM is stealing from Ford for building something of their own but offers the same functionality of a car? Hardly. I believe thats called competition.
At any rate, please tell me something that was open sourced (and not already on linux) and promptly ported to linux.
we have a right to free music and movies!
You seem to thing that musicians and movie makers have a right to be paid for what they do. It wasn't always like that however. Before the record companies, musicans played hoping to get tips. If you liked them, you could tip them. But surely you don't think that everyone that liked the musician tipped him, do you? So where they morally wrong? If i did tip him, was i also paying for the failing musician? Things are different now with the record labels. They say on one hand if i want to listen, i have to pay, yet on the other hand they get thier music played over the radio, which i could record for free. At any rate, i was born with ears and eyes, and i have a right to use them.
people here have gone way beyond that into a "me! me! me!" attitude that make middle-age yuppies look like ghandi.
So tell me, you think its normal for people to WANT to pay for anything? If people can get something for free, don't you think they would take advantage of that? Of course i don't want to pay for my OS; and there's one there for free. Whats wrong with me taking that? Getting stuff for free only becomes wrong with you are stealing it.
Besides, did you ever stop to think this 'everything for free' attitude is a direct result of being subjected to the corporate attitude enacted by the middle agged yuppies of 'screw every last dime out of them?' Most buisness today isn't about making a better product; its about locking people in. Its 'we will offer these shitty services no one will want at a low price, and offer the service they do want at a high price.'
I hear you on the tv thing. Even shows that i love like the simpsons or the x-files (which was very good last sunday also) i can barely watch b/c the ads take too long to get through. It seems i spend more time being bored and annoyed by commercials then i do enjoying the show.
I dont think the web is that bad yet, and i can block it in realtime (unlike tv). But then i also use the internet for more then just web browsering, so that could have something to do with it.
I dunno, i kinda doubt they are useful. I've found most advertising anywhere to be A) something i already know about, and B) something i could care less about.
I can't afford a sun computer, and if I had to buy one for my company, i'd just go to sun's site. So the ads serve little purpose. The only ads that are any good tell me about something new. And with the exception of game ads, those are rare.
Ya i hate those fucking ads in icq. Actually the lastest version got rid of adds on the message window..but they're stil there on the file xfer and some other ones.
I'd hate to have icq slow down b/c it needs to download an ad...if it gets any worse, i'm going to dump icq.
There are already a couple of these things. A similar tank is in the Western US, also underground. Japan is going about it in a different way.
As far as whether they have mass or not; giving them a small mass does explain why they detect far less of these guys then if they were purely massless. I think right now the most being detected is like 40% of what they expect; adding mass brings that percentage up significatly. It was a Russian scienentist that came up with that part of the theory.
They won't; first, most people will never see the true numbers. Second, they don't care. I've tried explaining to a few people why they should care, but to no avail. They simply 'can't live without their music.'
OTOH, maybe the boycott of/. readers is responsible for the drop in sales:-)
Ya, i think a vast majority of the web content would disappear. Things like CNN and/. may go, but i think online stores and stores with an online presence would stay, and probably academic sites.
I might pay a small ammount for a few sites, but if every site started charging, i probably wouldn't use the internet as much. A buck here and a buck there ads up real quick, and with the millions of content sites out there, i doubt many sites could get enough subscribers to stay afloat.
Putting something in the ID tag wouldn't work...since most mp3s that get burned are done via burning software, not napster..besides, they are always converted to wavs beforehand...
Just how the hell do they think they're gonna stop anyone from burning the mp3s they download? Encrypt them, and only be playable through the client? Hmm...speaker goes to line in...and there's aprogram recording on line in...
A) Nothing was stolen. Even if they copied the program from somewhere, where was the theft? Would i be arrested for theft if i somehow cloned your car?
B) Source code is a free speech issue. They are trying to stop something from being published. Stoping anything from being published is censorship.
Slashdot Mirror
nightmare on elm street and a single, common (is spain, anyway) word are two slightly different things. I think i'll trademark 'the' and then no one could use it.
How do you trademark (i thought a mark was a symbol or something) a word of a language? Even Word needs the Microsoft before it. Diablo is spanish i believe for devil...how can that be a trademark, especially in Spain?!
no i think people can be that stupid. Just like you. Fuck off, you anonymous prick.
People are more willing to pay for porn then their local news.
Ironic that i live right in a big green glob in the NE US, and i can't get dsl...
Actually i've found cable modemto be pretty nice...it would be my prefered internet connection, ifi had it back home. I doubt DSL is dying a horrible death, but here anyway, DSL is only a thrid of what the cable modem is, at the same price. But if it were all i could get, i may do that.
When was the last time you saw an ad for something that was truely new and unique? Alot of the best products i know about i discovered via word of mouth. Even the new Cingular (sp?) phone company i don't really care about. To me its just another crappy cell phone provider. Verizon advertises with 'people want to be free.' From personal experience, i know this not to be the case (which is why i'm dumping them). Cingular says they value personal expression...why should ithink that any different?
And no, most of us do not have broadband by now. Most of us are using modems, and will be for quite some time. Take a look at normal people, not the close circle of your friends...
So you're saying it is morally wrong for me to walk away from the tv during commercials?
By the way, no one cares that you don't own a car or television. The only reason i can think thta you would even meantion that non-issue is b/c you're trying to see like you are 'holier then thou.' Unfortunatly not owning a car or tv doesn't make you any better then anyone else. And just as we do not care that you don't own these things, neither do any corporations.
great, let's block those ads! it's my God-given right to have free Internet content!
Actually to me its 'Hmm some company wants to use the bandwidth I paid for to deliver something i don't want. They're giving the content away for free, i never said they had to do it. They can always become a pay site if they like. But right now they are free, so i'll take what i want, and ignore/block the rest. Just like i never watch commercials on tv (when i do watch tv, that is). Do you think thats wrong? Do i have some kind of obligation to watch the commercials on tv b/c i'm watching a program i like? Would it be wrong for me to use the commercial skip button i have on my vcr?
and not so that we can add better functionality and improve the product, but so that we can port it to Linux (ie, steal it)
Porting to linux may be considered a derivitive work, which i think is allowed under copyright. Besides, what would they be stealing if the original author has no intention of porting it to linux themselves? Besides, i don't know where this has been done. Most open source things i've seen are for linux to begin with. The 'stolen products' you describe aren't usually ports at all. They are written from the ground up, yes possiblly to provide the same functionality as a commercial product, but they are hardly stolen. Would you say that GM is stealing from Ford for building something of their own but offers the same functionality of a car? Hardly. I believe thats called competition.
At any rate, please tell me something that was open sourced (and not already on linux) and promptly ported to linux.
we have a right to free music and movies!
You seem to thing that musicians and movie makers have a right to be paid for what they do. It wasn't always like that however. Before the record companies, musicans played hoping to get tips. If you liked them, you could tip them. But surely you don't think that everyone that liked the musician tipped him, do you? So where they morally wrong? If i did tip him, was i also paying for the failing musician? Things are different now with the record labels. They say on one hand if i want to listen, i have to pay, yet on the other hand they get thier music played over the radio, which i could record for free. At any rate, i was born with ears and eyes, and i have a right to use them.
people here have gone way beyond that into a "me! me! me!" attitude that make middle-age yuppies look like ghandi.
So tell me, you think its normal for people to WANT to pay for anything? If people can get something for free, don't you think they would take advantage of that? Of course i don't want to pay for my OS; and there's one there for free. Whats wrong with me taking that? Getting stuff for free only becomes wrong with you are stealing it.
Besides, did you ever stop to think this 'everything for free' attitude is a direct result of being subjected to the corporate attitude enacted by the middle agged yuppies of 'screw every last dime out of them?' Most buisness today isn't about making a better product; its about locking people in. Its 'we will offer these shitty services no one will want at a low price, and offer the service they do want at a high price.'
I hear you on the tv thing. Even shows that i love like the simpsons or the x-files (which was very good last sunday also) i can barely watch b/c the ads take too long to get through. It seems i spend more time being bored and annoyed by commercials then i do enjoying the show.
I dont think the web is that bad yet, and i can block it in realtime (unlike tv). But then i also use the internet for more then just web browsering, so that could have something to do with it.
I dunno, i kinda doubt they are useful. I've found most advertising anywhere to be A) something i already know about, and B) something i could care less about.
I can't afford a sun computer, and if I had to buy one for my company, i'd just go to sun's site. So the ads serve little purpose. The only ads that are any good tell me about something new. And with the exception of game ads, those are rare.
Ya i hate those fucking ads in icq. Actually the lastest version got rid of adds on the message window..but they're stil there on the file xfer and some other ones.
I'd hate to have icq slow down b/c it needs to download an ad...if it gets any worse, i'm going to dump icq.
Why not get Junkbuster. It works great for me.
There are already a couple of these things. A similar tank is in the Western US, also underground. Japan is going about it in a different way.
As far as whether they have mass or not; giving them a small mass does explain why they detect far less of these guys then if they were purely massless. I think right now the most being detected is like 40% of what they expect; adding mass brings that percentage up significatly. It was a Russian scienentist that came up with that part of the theory.
They won't; first, most people will never see the true numbers. Second, they don't care. I've tried explaining to a few people why they should care, but to no avail. They simply 'can't live without their music.'
/. readers is responsible for the drop in sales :-)
OTOH, maybe the boycott of
They do...they get 84%. Which is actually what they usually get if i remember correctly.
Anyway, its nice to see that the courts still know that censorship is unconstitional. Hopefully we will see more rulings like this.
Ya, i think a vast majority of the web content would disappear. Things like CNN and /. may go, but i think online stores and stores with an online presence would stay, and probably academic sites.
I might pay a small ammount for a few sites, but if every site started charging, i probably wouldn't use the internet as much. A buck here and a buck there ads up real quick, and with the millions of content sites out there, i doubt many sites could get enough subscribers to stay afloat.
Ya i never said anything about the gpl have i? Its nice to know the broad and sweeping assumptions you make...
Hey dumbass moderator..this isn't a troll, this is my definition of 'owning' something!
Putting something in the ID tag wouldn't work...since most mp3s that get burned are done via burning software, not napster..besides, they are always converted to wavs beforehand...
Hook speaker out to line in...rerecord..
its easy..
Just how the hell do they think they're gonna stop anyone from burning the mp3s they download? Encrypt them, and only be playable through the client? Hmm...speaker goes to line in...and there's aprogram recording on line in...
A) Nothing was stolen. Even if they copied the program from somewhere, where was the theft? Would i be arrested for theft if i somehow cloned your car?
B) Source code is a free speech issue. They are trying to stop something from being published. Stoping anything from being published is censorship.
You solution is absurd.
If it was a service offered by competing companies, then yes, he probably could switch. What you offered is a non solution.
It is also possible that i can get fed up with Earth enough to build my own space ship and colonize Mars. But do you think thats very likely?